|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Oct 9, 2009 21:03:34 GMT
I also expect it to finish 1-1 with City winning the replay 1-0. 1598 to be watching it at the New Buck's Head.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Sept 4, 2009 17:16:23 GMT
As a regular visitor to Throstle Nest this news has deeply saddened me.
|
|
|
Woking
Aug 14, 2009 19:41:06 GMT
Post by LeedsWCFC on Aug 14, 2009 19:41:06 GMT
In a bout of mindless optimism I'm going for 1-1 as well.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Aug 14, 2009 11:59:43 GMT
I'm not keen on this new website feature, open website, scroll to the fight to see any info!! I'm not aware of this 'feature'. Please let me know what's wrong and I'll look into it. I'm presuming too that you mean 'right' and not 'fight' although I can'tbe certain.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Aug 6, 2009 21:52:32 GMT
I think that RD has put together an excellent squad under the circumstances. It won't be enough for any glory this season but I can easily see him achieving his aim of proving the bookies wrong.
I'm going for a 1-0 win for City on Saturday with 712 attending.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Aug 6, 2009 21:49:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on May 22, 2009 20:37:06 GMT
So someone tries something which doesn't work out and that makes them a villain? Perhaps they should have just done f*c k all and watched the ship sink? I can't be arsed with this anymore. Was what they did anything to do with Worcester City? It was supposed to be a rescue for Malvern Town, wasn't it? Or were they happy to kill off another football club; call it, say, AFC Worcester while continuing to promote the demise of the current WCFC? And all just so that they could have control of a club with Worcester in the name while making false claims to be saviours of football in Worcester?
|
|
|
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 LeedsWCFC on May 12, 2009 0:36:00 GMT
Are the season tickets being sent out yet? When I've had one I've always collected it from the office. There is no need for them to be posted as they can be used in only one place and you'll be going there anyway to use it.
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on May 8, 2009 23:11:55 GMT
I think your 142 votes may have swayed it LeedsWCFC,,! :-) ;D
|
|
|
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 LeedsWCFC on May 6, 2009 17:19:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on May 2, 2009 9:50:18 GMT
You can pay on the day. The only difference is that the commemorative tickets are only available for advance purchases.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Apr 28, 2009 12:43:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Apr 18, 2009 18:09:22 GMT
Impressive powers you seem to have there considering that the result isn't on their website yet.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Apr 6, 2009 0:50:00 GMT
A brilliant achievement. ;D ;D ;D
Congratulations, Vicky, Debby, Graham and all the players and everyone else involved.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Apr 1, 2009 13:53:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Mar 24, 2009 20:46:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Mar 24, 2009 20:34:15 GMT
Commentary's back and better than before.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Mar 24, 2009 20:29:24 GMT
Same for me. I've texted Benny asking him to let Steve Miller know. He's probably sat there commentating to himself.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Mar 24, 2009 20:21:05 GMT
Don't know who scored as a Norman Collier robot is commentating You're experiencing the same problem as I am then? Glad it's not just me. Still, it's better than nothing.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Mar 24, 2009 14:24:09 GMT
1-0 defeat Attendance 427.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Mar 23, 2009 11:51:47 GMT
It's nothing to do with DB. It is part of the F.A.'s National League System Regulations:
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Mar 14, 2009 14:27:51 GMT
1-1. Attendance: 268.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Mar 6, 2009 10:03:20 GMT
Is there a kind supporter out there who is willing to make the presentation at tomorrow's game?
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Feb 28, 2009 16:07:24 GMT
Sounded like a good firsthalf from City. Keep it up.
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Feb 28, 2009 1:08:05 GMT
0-1 with 708 there.
|
|
|
Fatty
Feb 26, 2009 2:24:19 GMT
Post by LeedsWCFC on Feb 26, 2009 2:24:19 GMT
Why haven't you included "20-29" and "30-39" as separate options? Surely they'd get the most votes. ;D
|
|
|
Post by LeedsWCFC on Feb 23, 2009 16:38:19 GMT
There will be full commentary on AFC Wimbledon v Worcester City on Tuesday 24 February online at bbc.co.uk/herefordandworcester, kick-off is 1945 GMT.
|
|