Trouble in the East Stand??

[pride in battle]

having come across Fletcher at PoB last season I can honestly say that I haven't felt more disrespected from any employee of any company that I've used/been involved with.

He really is a case of "I'm above you" and shows a complete disregard for fan concerns and brushes it off like we're scum, the people he's responsible for and has a duty of care to.

I won't be satisfied until the day he is fucked off out of our club along with Showsec, hence why I promote any form of protest/action aimed explicitly at getting him removed along with his cronies and forcing through a new appointment who will enter in dialogue with fans and will co-operate with us on all stadium and fan related security/ejection issues, hence why I proposed a Fan representative group to lobby on behalf of fans and to create a power base within this section of the club as at the moment it won't be too long till he is carried on a throne by showsec and we'll all have to salute with our right arms and chant "sieg heil mein fuhrer", because he is seriously the biggest scumbag I've come across at City.

I will second that!

 

[Longsight-memories]

At every OSC meting just bring his name to the fore... he is a worker paid by the club the club pay his wages and the fans in part pay the club.. should be a matter of time...tara showsec

 

[Ricster]

Re: Re: Trouble in the East Stand??

Over 80,000 views on those videos inside 3 days, Fletcher cant sweep this sort of shite under the carpet for much longer.

Why can't he? After all South Yorks Police have managed to sweep their responsibility for the deaths of 96 Liverpool fans under the carpet for 22 years so far.

Can you imagine if there was such a thing as a mobile phone camera in those days. They'd have been fucked at Hillsborough and hopefully someone will or has already been fucked for this.

If i was Peter Fletcher, if he is insistant on Showsec continuing brute force, the first thing i would be doing before the next league game is relocate all families and with Children to other areas of the ground, cos in all seriousness it will only take for it to kick off and a small child to fall to the ground before we have something alot more serious to deal with, and unfortunately things could turn out this way.

 

[BluePurgatory]

Would not surprise me if city have their own stewards marshalling that area from now on. Feelings towards showtech are running high it could be like a timebomb ready to explode

 

[nobody can eat fifty eggs]

I wouldn't like to be a steward tonight. People will be having extra beers tonight before the game because of the ban and who's the first people they'll see as they walk through the turnstiles? I predict plenty of abuse aimed in their direction tonight. By the way I don't condone violence unless it's in self defence.

 

[bobmcfc]

if the stewards get heavy then just film them on your phone as evidence in future.

 

[crizack]

Pete feltcher should be fucked off pretty soon. Total shithouse with no respect for the paying fans.

 

[Hamann Pineapple]

I used to work for Showsec. I was initially interviewed and taken on to work at the Commonwealth Games. At my interview, there were 2 other guys interviewed at a table alongside mine. Both interviewees had declared criminal records on their application forms. Both were advised to delete that section and not mention it again, Both were taken on.

Surely that breaches licensing laws

 

[Vic]

i am one of the many who as been given the showsec treatment,i am a st holder in section 109 at the back but for the birmingham game i took my 12 year old grandson and his 12 year old friend i bought 3 tickets on row 3 his mother and grandmother were sat in our seats at the rear the weather on the night was bad it had been raining most of the day so all the seats were wet as we arrived at our seats showsec stewards were telling some young men about 16 years of age to sit down the lads said all the seats are wet they were not being rude in any way but the showsec steward just told them to sit down wich they did,there were other people stoodin front and at both sides of us but they then told me to sit down and i refused this went on for 5mins or so another steward came over to back up his mate i tried to explaine i am 53 i am registerd disabled and not prepared to sit in the rain soaked seat for 2 hours i said get me a towel so i can wipe my seat and then i will sit down he said "it`s not my job" at this point i went to the toilets to calm down but on leaving the toilets i was met by 8 stewards and ejected i did not argue just left,i had to phone my wife in the stadium to go and get my grandson and his friend who by now had got wet pants because the showsec stewards had made them sit down,i have emailed the club 4 times not one reply and sent 3 letters 2 of them to peter flecther guess what no reply, we spend millions on players and like to show the world that we are the club from manchester for the real football fan but really are we? come on city lets get back to basics!! we may have a rich owner but he can walk away at any time and the club will still be here but without our loyal fans the club will die!!!!

From piles by the sound of things.

Anyway, I was shouting "sit down" on Saturday - at all the people in front of me on tier 2 standing up to look at the fracas below rather than watch the game.

Someone made the point about 40 pages back - allowing standing in 109 doesn't just block the view in seats behind. 109 is a crucial area because it's not level with or behind the goal, so if you allow standing there, the people sat in the next block 107 can't see all the pitch, and so on. Plainly it's a beggar if many people thought (or were misled into thinking) they'd be able to stand when they bought seasoncards for that area, but clamping down on it seems to have been so as not to draw attention to the way it was being tolerated elsewhere. But for some people enough is never enough and now that attention has been drawn to it, I fear that will be counterproductive.

After the incident stewards had to get people in 213 to sit down, and my thought then (without knowing what had gone on) was that the case for allowing standing had been put back (and not advanced as many on here seem to think) because the Council may be unable to turn a blind eye.

The arguments about whether it's illegal to stand or not are frankly irrelevant (except as to what powers stewards/police have). The bottom line is that not doing what a steward tells you (however unreasonable) is against the ground regulations and renders you liable to ejection - and you cannot expect the club to say that any attempt to stop someone being ejected can justify a mini-riot. (We can all think of daft crowd management stuff, and obviously Hillsborough was a classic case of where obeying the authorities by not being allowed on the pitch was disastrous, but these aren't the norm - and everyone accepts the ground regs by buying a ticket.)

It might have been totally unreasonable to have the heart-problem man ejected (that will emerge), but I'm yet to be convinced that others coming to his "defence" helped him, the situation, or the campaign for safe standing. Nor frankly will some of the stuff on here for attacking stewards, and some other ways to "protest".

The only way to get safe standing is to persuade MPs to change the law. Having a ruckus every game doesn't seem likely to help.

 

[Nascent Blues]

i am one of the many who as been given the showsec treatment,i am a st holder in section 109 at the back but for the birmingham game i took my 12 year old grandson and his 12 year old friend i bought 3 tickets on row 3 his mother and grandmother were sat in our seats at the rear the weather on the night was bad it had been raining most of the day so all the seats were wet as we arrived at our seats showsec stewards were telling some young men about 16 years of age to sit down the lads said all the seats are wet they were not being rude in any way but the showsec steward just told them to sit down wich they did,there were other people stoodin front and at both sides of us but they then told me to sit down and i refused this went on for 5mins or so another steward came over to back up his mate i tried to explaine i am 53 i am registerd disabled and not prepared to sit in the rain soaked seat for 2 hours i said get me a towel so i can wipe my seat and then i will sit down he said "it`s not my job" at this point i went to the toilets to calm down but on leaving the toilets i was met by 8 stewards and ejected i did not argue just left,i had to phone my wife in the stadium to go and get my grandson and his friend who by now had got wet pants because the showsec stewards had made them sit down,i have emailed the club 4 times not one reply and sent 3 letters 2 of them to peter flecther guess what no reply, we spend millions on players and like to show the world that we are the club from manchester for the real football fan but really are we? come on city lets get back to basics!! we may have a rich owner but he can walk away at any time and the club will still be here but without our loyal fans the club will die!!!!

From piles by the sound of things.

Anyway, I was shouting "sit down" on Saturday - at all the people in front of me on tier 2 standing up to look at the fracas below rather than watch the game.

Someone made the point about 40 pages back - allowing standing in 109 doesn't just block the view in seats behind. 109 is a crucial area because it's not level with or behind the goal, so if you allow standing there, the people sat in the next block 107 can't see all the pitch, and so on. Plainly it's a beggar if many people thought (or were misled into thinking) they'd be able to stand when they bought seasoncards for that area, but clamping down on it seems to have been so as not to draw attention to the way it was being tolerated elsewhere. But for some people enough is never enough and now that attention has been drawn to it, I fear that will be counterproductive.

After the incident stewards had to get people in 213 to sit down, and my thought then (without knowing what had gone on) was that the case for allowing standing had been put back (and not advanced as many on here seem to think) because the Council may be unable to turn a blind eye.

The arguments about whether it's illegal to stand or not are frankly irrelevant (except as to what powers stewards/police have). The bottom line is that not doing what a steward tells you [/size](however unreasonable) is against the ground regulations and renders you liable to ejection - and you cannot expect the club to say that any attempt to stop someone being ejected can justify a mini-riot. (We can all think of daft crowd management stuff, and obviously Hillsborough was a classic case of where obeying the authorities by not being allowed on the pitch was disastrous, but these aren't the norm - and everyone accepts the ground regs by buying a ticket.)

It might have been totally unreasonable to have the heart-problem man ejected (that will emerge), but I'm yet to be convinced that others coming to his "defence" helped him, the situation, or the campaign for safe standing. Nor frankly will some of the stuff on here for attacking stewards, and some other ways to "protest".

The only way to get safe standing is to persuade MPs to change the law. Having a ruckus every game doesn't seem likely to help.

What if a steward asks you to give him a nosh at half time in the toilets?