JamesBCFC

Congratulations.

That's also a job that I got some cider working on.

Noises suggesting we will spend a bit more this season coming. Lloyd Kelly I think will stay at least 1 more season. Was his breakout year and not played in the position his long term future is seen as.

Because you quoted me...

Well the post was quite clearly a joke. So I was here to make a joke while passing the time on my way home from Hull.

Do you have that quote saved?

Should I wait until you guys are out of the playoffs before starting "The race for promotion 19/20"?

We've got a flat tyre, but still racing.

Eh. He hasn't done a bad job, but he's taken a team that's a playoff side and nearly reached the playoffs (may yet do it). Derby are always in and around the playoff picture. If he takes them up then he's done a very good job.

Got the car going with a bump start, we're still in this race.

Whereas on Saturday we played very well for most of the game, tonight we were bad until the penalty save. Controlled the game with no threat in the first half and found ourselves 1-0 down. Penalty save seemed to give the players belief and changed the game. Was worth missing my brother's birthday to go though If Derby don't win tomorrow then Boro are favourites for me. However, Rotherham have a decent home record and could cause a slip up there. Can't believe I'm saying this, but come on Swansea.

No, Bristol play a different sport

And is it really awkward? Not for me. The comment made was a joke which didn't in any way suggest City would be getting promotion, and now we aren't.

We had an engine failure.

My money is on the guy 3rd from the left.

So when does the race for promotion start? Is this free practice now or are we in qualifying? Are we allowed to pit for fuel?

There is. That's not an FFP issue as such. Academy spending is exempt from FFP, presumably the idea being that if a club is developing the players then they aren't spending a fortune to buy them- most will cost little to nothing (on a relative scale). However clubs attempting to horde as much young talent and then extort teams who want to loan one and using their academy status as a way to milk money from players they have no intention of using in the first team is an issue. As an example Tomas Kalas is Chelsea's longest serving player, and has a total of 2 league appearences in 9 years. In that time they've charged a loan fee of at least £1-2m to Bristol City, Fulham (twice), Middlesbrough (twice) , FC Koln and possibly another team or two, as well as getting the club's to contribute to his wages which would be above what any of those clubs would have been paying at the time of him joining. There's no intention of Chelsea using Kalas as a first teamer and since signing his last contract with them he has said he feels "like a training cone, moved around to wherever the club wants". Thankfully there is a rule change coming in which I believe is limiting the amount of over 21* year old players a club can send out on loan. *Might be over 23, as that's the max age for a 'Young player' award.

It was **** ridiculous. Fully understand that a club would mark up, and just for balance 90% of the time these were on sale there was a "50% off everything" deal in the shop, but they still took the piss with this. That said it's not a story that should have reached front page of the BBC website Club was wrong to do it, and today's result was shit been a bad week for us. And despite all this I just bought my ticket for Millwall away- I think I need a lobotomy.

Generally agree with your summary of the game. We certainly weren't as good after your first goal. The Baker sub I think was to allow the formation to change. Can't fully recall off the top of my head though.

Before Adomah's miss Matty Taylor also missed a free header with the goal gaping (though not as open as Adomah's miss). In about the second minute Eliasson pinched the ball off of a defender and should have put Matty Taylor 1 on 1 but instead dragged his shot wide. We could have easily scored a couple from those chances. I'm not disputing that Villa created more chances, but I don't think simply looking at the stats shows a fair reflection of the first half. We moved the ball around well ourselves and looked good on the counter until that final pass, so our moves broke down before the shot. And playing the counter attacking style you are naturally going to have less possession. However, I'm not suggesting that we were on top, just that the first half was evenly matched in terms of quality. Abrahams offside wasn't even close, whereas the Weimann one was a tight call. So think that's a bit of a moot point to mention. An aside on the "but for O'Leary it would have been a hammering" type comment I think that's a bit of an odd one. The fact that he made lots of saves on its own doesn't mean Villa deserved to win- after all O'Leary is being paid to stop shots from going in, he wasn't doing anything beyond what he is paid for. This also applies to our home match where we lost to Stoke, but Butland pulled off 3 or 4 worldies and we hit the post twice. Butland making those saves is what he is paid incredibly well to do. However, post penalty, Villa were well on top. And based on performance from that point an argument that Villa deserved the win is entirely valid. On VAR, I don't think you get the penalty if it was there Saturday, and it would have cleared up the Weimann onside/offside once and for all. That's potentially a 2 goal swing right there. Still don't like VAR mind.

R.E the penalty. Hourihane backed into Hunt, then collapsed and handballed on his way down. When Hunt asked the referee and linesman what it was given for they gave contradictory answers- one said for pushing Hourihane, one said for pulling him. Going back a bit into the offside, one thing that's quite telling IMO is the reaction of players. Not sure who it was, but you can see one of the Villa defenders shaking his head when the goal is scored, rather than appealing for offside. Usually if a goal is offside (and even sometimes when it isn't) you get plenty of appeals that it was. Don't want a bollocking for derailing the promotion thread, but appreciate yourself and a few others being able to have a reasonable debate on it. The decisions still frustrate, and while I dislike VAR, it's becoming apparent that it's needed as the refereeing standards are declining. Regardless I'm now looking forward to Reading on Good Friday, hopefully I'm over this illness by then! *Bolded bit is a bit subjective.

To be fair, has any fan from either club said that? Edit- read it as couldn't say you didn't deserve to score.

Weren't completely outclassed until after the penalty though. First half Villa created the better chances and had a bit more possession, but we looked good on the ball and dangerous on the counter- albeit the final ball was lacking. Villa started undoubtedly stronger second half, but weren't quite dominant until Hourihane won a penalty by committing handball. After that I fully agree that Villa were well on top, the question is would that still have been the case if the penalty wasn't given? The majority of the chances created were after that, at which point you have two after effects, the momentum shift of the goal, and our players having to wonder what they can actually do without being penalised. I think that's a valid point to make on how the game shifted.

Not at all. Weird you think that even the slightest disagreement means someone is salty. Bit in bold I fully agree with, and it grates when Man City or Man United are just referred to as "City" or "United"- even seen it done when they were playing against another "City" or "United" themselves! I wouldn't necessarily expect an opposition fan to refer to us as "City" or at least not outside of the context of a game where we played their side. Obviously I can't speak for all our fans, but the consensus seems to be most of us find being referred to as "Bristol" a bit annoying, though I can't say exactly why. Doesn't wind me up enough to upset me as it were, but found it did wind up quite a few Villa fans on Twitter when your club was referred to as "Aston" yet those same people couldn't see they were doing exactly the same thing with "Bristol". All O was doing by saying "Aston" was to highlight that. But very much straying off topic now, sorry mods.

FWIW @rodders0223, most of you who quote me come across as alright. However, the Aston Villa fan on that thread (not Pedro) has come across as a bit of a belter each time he turns up on OTIB. I realise when on here people might not always agree or appreciate my posts, but I do at least try and be respectful for the most part.