Trouble in the East Stand??

[SWP's back]

What a chroc of shite.

So the guy is asked to sit down, he refuses, then he is led out without any problems. As he is being led out he ask's the secuirty gurads why he is being led out for standing when the majority in 109 are still standing and will remain standing for the rest of the match? The security guard looks at him puzzeled and doesn't know.

Your missing the point Tolmie. City/Showsec can't single out individual city fans, eject them, then let the rest of the block stand. What purpose does that serve? None.

Also.

As has been stated.

The ticket office were telling fans 109 was a standing block when they wanted to relocate there. Hence fans moving to that block. If it wasn't/isn't a standing block, why wasn't this made clear when fans wanted to relocate there? (over to the ticket office)

The 'mythical Peter Fletcher not standing letter' went out after season tickets were renewed in 109. Not only that, the said letter, if it ever existed, didn't go to every City fan in that block. Why? (City hold a database)

At the end of the day City f*** up. End of! Now they are making the situation even worse. 1 match it's ok to stand in 109, with Showsec taking no action. The next match Showsec are piling in. It's time City and Fletcher made their minds up.

Whilst I partly agree with your sentiment.

The club have now made it very clear at games and in writing to those in 109 that it is NOT a standing block. We all know the blocks that club are turning a blind eye on standing to and 109 is not one of those. Those blocks are full.

I can't see why people can't realise the club don't want people to stand there anymore. The rules have changed and aggro with showsec will continue until either people start sitting down or the club change the rules.

That in no way excuses showsec's behaviour and there should be a club investigation into the incident but please stop saying "We were told its a standing block", you have since been told different but choose to take no notice of it.

you pay for your puppy beast and they change their minds and give you a poodle.

you gonna take that because they've changed it on you even though you paid for something else or are you going to stand up for what was originally agreed until you get it?.

No, I'm saying everyone is aware of the rule change. It's not as though people have been charged more to have a "seat" in 109 as it is standing.

As I say, this sort of thing will continue until the rules change or people sit down. Showsec are only carrying out the club's instruction (though it would appear they are doing it badly).

 

[gaudinho's stolen car]

I'm not getting into a who was right or wrong argument as people have very strong views and it'll detract from my point - but for an 'old man' - as he is being touted by the press and media - he put up a hell of a fight that needed half a dozen stewards to get him out of his seat.

If I was on five pills a day to ensure my heart didn't pack in I sure as hell wouldn't get myself into a situation like that. I'm not saying the stewards were in the right asking him to sit, but surely a man on tablets to stabilise his heart shouldn't get himself into such an argument. I know people are going to say he shouldn't just do as he's told, but he allegedly has a serious heart condition and should not be getting himslef worked up. From what I saw he awas arguing for some time - just seems silly risking your life over being told to sit down.

It'd be interesting to hear from him and how he feels about the uproar his eviction (rightly or wrongly) caused?

On a lighter note - did anyone see the comment on the MEN site - Steven Brown, 26, from Bury, was four rows behind the fan.

He said: "He was stood up like every other person in that section. I heard everything and he never swore at them


Four rows behind at a football match and he didn't hear an individual swearing - really???

.

That's Stevie B, Dave. Read the thread.

 

[LongsightM13]

No mention in the MEN article, or in the comment from the club spokesman, about the Showsec goon being arrested for assaulting supporters. Perhaps he was one of the unattributed 'two other people' arrested.
Shoddy work.

 

[M18CTID]

There's no inconsistency.

If they told me to sit down, I refused and I got dragged out there would only be one person to blame?

Now the manner they dragged me out may well be overkill for the offence but that's club policy.

they don't tell me to sit down in 117, I know they don't so I can stand.

I have been told to sit down in 120 and hey fucking ho, I sat down. regardless of 200 people standing to my right.

I then moved to 117.

109 should be allowed to stand IMO if 116 and 117 are. they aren't and that's club policy, not the stewards. Did they not send a letter out saying you couldn't in 109?

Was hardly breaking news on Sat was it?

Standing is not club policy. It is governmental law under the Taylor Report into top flight stadia.

This is not an issue for City. They either have to be seen to enforce it at various times, or the council revoke the stadium safety certificate, same with smoking.

It's laughable some of the kidology going on in this thread.

Prior to the flashpoint, nobody outside of the gentlemen in question and stewards, would be privvy to what took place beforehand, the ongoing stand-off.

Only the fan knows how much he was swinging the lead.

Thankfully, I'm not a steward or police officer.

But if I'm surrounded by a hundreds of people, all trying to impact the situation, offering their two-penneth, aggressive in nature, I can see why they want to use force to get the fuck out as quickly as possible.

£8 quid an hour don't seem worth it to be brazenly intimidated each weekend.

You have the cheek to make that point yet it hasn't stopped you forming your own opinion of him.

 

[SWP's back]

The club have now made it very clear at games and in writing to those in 109 that it is NOT a standing block.

I never received anything?

I got my renewal back so it seems they know where I'm sat and have my address...

Seems most people did Tim. The 2 lads behind and in front of my old seat did.

I've moved so can't say for sure but it does seem the majority received one (in fact you're the first 109-er I've come across that said you hadn't got one). I remember a big thread about it when they first went out.

<a class="postlink-local" href="http://forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=229547&hilit=fletcher+letter+standing+109" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">viewtopic.php?f=1&t=229547&hilit=fletcher+letter+standing+109</a>

Funny that JRB started that thread, posted the letter but ignores it and refers back to being sold he could stand there off some bloke in the ticket office. The same ticket office he knows is shite and slags off at every opportunity on other threads but relies on as gospel when it suits his argument.

But before you have a go JRB, I understand your frustration but until Fletcher changes his mind then everyone in 109 is at risk.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

Whilst I partly agree with your sentiment.

The club have now made it very clear at games and in writing to those in 109 that it is NOT a standing block. We all know the blocks that club are turning a blind eye on standing to and 109 is not one of those. Those blocks are full.

I can't see why people can't realise the club don't want people to stand there anymore. The rules have changed and aggro with showsec will continue until either people start sitting down or the club change the rules.

That in no way excuses showsec's behaviour and there should be a club investigation into the incident but please stop saying "We were told its a standing block", you have since been told different but choose to take no notice of it.

you pay for your puppy beast and they change their minds and give you a poodle.

you gonna take that because they've changed it on you even though you paid for something else or are you going to stand up for what was originally agreed until you get it?.

No, I'm saying everyone is aware of the rule change. It's not as though people have been charged more to have a "seat" in 109 as it is standing.

As I say, this sort of thing will continue until the rules change or people sit down. Showsec are only carrying out the club's instruction (though it would appear they are doing it badly).

It's wrong to change the rule after somebody's paid for something elss that you advertised for their money, that's my point.

The club could do a lot of things to sort it out, picking on random people, turfing them out and injuring fans in squabbles with stewards turning round and aggressively pushing and shoving fans is not the right way whatever anyone says, badly is an understatement imo.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Standing is not club policy. It is governmental law under the Taylor Report into top flight stadia.

Absolute nonsense. That's shocking from someone like you. How many bloody times do I have to repeat this.

The Taylor Report recommended all-seater stadiums and the Government adopted this for clubs in the Premier League & Championship. As part of that legislation, local authorities were given power to licence grounds and some model regulations for criteria to be used were published. However these were just suggestions. One of those model regulations involved banning persistent standing though Taylor never actually identified standing as the problem per se. However it's not legislatively banned.

In consultation with the licensing body, the ground regulations for football matches (as these are the only ones covered under the legislation) include a policy of not permitting persistent standing. However if I was watching a concert or some other event other than football, I could stand (and drink at my seat). So there's an implicit recognition that standing is not unsafe in itself. As I understand it, if the council decide that trying to get fans to sit down is more dangerous than leaving them stood up, then they can choose not to enforce the regulation. No one is breaking the law in doing that. Smoking however is illegal in enclosed spaces and the club is deemed to be committing an offence by not enforcing that law.

City have, with presumably a "nod and a wink" from the council, sensibly agreed to ignore standing in the South Stand blocks (including away fans) and in 110/111. Now the overwhelming majority in 109 want to stand and the club gave a "nod and a wink" to this at the end of last season. Once the season started however, when everyone had bought their season tickets, they reversed that policy, plus sometimes they try to enforce it vigorously and sometimes they don't bother at all. So they're sending out mixed messages all the time.

If you booked and paid for a holiday at a particular hotel whcih had facilities for your kids and was on the beach then arrived at your destination to find you were actually sent somewhere else, which was inland and had no kids' facilities then you'd be pissed off and, more importantly, have a remedy in law.

 

[Why Always Ste]

Shame about the clubs statement in that article I was quoted in.

Either the club are purposely lying or they have been fed BS from ShowSec.

I've seen lads kicking off before, usually after a few too many drinks and I've heard them swearing and going crazy, when evicted - I've had no problem, neither have most fans.

This guy however possessed no threat to joe public neither had anyone around him complained about him... Unless they sneaked away and complained away from view.

Shouldn't of spoke with MUEN really but meh... Rags in the article Comments section as well taking the piss because I live in Bury... I mean c'mon - I've fucking cycled to our stadium for matches, I'm 15miles away from Eastlands.

 

[Skashion]

The man was not several rows from the front. He was in row B. He was standing along with those alongside him. He was probably more stubborn than most. As for Tolmie's assertion that no-one know what went on before the video. Erm, I do, I was there directly behind him. If a steward who had a row between him could hear him, I damn well could. He was not aggressive and he didn't swear. He was polite and put forward an argument they couldn't answer. He refused their instruction to sit down. They said they'd get the police, whilst they were doing that he sat down. As for putting up a fight as one poster suggested, absolutely hilarious. He put up no fight whatsoever. Funny how some on here know better than those who were there and their video footage.

 

[Happy Feet]

Basically they picked on an easy target, how can you pick out 1 person when the whole section are standing. The away fans always stand up at City, most of the time the Kop stands, as does the Stretford end etc etc etc