Search results

It's very possible. I said a few weeks ago that the only two fixtures that mattered were Pompey and Bristol City. Pompey was job one done, but Bristol is massive. And for all the elation over a win like today's, the opposite is true too - it can feel like shoulder-dropping quicksand with a big loss.

About...bloody...time!

Braced for the locals...

Indeed. A chuckle-worthy poll. Home form: 1.5 points-per-game average; +5 goal difference. Assessment: Thorn's managerial brilliance. Away form: 0.26 points-per-game average; -22 goal difference. Assessment: SISU's fault for providing a subpar squad.

A dodgy comparison.

Interesting that you ask the question. Can I infer, then, that you'd agree it would be bad form to argue in such a way?

Absolutely. The trouble is when "fair assessment" is confused with "whitewash". As far as certain factions are concerned, AT is responsible for nothing other than the good times.

The question is really whether it is sufficient punishment. By spending so much money (that they didn't have), they were either creating an advantage for themselves over other teams or encouraging other teams to go into debt in order to match them. Neither scenario is pretty, and their actions...

In most circumstances it'd be big, but it's dwarfed by the actual away fixture at Bristol. A proper six-pointer, that.

You realise we're still in the relegation zone, right?

I've always wanted City to come out to the 'Pressure Drop' cover by The Specials - top tune, local links, and some context for CCFC!

It's not an irrational grudge, valiant. There are so many questions about our current circumstances, and so much of it does go back to the Richardson regime. Like, look at the example Rich posted: yes, it's true, Richardson did not allow the squad to thin out in the same way that SISU has, but...

Yes, and how did Chairman Richardson finance that?

I think it's more likely that SISU sustained the attendances for longer. The McGinnity regime ran into the wall in 2007 - the club was minutes away from administration. In that scenario, we'd likely have seen the team reduced to a poorer squad than we have now, a ten-point deduction, inevitable...

Interesting question. I had to look up the stats - here are the last 10 years: 14812 14816 16047 21301 20342 19123 17407 17305 16309 14950 So what you see there is a rainbow shape. Interestingly, our attendance is settling back down to the original Highfield Road/initial Championship levels...

We couldn't fill Highfield Road when we were in the Premiership and Chairman Richardson was "investing" £60m. I do believe that a modest investment could take this club a long way, but we shouldn't take anything for granted. I'm not sure how you can loan a club like CCFC £30m (or whatever it...

That's the point - why should expectations be any higher? We may have a better history than Macclesfield, but that shouldn't leave us feeling entitled. It is not unreasonable to say that the average club is a reflection of its fanbase, with the occasional sugar daddy being an exceptional variable.

I think that's the point. Regardless of the results or performances, he would have your unconditional support. That's not astute or objective behaviour - it is cultish.

The owners do support the club - at last count they were tens of millions of pounds in the hole. The only issue is whether they should "support" it more...which brings into play the fan factor. If you get small crowds, you have to be run as a small team (unless you have a sugar daddy). To...