Of course not. But when a team beats another team 3-0 you can get a pretty good indication of which is the better side. Doncaster got the winner with a wonder goal, but that's football.
Nah you guys didnt fall away as bad as they did, you were in and out of the playoff spots last year like it was the hokey cokey hehe
Will Leeds be able to afford him after all looks like there fans are stopping supporting them in droves http://www.thescratchingshed.com/2011/10/elland-road-attendances-down-more-than-15/
Well not giving him money seems like a fairly effective way of doing it, does it not? I'm giving up my ST next season and don't intend to put more than 100 quid in his pocket. That's 500 down on what I've given him this season. If even 1,000 more think like me (and I bet it's more), the club will make a significant loss. Something Bates will have to react to.
A real fan goes to the support their club regardless of who sits in the driving seat. What do you think the players think of it? They're not gonna want to stick around. Sorry, but I just find it pathetic.
What happened to taking banners and chanting "so-and-so out!" at matches? That's more effective that 50 or so fans not bothering to show up, even if it is 80% of the entire attendance...
A real fan has their club's best interests at heart, and in this case, starving Bates of the money he needs to keep us afloat is what will trigger a sale of the club - the only thing that is in its best interests. There is no alternative. It's extreme, but has to be done for the good of LUFC. And don't imply I'm not a real fan when I'll still be going to 15+ away games from the North East next season. Well I suggest it's more like at least 10,000 fans who aren't showing up who otherwise would have been. We've protested and yes, it had an effect and yes, I'd like to see more of it. But ultimately, it won't kick off unless we sell more players or fall into the relegation places. We just look expectant and fickle otherwise. And I still think depriving him of cash has more of an effect. Bates just seems to relish the hatred towards him - last time he was at a game and 'Bates out' was being sung, he did conducting motions at the Kop like he wanted more.
You might get an idea who was better on the day! Nothing else. AKCJ that type of nonsense makes you look like you know nothing about football. 1998-99 season Man Utd were beaten 3-0 by Arsenal and 3-1 by Sheffield Wednesday End result: Champions, FA Cup Winners, Champions League winners 1999-2000 season Man Utd beaten 5-0 by Chelsea End result: Utd champions by 18 points (26 ahead of Chelsea) 2009-2010 season Chelsea beaten 3 - 1by Wigan End result Chelsea champions Wigan 16th etc etc Palace are above you in the league so have been the better side so far this season after 22 games. The table doesn't lie. After 22 games the following teams are better than Leicester: Southampton West Ham Middlesborough Hull City Cardiff Leeds Reading Crystal Palace Blackpool Brighton It may well change by the end of the season but until then get rid of the "Billy Big-B***ocks" and people may give you a more serious hearing. Merry Xmas.
I said 'gives a pretty good indication'. So all you've done is look like you can't read or take in new information. As Proud Fox said, we won't know until May and even those results will be iffy because we have changed manager mid season again to a completely new style.
