Gloucestershire football

Talk about other football teams at all levels. AND ANY Glos City related threads, even if talking about the groundsharing.

Moderators: Admin, Ralph, asl, Robin

RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29922
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Cheltenham bottom.

FGR bottom.

Gloucester in relegation area.

Desperate stuff.
ctfc-fan
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 12:00
Hopefully the sad old vegans get dumped into non league where they belong. Then that new stadium really will be a white elephant.
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29922
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
ctfc-fan wrote: 07 Oct 2023, 17:29 Hopefully the sad old vegans get dumped into non league where they belong. Then that new stadium really will be a white elephant.
Pretty revealing interview after their latest defeat.

https://www.fgr.co.uk/news/?video=mccan ... on-verdict
Chris FGR
Posts: 308
Joined: 17 Sep 2015, 16:51
Gloucestershire relegation hat trick on the cards.

I highly doubt the new stadium will happen. Especially not if we’re non league.
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29922
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
:cry:
Chris FGR wrote: 09 Oct 2023, 09:24 Gloucestershire relegation hat trick on the cards.

I highly doubt the new stadium will happen. Especially not if we’re non league.
Potential redressing of the power balance between the Gloucestershire, Bristol, and Somerset sides.

In recent years CTFC and FGR have been in ascendency over Bristol Rovers, and Gloucester have looked ahead of Yeovil and Bath.

Gloucester could be Southern League next season.

Bath and Yeovil could join FGR in the National League.

CTFC in L2 with Rovers in L1.

Look into Wiltshire as well and Swindon are mounting a promotion challenge.

In a year or two we could be back to the situation 25-30 years ago where Swindon and Rovers are the leading lower league sides in the region with CTFC and Yeovil battling for third spot.

There doesn’t seem to be carrying capacity in the region for more than 3 of the sides mentioned to be ascending at any one time. Always looks that as some decline others rise; perhaps it is our turn to be one of the decliners.
Ralph
Posts: 4850
Joined: 23 Dec 2009, 01:56
Chris FGR wrote: 09 Oct 2023, 09:24 Gloucestershire relegation hat trick on the cards.

I highly doubt the new stadium will happen. Especially not if we’re non league.
FGR fans need to show some backbone to take their club back from DV. He's growing tired of the marketing "look at me" plaything. If you get a 4th head coach in the next 6 weeks thats 4 in a year i think

How are those 3 gold stars on the back of the shirts looking nowadays?
CTFC.Harry
Posts: 266
Joined: 26 Oct 2018, 14:07
Location: Exiled in the East Mids
Bishops Cleeve 9th in Southern League (Div one). Local derby against Glos could be on the cards next season. Although I suppose Gloucester are a Northern club nowadays!
Jerry St Clair
Posts: 1797
Joined: 15 Aug 2011, 16:40
CTFC.Harry wrote: 10 Oct 2023, 13:30 Bishops Cleeve 9th in Southern League (Div one). Local derby against Glos could be on the cards next season. Although I suppose Gloucester are a Northern club nowadays!
City still bang bottom and 8 points off safety. Early days still but they’d go into either Southern League Premier Central or Premier South next season if relegated. The likes of Alvechurch, Stourbridge, Redditch, Stratford in Central or Swindon Supermarine, Tiverton, Hungerford, Merthyr in South.
CTFC.Harry
Posts: 266
Joined: 26 Oct 2018, 14:07
Location: Exiled in the East Mids
12 points off now, oh dear. Surely unlikely as it may be, if Cleeve came up though there would be a fair chance they'd play each other if City went down.
Jerry St Clair
Posts: 1797
Joined: 15 Aug 2011, 16:40
Having spent more than a decade as nomads, Gloucester fans must have thought things were looking up when they returned to Meadow Park. Football is a horribly cruel sport sometimes.
CTFC.Harry
Posts: 266
Joined: 26 Oct 2018, 14:07
Location: Exiled in the East Mids
Jerry St Clair wrote: 27 Nov 2023, 13:08 Having spent more than a decade as nomads, Gloucester fans must have thought things were looking up when they returned to Meadow Park. Football is a horribly cruel sport sometimes.
Weren't they looking good for promotion in 20/21 until their league was curtailed? And then they of course got to the play-offs last season as well. Seem to have dropped off a cliff this season.

On a side note, I had a look at the Hellenic League earlier and was surprised to see that Cinderford and Slimbridge are both down there now. They've been consistently in Step 4 for a good while haven't they? Gloucestershire Football is certainly in a bit of a rut!
SHANDY VOR
Posts: 581
Joined: 12 Aug 2012, 16:13
And Worcester of course
CTFC.Harry
Posts: 266
Joined: 26 Oct 2018, 14:07
Location: Exiled in the East Mids
SHANDY VOR wrote: 01 Dec 2023, 07:37 And Worcester of course
Quite right! I remember seeing in the Summer that 2500 went to watch Worcester City play the Raiders. Strange how the latter play at Sixways. Hopefully the appetite for Football increases up there with the demise of the Rugby club.
paperboy
Posts: 2860
Joined: 05 Jul 2011, 22:56
CTFC.Harry wrote: 01 Dec 2023, 13:20
SHANDY VOR wrote: 01 Dec 2023, 07:37 And Worcester of course
Quite right! I remember seeing in the Summer that 2500 went to watch Worcester City play the Raiders. Strange how the latter play at Sixways. Hopefully the appetite for Football increases up there with the demise of the Rugby club.
Coincidentally, City unveiled hopes for a new ground as part of a new complex north of the city in Fernhill Heath this week.
A lorra ,lorra hoops to jump through for that to become reality and smart money might think they'll still be at Claines Lane in 10 years time.
Sad to think that for many years they were similar in profile to us, but whilst we've travelled upwards they've done the opposite.
Wellwisher
Posts: 144
Joined: 24 Jan 2022, 22:21
Something strange going on at FGR?

"Forest Green's FA Cup second-round tie at Blackpool on Saturday has been postponed due to a Football Association investigation into League Two club Rovers.

A statement from Forest Green said they would "comply with the FA in their investigation" before updating fans.

It has not been confirmed what the FA are looking into."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/67596738
ctfc-fan
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 12:00
Wellwisher wrote:Something strange going on at FGR?

"Forest Green's FA Cup second-round tie at Blackpool on Saturday has been postponed due to a Football Association investigation into League Two club Rovers.

A statement from Forest Green said they would "comply with the FA in their investigation" before updating fans.

It has not been confirmed what the FA are looking into."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/67596738
Brilliant! Maybe the wheels are about to fall off DV’s media machine! Nice to see bad publicity for once ImageImage
Ralph
Posts: 4850
Joined: 23 Dec 2009, 01:56
Here's hoping they get a points deduction..
If it was an ineligible player, the FA should just come out and say it. They are not saying what it is which makes me think, it's a bit more than that
asl
Posts: 6874
Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 09:37
OTC has spoken to the girl in the office who has assured him that there's nothing to see, here. "These are not the ineligible players you are looking for".
Chris FGR
Posts: 308
Joined: 17 Sep 2015, 16:51
Citizen understands it is to do with an ineligible player. So that's us out of the Cup then, mainly thanks to incompetence/lack of anyone giving a s#!t and actually doing their job properly which sums up the way the club has been run over the last year or so.
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29922
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
494 at The New Lawn tonight in the Trophy. Deary me.
ctfc-fan
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 12:00
Image
ctfc-fan
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 12:00
Image

Rude because their club is hated by the masses.
ctfc-fan
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 12:00
Image

The natives are getting touchy now. Apparently FGR are due to hear tomorrow midday. Fingers crossed they re out of the cup and deducted league points and Stale Mince is outed as a secret meat eater Image
ctfc-fan
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 12:00
So Forest Green have clearly bribed someone as despite admitting to fielding an illegible player, they have been allowed to replay their match against Scarborough. It will be interesting to see if Barnsley take any action against the FA for this as they did the same and were thrown out.
User avatar
longmover
Posts: 2986
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 18:55
ctfc-fan wrote: 06 Dec 2023, 20:49 So Forest Green have clearly bribed someone as despite admitting to fielding an illegible player, they have been allowed to replay their match against Scarborough. It will be interesting to see if Barnsley take any action against the FA for this as they did the same and were thrown out.
An FA statement read: "The FA charged Forest Green Rovers for fielding an ineligible player in the Emirates FA Cup first round proper tie against Scarborough Athletic, which constitutes a breach of FA Cup Rule 109, and Forest Green Rovers subsequently admitted this charge."

Barnsley were kicked out of the FA Cup in November for fielding an ineligible player in their 3-0 first-round replay win at non-league Horsham.


fit and proper.
ctfc-fan
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 12:00
Absolutely disgraceful. I can see this opening up a can of worms.
Si Robin
Posts: 5670
Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 10:29
longmover wrote: 06 Dec 2023, 21:58
ctfc-fan wrote: 06 Dec 2023, 20:49 So Forest Green have clearly bribed someone as despite admitting to fielding an illegible player, they have been allowed to replay their match against Scarborough. It will be interesting to see if Barnsley take any action against the FA for this as they did the same and were thrown out.
An FA statement read: "The FA charged Forest Green Rovers for fielding an ineligible player in the Emirates FA Cup first round proper tie against Scarborough Athletic, which constitutes a breach of FA Cup Rule 109, and Forest Green Rovers subsequently admitted this charge."

Barnsley were kicked out of the FA Cup in November for fielding an ineligible player in their 3-0 first-round replay win at non-league Horsham.


fit and proper.
With all due respect, I know getting at Vince is free reign on here and I'm not against that, but, I think the one thing you can't accuse him of is being an unfit and improper owner. He has never seen the club into any financial issues, as far as I'm aware never been late with pay to staff, etc...

What he's done is financially dope the club above their "station" and if he does go their financial sustainability might be in issue - but until he does then he's been nothing but a good thing for FGR in terms of where they are as a club (forget the moralistic issues that you may or may not agree with)

This is clearly an admin error, what seems like a similar error to the one Barnsley made (though not as bad given they've not been chucked out of the cup) and one that's been made by many teams over recent years (Bury in 2006 for example - before ownership issues). Oddly, it always seems to be linked to replays. Bury fielded an ineligible player in a replay, Barnsley the same and now FGR.
User avatar
longmover
Posts: 2986
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 18:55
Si Robin wrote: 07 Dec 2023, 08:32
longmover wrote: 06 Dec 2023, 21:58
ctfc-fan wrote: 06 Dec 2023, 20:49 So Forest Green have clearly bribed someone as despite admitting to fielding an illegible player, they have been allowed to replay their match against Scarborough. It will be interesting to see if Barnsley take any action against the FA for this as they did the same and were thrown out.
An FA statement read: "The FA charged Forest Green Rovers for fielding an ineligible player in the Emirates FA Cup first round proper tie against Scarborough Athletic, which constitutes a breach of FA Cup Rule 109, and Forest Green Rovers subsequently admitted this charge."

Barnsley were kicked out of the FA Cup in November for fielding an ineligible player in their 3-0 first-round replay win at non-league Horsham.


fit and proper.
With all due respect, I know getting at Vince is free reign on here and I'm not against that, but, I think the one thing you can't accuse him of is being an unfit and improper owner. He has never seen the club into any financial issues, as far as I'm aware never been late with pay to staff, etc...

What he's done is financially dope the club above their "station" and if he does go their financial sustainability might be in issue - but until he does then he's been nothing but a good thing for FGR in terms of where they are as a club (forget the moralistic issues that you may or may not agree with)

This is clearly an admin error, what seems like a similar error to the one Barnsley made (though not as bad given they've not been chucked out of the cup) and one that's been made by many teams over recent years (Bury in 2006 for example - before ownership issues). Oddly, it always seems to be linked to replays. Bury fielded an ineligible player in a replay, Barnsley the same and now FGR.
My 'fit and proper' comment was aimed at the FA (some midweek irony :lol: :roll: ).

I do think the FA need to explain the difference between fgr and barnsley as its getting a lot of traction on the socials. I'm intrigued as well.
asl
Posts: 6874
Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 09:37
Someone on the FGR thread offered this explanation of the difference between the two cases: Barnsley fielded a player who simply wasn't eligible and shouldn't have played; FGR fielded a player who was eligible but a particular piece of paperwork had been incorrectly filed. Had that paperwork been filled in correctly, there would have been no problem - but, in the Barnsley case, nothing in the paperwork would have changed the fact that their player should not have played. He also provided a precedent case (Colchester, I think - also ordered to replay a tie in similar circumstances).

Btw: it wasn't the replay that the fault occurred - it was the original drawn match.
User avatar
longmover
Posts: 2986
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 18:55
asl wrote: 07 Dec 2023, 10:17 Someone on the FGR thread offered this explanation of the difference between the two cases: Barnsley fielded a player who simply wasn't eligible and shouldn't have played; FGR fielded a player who was eligible but a particular piece of paperwork had been incorrectly filed. Had that paperwork been filled in correctly, there would have been no problem - but, in the Barnsley case, nothing in the paperwork would have changed the fact that their player should not have played. He also provided a precedent case (Colchester, I think - also ordered to replay a tie in similar circumstances).

Btw: it wasn't the replay that the fault occurred - it was the original drawn match.
Fair enough, this in their statement would have helped.
User avatar
Shade
Posts: 17235
Joined: 27 Sep 2010, 13:02
Location: Cheltenhamshire
Indeed it would, and would stop a lot of unnecessary speculation on the internet. Yet another case of the FA failing to wipe its ass.

Presumably Scarborough can claim back their costs, given they have had to play two games and travel to Nailsworth for nothing, and now have to stage a second home tie.
ctfc-fan
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 12:00
Scarborough leading the replay 1-0! C’mon boys, you can beat the scum!!
User avatar
longmover
Posts: 2986
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 18:55
ctfc-fan wrote: 12 Dec 2023, 20:20 Scarborough leading the replay 1-0! C’mon boys, you can beat the scum!!
hopefully blackpool wipe the floor with them as its Forest in the 3rd and the BBC will be in wetting themselves if FGR get there.
ctfc-fan
Posts: 2006
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 12:00
Hope so. Hope they batter them (in non-vegan batter)
Jerry St Clair
Posts: 1797
Joined: 15 Aug 2011, 16:40
Si Robin wrote: 07 Dec 2023, 08:32
With all due respect, I know getting at Vince is free reign on here and I'm not against that, but, I think the one thing you can't accuse him of is being an unfit and improper owner. He has never seen the club into any financial issues, as far as I'm aware never been late with pay to staff, etc...

What he's done is financially dope the club above their "station" and if he does go their financial sustainability might be in issue - but until he does then he's been nothing but a good thing for FGR in terms of where they are as a club (forget the moralistic issues that you may or may not agree with)
I disagree Si.

'Financial doping' is precisely what poor owners do. It's all fine.......until it isn't.

If a football club is completely reliant on the benevolence of one person, then they are incredibly fragile. It isn't completely the owners' fault. The EFL/FA rules are culpable here in allowing these situations to develop.

But unless the owner has a sustainability plan, which is in their gift, then I would argue they are, at least partially, culpable in putting the future of their clubs at risk.
Post Reply