Pepe the Horseman JVDB getting a lot of criticism, despite his excellent pass to set up the winner.
No doubt that he can pick a pass but is that enough - more negatives than positives for me...
by Steve_Upper_West » 03 Jan 2017 21:23
Pepe the Horseman JVDB getting a lot of criticism, despite his excellent pass to set up the winner.
by CountryRoyal » 04 Jan 2017 00:19
Steve_Upper_WestPepe the Horseman JVDB getting a lot of criticism, despite his excellent pass to set up the winner.
No doubt that he can pick a pass but is that enough - more negatives than positives for me...
by bobby1413 » 04 Jan 2017 09:04
by Nameless » 04 Jan 2017 09:14
by bobby1413 » 04 Jan 2017 09:24
Nameless Interesting thatBristol have extra policing too. Not the only ground I've heard it happening. There have been more at the Madejski too. It's money driven, the police decide club's need more police, the club's cannot say no but they then get a huge bill.
by Sutekh » 04 Jan 2017 09:29
bobby1413Nameless Interesting thatBristol have extra policing too. Not the only ground I've heard it happening. There have been more at the Madejski too. It's money driven, the police decide club's need more police, the club's cannot say no but they then get a huge bill.
Eh?
Are you suggesting the Police think "We need a bit more cash... let's tell Bristol City they need another 50 officers and then we will send them the bill"?
by bobby1413 » 04 Jan 2017 09:52
Sutekhbobby1413Nameless Interesting thatBristol have extra policing too. Not the only ground I've heard it happening. There have been more at the Madejski too. It's money driven, the police decide club's need more police, the club's cannot say no but they then get a huge bill.
Eh?
Are you suggesting the Police think "We need a bit more cash... let's tell Bristol City they need another 50 officers and then we will send them the bill"?
Effectively, yes I believe that is so. Seem to remember Dave Whelan, then chairman if Wigan, getting stroppy with Lancashire's finest saying the level of policing was unnecessary and refusing to pay The Bill.
by muirinho » 04 Jan 2017 09:57
bobby1413
The way the original post made by Namless sounded, it was as if they were saying the Police in this case and others had upped the presence in order to deliberately increase the bill to the club and generate more funds for themselves.
by bobby1413 » 04 Jan 2017 11:56
muirinhobobby1413
The way the original post made by Namless sounded, it was as if they were saying the Police in this case and others had upped the presence in order to deliberately increase the bill to the club and generate more funds for themselves.
that is exactly what has been alleged previously. What justification would there have been for that increased presence at Bristol other than "overtime to pay off Christmas loans"?
by paultheroyal » 04 Jan 2017 12:05
I will try and answer most of the points mentioned!
1) I am not aware of the armed police at Cardiff however I am speaking to them tomorrow so will try and get some clarification from them and will feed back here.
2) there was an increased presence at the game yesterday you are correct. Each game is graded according to intelligence received from both sides and in agreement with Bcfc officers were utilised on the seg line and post match in the park. We use police horses on a regular basis at football, they are cheaper and do in effect the work of lots of police!!! There were no arrests made yesterday,
2 smoke grenades were set off by reading fans which the ref I am sure saw and will write a separate report. A small group of anti social young city fans were spoken to post match for attempting to goad reading fans on their walk back to the train station.
3) officers wearing blue shoulders at football matches are specialised football officers or ' spotters' as the media calls us. Bcfc and Brfc have a group of approx 10 including me who travel to both home and away games, and assist with any policing operation out of force. There are normally 2 each time.
4) there is no change to any security alerts around terrorism however I would urge any fan to report anything suspicious immediately to a steward or police officer.
5) bank holiday working is paid at double time to police who could volunteer. If not enough do than police officers are ordered to do the duty which was the case with a few yesterday.
hope this answers everything
by LWJ » 04 Jan 2017 12:48
Brum Royal
Not sure whether it was a change in tactic or just that they got knackered, but City pressed us high up the pitch in the first half and stopped us playing, second half at 2-0 up they didn't do it and combined with Jaap's subs allowed us to turn the game round.
.
by muirinho » 04 Jan 2017 12:49
bobby1413muirinhobobby1413
The way the original post made by Namless sounded, it was as if they were saying the Police in this case and others had upped the presence in order to deliberately increase the bill to the club and generate more funds for themselves.
that is exactly what has been alleged previously. What justification would there have been for that increased presence at Bristol other than "overtime to pay off Christmas loans"?
Who exactly would make that call? A police Inspector and above does not get any extra money for working bank holiday or overtime. Are you therefore suggesting that higher up police officers think "Oh lets make another 50 officers work as they need the money...". No chance, especially as those making that call would be sat miles away looking at figures and with multiple budget cuts and lower staffing they would not want to over resource it.
I don't know why there was extra Police - possibly because they expected more people/issues due to it being a bank holiday game and more local than others? Not sure but the idea that the police have more of a presence as they want more money is just ridiculous
by LWJ » 04 Jan 2017 12:51
Nameless Interesting thatBristol have extra policing too. Not the only ground I've heard it happening. There have been more at the Madejski too. It's money driven, the police decide club's need more police, the club's cannot say no but they then get a huge bill.
by PieEater » 04 Jan 2017 13:30
bobby1413 No chance, especially as those making that call would be sat miles away looking at figures and with multiple budget cuts and lower staffing they would not want to over resource it.
by Brum Royal » 04 Jan 2017 13:59
LWJBrum Royal
Not sure whether it was a change in tactic or just that they got knackered, but City pressed us high up the pitch in the first half and stopped us playing, second half at 2-0 up they didn't do it and combined with Jaap's subs allowed us to turn the game round.
.
Interesting - My view was that City sat back and didn't try and press at all.
by Tilehurstsouthbank » 04 Jan 2017 17:01
WestRoyalCountryRoyalmuirinho
Really? Assist on the first, key pass for the second....
I've literally just seen the highlights and instantly knew I'd be pulled up on this.
Whatever he was still gash I hate him.
And there muirinho is the real reason behind his 5 rating despite the assist, that's why you should take ratings with a pinch of salt.
I went and IMO Beerens was lucky not to be subbed instead of mccleary who was our biggest threat during the first 45 and who along with gunter would get a 6.
by LWJ » 04 Jan 2017 17:17
Brum Royal Ok, given your differing viewpoint, I will qualify mine and say that we were sat in row 1, so distance perception was more difficult. It seemed to me that Abraham and his forward colleague seemed to press our back 4 quite a lot in the first half, especially when AAH was continually passing it out to them - that was where their opening goal came from after all. When we had the ball in their half, I would agree, that they were set up in two banks of four and made us play a lot of sideways and backwards passes.
by genome » 04 Jan 2017 22:08
Pepe the Horseman JVDB getting a lot of criticism, despite his excellent pass to set up the winner.
by Nameless » 05 Jan 2017 07:34
bobby1413muirinhobobby1413
The way the original post made by Namless sounded, it was as if they were saying the Police in this case and others had upped the presence in order to deliberately increase the bill to the club and generate more funds for themselves.
that is exactly what has been alleged previously. What justification would there have been for that increased presence at Bristol other than "overtime to pay off Christmas loans"?
Who exactly would make that call? A police Inspector and above does not get any extra money for working bank holiday or overtime. Are you therefore suggesting that higher up police officers think "Oh lets make another 50 officers work as they need the money...". No chance, especially as those making that call would be sat miles away looking at figures and with multiple budget cuts and lower staffing they would not want to over resource it.
I don't know why there was extra Police - possibly because they expected more people/issues due to it being a bank holiday game and more local than others? Not sure but the idea that the police have more of a presence as they want more money is just ridiculous
by Brum Royal » 05 Jan 2017 09:19
LWJBrum Royal Ok, given your differing viewpoint, I will qualify mine and say that we were sat in row 1, so distance perception was more difficult. It seemed to me that Abraham and his forward colleague seemed to press our back 4 quite a lot in the first half, especially when AAH was continually passing it out to them - that was where their opening goal came from after all. When we had the ball in their half, I would agree, that they were set up in two banks of four and made us play a lot of sideways and backwards passes.
I wasn't saying you were wrong, just how it was interesting we could see the game differently. I was in row 20 and commented during the game that they were set up in a 451 formation.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 223 guests