No Internet Radio covereage today, Boreham Wood are pathetic

Mellor would be my first name on the team sheet as he is our most effective and consistent player (which is why last weeks aberations were so shocking).

But I suppose you could also put him down last because he is always going to play.

yuffie wrote: Of course, that formation tends to leave Stearn as the odd man out so if he 'must' play as some supporters insist it's back to the tried and tested 4-4-2.

I don't think it's a case of 'he must play'. I think it's a case of he must be given a couple of decent consecutive starts to play himself in or out of the team.

http://www.borehamwoodfootballclub.co.uk/match-report-boreham-wood-vs-bath-city-2/

Due credit given.

This is interesting as we definitely haven't got the personnel for it

we started to go long, which is not the type of game the personnel I have can play

I think it shows that at this level the majority of teams can end up 'going long' when they are chasing a game even if they are not really set up to make it work.

Does anybody know on what basis Boreham Wood were able to make this ruling? What is the scope of this? Can no one connect to wifi on any device? Can I text my mates from the ground? Is it even enforceable? I don't even understand their motivation for this. Questions questions. Inquiring minds wish to know.

I don't know the legal aspects but it might be something to do with them putting video highlights on their website which they appear to be charging for. Seems a new thing.
I agree it is ridiculous that they wouldn't allow a radio broadcast or even line by line updates. With 201 in the ground and the team lying second in the table you would think they would be looking to secure a wider audience.

I've given my views on Borehamwood now, let me know what you think!

www.mtannersports.com

Enjoy!

Sounds like the place was even worse than last year! As I didn't go, it would have been nice to sit at home listening to the commentary. However, I'm surprised clubs do allow this without charge as it has to have an effect on the gate. A couple of seasons ago I forked out nearly £20 in order to listen to Millwall match commentaries and I think that is pretty standard above our level. I know of City fans who now regularly listen to the commentaries even of home matches rather than travelling to TP. Yes, there may be income from advertisers, but is that topping the possible losses at the gate? I wonder if the time will come when regular listeners to our commentaries will be asked to subscribe...

You are absolutely right. Personally I couldn't imagine sitting at home huddled over the computer rather than standing on the poplar terrace and experiencing the match but there will be those that do. Even when a fan gets to the stage where they can't be bothered to make the effort to go up any more (for whatever reason) they will still be interested in the fortunes of the team.

I think it would be fair to pay say £20 for a years subscription to the coverage. There are two problems Andy Kerslake is independent of the club and what happens at places like Boreham Wood? We would have to get an agreement within the entire league. This should not be insurmountable.

A small 'season ticket' subscription wouldn't be too bad for highlights and live match radio commentary, but banning text updates is a step too far! Like you say Ben it would have to be agreed throughout the league, not just a few clubs doing it. Then free access to the goals on YouTube 2 weeks after the game has passed? Don't want to stop fans seeing anything at all when you search 'Bath City goals 2014/15' for example. However the finished product through this subscription package would have be professionally done to give it the edge over fan videos!

I have no issue with commentaries of our away matches. I'm fortunate to be able to get to the majority of them, but Bath City is not losing out financially if supporters tune into coverage of our away fixtures. Listening to those at TP is a different matter. I can think of at least one former regular who can no longer attend for health reasons, but I'm sure he wouldn't object to paying for say £20 to cover home matches. I wonder how many are tuning in to the commentaries...

I forgot to mention this yesterday Mark - well done with your Boring Wood blog - content is excellent throughout - very informative, and, as I was also there, I can verify its accuracy, even down to that friendly steward, and the 'cold' unappertising bar. Top job.

I wouldn't mind paying £20 a year for the commentary; but only if AK starts playing some decent music at half time!

Now that I have my ipad mini I can listen to the commentary while out and about on a Saturday afternoon. When I say "out and about" I actually mean sat in a pub in Liverpool enjoying a pint of real ale.

No you can't listen to it today as Bish have done a Boreham.
Another tinpot club I won't be visiting in future.

Presumably we will return this hospitality when these clubs visit Twerton later on....

Actually, I think it would be better to rise above their pettiness and be ultra- hospitable.

I know what you mean, but it will be like water off a duck's back. We endured this nonsense in BSP and it's a real shame this attitude is now filtering down to this level. I think it was at an evening match at Bish a few years back where our supporters coach was blocked in the carpark until gone 10 by a sponsor's car and the club didn't bat an eyelid. Give their directors a bowl of gruel and glass of water when they come, I say!

That was Braintree and didn't remotely surprise me, the most awkward club in the land.

Marc Monitor wrote:Actually, I think it would be better to rise above their pettiness and be ultra- hospitable.

I agree Mark - we must rise above their pettiness - it is the only way to shame them into reversing this trend.

But they won't reverse it, will they?

If they cannot be shamed into it - no, but I maintain that clubs like ours must rise above what clubs like them are now doing, in order to encourage them to eventually climb down.

Just two minutes - http://audioboo.fm/boos/2475554-bcir-sam-stevens-on-bishops-stortford - the name of the hosting site is very appropriate.

comrade powell wrote:I have no issue with commentaries of our away matches. I'm fortunate to be able to get to the majority of them, but Bath City is not losing out financially if supporters tune into coverage of our away fixtures. Listening to those at TP is a different matter. I can think of at least one former regular who can no longer attend for health reasons, but I'm sure he wouldn't object to paying for say £20 to cover home matches. I wonder how many are tuning in to the commentaries...

I tune in for midweek away matches and I have seen as many as 90 others at times. Can also be in the teens though. Its pretty inconsistent. Some proper market research would establish people's attitudes to this and other aspects of supporting City. We need to be mindful of the 'floaters' in these kind of decisions - i.e. those that can take it or leave it. Ideally, you try and increase your pool of peripheral fans (customers) whilst converting as many as possible into more committed fans. My concern would be that charging people for these services would actually push floaters away. I am not aware we have this kind of marketing strategy in place. Anybody?