Bristol City vs Swindon Town

[JonBCFC]

That's the other thing, our 'financial advantage'. Yes the potential is there but Swindon fans appear to ignore the fact that our deals involving a fee were all covered by the money we received from selling Baldock, as for wages Baldock, Fontaine, Pearson, Marvin Elliott and Carey all left the club last season, all players who would have been on championship wages, the fact we have drastically reduced our wages since coming down also doesn't have anything to do with it ether..... We definitely don't have the highest wage bill in the league, Preston and Sheffield Utd will at least be above us, and for Swindon fans calling Flint a money grabbing (insert word here), Swindon fans claim their budget should see them finish just outside the relegation zone most the time and that we should be at the top of the league, seems a wise move career wise....

Hopefully this can just be put to bed soon, we didn't have to play Swindon for several years last time we were promoted, can hopefully be the same again.

Not this argument again

 

[TomPNE94]

Ours wil be similar to yours but as Jon says, let's not dredge this shite up again please or I will just lock the thread.

 

[hodge]

Fair enough I won't mention it again, but Swindon fans shouldn't keep bringing up finances when we can provide reasoning as to why we can afford the squad we have.

 

[Luke_ciderhead]

If you read their match thread, its full of sour grapes about how we bought promotion etc. As i've said time and time again, no amount of money can buy the togetherness and spirit in this city team.

 

[Ravey 28]

One of the worst culprits actually!

Yeah, you're probably right tbf

Gotta be able to take it too, Dave

 

[Aaron-Bcfc]

What are you on about?

Was Bryan's not a "hopeful shot from the edge of the box?"

Well yes I wouldn't really have expected him to score it so I wouldn't have counted it as a chance. But that has nothing to do with it anyway. The point I was effectively trying to make, is that just because you have more shots doesn't mean you have more chances, which is what the Swindon fan I quoted claimed. That wasn't the case, as I said 90% of their shots were outside the box and either sailed harmlessly over the bar or were blocked. If you take away the Bryan goal we still had as many chances as them, Agard + Wilbrahams goals, we hit the bar, and had 2 blatant penalties turned down.

 

[SF_]

We definitely don't have the highest wage bill in the league, Preston and Sheffield Utd will at least be above us

Are we bollocks.

 

[Cashis]

Cheers Don and i hope non of us come across as arrogant either .

The majority of you come across as massive pricks in all honesty.

 

[hodge]

Are we bollocks.

Players like Killkenny, Davies, Beckford, Gallagher, Garner, Ebanks-Blake on your wage bill, they will all be on a lot, you will be right up there for highest wage bill with us Sheffield Utd etc.

 

[TomPNE94]

Players like Killkenny, Davies, Beckford, Gallagher, Garner, Ebanks-Blake on your wage bill, they will all be on a lot, you will be right up there for highest wage bill with us Sheffield Utd etc.

Beckford is on loan, we won't be paying all of it. Gallagher the same. Ebanks-Blake was desperate for a club after being turned down by Bradford, he won't be on much.

 

[BCFC Jordan]

The majority of you come across as massive pricks in all honesty.

Ah, you again. Bore off, mate.

 

[hodge]

Beckford is on loan, we won't be paying all of it. Gallagher the same. Ebanks-Blake was desperate for a club after being turned down by Bradford, he won't be on much.

Yes you will be paying some of Beckford and Gallagher's wages, however one is at a premier league club, another championship, more than likely even paying some of their wages would be equivilent to a league 1 players wage.

 

[SF_]

Players like Killkenny, Davies, Beckford, Gallagher, Garner, Ebanks-Blake on your wage bill, they will all be on a lot, you will be right up there for highest wage bill with us Sheffield Utd etc.

I couldn't really give a shite in truth, I just thought i'd object as some of you lot get so defensive over it.

Grayson let slip a while back that we pay 10% towards Paul Gallagher's wages, lovely stuff

 

[BCFC Jordan]

People getting defensive over something used as an argument over and over again despite it being a misconception. Shocker.

 

[SF_]

People getting defensive over something used as an argument over and over again despite it being a misconception. Shocker.

Go have a cry mate.

 

[BCFC Jordan]

Go have a cry mate.

Great response.

 

[Aaron-Bcfc]

Lock the thread!

 

[TomPNE94]

This is highly tedious and boring so I might lock it, I'll give it another hour or two.

 

[Luke_ciderhead]

Lock lock lock!!!

 

[JonBCFC]

Lock before Indian dan makes an appearance? No way!

 

[Posh Red]

The point I was effectively trying to make, is that just because you have more shots doesn't mean you have more chances, which is what the Swindon fan I quoted claimed. That wasn't the case, as I said 90% of their shots were outside the box and either sailed harmlessly over the bar or were blocked. If you take away the Bryan goal we still had as many chances as them, Agard + Wilbrahams goals, we hit the bar, and had 2 blatant penalties turned down.

Not wanting to baffle you with facts, but City had FOUR shots on target of which you scored with three (as I said, clinical finishing).

Swindon had 8 shots on target, of which Smith's header, Williams one-on-one after Flint's mistake, Gladwin hitting the bar & Oboka's shot were all good chances from INSIDE the box. I make that 50%, so some way short of the 90% you claim.
we also hit the woodwork twice (Bar & Post, so again twice as often as you did).

We can't argue that City deserved to win, because they put the ball in the net & after all that is what counts.
Whilst Swindon arguably played the better football, City's play was much more effective.

I will agree that many of the 13 shots we had off target were from long range, although Gladwin had another from outside the box which was well saved by Fielding.

 

[hodge]

Won't get mentioned by me again, separate note points from last 10 games

MK 19
Swindon 13
Sheffield Utd 15
Chesterfield 21
-----
Rochdale 18
Fleetwood 18
Bradford 12
P'boro 16
Barnsley 18

Personally think Bradford, P'boro and Barnsley are gone but are Chesterfield, Rochdale and Fleetwood hitting form at the right time? Sheffield and Swindon, while they look like they've got a play off place their form has dropped drastically compared to say Chesterfield, could they be the dark horse going into the play offs.

 

[Redcityman]

Indian Dan will be back on Saturday when Swindon win there third win on the trot as he predicted with the City having to rely on Preston and Swindon losing their games in hand to get promoted, oh wait...

 

[BCFC Jordan]

I think Swindon had a really good spell in fifteen or so minutes of the first half, but the rest of the game they largely struggled to pose a threat.

 

[Aaron-Bcfc]

Not wanting to baffle you with facts, but City had FOUR shots on target of which you scored with three (as I said, clinical finishing).

Swindon had 8 shots on target, of which Smith's header, Williams one-on-one after Flint's mistake, Gladwin hitting the bar & Oboka's shot were all good chances from INSIDE the box. I make that 50%, so some way short of the 90% you claim.
we also hit the woodwork twice (Bar & Post, so again twice as often as you did).

We can't argue that City deserved to win, because they put the ball in the net & after all that is what counts.
Whilst Swindon arguably played the better football, City's play was much more effective.

I will agree that many of the 13 shots we had off target were from long range, although Gladwin had another from outside the box which was well saved by Fielding.

So there you've singled out four good chances inside the box. You had a total 21 shots so that comes out as being just over 80% that weren't actual goal scoring chances. Not 90% as I had estimated, but not far off. I know we've only had 4 on target but we should have had 2 penalties which would've equated to 2 more clear goal scoring chances.

Anyway, this argument is a bit silly and I agree and appreciate the rest of your post

 

[Scrumpy]

Argue argue argue.

Moan moan moan.

<using very defensive and offensive words>

.......You gonna lock it or what?!

 

[Alex_BCFC]

Yeah lock it!

 

[Hairy Otter]

Won't get mentioned by me again, separate note points from last 10 games

MK 19
Swindon 13
Sheffield Utd 15
Chesterfield 21
-----
Rochdale 18
Fleetwood 18
Bradford 12
P'boro 16
Barnsley 18

Personally think Bradford, P'boro and Barnsley are gone but are Chesterfield, Rochdale and Fleetwood hitting form at the right time? Sheffield and Swindon, while they look like they've got a play off place their form has dropped drastically compared to say Chesterfield, could they be the dark horse going into the play offs.

Blades have earned 12 from the last 5 games, which would imply our form isn't that bad now. Was shite a few weeks back mind you...

 

[Aidan pritchard]

First time I've been on here since yesterday.

Fairplay to bristol City it was a great game very entertaining and the atmosphere was electric. Both sets of fans singing their hearts out and it was a great day.

City took their chances so well done. 55% possession and 8 on target says it all but don't have the finishers.

Good luck to city for the rest of the season. Hope we can join you in the playoffs.

 

[hodge]

First time I've been on here since yesterday.

Fairplay to bristol City it was a great game very entertaining and the atmosphere was electric. Both sets of fans singing their hearts out and it was a great day.

City took their chances so well done. 55% possession and 8 on target says it all but don't have the finishers.

Good luck to city for the rest of the season. Hope we can join you in the playoffs.

Hope we don't have to resort to the play offs