Same process as before - you can secure your own seats.

Need to put yesterday’s disappointment behind us and fill the place.

Let’s take a good lead over to Bradford.

On the piss in the afternoon prior to an 8pm kick-off on a Saturday, should make it a belting atmosphere under the lights.

COYFWM 👏

Edited May 3May 3 by desperado

2 hours ago, Johnnyrotten said:

That is just not the game I watched.  The ball was in our half for most of the first 15 minutes.  We were undoubtedly the better team for the last 30 minutes of that half, without creating anything at all.

In the 2nd half we got a great goal, might have got a 2nd, but spent loads of that half trying to stop them getting into our box (and getting near Bonham who was scary), I fail to see how we dominated at all, it was exhausting watching so god knows how nackered the players were.

Thought their crowd gave decent backing too, bearing in mind only 2k, hope our's can make themselves heard as much on Thursday.

I'm glad I didn't watch this game

2 hours ago, Stig said:

Anywhere where you have to wait for table service beers isn't for me. I'd get too impatient. 

Would probably stand up queuing the same length of time and be happy mind

Usually works really well as they come over just before you finish your pint ready to take payment for your next one but they couldn’t keep up last night 

16 hours ago, desperado said:

Oh and by the way that crowd is absolute bull shit. We’ve gone back to the Burnden days of fiddling the crowd for tax returns.

Only now it’s so we don’t have to declare to the EFL how much we’ve received from tickets sold. 

And the twisted irony in all of this, is that we’ve gone through the last 4 years of over inflating crowds, declaring kids tickets as bums on seats.

It was as rammed as I’ve ever known it in ESL north side.

There was more in today at “22,700” than there was last week at over “25,000”

You just don’t get a real reflection of attendance anymore.

I agree with that bit, it was as packed as I've seen it in recent years (but I didn't attend the 2 play offs v Barnsley).  Not just in the ground but the concourses absolutely rammed pre-match and H-T, more than any other time.

But presumably the seat map of unsold seats on the day of the game was accurate, it had to be.

I think it just shows how much league attendances are accurate every week, we get folk saying Bolton fans haven't turned up but anyone that was there knows it was a huge turnout relative to league games.

I don't go along with your false declaration of attendance though, the difference would be minimal between declaring 23k and 25k, are they really going to lie for the sake of a few grand, and logically every single play off attendance must be made up, this season and previous seasons.

It was absolutely heaving

Pinched from a Bradford fan’s tweet but shows just how many empty seats there were in the North

Edited May 10May 10 by Leyther_Matt

11 minutes ago, Johnnyrotten said:

I agree with that bit, it was as packed as I've seen it in recent years (but I didn't attend the 2 play offs v Barnsley).  Not just in the ground but the concourses absolutely rammed pre-match and H-T, more than any other time.

But presumably the seat map of unsold seats on the day of the game was accurate, it had to be.

I think it just shows how much league attendances are accurate every week, we get folk saying Bolton fans haven't turned up but anyone that was there knows it was a huge turnout relative to league games.

I don't go along with your false declaration of attendance though, the difference would be minimal between declaring 23k and 25k, are they really going to lie for the sake of a few grand, and logically every single play off attendance must be made up, this season and previous seasons.

The announced attendance is tickets sold (including season tickets and cops for staff, etc), not people in the ground. Given everyone had to fork out for this match with less than 4 days' notice, turnout will have been close to 100%.

Edited May 10May 10 by jmjhb

9 hours ago, Leyther_Matt said:

EFL finance bods check the reporting so it absolutely will have been the correct crowd. Odd empty seats were all over the place and it soon mounts up.  

It would be wierd if they didn't.  There are 12 play off games excluding the final, potentially over 200k attendances generating maybe £5mil, they must have a system in place to ensure gate receipts are recorded accurately.  I just don't see us as being the type of club to cook the books even if it was that easy to get away with it.

9 hours ago, Bradshaw White said:

Game of two halves. First half lacked intensity. 2nd half we played with more intent & that was the difference. They were very negative which didn’t help. We can be happy with that. A similar show from us should get the job done as we are the better side. Stadium was bouncing last night, pure passion. Onwards. 

Strange we saw it so different.  I thought it was the most intense half I've seen this season.  Only bettered by the intensity of the 2nd half!  Every single ball challenged for with intent and purpose, not an inch given, every player closed down the second they got the ball.

The only breaks were when they tried to slow it down - as you say that was negative from them (30 seconds for every throw in or dead ball) but that's a normal tactic for an away team.

The first time I took a breath was when the ref blew his half time whistle, couldn't relax for a second.

From the EFL handbook, if you really want to know:

A levy amounting to 3% of the Semi Final Net Gate Receipts Before Levy shall be payable in accordance with Article 36. The balance of the net proceeds after deduction of the levy represents the ‘Net Gate Receipts’ and such Net Gate Receipts shall be divided as follows:

5.6.1 50% of the Net Gate Receipts shall be paid into the Pool Account referred to in Article 35; and

5.6.2 the remaining 50% of the Net Gate Receipts shall be aggregated, Division by Division, and each Division’s aggregated monies shall be shared equally amongst the four Clubs taking part in that Division’s Play-Off matches.

5.7 Each Home Club shall send the 3% levy and the shares of the Net Gate Receipts to be paid Into the Pool Account to The League together with a statement of the calculations thereof within ten days of the match to be aggregated by Division.

Edited May 10May 10 by jmjhb

8 hours ago, freds dad said:

He did seem to be struggling for the last 20 minutes and before then he wasn’t very mobile but then he is 34 so if they do go up I can’t see him playing much of a part in the Championship 

He won't lose any sleep over that, he'll move onto his next promotion mission.  Looking at Bradford's team, its a struggle to think of one player that would be playing in the championship (not that we have many ourselves, aside from loan players).

29 minutes ago, Johnnyrotten said:

I agree with that bit, it was as packed as I've seen it in recent years (but I didn't attend the 2 play offs v Barnsley).  Not just in the ground but the concourses absolutely rammed pre-match and H-T, more than any other time.

But presumably the seat map of unsold seats on the day of the game was accurate, it had to be.

I think it just shows how much league attendances are accurate every week, we get folk saying Bolton fans haven't turned up but anyone that was there knows it was a huge turnout relative to league games.

I don't go along with your false declaration of attendance though, the difference would be minimal between declaring 23k and 25k, are they really going to lie for the sake of a few grand, and logically every single play off attendance must be made up, this season and previous seasons.

 

10 hours ago, Leyther_Matt said:

Real battling performance considering there wasn’t the easy route of hitting Dalby up top or sticking it in the channels for Kenny.

Goal was up there with best limbs at the Reebok.

Nam Ploy absolutely chocker pre match, we really do need a proper pub up there.

EFL finance bods check the reporting so it absolutely will have been the correct crowd. Odd empty seats were all over the place and it soon mounts up.  

As I always will, I’ll concede if I think I’ve been shown to be wrong, I’ll hold my hands up on this one.

An over-reaction to the anomaly of witnessing one crowd as 22,700 be more than one announced as 25,000.

I still think it’s hard to see 6,000 spare seats last night, but I can understand the odd ones mount up. 
 

5 hours ago, W.cramp said:

Thought sheehan was great last night,  last few games he looks to me as though he has decided to take the game by the scruff of the neck and control it.  

Erahon looked very rusty, 3 times in the first half he gave the ball away in our half,  I understand he will likely be starting on Thursday but simons looked more upto speed when he came on.

I must admit I've been puzzled by the positive comments on EE, I thought he was showing the reason he doesn't play more.  Sloppy in possession more often than most, clumsy in the challenge more often than most, a bit bull in a china shop at times.  There is a perception of his physicality and strength but its not often that's been evident in terms of winning tackles, Sheehan and RR won more last night from memory (if someone has stats to prove me wrong fair enough).  And if his role was just to be an extra body in midfield OK, but it took a lot away from our attacking threat only having one up front. 

5 hours ago, Arrested development said:

I actually thought Ethan had a good game considering he's been out for a while. I'm not his biggest fan but yesterday he did the job that needed doing. Him and Sheehan dominated that midfield. 

That was down to Sheehan and RR in the main, no way was RR playing up front, virtually the same role he's had in previous games.  EE did do some good stuff, not saying he had a nightmare or anything, just thought as said above he was rusty and Simons seemed to be an upgrade, as Dempsey would have been IMO.

First game back after an injury.

Missing strikers, no Dempsey. 

Team did pretty well, without being spectacular. 

A nervy occasion, and everyone contributed, against a hard working, well drilled opponent.

He did OK.

4 hours ago, masi 51 said:

We play a midfield two,,,,,,,His legs are shot to take either RR or Sheehans place . I give you he plays further forward and last night we had Erhahon and Sheehan.....RR took the 10.......And a fully fit squad we play two up top Kenny Dalby

Looks ok in a bad team that did ok in a bad league.

I'm not trying to be a Sarcevic fan here, I didn't care that he left as I was happy with our replacements.  But if he's scored 11 in a bad team, that hardly creates anything, how many would he have got in our team?  (we finished below them but we'll go with we are better).  The comment was that he wouldn't get on our bench, I'd say you could do worse than bringing him on as a 10 for the last 20 minutes when chasing a goal.  Not for me to say who instead of, but its harsh to play down his impact this season when we aren't blessed with goalscoring midfielders.  And that fully fit squad - that would be great!

3 hours ago, CumbrianWhite said:

Getting to the point where he’s our best player. We don’t win that game without him last night. I think he’s one of the few who could comfortably step up into championship football. 

I think its just necessary to have a "stopper" and a big unit that wins the headers, in fact its so obvious that its incredible he's missed so many games.  Although his handball at Swindon probably didn't do him any favours.  There were also folk on here slating him in the U21s cup for looking a bit half hearted.

If he has a fault, his pace is a questionable, takes a while to get his frame moving, but at this level he's a must and if we went up I'd want to keep him in the squad at least.  Also comes across as a captain type on and off the pitch, but presume he wasn't in the running for that role given he wasn't a first choice.

1 hour ago, Johnnyrotten said:

I agree with that bit, it was as packed as I've seen it in recent years (but I didn't attend the 2 play offs v Barnsley).  Not just in the ground but the concourses absolutely rammed pre-match and H-T, more than any other time.

But presumably the seat map of unsold seats on the day of the game was accurate, it had to be.

I think it just shows how much league attendances are accurate every week, we get folk saying Bolton fans haven't turned up but anyone that was there knows it was a huge turnout relative to league games.

I don't go along with your false declaration of attendance though, the difference would be minimal between declaring 23k and 25k, are they really going to lie for the sake of a few grand, and logically every single play off attendance must be made up, this season and previous seasons.

I think part of the reason the concourses were so packed was that it was so cold. I saw quite a few dressed for May, when we got a March (and earlier) temperature.

People stayed down on the concourse until kick off, and a lot went down at half time, simply to warm up!

23k (it wasn’t just 22k) felt about right.

4 minutes ago, Rival Son said:

I think part of the reason the concourses were so packed was that it was so cold. I saw quite a few dressed for May, when we got a March (and earlier) temperature.

People stayed down on the concourse until kick off, and a lot went down at half time, simply to warm up!

23k (it wasn’t just 22k) felt about right.

Agree with that about the temperature, was bloody freezing, had four layers on at top of West Upper 

I'm surprised people think we'd be fiddling the figures

It's not like collecting ticket stubs anymore 

2 hours ago, gonzo said:

I'm glad I didn't watch this game

We all see it differently, someone else thought we dominated for 90 minutes, its all opinions.  It was thrilling to be there though, I haven't seen a play off at our stadium for about 20 years or whatever, and they are special unique occasions.  If I misread what I saw, it was just my genuine take on it and I know the fans around me were breathless in the 2nd half and happy when the ref blew the whistle.  Which would have been a surprise in a 1st leg we dominated from start to finish but only scored 1.  

The way I saw it is there were a couple of times where we let them in and then a bit of pressure in the last ten minutes but that's about it

I never really thought we weren't the better team or good value for the win 

1 hour ago, jmjhb said:

The announced attendance is tickets sold (including season tickets and cops for staff, etc), not people in the ground. Given everyone had to fork out for this match with less than 4 days' notice, turnout will have been close to 100%.

Sorry my bit that said announced attendances are accurate, meant to say inaccurate!

Its common knowledge that its seats sold, whereas cup games and play offs as you say are basically bums on seats, you're not buying a ticket 3 days before then not going.  Many more last night than usual, but we don't know how many are normally here (chap in ticket office said its normally 4k unused S/Ts - more for midweek).

10 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

The way I saw it is there were a couple of times where we let them in and then a bit of pressure in the last ten minutes but that's about it

I never really thought we weren't the better team or good value for the win 

I agree.  I was just surprised anyone thought we dominated the entire game.

2nd half, they had that run through when someone challenged as last man and Bonham spilled it, there was the Sarcevic chance he surprisingly put wide (at 0-0), the cross from their overlapping left back when someone was coming in at pen spot, could have gone on target but went to their man 6 yards out, put it wide but was offside; 4 corners in 2nd half - not saying they are chances, just moments we held our breath and hoped for the best.  Course - we had as many chances if not more at the other end and the one that hit the post was freakish, I was celebrating properly and thought it was a wind up when someone said no goal.

1-0 to us about right, I never thought we dominated in terms of being all over them for long spells and/or creating loads, it was a really tight game and I expect the same on Thursday.

1 hour ago, Johnnyrotten said:

That was down to Sheehan and RR in the main, no way was RR playing up front, virtually the same role he's had in previous games.  EE did do some good stuff, not saying he had a nightmare or anything, just thought as said above he was rusty and Simons seemed to be an upgrade, as Dempsey would have been IMO.

Simons wasn’t an upgrade, you mustn’t like EE. 

1 minute ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Simons wasn’t an upgrade, you mustn’t like EE. 

I can't think of a player I don't like in this squad, can only think of a couple in the last couple of years I didn't enjoy watching.

I just thought Simons looked after the ball better, didn't give away as many fouls and was more attack minded.

EE might play at Bradford and be MOTM like he was a couple of times earlier in the season, and if he is as usual I'll say it as I see it on a game to game basis.