althom
Squad Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by althom on May 8, 2009 9:16:29 GMT
Purely from a football point of view, the South would appear to be a less aggressive league to play in. I think that in the North teams were much stronger in defense with giant defenders and with our diminutive forward line we will struggle (even more) in the North. Of course RD may have stronger players lined up with a bit of height for next season!!
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 8, 2009 10:08:07 GMT
If we had played in Blue Square North last season with that squad, we would have been slaughtered.
|
|
|
Post by Bstander on May 8, 2009 10:22:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 8, 2009 10:49:24 GMT
From Worcester News: A club statement read: "We are specifically requested not to make public our thoughts as part of the FA’s wish to avoid unnecessary conjecture." But that is exactly what not saying anything will do
|
|
walrus
Youth Teamer
Go away Hallmark
Posts: 26
|
Post by walrus on May 8, 2009 11:05:11 GMT
It's North.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2009 11:49:46 GMT
If it is North then I agree with Mark above - we need to get some muscle in there. Last year's squad would have been steamrolled.
|
|
|
Post by birdfeeder on May 8, 2009 14:15:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bigsteve on May 8, 2009 15:18:00 GMT
If it was South then there would be nothing to rubber stamp.
|
|
|
Post by Croc on May 8, 2009 15:23:14 GMT
So we go South causing RD to jettison 95% of a fairly useful squad - and now it looks like the "club" are heading back North after one season - causing another round of player releases.
In their place are brought in lower grade players on little money the "club" has, crowds decrease even more, football on the pitch gets worse, more people stay away, the "club" slowly dies and the inevitable sale of all assets for derisory amounts goes ahead...
Is this Phase B of "The Masterplan"?
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on May 8, 2009 18:22:26 GMT
So we go South causing RD to jettison 95% of a fairly useful squad - and now it looks like the "club" are heading back North after one season - causing another round of player releases. In their place are brought in lower grade players on little money the "club" has, crowds decrease even more, football on the pitch gets worse, more people stay away, the "club" slowly dies and the inevitable sale of all assets for derisory amounts goes ahead... Is this Phase B of "The Masterplan"? Is this phase B of more inane witterings? 95%? I don't recall 19 out of 20 players being released. Are we heading back North? No-one knows yet. Whatever Worcester City and other clubs have requested for next season is still ultimately dependent on what the F.A.'s Leagues Committee decides and they have gone against clubs' wishes often enough before. Another round of player releases? Of those who have been retained and those from whom decisions are still awaited most of them have played for us in both North and South so why should they leave if we are moved?
|
|
|
Post by Bstander on May 8, 2009 21:47:07 GMT
So we go South causing RD to jettison 95% of a fairly useful squad - and now it looks like the "club" are heading back North after one season - causing another round of player releases. In their place are brought in lower grade players on little money the "club" has, crowds decrease even more, football on the pitch gets worse, more people stay away, the "club" slowly dies and the inevitable sale of all assets for derisory amounts goes ahead... Is this Phase B of "The Masterplan"? Is this phase B of more inane witterings? 95%? I don't recall 19 out of 20 players being released. Are we heading back North? No-one knows yet. Whatever Worcester City and other clubs have requested for next season is still ultimately dependent on what the F.A.'s Leagues Committee decides and they have gone against clubs' wishes often enough before. Another round of player releases? Of those who have been retained and those from whom decisions are still awaited most of them have played for us in both North and South so why should they leave if we are moved? I think your 142 votes may have swayed it LeedsWCFC,,! :-)
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on May 8, 2009 23:11:55 GMT
I think your 142 votes may have swayed it LeedsWCFC,,! :-) ;D
|
|
|
Post by DazaB on May 8, 2009 23:42:34 GMT
I don't understand why people think we would have been slaughtered in the North - I think the South is the better league.
|
|
|
Post by bigsteve on May 9, 2009 7:18:18 GMT
but wasnt the idea that the South was an easier league when we were in the North? Grass always greener? Truth is they are probably on a par with each other.
|
|
|
Post by Tony is not to despondent now. on May 9, 2009 7:34:20 GMT
The FA seem to have shot themselves in the foot again.
Mark AFC Worceser is correct in his thinking.
The decision of the FA will only create conjecture.
|
|
|
Post by michael on May 9, 2009 9:51:52 GMT
" We will comment further on our reasoning when the decision is known."
So it has to be north really. The FA have no decision to make about us being in the south.
If true, where does that put us if say three/four northern teams get relegated from the conference next season? Can the FA force us into the south again?
|
|
walrus
Youth Teamer
Go away Hallmark
Posts: 26
|
Post by walrus on May 9, 2009 14:28:34 GMT
I wouldn't worry about that, chances are there won't be a side to support after this next season, and if there is then they will be down a league or two!
|
|
|
Post by georgethebassett on May 9, 2009 19:38:41 GMT
With AFC Telford losing at Gateshead last night, I can think of a 1000 good reasons (11K) for moving back North.
Incidentally, why was the BSN Final not played at a neutral venue (Burton) like previous years?
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on May 9, 2009 23:19:32 GMT
Incidentally, why was the BSN Final not played at a neutral venue (Burton) like previous years? The decision was made at the Football Conference AGM last year. I don't know if they stated the reasons for it but one could be their own inability to organize things properly after they twice changed the venue of the Conference South play-off final in the few days before it took place. It has also been suggested that Burton Albion under-declared the gate for last season's Conference North final resulting in a loss of revenue for the competing clubs.
|
|
dragon
First Teamer
Posts: 355
|
Post by dragon on May 10, 2009 8:10:57 GMT
Next season is probably the most significant in the club`s history.It will almost certainly be the last!
|
|
|
Post by creaner on May 14, 2009 6:28:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sleepinggiant on May 15, 2009 11:04:14 GMT
|
|
walrus
Youth Teamer
Go away Hallmark
Posts: 26
|
Post by walrus on May 15, 2009 11:30:07 GMT
I wouldn't read too much into that, not as though they get things right very often on there, and after all the crux of their argument is that "City cannot be moved" - whereas City can volunteer to move, which after all is where the debate has sprung from. It's not about the Conference rulings, it's about City's choice.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on May 15, 2009 20:45:46 GMT
I wouldn't read too much into that, not as though they get things right very often on there, and after all the crux of their argument is that "City cannot be moved" - whereas City can volunteer to move, which after all is where the debate has sprung from. It's not about the Conference rulings, it's about City's choice. Sh*t, if that's the current board and their scientific 'poll' on the official site, we're all screwed.... And I wonder how many from Gloucester have voted on there??
|
|
|
Post by tigerroar on May 16, 2009 10:45:35 GMT
plenty!
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on May 16, 2009 18:22:54 GMT
Fair enough, I suppose. Which shows it up for the farce we'd all expect, FFS....
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on May 16, 2009 22:52:40 GMT
I wouldn't read too much into that, not as though they get things right very often on there, and after all the crux of their argument is that "City cannot be moved" - whereas City can volunteer to move, which after all is where the debate has sprung from. It's not about the Conference rulings, it's about City's choice. Sh*t, if that's the current board and their scientific 'poll' on the official site, we're all screwed.... And I wonder how many from Gloucester have voted on there?? "the current board and their scientific poll"? The poll was not requested by the board nor anyone on it and who, other than you, has claimed that it's meant to be "scientific"? It's a survey which can be replied to by anyone, maybe even Blyth Spartans supporters who would prefer to travel to Worcester rather than Cirencester. It's quite obvious to me that there are ways that the vote could be affected but it was never intended to be anything other than a means for people (and I know it's accessible to those who aren't Worcester City supporters) to express their preferences. Fair enough, I suppose. Which shows it up for the farce we'd all expect, FFS.... Sorry to disappoint you tigerroar and voiceofnoreason but the number of votes cast by Gloucester City supporters redirected from the Tigers' message board have been very few, If they are taken off then the vote would be 60%:40% in favour of Conference North instead of the 61%:39% that it is at present.
|
|
|
Post by georgethebassett on May 17, 2009 16:47:17 GMT
There is very little to choose between North & South in football terms; commercially it would be madness for City not to return North.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on May 18, 2009 11:26:26 GMT
Commercially, with the current regime, it's madness for City to even exist!
And to our W.Yorks friend;why have that 'poll' on there then?? Though you're right, there's no way it's scientific....are you aware of irony??
|
|
|
Post by bigsteve on May 18, 2009 11:45:07 GMT
The poll was pretty stupid so I voted a few times in different ways to add to the stupidity. Now that polls been done, all you know is that whichever way the club decide on then they will piss off over 200 people. not sure that really helps anyone.
|
|