3-0

Collins, Paris and Killa Cam

Even if we'd offered them the whole end, they wouldn't sell them all, and that would leave large sections empty.

Restrict their numbers and allow home fans in the south stand again.

A no brainer. 

19 hours ago, L/H White said:

No confidence at all in these playoffs 

Cheer up misery guts we’ll slam em. 😁

1 minute ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Even if we'd offered them the whole end, they wouldn't sell them all, and that would leave large sections empty.

Restrict their numbers and allow home fans in the south stand again.

A no brainer. 

Give them 100 in the middle of the crazy corner 😂

im not even arsed

rushing around, no refreshments, nowt getting decided

plus its live on proper telly

in fact, have they announced no bolton in the pubs yet?

2 minutes ago, Casino said:

in fact, have they announced no bolton in the pubs yet?

Yep plus 45 mile exclusion zone in place till 7pm

4 minutes ago, Casino said:

in fact, have they announced no bolton in the pubs yet?

What a joke that was. We had a laugh with em last year n all 

25 minutes ago, Whitesince63 said:

Cheer up misery guts we’ll slam em. 😁

i hope you're right 

54 minutes ago, desperado said:

It’s bollocks, it really is.

I get why and I understand the barriers/limitations/safety etc.

But those responsible for making this decision have bottled it. Most weeks those making football decisions for big games/crowds, can find ways to overcome these barriers, to have grounds full and allow the maximum number of people to watch a game safely.

it's nothing to do with safety

1 hour ago, Zico said:

it's nothing to do with safety

I think you’re right.

But I’d be amazed if the decision makers, whoever they are (Barnsley/Bwfc//EFL/SYP) if pushed for a response in reasoning behind the decision didn’t hind behind “safety”.

 

Why would Barnsley want another 2,000 Bolton fans in the ground generating noise?

They need to do whatever helps them most.

It’s an allocation that suits both clubs and 1 fanbase really. 
 

the apathy around their place at the minute when they probably feel they’re already up against it means they want to reduce our following and potential influence on the game. Whereas the game at our place allows us to put them in the top tier only and potentially open up the bottom for home fans. As they would be unlikely to bring much more than that. Can’t imagine many within the club being too frustrated with it overall. 

4 minutes ago, barrycowdrill said:

It’s an allocation that suits both clubs and 1 fanbase really. 
 

the apathy around their place at the minute when they probably feel they’re already up against it means they want to reduce our following and potential influence on the game. Whereas the game at our place allows us to put them in the top tier only and potentially open up the bottom for home fans. As they would be unlikely to bring much more than that. Can’t imagine many within the club being too frustrated with it overall. 

Didn't they give us the same last season

15 minutes ago, Traf said:

Why would Barnsley want another 2,000 Bolton fans in the ground generating noise?

They need to do whatever helps them most.

Aye

It was never in their interests to give us a bigger allocation

4 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

Aye

It was never in their interests to give us a bigger allocation

Especially when the money generated is split 5-ways ie the 4 clubs in the play-offs and the EFL.

Add 2,000 Bolton fans at a maximum income of £40k, if they were all adult tickets.
Deduct the cost of more police & stewards and then keep 20% of it?
Not worth it.

We just need to concentrate on filling our ground. That second leg could be amazing with the stadium rocking 

36 minutes ago, DirtySanchez said:

Didn't they give us the same last season

They did which was driven mainly by them. I think we would’ve been open to more each way. Not saying that isn’t also the case this season but can see how we’d be more accepting of it this time with the scope to open the WSL to home supporters. 

2 minutes ago, barrycowdrill said:

They did which was driven mainly by them. I think we would’ve been open to more each way. Not saying that isn’t also the case this season but can see how we’d be more accepting of it this time with the scope to open the WSL to homo supporters. 

@Casino and @victor meldrew have been in there for years

4 minutes ago, tomski said:

@Casino and @victor meldrew have been in there for years

Haha SSL 🤦🏻‍♂️ long day 

If Barnsley can sell the seats to their own fans, it's fair enough, but if they choose to leave 3/4 thousand seats empty because they fear the noise that our fans can make, it makes Barnsley, pitiful, tinpot shithouses.

& yes, i'd certainly reciprocate, giving them the minimum possible number of tickets right at the back of the top tier.

1 hour ago, desperado said:

I think you’re right.

But I’d be amazed if the decision makers, whoever they are (Barnsley/Bwfc//EFL/SYP) if pushed for a response in reasoning behind the decision didn’t hind behind “safety”.

 

I don't think they would hide behind any excuse

not when we know we could've had 4-5k fot the league match if we'd wanted them

everyone knows the score and knows it's nothing to do with safety

they just announce the allocation and leave us to it

if pushed one club might say it was the  other who led the decision

1 hour ago, Traf said:

Why would Barnsley want another 2,000 Bolton fans in the ground generating noise?

They need to do whatever helps them most.

 

10 minutes ago, Zico said:

I don't think they would hide behind any excuse

not when we know we could've had 4-5k fot the league match if we'd wanted them

everyone knows the score and knows it's nothing to do with safety

they just announce the allocation and leave us to it

if pushed one club might say it was the  other who led the decision

So I think what you are both saying is it’s a decision that both clubs made/agreed in line with EFL regulations? 

With essentially the reason being it means both clubs are happy they don’t have to deal with a big away following which proves advantageous?

Again all of which I understand.

But I don’t like it and I don’t agree with it! 🤣

You could apply that to any game/match/occasion.

I get it in a sell out game, the 3000 (or 10% rule if less than 30,000 the prem use - used to use -) is more understandable than leaving stadiums/stands empty when they can/could be used. 

7 minutes ago, desperado said:

 

So I think what you are both saying is it’s a decision that both clubs made/agreed in line with EFL regulations? 

With essentially the reason being it means both clubs are happy they don’t have to deal with a big away following which proves advantageous?

Again all of which I understand.

But I don’t like it and I don’t agree with it! 🤣

You could apply that to any game/match/occasion.

I get it in a sell out game, the 3000 (or 10% rule if less than 30,000 the prem use - used to use -) is more understandable than leaving stadiums/stands empty when they can/could be used. 

aye, it's bullshit, I don't like it either

we've beaten plenty teams with 4k-5k behind the goal and lost to plenty with fuck all there

47 minutes ago, barrycowdrill said:

Haha SSL 🤦🏻‍♂️ long day 

Thought you were gonna say they are not homos ha

How you get around your phone saving the old version of the site again?