The Dingles

[wilsdenrover]

2 minutes ago, Hasta said:

My point being, for the UTC crowd viewing this, is that if we genuinely are reducing your allocation because we believe it gives us an advantage on the pitch then we should be doing it to all clubs we play. But we aren’t. Personally I have no idea and think you should have at least all the top tier (3k)
 

What I do know is someone suggested to me after the game was rearranged, but long before the announcement was made, that it was gong to be low. This was because we have a home game a few days later, and there was concern regarding the state that the toilets, tvs etc would be left in at Ewood after previous visits. This leaves half of the BBE lower and all the upper undamaged for Luton.  That was from ‘a friend of a friend who works at the club’. I took it as nonsense at the time and still think it probably is, but here we are.

 

If Burnley do fuck up the facilities they’d still be better than Luton fans get for their home games 😁

[sympatheticclaret]

2 hours ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

Let me guess, you spend your time researching that because that’s a hobby of yours as well?

By the way, Bellamy is an ex Rover too, so it’s not like we are taking the piss out of the dingles on this one 

Genuine question - is there anything about the Rovers you don’t know? 😉

I don't live in a cave, as I've said before, it's better to keep informed

Why is it on the " Dingles " thread then ?

I don't know the answer, I don't know what I don't know ... 

2 hours ago, wilsdenrover said:

I imagine, if nothing else, he doesn’t know what the Venkys get out of owning the club 🤔

Correct, but I suspect I'm not alone in that ! 

Edited March 25, 2023 by sympatheticclaret

[wilsdenrover]

3 minutes ago, sympatheticclaret said:

I don't live in a cave, as I've said before, it's better to keep informed

Why is it on the " Dingles " thread then ?

I don't know the answer, I don't know what I don't know ... 

Correct, but I suspect I'm not alone in that ! 

I don’t think even they know the answer…

[Dreams of 1995]

2 hours ago, sympatheticclaret said:

I don't live in a cave, as I've said before, it's better to keep informed

Why is it on the " Dingles " thread then ?

Probably because he works for them at this present moment

And I honestly couldn’t tell you 95% of the ex Burnley plays from before, say 2015. Let alone their financial history after retirement. Seriously. You go out of your way to be informed about Rovers 😌

[booth]

23 hours ago, Andy said:

Totally agree with this and it's been the same for me - being born in the mid-80's, Burnley never registered to me.

They were always in the lower end of the leagues, whilst we challenged for the Prem title, main rivals being Man Utd.

Whilst I appreciate the rivalry goes back much further than that, they've always been the strangely obsessed little cousin to me. I've worked and lived over that way and they take it all so seriously, it's hilarious.

 

22 hours ago, David Taylor said:

The strange obsessed little cousin was winning the top English league,and playing in the European cup whilst you were in nappies.

Can someone explain this exchange? Have I missed something?

[AllRoverAsia]

13 minutes ago, booth said:

 

Can someone explain this exchange? Have I missed something?

Probably a time warp or black hole type of thing. Or crack.

[wilsdenrover]

15 minutes ago, booth said:

 

Can someone explain this exchange? Have I missed something?

I don’t think you’ve missed anything - he must have just got his dates (completely) messed up.

You would think such a mistake would be impossible given they’ve won nothing of note since…

 

Edited March 25, 2023 by wilsdenrover

[rigger]

24 minutes ago, booth said:

 

Can someone explain this exchange? Have I missed something?

Nothing of any importance.

[Upside Down]

Ooohh they are a toutchey bunch.

[booth]

1 hour ago, AllRoverAsia said:

Probably a time warp or black hole type of thing. Or crack.

Or BRFCS has its first visitor from a Parallel dimension where Burnley weren't desperately trying to stay in the fourth division.

Probably crack though.

[wilsdenrover]

1 minute ago, booth said:

Or BRFCS has its first visitor from a Parallel dimension where Burnley weren't desperately trying to stay in the fourth division.

Probably crack though.

Certainly an arse.

[redroser]

11 hours ago, booth said:

 

Can someone explain this exchange? Have I missed something?

I believe the poster was pointing out that Burnley too had been English champions in the not too distant past and had also played in European competition.

[Gordon Ottershaw]

They won the League on Pathe News.

[Mattyblue]

63 years ago is the ‘recent past’ now?

[redroser]

Granted it was they early sixties, however, it was in my, and many fellow Rovers' fans lifetime. Even I will admit that was some achievement.

[redroser]

We as fans often revel in the fact that we are the most successful town club in football's long history. Are our achievements of over 100 years ago worth any less? 

 

[Mattyblue]

 No, but they are supplemented by much more recent trophy wins.

I’ve no problem, by the way, acknowledging that those down the road are a proper football club, as at the end of the day Old Lancashire is the heartland of the game, as the founder member list (and the plethora of league clubs still around this region today) would tell you.

[lraC]

16 hours ago, Hasta said:

My point being, for the UTC crowd viewing and commenting on this, is that if we genuinely are reducing your allocation because we believe it gives us an advantage on the pitch then we should be doing it to all clubs we play. But we aren’t. Personally I have no idea and think you should have at least all the top tier (3k)
 

What I do know is someone suggested to me after the game was rearranged, but long before the announcement was made, that it was going to be low. This was because we have a home game a few days later, and there was concern regarding the state that the toilets, tvs etc would be left in at Ewood after previous visits. I suppose this leaves half of the BBE lower and all the upper undamaged for Luton.  That was from ‘a friend of a friend who works at the club’. I took it as nonsense at the time and still think it probably is, but here we are.

 

It may well not be nonsense. Damaging the facilities has happened before, so let’s face it, giving them a smaller area to cause the damage, may well work out saving more money, than they would make on the extra 7,000 tickets. 

[wilsdenrover]

13 minutes ago, lraC said:

It may well not be nonsense. Damaging the facilities has happened before, so let’s face it, giving them a smaller area to cause the damage, may well work out saving more money, than they would make on the extra 7,000 tickets. 

I’m perfectly happy with the allocation we’ve given them but we should always ensure we have sufficient (in terms of quantity and quality) stewards to mitigate any potential trouble.

 

Edited March 26, 2023 by wilsdenrover

[Mattyblue]

Unfortunately these days ‘stewarding’ is just a few folk employed in a ground on a match day to ensure a club keeps its safety certificate.

They do zero stewarding as recent pitch invasions have shown.

[wilsdenrover]

12 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Unfortunately these days ‘stewarding’ is just a few folk employed in a ground on a match day to ensure a club keeps its safety certificate.

They do zero stewarding as recent pitch invasions have shown.

My point entirely 👍

[tomphil]

All this whining they are doing about 7k is nonsense anyway because they've never had that in the league.

I seem to recall when Bowyer was here they had about 6 thousand but most other times it's always been restricted to around 4.5/5k.  They'd be moaning anyway even if they had that.

Similarly we've rarely had the full end over there for a league game.

[Hasta]

1 hour ago, lraC said:

It may well not be nonsense. Damaging the facilities has happened before, so let’s face it, giving them a smaller area to cause the damage, may well work out saving more money, than they would make on the extra 7,000 tickets. 

I rememer it being said that the 'away club' has to pay for the damage caused by their own supporters, but don't know if that is a urban myth.

[sympatheticclaret]

4 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

I’ve no problem, by the way, acknowledging that those down the road are a proper football club, as at the end of the day Old Lancashire is the heartland of the game, as the founder member list (and the plethora of league clubs still around this region today) would tell you.

I spoke to one of the Radio Lancashire reporters a few years back, and he told me of meeting a new Radio Norfolk Sports presenter who was saying that he was " so busy " covering both Norwich & National League King's Lynn. " How many teams do you have to cover ? ", our man thought for a moment ... " Oh, we're lucky really, just the 7 ", " Lucky ? " replied the Radio Norfolk man, " Yes, if we were covering the whole of " Old Lancashire ", it would be 17 !! " 

4 hours ago, redroser said:

We as fans often revel in the fact that we are the most successful town club in football's long history. Are our achievements of over 100 years ago worth any less? 

No they are not !! Both Clubs have storied histories, especially in relation to the size of their populations and are rightly celebrated by both sets of fans .... 😎

Edited March 26, 2023 by sympatheticclaret
Can't count !

[wilsdenrover]

2 hours ago, sympatheticclaret said:

I spoke to one of the Radio Lancashire reporters a few years back, and he told me of meeting a new Radio Norfolk Sports presenter who was saying that he was " so busy " covering both Norwich & National League King's Lynn. " How many teams do you have to cover ? ", our man thought for a moment ... " Oh, we're lucky really, just the 7 ", " Lucky ? " replied the Radio Norfolk man, " Yes, if we were covering the whole of " Old Lancashire ", it would be 17 !! " 

No they are not !! Both Clubs have storied histories, especially in relation to the size of their populations and are rightly celebrated by both sets of fans .... 😎

The fact Sky ignores over one hundred years of football’s history shouldn’t mean the rest of us do so as well.