torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Well most of us are. The rest attend and stand on the hill and watch anyway.
Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2
Twist it how you like, home attendances this season are 82% down on last season's league average.
Fans ARE voting with their feet.
NOPM.
Did the attendance make you more proud than the actual score though? Some people I have seen just comment on the attendance and not the actual football being played.
Those weak in mind and heart go to sick fields
no, those who want to support the team and view the situation differently to you are the ones going to sixfields.Those weak in mind and heart go to sick fields
Still shit as per my previous post. We had more home fans watching Arlesey Town last year than those first 3 home games put together, thats a statement in its self.
How does that make them weak? ha
How does that make them weak? ha
Why is it Torch?
Because if they were strong and stuck to genuine feelings, did not go into Sixfields this whole sorry mess would be resolved.
What would make SISU pick the phone up to ACL? A full Sixfields or an empty Sixfields?
Would the FL and FA want the situation resolved if the stadium was empty or full?
Before you say why not ACL call SISU, well offers have been made and not taken, ACL are moving on.
Was at the Ricoh yesterday it was packed again.
They've made a decision to go to games and stuck to that decision against majority opinion. Maybe they view that helping the club means attending games. This doesn't make them weak, this just means they don't hold your viewpoint. Of course to many on here if you're not a boycotter, or a hill freeloader you must be weak.Why is it Torch?
Because I would never call any supporter of any team "sick in the mind and heart" for going to cheer their team. I'm not going, but fair play to those that wish to. If I'm disappointed by any fans then it's the ones on the hill.
Your view Torch, mine is if no one went this would be resolved much quicker.
Your view Torch, mine is if no one went this would be resolved much quicker.
Your view Torch, mine is if no one went this would be resolved much quicker.
What was on at the Ricoh to attract 32,000?
I think the Telegraph claimed that city support had risen by about 400 on the first game. Then i think there was an additional 20 odd for the Colchester.
The police I spoke with outside the ground on Sunday said that actual numbers through the gate was less than the official attendance. Who's figures do you trust?
Can't trust any of them.
To think we used to accuse the club of "lowering" the gate, presumably because they didn't want to declare the income.
Now it seems they want to do the opposite.
Because I would never call any supporter of any team "sick in the mind and heart" for going to cheer their team. I'm not going, but fair play to those that wish to. If I'm disappointed by any fans then it's the ones on the hill.
Yep they just want to pay more tax I guess.
It is one big conspiracy to show the people on the hill up isn't it?
I'd just like to say how proud I was at the lowly 1,789 attendance for the Colchester game. We have shown resolve for an issue that transcends a short-term urge to watch the team play.
Mr Fisher expected most of us to have crawled back by now but I think the message is loud and clear with SP and most of the media noting our absence despite the entertainment on offer.
The NOPM campaign is looking strong. Keep it up.
I hardly think paying tax on the profits of a few hundred people would bother Fisher, when we're ultimately talking of millions of pounds. Why bring the hill into it though Nick? I don't understand how the gates will affect those who go on the hill (unless, of course, you mean those on the hill should be paying to watch the team)?
Why else would he want to fabricate attendance if it wasn't to prove people wrong? Thing is, he obviously gave it loads of cockiness when saying people will flock back and we will get x amount which we clearly haven't so he has lost face. Why would adding a cheeky 150 onto a shocking attendance make much difference?
They've made a decision to go to games and stuck to that decision against majority opinion. Maybe they view that helping the club means attending games. This doesn't make them weak, this just means they don't hold your viewpoint. Of course to many on here if you're not a boycotter, or a hill freeloader you must be weak.
Absolutely..... and vice versa
I don't think it is a true celebration of our low attendances, but more in the fact that the majority of fans are telling fisher that he has got it wrong.
As i read things, This whole thread seems to have gone wayward?
My interpretation of the OP's post, is that it is his satisfaction at the resolve of people not giving in to temptation in the way fisher thought we would.
I don't think it is a true celebration of our low attendances, but more in the fact that the majority of fans are telling fisher that he has got it wrong.
I think there is nothing more, that all of us would want to see, than our team playing great football in front of a packed Ricoh. To suggest that some are revelling in our low attendances, as an individual reason for celebration, is nonsense.
Pusb
I'd just like to say how proud I was at the lowly 1,789 attendance for the Colchester game
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?