BURY VS CHELTENHAM TOWN MATCH THREAD

Joey · 31 Aug 2013, 15:38

Bring back Alan Bennett.....

Alf · 31 Aug 2013, 15:40

What is Gillespie doing on the bench. What is the point of taking him on loan if we don't play him.
Also, according to BBC stats we haven't had a shot on target all game. More tactical wizardry.

BURYFC · 31 Aug 2013, 15:40

I am well aware we have been helped by ctfc's injuries this afternoon, you have been unlucky and have been much better second half.

Malabus · 31 Aug 2013, 15:41

BURYFC wrote:YEEEEEEEEESSSSSSS!!!! 4-1, unlucky ctfc, well played Bury! We want 5, we want 5!

You will never be as big as us. Hard facts.

Malabus · 31 Aug 2013, 15:41

Alf wrote:What is Gillespie doing on the bench. What is the point of taking him on loan if we don't play him.
Also, according to BBC stats we haven't had a shot on target all game. More tactical wizardry.

What's the point Billy Jones being on the bench.

BURYFC · 31 Aug 2013, 15:42

Malabus wrote:
BURYFC wrote:YEEEEEEEEESSSSSSS!!!! 4-1, unlucky ctfc, well played Bury! We want 5, we want 5!
You will never be as big as us. Hard facts.

lol.

Alf · 31 Aug 2013, 15:43

What's the point. Full stop!

BURYFC · 31 Aug 2013, 15:49

Unlucky ctfc (and I mean that, I know how it feels), and well played Bury, a superb performance today.

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 31 Aug 2013, 16:05

Alf wrote:What is Gillespie doing on the bench. What is the point of taking him on loan if we don't play him.

I doubt any on here can provide a rational answer to that.

taxidave · 31 Aug 2013, 17:36

RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
Alf wrote:What is Gillespie doing on the bench. What is the point of taking him on loan if we don't play him.
I doubt any on here can provide a rational answer to that.

But if you play Gillespie, what is the point in buying Harrison or signing Gornell both of whom must, by Cheltenham standards, be on big money.

Oldun · 31 Aug 2013, 18:20

Same situation as last season.....strikers not getting a game. Gillespie looked most likely v Plymouth, but does not play today.
Seems we need defenders at present!

everyman · 31 Aug 2013, 18:52

Malabus wrote:
BURYFC wrote:Attendance today is 2,910 (167 from #tfc)
How do you survive on those attendances.

wait for the gate v Plymouth ?

taxidave · 31 Aug 2013, 19:28

everyman wrote:
Malabus wrote:
BURYFC wrote:Attendance today is 2,910 (167 from #tfc)
How do you survive on those attendances.
wait for the gate v Plymouth ?

I don't think JPT matches hold a lot of attraction no matter who the opposition is.

RTT · 01 Sep 2013, 10:42

I know it is the JPT, and some do like these cup matches, but I would have thought that the team needs to know/realise that the supporters are behind them.

taxidave · 01 Sep 2013, 11:05

RTT wrote:I know it is the JPT, and some do like these cup matches, but I would have thought that the team needs to know/realise that the supporters are behind them.

I didn't travel to Bury but I wonder whether those that did (and paid a considerable amount of money to do so) will still be behind the players !

Peter Griffin · 01 Sep 2013, 11:39

My thinking is that Gillespie was benched because Yates wanted to stick with the same 11 that gave West Ham a good game in midweek.

RTT · 01 Sep 2013, 12:50

taxidave wrote: I didn't travel to Bury but I wonder whether those that did (and paid a considerable amount of money to do so) will still be behind the players !

Quite a lot of them travel to most away games and all home games. We lost heavily last season away, my wife and I went to them all, and we still carried on going. I may be wrong but I thought that being a supporter of a club is that you supported them through thick and thin and, if one has the finances and free, either home or away. So, with the grace of God, we shall be there on Tuesday.

taxidave · 01 Sep 2013, 14:33

RTT wrote:
taxidave wrote: I didn't travel to Bury but I wonder whether those that did (and paid a considerable amount of money to do so) will still be behind the players !
Quite a lot of them travel to most away games and all home games. We lost heavily last season away, my wife and I went to them all, and we still carried on going. I may be wrong but I thought that being a supporter of a club is that you supported them through thick and thin and, if one has the finances and free, either home or away. So, with the grace of God, we shall be there on Tuesday.

If you consider our average home support to be about 2500 then I do not think our travelling support of roughly 125 (West Ham excluded) to be "quite a lot", in fact it is only about 5% of the home support, so your idea of following them through thick and thin is not supported by many Whaddon Road regulars.

01 Sep 2013, 14:40

Dave,

As he is quoting your post which refers to those fans that travelled to Bury - then when he says "quite a lot of them travel to most away games", he is meaning quite a lot of those that went to Bury - not quite a lot of the 2500 home fans.

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 01 Sep 2013, 15:16

Admin wrote:Dave,

As he is quoting your post which refers to those fans that travelled to Bury - then when he says "quite a lot of them travel to most away games", he is meaning quite a lot of those that went to Bury - not quite a lot of the 2500 home fans.

Hallelujah.

Nesty · 01 Sep 2013, 15:38

RTT wrote:
taxidave wrote: I didn't travel to Bury but I wonder whether those that did (and paid a considerable amount of money to do so) will still be behind the players !
Quite a lot of them travel to most away games and all home games. We lost heavily last season away, my wife and I went to them all, and we still carried on going. I may be wrong but I thought that being a supporter of a club is that you supported them through thick and thin and, if one has the finances and free, either home or away. So, with the grace of God, we shall be there on Tuesday.

I think that used to be the case RTT, but with the tightening of belts people are having to consider whether they can justify going to games purely to satisfy other peoples vision of a "true supporter" - I have been a regular to home matches for around 60 years, and believe me I have seen a lot of "thin", and kept going because in the main I could afford it.

51/84 · 01 Sep 2013, 16:10

I am being retired next month so I will be budgeting much more carefully than before
Travelling to 4-1 defeats does seem to be a bit of a waste of time and money. If its north of Birmingham I will not be going unless its is cheap. 6 away matches equals my season ticket for next season, and thats money in CTFC pocket and not another club/pub/transport company.

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 01 Sep 2013, 16:20

51/84 wrote:I am being retired next month so I will be budgeting much more carefully than before
Travelling to 4-1 defeats does seem to be a bit of a waste of time and money. If its north of Birmingham I will not be going unless its is cheap. 6 away matches equals my season ticket for next season, and thats money in CTFC pocket and not another club/pub/transport company.

I'll buy you a pint if you come to York or Hartlepool.

RTT · 01 Sep 2013, 19:52

Nesty wrote:
RTT wrote:
taxidave wrote: I didn't travel to Bury but I wonder whether those that did (and paid a considerable amount of money to do so) will still be behind the players !
Quite a lot of them travel to most away games and all home games. We lost heavily last season away, my wife and I went to them all, and we still carried on going. I may be wrong but I thought that being a supporter of a club is that you supported them through thick and thin and, if one has the finances and free, either home or away. So, with the grace of God, we shall be there on Tuesday.
I think that used to be the case RTT, but with the tightening of belts people are having to consider whether they can justify going to games purely to satisfy other peoples vision of a "true supporter" - I have been a regular to home matches for around 60 years, and believe me I have seen a lot of "thin", and kept going because in the main I could afford it.

If you read my post you will see that I said was 'if one has the finances'. As for a 'true supporter' my main point is that I believe that one doesn't stop going to matches just because you lost the most recent on by a big score. I fell that my definition was reasonable, and you are quite free to disagree, and a lot better that others I have had quoted to me e.g. Must hate Gloucester, must drink and swear, must stand etc.

Alf · 01 Sep 2013, 20:10

Peter Griffin wrote:My thinking is that Gillespie was benched because Yates wanted to stick with the same 11 that gave West Ham a good game in midweek.

Surely setting up a team to play a Premiership side in a cup game is different to setting up a side against an average second division side. It wan't as if we had beaten West Ham making Yates's decision inevitable.

RED ROB · 01 Sep 2013, 21:32

Bring back Bennett !!!! uuummm I don't think so.

Liability and after some really poor games dumped by Yates.

Nesty · 01 Sep 2013, 22:05

sorry RTT - didnt mean for my comment to come out quite like that - I know the financial constraints people are faced with, I think we are saying the same thing. But the days of going to WR just for blind faith sadly is over for a lot of people.

taxidave · 01 Sep 2013, 22:30

Nesty wrote:sorry RTT - didnt mean for my comment to come out quite like that - I know the financial constraints people are faced with, I think we are saying the same thing. But the days of going to WR just for blind faith sadly is over for a lot of people.

I agree Roger, the days of going to football because there was very little alternative have gone forever. Nowadays fans can go to the pub and watch the early Premier league match on tv, sit around and have a few more pints and then watch the 5.30 kick off game without leaving the pub.
Years ago there was no football on tv, in fact very little tv, and even if there had been you would not have been able to watch it in the pub because they were shut all afternoon, so if you wanted to watch any football you went to Whaddon Road.
Times have changed and probably for the better and despite what people say there is more leisure money about but so are the opportunities to spend it.

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 02 Sep 2013, 06:42

taxidave wrote:
Nesty wrote: Times have changed and probably for the better and despite what people say there is more leisure money about but so are the opportunities to spend it.

Spot on TD, that is the crux of the matter. The problem is there is so much choice CTFC does not rank highly - whenever I ask my teenage brothers if they are going to the next home game they always say "maybe, need to see what else people are doing" - and whatever other leisure activity is on offer they tend to prefer.

And people gravitate to the highest level of football - demand for Premier League tickets is greater than ever, as are the TV deals, and the pubs are full of people watching as you say.

02 Sep 2013, 08:35

I agree with RCS and I feel we are feeling it more than many other lower league clubs because of our non-league roots and the simple fact we are not remotely fashionable locally.

confused.com · 02 Sep 2013, 09:02

As I posted after the Plymouth fiasco and don't see the need to alter it now ....
We start with the view that the team we have built over the summer, looks good on paper. However when they get on to grass, in general their ability to produce a performance, rarely exceeds 45 minutes in any one match. When we do have a good 45 minutes, we may escape with a tense victory or a tense draw. Following this we get the usual 'must be able to play for 90 minutes', 'don't know why it took 45 minutes for us to kick into life' , 'don't know why we vanished in the second half'. However MY assures us that it won't be happening next time out, just as the interviewed players assure us that better is to come.
Danger is that when we don't perform for 45 minutes we become abject failure on a football pitch. No chance of scraping a draw and little chance of scoring a goal. In the aftermath, we are usually assured that it is because we where bullied and it won't be happening again. We read the words and know that it will. The players say there will be a big response, we read the words and know it may last a match, maybe two.
There is of course the third possibility that we rip teams apart ...... hmmmmmm bit like hen's teeth that one, and we know if it does happen, it will be a long time before we see another one.
No point in over reacting, because we do the same year in year out and that is about the only thing we are consistent in. Playing for 90 minutes for the majority of the matches would be nice. We don't even have the opinon of parking the bus, as that kind of implies that we have the confidence that we can nick a goal and a victory. I think we all know that is not the case.
I think that every Saturday at 14.55 we should play Sony & Cher's 'I got you babe' and have Ned Ryerson read out the team sheet