Albion Rovers vs Queen of the South; Scottish Cup 3rd Round; 26th November

[Broony88]

That assault on Marshall though. 

[Skyline Drifter]

18 minutes ago, Broony88 said:

That assault on Marshall though. 

Yeah I thought at the time that he appeared to slip when making the challenge but he didn't. It's accidental but clearly dangerous and it should probably have been a straight red.

[an86]

Also, with regards to the windfall, it should be noted that Rovers were one of the only clubs lucky enough to miss Sevco on their way up. The misfortune from that was that they didn't get the TV money that most of us did get. Obviously with our capacity, we did exceptionally well out of the ticket money, as utterly horrific as it was.

Really baffles me to see fans of small clubs grudging other small clubs a wee bit of good fortune. We're all largely in the same boat here.

[Mick1867]

2 hours ago, ayrmad said:

I'm not into clubs switching venues but once the authorities took the Queens shilling for allowing Celtic to use Hampden they ceded a bit of the moral high ground IMO.

Authorities? It was Queen's Park that got all the rent money from Celtic that season ( there was no stadium management contract in place with the SFA back then ) Can't remember the exact amount they paid us but I know McCann was seething about it at the time, which was pleasing 

[Bold Rover]

Go back further and Celtic chose to play their 1970 European Cup semi-final at Hampden. To accommodate a bigger crowd.

[lionel wickson]

Also, with regards to the windfall, it should be noted that Rovers were one of the only clubs lucky enough to miss Sevco on their way up. The misfortune from that was that they didn't get the TV money that most of us did get. Obviously with our capacity, we did exceptionally well out of the ticket money, as utterly horrific as it was.

Really baffles me to see fans of small clubs grudging other small clubs a wee bit of good fortune. We're all largely in the same boat here.

I'm pretty sure that the tv money is/was divided among all clubs for league games and there isn't any advantage in being the featured team. Scottish Cup ties are a different kettle of fish. Maybe League Cup ties too?

[Mick1867]

25 minutes ago, an86 said:

Also, with regards to the windfall, it should be noted that Rovers were one of the only clubs lucky enough to miss Sevco on their way up. The misfortune from that was that they didn't get the TV money that most of us did get. Obviously with our capacity, we did exceptionally well out of the ticket money, as utterly horrific as it was.

Really baffles me to see fans of small clubs grudging other small clubs a wee bit of good fortune. We're all largely in the same boat here.

If Rovers hadn't missed out on the "pleasure" of playing Sevco back then, would they have been "forced" to move those league games away from Cliftonhill?

[1320Lichtie]

I'm pretty sure that the tv money is/was divided among all clubs for league games and there isn't any advantage in being the featured team. Scottish Cup ties are a different kettle of fish. Maybe League Cup ties too?

It was.

And the cup ties are different and on a game by game basis.

[an86]

11 minutes ago, lionel wickson said:

I'm pretty sure that the tv money is/was divided among all clubs for league games and there isn't any advantage in being the featured team. Scottish Cup ties are a different kettle of fish. Maybe League Cup ties too?

My mistake. Assumed it was game by game.

[HibeeJibee]

Albion Rovers would have got £82,500 in TV money for each Rangers tie in the Scottish Cup, and a much smaller (but still not to be sniffed at) sum for the tie in the Challenge Cup.

In the league it was just rolled into prizemoney, most of which went to SFL1 clubs anyway under the 55%-33%-12% system.

SFL3 clubs made at best a few thousand £. Indeed there was press coverage of a couple who effectively lost money, as they spent more putting in extra lighting for the cameras.


Of course it also transpired SPL, having struck a bargain deal with SFL to buy their rights for c£1M to package with their own, actually paid Sky-BT to show Rangers league games.

Financially it was like striking the jackpot to play them in cups, versus league.

[parsforlife]

Given the hight of the hill and how low down CH is in comparison Donald J Trump would struggle to build a wall high enough to stop the locals watching. 

Will Parsforlife be demanding that gate receipts for Rovers game be used to build the wall to avoid a couple of kids & people who can't afford to pay in from seeing league 1/2 fixtures.

if he'd been as demanding of Gavin Masterton then maybe his club wouldn't have stiffed as many creditors and almost died..... Although he wouldn't be sitting in the comfort he does now at EEP which if my recollection is correct, which it rarely is, was built by a stadia group or something similar. A company that his owner was involved in and bumping clubs around the country 

YOUSE WER IN ADMIN!!!!1!!!!

not really sure how it's relevant at all tbh.

Ultimately I'm pretty confident Albion would find a way of hosting the game if they couldn't earn any cash from additional ticket sales. If they can't then let them play elsewhere, but still no cash, nobody should profit from failing to have their ground at an acceptable standard.

Oh and this was how I reacted to going into admin

[haufdaft]

Surely the capacity should be greater given this story 2 years ago.... Or did you find a better use for the money?
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=/amp/www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/albion-rovers-terrace-plans-double-4826333.amp&ved=0ahUKEwjT3benytPQAhVC2hoKHbKUBJ0QFgiGAjAf&usg=AFQjCNG0mHgIgFFRN5SpR2i1_ROVoWRogw&sig2=Cfcv8CCeUCF_S9bDQpXwUw

[Tam]

3 hours ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Yeah I thought at the time that he appeared to slip when making the challenge but he didn't. It's accidental but clearly dangerous and it should probably have been a straight red.

With glorious hindsight, I wish to god that the guy had got a way with it and stayed on the pitch. If so, I reckon we would have a replay at Palmerston, after playing out a tame final few mins.

[vikingTON]

5 hours ago, Bold Rover said:

So it's back to vT's assertion that we should have to leave the SPFL.

Incorrect again. You would be allowed to play in the SPFL, but wouldn't be able to use Cliftonhill until it has the facilities to fulfil all potential fixtures.Either reading for comprehension just isn't your thing or you're trying to build a straw man argument to win sympathy for the non-existent plight of your club.

Other clubs have substantially improved their facilities in order to host big home ties at their ground, including Annan who are currently playing a league below you. When Morton visited them when they were a non-league side in the Scottish Cup a decade ago, the away fans had to navigate makeshift entrances and segregation. Had they beaten us in the early stages and gone through, it probably wouldn't have been able to cope with a much larger travelling support. Through hard work and prioritising resources though, they now have a ground perfectly capable of hosting any club in Scotland without problems. 

Perhaps if their officials got away with punting big ties to Palmerston instead to rake in some cash, they wouldn't have bothered doing so.  

 

[Tam]

7 hours ago, Bold Rover said:

Interesting point of view - no segregation, no football. Well, we should certainly be out, by that criterion. Segregation at Cliftonhill, when applied, is almost entirely voluntary. Unless you cannot get through a strip of police tape tied between two random objects. Using the standards demanded in this discussion there'd be precious little football in Scotland. Maybe that's what some people want?

I am old enough to remember attending Hibs games in the 70s v OF with no segregation. And at Palmerston, like many a ground, home and away fans swapped ends at HT without rancour. In fact I attended the game on Tuesday night with a friend and work colleague from Coatbridge and stood with him amongst the home fans. And a pleasant good natured bunch they were too. As for Cliftonhill - apart from the odd pillar - I enjoy going there; but then, I go to watch the games, not sit in comfy seats, eat prawn sannies, or shout abuse at opposing fans or players. End of sermon.

[Aloysius Snuffleupagus]

1 hour ago, haufdaft said:

Surely the capacity should be greater given this story 2 years ago.... Or did you find a better use for the money?
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=/amp/www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/albion-rovers-terrace-plans-double-4826333.amp&ved=0ahUKEwjT3benytPQAhVC2hoKHbKUBJ0QFgiGAjAf&usg=AFQjCNG0mHgIgFFRN5SpR2i1_ROVoWRogw&sig2=Cfcv8CCeUCF_S9bDQpXwUw

We did built a terracing behind that goal but with a capacity of 400 rather than 1000. The money saved went on coke and hookers...

[Aloysius Snuffleupagus]

6 hours ago, SimonLichtie said:

It either boils down to Albion or the police. If it boils down to Albion themselves, then it's them who're a disgrace, if it boils down to the police then it is the police who are a disgrace, and I would feel sympathy with Albion if their attempts to get the game played at Cliftonhill were brushed off without any sort of valid reasoning.

 

That sums it up for me.

i'd like to think Rovers opening gambit in any discussions are that the game should be at Cliftonhill and we'll do what it takes to make it happen. I'm not convinced that will happen though.

[1320Lichtie]

The money saved went on coke and hookers...

Explains all the dodgy tweets..!

[Branch Ton]

All of this expressed concern about fan segregation or the lack of facilities to do that would suggest that we have a closet safety officer posting on this thread.

[Tam]

1 hour ago, Branch Ton said:

All of this expressed concern about fan segregation or the lack of facilities to do that would suggest that we have a closet safety officer posting on this thread.

Well, closet safety is a serious issue. That's why swinging cats in WCs has been banned for years.