Don't be sad HarpsHarps62 wrote:Lovely comment
Very sad but there you go
Cheers
All said in jest
Don't be sad HarpsHarps62 wrote:Lovely comment
Very sad but there you go
Cheers
Pathetic comment.Jimmy Exile wrote:Hi all. is it true that the Dragons management refused Countys requests to have food and drink vans for the people queuing?
if so thats poor show from the dragons directors. maybe they are jealous that we are getting better crowds than there shower of shite club
Once again you are being ridiculous.George Street-Bridge wrote:So let's go to the enormous effort and expense of putting up a stand similar to the one at the other end, getting it licensed, pricing tickets to fit the overall model, and then spend extra on it which at best takes a bite out of any profit. Not to mention financial risk, in the event of a postponement.
And given the prevailing wind, if it does rain there's more than an even chance you'd get soaked anyway. Cheltenham home game, anyone?
Spiderman wrote:Exactly. Forest Green Rovers are letting opposition fans get a soaking if it rains, we're letting our fans get a soaking if it rains.Stan A. Einstein wrote:No cause he's thickdaftasfxxx wrote:
Can you really not see the difference between this and FGR? Sheesh.
Isn't that exactly the point here.Harps62 wrote: Wrong again
They don't give us any choice.
Totally happy for us all to get soaked.
If the club had not implemented the priority idea, then at some point today it is likely the shutters would have gone down with a sold out sign and hundreds of poor buggers who had been 'guaranteed' a ticket and queued for hours in the rain would have been rather upset. How is that over thought? I would say top marks to whoever in the club thought of it.Stan A. Einstein wrote:I agree. The scanning was a superb response. I said so at the time. I just don't understand the priority idea. No problem with it in the sense I am sure it was done with the best of intentions but as I say in my opinion it was over thought.lowandhard wrote:Exactly that, it must have been a shock to see people asking for 20 and 40 tickets at a time, hence the endorsement policyG Guest wrote:Crawley tickets were initially marketed as carrying a promise of a Spurs ticket. It became evident that the demand for tickets was likely to exceed the supply of Spurs tickets unless something was done. So the promise was withdrawn for future sales. Without that action we would be in serious trouble now, having promised hundreds or even thousands of Spurs tickets that we couldn't supply. Someone at the club did well to spot the developing problem and find a solution.
Can't say I'm surprised, it would have taken a lot of planning to know how many seats AND what they were all called and add that to the seating plan on the system, etc.Sooty wrote:These are unreserved seats sit where you want
I asked Jeff that and he said they weren't!Sooty wrote:These are unreserved seats sit where you want
Users browsing this forum: Amberexile