|
Post by genghis on Oct 5, 2017 21:32:47 GMT
Nice you’re keeping track.
(I would make a better left-back than Griffiths btw)
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Oct 5, 2017 19:34:57 GMT
I'm not surprised the attendance figures haven't fallen further. After all, when the petition to challenge the sale of SGL was started by Niels and others, many wouldn't sign it. They "just wanted to watch the football". Apathy rules amongst our supporters. Maybe we do get what we deserve after all. Spot on Mr NoBoddy and what we are going to get is a club slowly going bust languishing in the lower reaches of non-league football governed by a bunch of directors with the dynamism of dead sheep who are quite satisfied with this outcome. Enjoy everyone! Are you really at this stage now? You’re both coming off as very elitist and divisional. The old man who still goes to watch the same club he’s watched all his life is not your enemy. Nor is the Father taking his son to his first game. They don’t deserve to lose their club because they didn’t sign your petition. Not everyone is going to be interested in club politics. In fact, the majority aren’t interested. They just want to watch their team play. That doesn’t make them bad people or any less of a supporter than either of you.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Oct 3, 2017 22:02:01 GMT
I agree with the Hampson sentiment, but it’s the first home game in a long time i’ve been to and he not be there. I just wondered if it signifies anything.
Griffiths did a really good cross today to set up Reynolds’ second goal. He’s still terrible though.
Bottom of the table Shawbury are next. That should be fun.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Oct 3, 2017 21:34:15 GMT
They were pretty awful. After the third goal, a fight almost broke out between the Sphinx defenders. Says a lot about the kind of side they are.
Anyone know why Hampson wasn’t at the game?
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Oct 3, 2017 19:57:02 GMT
City up 2-0 at 55 minutes in. Reynolds and Birch were the scorers. Both goals came with a few minutes of each other about 10 minutes in.
Birch had to go off not long after he scored. He seemed quite upset.
Palmer’s in goal, and doing a pretty good job tonight. Fishwick and Reynolds in fine form too.
Interestingly, Hampson is not here tonight.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Oct 3, 2017 19:36:02 GMT
Tim Munslow, would you feel the same way if you knew that your money was being used to fund criminal activities? If your going to games allowed certain people to get involved in drug running and people trafficking? Would you still be as happy to watch a game of football? A lot of people who still go to the games just want to watch football, and stay out of club politics. There’s nothing wrong with that. You’re being a bit silly with your analogy btw. Unless you were being literal. In which case, who do you suspect?
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Oct 2, 2017 9:46:54 GMT
One thing I will say for the Midland Prem is the fans I’ve encountered seem to be more pleasant than those in the Vanarama North.
I certainly don’t miss F.C. United fans.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Oct 1, 2017 21:42:23 GMT
Griffiths and both Smiths are terrible. Griffiths looks like he’s had very little experience of playing competitive football in his life. A poor tackler and marker. Never positioned correctly.
Reynolds is excellent. Far superior to the level he’s playing at. Shoots too early and from poor positions occasionally, but that’s only a minor issue overall.
Gwynne is a good keeper for the division, but I think he’d struggle against better opposition.
Keep in mind i’ve only seen 5 games this season so far, and missed the last 4. I can only judge on what i’ve seen.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Sept 30, 2017 11:52:13 GMT
I still attend when I can. Won't be there today, but pretty much 100% will be there Tuesday night.
However, the standard we're playing at is disappointing. If City don't achieve promotion, I will likely be attending less games next season.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Sept 26, 2017 20:43:50 GMT
You can, but even though they (mostly) use the correct player names for divisions lower than Vanarama North/South, no scouting has taken place of these divisions or players. They employ actual scouts to gauge the ability and strengths/weaknesses/personalities of players in the originally playable divisions. So even though the player names would be accurate, that's as far as the realism would go. It's ok, I'll stick with FM17 where it's the 25/26 season and City are in League One. That's terrible. I remember I got City to 4th in the prem by about 2023 in FM2010. I'd say the realism in FM isn't very accurate at NLN level anyway. Just look at the wages and the ability of some and it's laughable. Based on that timeline, I still have another 3 seasons to make the Prem, lol. There are some anomalies with wages at the lower levels, with far too many players earning 1k+ on part-time contracts. When you eventually become full-time, wages aren't affected at all for some reason. As far as I recall, City's starting 16/17 season squad wasn't rated too differently from their real abilities. Nelson-Addy was rated too high - predicted to be a good Vanarama National level player in the future. I remember laughing at that one a bit.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Sept 26, 2017 11:25:06 GMT
I just realised I won't be able to play as Worcester City in the next edition of Football Manager due to the lowest playable teams being in the Vanarama North/South. Surely you can load the editor, make the league playable, then you can p*ss the tinpot league yourself and claim all the glory ! You can, but even though they (mostly) use the correct player names for divisions lower than Vanarama North/South, no scouting has taken place of these divisions or players. They employ actual scouts to gauge the ability and strengths/weaknesses/personalities of players in the originally playable divisions. So even though the player names would be accurate, that's as far as the realism would go. It's ok, I'll stick with FM17 where it's the 25/26 season and City are in League One.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Sept 25, 2017 23:38:55 GMT
I just realised I won't be able to play as Worcester City in the next edition of Football Manager due to the lowest playable teams being in the Vanarama North/South.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Sept 24, 2017 19:34:18 GMT
You're just coming at it from a different perspective to me. The point you're making is valid, but you're not going to represent the whole fan base anymore than I am. Many have given up on the club altogether, and I don't believe that coming in with any other mentality than 'we need to return to our previous stature' will convince them to return. My viewpoint may seem too demanding and even improbable, but I just can't bring myself to accept anything less. Sounding like Halifax fans last season - wanting to "piss this tinpot league" You have to beat what is put in front of you. We are third in the league for goodness sakes! When you get used to watching your club play st a certain level, then suddenly you are watching them play 3 divisions lower, I would believe that to an acceptable train of thought.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Sept 24, 2017 18:48:20 GMT
Our management really don't have a clue. And that is why we won't be getting anywhere near Wembley and won't win the league. The defence needs a complete overhaul Never thought these 2 should have been in charge, a pair of inadequate team one of the reasons I will never follow City again with these clowns in charge.... I've made jokes about John Snape in the past, but being 100% serious, neither him or Hughes are the ones who will turn City around. It's not negativity for the sake of it, but accepting anything less than complete domination is unacceptable at the level City are playing at now. No other fan base would accept it, so neither should we.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Sept 24, 2017 18:43:52 GMT
Completely agree. In every game this season the defence has consistently been the weakest part of the team. Terrible marking and sloppy tackling galore. The quality difference between attack and defence are literally divisions apart. What even the games where we didn't concede.Yes the team were not so good ,but we won playing badly on a plastic pitcth, that that was new to quite a few players.The team are in the next round, so let's be posative. The only exception I can think of is the Quorn game. Would you disagree with the notion that defence is the weakest part of City's game? Not having a dig (I have missed a few games this season) but I don't know how anyone can not blame poor defending for the team's performance. Poor management, maybe, but on-pitch it's clearly the defence letting us down.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Sept 24, 2017 14:04:23 GMT
Our management really don't have a clue. And that is why we won't be getting anywhere near Wembley and won't win the league. The defence needs a complete overhaul Completely agree. In every game this season the defence has consistently been the weakest part of the team. Terrible marking and sloppy tackling galore. The quality difference between attack and defence are literally divisions apart.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Sept 21, 2017 13:43:50 GMT
Greetings, Spending time on this forum leads me to believe that you all have some interest in the good of Worcester City FC – as do I (albeit from afar). Anyway, just wanted to share a few things; I recently contacted a stadium construction company and was quoted a price for a 500 seat stand, it was £125,000 + VAT. Definitely cheaper than I imagined. A total spend for a modest stadium (including clubhouse, changing rooms & toilets as portable buildings, floodlights, hard standing area around the pitch, football goals etc) runs to just under £400,000. Secondly I have created an artist’s impression of what such a stand might look like if City were to make it home. Wishful thinking!? I hope not. Up the City Ignore any naysayers, that's excellent work. The price seems much more reasonable than I would expect too.
|
|
|
Quorn (H)
Sept 18, 2017 22:14:39 GMT
via mobile
Post by genghis on Sept 18, 2017 22:14:39 GMT
Well actually you imagine wrongly,I know for a fact that many players do their research even before joining the club, I know that because I made comments which caused a player to decide against joining WCFC, even though the comments were factual, and fans do talk to players, and players come on here more than you think. but thats not the point, the point is, you've shown this football club no respect with your childish and disturbing, factually incorrect postings, all for a bit of a laugh. Trouble is, no-one is laughing, except thankfully at you. If , as you're now saying, none of the accusations thrown at John Snape is true, then I believe that you owe him, and those who entrust him to manage a team of young players, an apology for being a rather silly person. They were no more ridiculous than many of the aspersions cast on Hampson by multiple members of this forum. While many may have had a factual basis, many more are deliberate exaggerations or just outright lies. Maybe your definition of respect doesn't stretch that far though.
|
|
|
Quorn (H)
Sept 18, 2017 10:58:53 GMT
via mobile
Post by genghis on Sept 18, 2017 10:58:53 GMT
You have been disrespectful of the football club and those who serve it. How do you think players feel when people like you are suggesting that their manager is making a drunken play at their wives and girlfriends? How do you think players feel when you are suggesting that their manager is taking money from them? They've made a commitment to be at this club, often based on their feelings towards how the management act towards them. I wouldn't worry about the libel issue, as I said (and I have first hand knowledge of defamation law) no-one will be suing anyone for anything. I would imagine those players take their information from more reliable sources, not an internet message board which the majority are not even aware of. They weren't aware of it last year anyway!
|
|
|
Quorn (H)
Sept 17, 2017 22:51:04 GMT
via mobile
Post by genghis on Sept 17, 2017 22:51:04 GMT
Over a 2 month period, it really doesn't take too much time out of my day. A fair few posts I made while watching City play. 'Libellous' is a stretch. Most was pretty tongue-in-cheeek. As is most libel ! "I was only having a bit of fun!" is really no defence. Mind you, you're not worth suing anyway, you have no money. Defamation is for those who can afford to win, against those who can afford to lose! Your comments might be tongue in cheek, but have been very disrespectful to staff and players of the football club that you say you support. And for what purpose? What an interesting definition of libel you hold. With such a lax definition, almost anyone on this board (or almost any other) could be prosecuted for their comments. I've seen numerous posts on this forum suggesting that Hampson has stole money from the club. It's far more of a serious allegation than saying that John Snape doesn't flush the toilet after having a s***. I have not once disrespected a City player. Show me a post where I did.
|
|
|
Quorn (H)
Sept 17, 2017 22:31:56 GMT
via mobile
Post by genghis on Sept 17, 2017 22:31:56 GMT
I didn't read that latest loooong post, but did look at the edges to see if you were Rick Rollin'. But to post 138 times whether a "joke" or not, is bordering on psychosis. Plus some of the stuff could easily be seen as libelous. Court's don't get jokes. Over a 2 month period, it really doesn't take too much time out of my day. A fair few posts I made while watching City play. 'Libellous' is a stretch. Most was pretty tongue-in-cheeek.
|
|
|
Quorn (H)
Sept 17, 2017 21:44:59 GMT
via mobile
Post by genghis on Sept 17, 2017 21:44:59 GMT
I love the way that threads on boards like this can migrate from one idea to another and morph through different concepts. What is annoying though is that no matter what topic is being discussed here it always becomes about genghis. The team performance; the future of the club; everything becomes about this knob. Don't take the bait and let this troll swamp open debate. Or learn to read. In my third or fourth (since deleted) post in this forum if you read the first letter of each line, it spells out 'I am taking the piss'. No-one caught on. Yesterday, I literally said that I'm taking the piss but no-one acknowledged it and continued the back-and-forth instead. Seems to me that people enjoy it more than they claim they do. Just a bit of fun. BlueandWhite Flag is a bit of a dick though.
|
|
|
Quorn (H)
Sept 17, 2017 20:40:57 GMT
via mobile
Post by genghis on Sept 17, 2017 20:40:57 GMT
Your username is the epitome of originality.
|
|
|
Quorn (H)
Sept 17, 2017 19:37:08 GMT
via mobile
Post by genghis on Sept 17, 2017 19:37:08 GMT
I am delusional and you're not. No, you are if you believe Snape's lies. Let me tell you a little about John Snape. I feel compelled to preface my remarks with the following: Mr. Snape 's lackeys have cooperated closely with treacherous Neanderthals on several projects. You see, I inarguably believe that Snape demands that his surmises be inoculated from inspection, criticism, and condemnation. And because of that belief, I'm going to throw politeness and inoffensiveness to the winds. In this letter, I'm going to be as rude and crude as I know how, to reinforce the point that Snape clearly believes that he acts in the public interest. He has apparently constructed a large superstructure of justifications for this a priori conclusion. I guess that shouldn't be too surprising given that Snape has been reviling everything in the most obscene terms and dragging it into the filth of the basest possible outlook. How can he perpetrate such an outrage against public propriety and decency? If you were to ask that of Snape, he'd certainly fling a large barrage of insults in your direction instead of actually addressing the question. One of Snape's most loyal legates is known to have remarked, “Going through the motions of working is the same as working.” And there you have it: a direct quote from a primary source. The significance of that quote is that Snape says that censorship could benefit us. This is at best wrong. At worst, it is a lie. It unequivocally shouldn't be necessary to have to say such things, but if Snape can overawe and befuddle a sufficient number of prominent individuals then it will become virtually impossible for anyone to counteract the subtle but pervasive social message that says that Snape's Lysenkoism movement consists entirely of lovable, cuddly people who would never dream of making individuals indifferent to the survival of their families. Too many parviscient menaces out there are looking for the quick and easy fix, for a great savior who will make it all right again so they can go back to sleep. They gather at the foot of the mount to herald the coming of Snape and neglect to notice that Snape's catty bruta fulmina have been helping a crotchety fringe take over WCFC. Still, I recommend you check out some of Snape's casus belli and draw your own conclusions on the matter. Like a verbal magician, Snape knows how to lie without appearing to be lying, how to bury secrets in mountains of garbage-speak. Of course, he is utterly—and I mean utterly—mean-spirited. I say “of course” because he not only lies but brags about his lying to his janissaries. While there are many sullen, ultra-amateurish philosophunculists, Snape is the most grungy of the lot. He coins polysyllabic neologisms to make his excuses sound like they're actually important. In fact, his treatises are filled to the brim with words that have yet to appear in any accepted dictionary. Whether or not Snape should envelop us in a nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror ought to be a simple question, far beyond the realm of debate. However, he has been fostering a culture devoted to policing speech and punishing speakers. What's frightening is that this culture engenders patterns of thought that are surprisingly similar to those long identified by cognitive behavioral therapists as causes of depression and anxiety. I don't know about you, but I would prefer to live in a culture in which people are free to admit that Snape asserts that he is always being misrepresented and/or persecuted. I hate to sound a dissenting note, but this assertion is pure insanity. As Snape ought to know, the reality is that he doesn't want to acknowledge that his blandishments reek of so much exclusionism that the smell nauseates me. In fact, Snape would rather block all discussion on the subject. I suppose that's because he has for a long time been arguing that honesty and responsibility have no cash value and are therefore worthless. Had he instead been arguing that only the assembled and concentrated might of a national passion rearing up in its strength can ask him to rephrase his criticisms in a more reasoned way, I might cede him his point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in Snape's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how you, of course, now need some hard evidence that it's time for him to grow up. Well, how about this for evidence: Snape plans to reward mediocrity. I don't know if Snape's bagmen are complicit in that scheme or are merely clueless. I do know, however, that Snape has been using all sorts of jiggery-pokery to convince people that his way of life is correct and everyone else's isn't. That worldview may be appealing, at least to dictatorial scaremongers, but it severely limits our national conversation on critical policy issues. Perhaps more painfully, Snape preys on the rebellious and disenfranchised, tricking them into joining his coalition of stuporous, unmannerly ingrates and execrable social outcasts. Their first assignment usually involves resorting to underhanded tactics. The lesson to draw from this is that Snape has no conception of our moral and ethical standards. I can reword my point as follows: Snape has got to go—and yesterday isn't soon enough. When I say that Snape's generalizations are barbaric, I mean it. I don't mean that they remind me of something barbaric or that they have one or two barbaric characteristics. I mean that they are barbaric. In fact, the most barbaric thing about them is the way that they prevent people from seeing that we must help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world. If we do, then perhaps a brighter day will dawn on planet Earth. Perhaps people will open their eyes and see that I don't need to tell you that I don't enjoy Snape's bawdy sense of humor. That should be self-evident. What is less evident is that Snape somehow forgot to tell his spokesmen that he's the panjandrum of conformism. From this anecdotal evidence I would argue that once you understand Snape's exhortations, you have a responsibility to do something about them. To know, to understand, and not to act, is an egregious sin of omission. It is the sin of silence. It is the sin of letting Snape rot out the foundations of our religious, moral, and political values. You may find it instructive to contrast the things I like with the things that Snape likes. I like listening to music. Snape likes putting our liberties at risk by an intransigent and obnoxious rush to defy the rules of logic. I like kittens and puppies. Snape likes corrupting our youth. I like spending time with friends. Snape likes threatening anyone who's bold enough to state that if he truly believes that violence directed at his opponents is morally justified, then maybe he should enroll in Introduction to Reality 101. I'm worried you might not believe me when I state that it is a sad state of affairs when unimaginative, hotheaded deviants like Snape arrest and detain his adversaries indefinitely without charge, without trial, and without access to legal counsel. I know, seeing is believing. Therefore, the next time you see Snape make individuals indifferent to the survival of their families, be sure to remember that it's unfortunate that he has no real education. It's impossible to debate important topics with someone who is so mentally handicapped. You may not be aware of this, but the point is that if everyone spent just five minutes a day thinking about ways to preserve the peace, we'd all be a lot better off. Is five minutes a day too much to ask for the promise of a better tomorrow? I sure hope not, but then again, the last time I told Snape's cultists that I want to call Snape's bluff they declared in response, “But cultural tradition has never contributed a single thing to the advancement of knowledge or understanding.” Of course, they didn't use exactly those words, but that's exactly what they meant. Continue to appease Snape, and he will really inure us to mumpish despotism. The voices of his victims have not historically been chronicled. They have gone largely unnoticed and undocumented. What can we do about that? I suggest we start by creating a world in which fogyism, larrikinism, and Titoism are all but forgotten. Doing so will demonstrate to the world that serving in Snape's imperium is nothing short of nirvana for damnable harijans—no disagreements, no arguments, no reasoning, no thinking, no responsibility. Snape tells them what to do, and they do it. They never even consider that if we contradict Snape, we are labeled asinine knuckle-draggers. If we capitulate, however, we forfeit our freedoms. A final word: There is not a single word in that sentence that Mr. Snape can take exception to.
|
|
|
Quorn (H)
Sept 16, 2017 22:37:18 GMT
via mobile
Post by genghis on Sept 16, 2017 22:37:18 GMT
I am zeke and you're not. FIFY
|
|
|
Quorn (H)
Sept 16, 2017 21:13:47 GMT
via mobile
Post by genghis on Sept 16, 2017 21:13:47 GMT
You're a bit too late, mate. And where's the build? You can't just blow your load on the first couple of posts. I can do what I like, you don't make the rules, and I'm not your mate. Just feel the love for the Snapper Course you can. You're very special
|
|
|
Quorn (H)
Sept 16, 2017 19:42:52 GMT
via mobile
Post by genghis on Sept 16, 2017 19:42:52 GMT
I'll poo in the houses of anyone who is anti-Snape, and flirt with their wives and girlfriends. And that Genghis? I'll make a right mess of his toilet. What a nutcase. You're a bit too late, mate. And where's the build? You can't just blow your load on the first couple of posts.
|
|
|
Quorn (H)
Sept 16, 2017 15:45:23 GMT
via mobile
Post by genghis on Sept 16, 2017 15:45:23 GMT
7-0 now. This is what I've been missing. Great performance from City in every aspect today.
Edit - lol, 8-0 as I was writing this.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Sept 16, 2017 15:05:34 GMT
Keep all your threats to yourself. I know that's how your sort operate but it doesn't work on me. Looks like you can give it out (making unsubstantiated allegations about everyone from the management to the Supporters Trust, to ordinary users on here) - but you haven’t the stones to suck it up when you get it back mildly in return. You’re a lampoon. Looks like the hypocritical lady doth protest too much... Chill bro, I'm taking the piss.
|
|
|
Post by genghis on Sept 16, 2017 8:44:24 GMT
Couldn't give a toss what one of Snape's boys thinks about anything. If you're anything like Snape (which you appear to be), then you know as much about how 'shite' a player is as I do about ballet. One of Snape's boys?! Hilarious. I have never once had a conversation with the man. I am as indifferent to him as you are obsessive about him. You seriously need to address your mental health issues. Paranoid delusions and obsessive behaviour are seriously worrying signs and you need help before your insane ramblings get you into some serious trouble. Keep all your threats to yourself. I know that's how your sort operate but it doesn't work on me.
|
|