Trouble in the East Stand??

[gaudinho's stolen car]

It is not a surprise to me that you are bemused.

Me neither, he's had it spelled out to him.

No I haven't. I suggested some of the comments in this thread were from brain dead Neanderthals, and then suggested that no one was capable of 'grown up' response. Surely both those statements compliment each other, yet the opposite is suggested...

Anyway, I've said my bit, and this thread is already being ridiculed on many other football forums, so for some dignity, I'm out...

You forgot to mention that the brain dead neanderthals all live in council houses. Next time you try to bite off more than you can chew think twice or you will end up looking like a little woman again. The highlighted bit made me physically put my face in my palm.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

There can be little sympathy at the end of the day.

This guy was just unlucky that he was picked out, but ultimately, he doesn't have a leg to stand on, literally.

In the video, he is clearly being obstinate and some of his actions, quite laughable.

He is quick to state a heart problem when the flashpoint increases, however, not so serious, that a man of his age can stand up all game and is old enough to know better.

My old man was thrown out for smoking in toilets the other season, must have been 200 in there doing exactly the same.

Means fuck all.

The law is clear, City, nor any other club, are able to enforce it across the board, but they can't be seen to disregrading it.

The whole incident just seems to smack of escalation, sheep followers and those who just wanted to exacerbate it for the sake of mob rule and handbags with police and stewards.

By the same people who spend the majority of the game being so self-aware, they concern themselves more with homophobic chants than watching the game, and giving it the big 'un to rival fans who are separated by police and stewards.

Also, I fail to see any hypocrisy in my earlier statement, I'm bemused in fact...

FUCK THAT. Explain this to me. If the twats wanted the block to sit down, why not start going from left to right of the front row, then second row and third and so on? Why pick an old man with heart problems a few rows back? go on....

Was he wearing a sign saying "I have a heart problem"
If indeed he had a heart problem would he not just leave as to make sure it didnt make the problem worse. I dont agree with what happened but at the end of the day its not like they picked on him because he had a heart problem

 

[lancs blue]

May not go down well but I propose a boycott of a City game, certainly some form of action until:

-Fletcher is removed from the club in all aspects.
-Showsec's contract is terminated and the new stewards are brought in on a permanent basis in the same areas of the ground and are prohibited from man handling and any violent acts towards supporters.
-The club immediately with consultation from the fans addresses the status of 109 and other blocks and makes it immediately clear whether it is seating or standing, and offers alternative seating for those affected negatively by the decision. I also propose on this that every listed seat holder in 109 hold a vote which decides whether it is standing or seating. The club must also clarify and label on every chart/season ticket package which areas are deemed part of the "singing section" and that this decision is applied consistently and unwaiveringly at all points during that season, bar for any clear changes in seating policy ie. the South Stand move for the Villarreal game.
-The club appointing a new head of security operations who, along with other City staff will have a duty to meet and communicate with City fan representatives who will discuss progress and issues and any emails/calls etc. from fans with issues must be responded to with fairness and neutrality.
-A major overhaul in the smoking ejection policy with a new strategy implemented ie. level 1 gates opened with police and stewards monitoring said opened gates and card readers used to re-admit people into the ground, the club should discuss with the aforementioned City reps on a manageable way forward.
-No ejection resulting in a ban until the security staff give the fan in question the opportunity to appeal and call forward any eyewitnesses as evidence. Ideally a neutral individual should hear the appeal to ensure that blatant backstabbing of fans in favour of keeping the status quo of the security staff happy and in the good books is ended.

Anybody else want to add anything?

What about a petition and a candlelight vigil?

FFS it's our best season for donkeys years and you want people to boycott matches?

it's whether you care about a game of football more than other people getting assaulted and wrongly kicked out because some power crazy egomaniac who has far too much power gets a kick from it?

It's the same old "I'm alright Jack" which leads to these apathetic fans who don't care until the day it happens to them, then they'll woman, and guess what? if you'd make the sacrifice to make a proper stand something could have been done about it.

Same way if fans made proper sacrifices their quests for ticket prices to go down, TV prices to go down, safe standing would be a hell of a lot further down the line.

Instead it's always a load of hot fucking air and posts on a football forum. I, for one, would rather get a change to lead to a fair football club and fair policy than have to put up with the debacle that is currently going on.

When it comes to "I'm alright Jack", the fans who stand regardless of the wishes of people behind them are in a class of their own.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: Re: Trouble in the East Stand??

I'm in 117 and stand throughout and I like standing. I've also sat elsewhere and not been able to - I mean I could have just stood up regardless but didn't. Life's a woman.

Do you not see the inconsistency in your post?

You can't stand in 117 either but its not actually illegal and the club (and presumably the council) turn a blind eye to it.

The point about 109 is that the club used to strictly enforce the no standing rule but as the Singing Section became more popular, more people came into this area ad the atmosphere was better.

The club then clearly indicated by word & deed that they would tolerate standing there. But when people bought season tickets they changed their mind.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

There can be little sympathy at the end of the day.

This guy was just unlucky that he was picked out, but ultimately, he doesn't have a leg to stand on, literally.

In the video, he is clearly being obstinate and some of his actions, quite laughable.

He is quick to state a heart problem when the flashpoint increases, however, not so serious, that a man of his age can stand up all game and is old enough to know better.

My old man was thrown out for smoking in toilets the other season, must have been 200 in there doing exactly the same.

Means fuck all.

The law is clear, City, nor any other club, are able to enforce it across the board, but they can't be seen to disregrading it.

The whole incident just seems to smack of escalation, sheep followers and those who just wanted to exacerbate it for the sake of mob rule and handbags with police and stewards.

By the same people who spend the majority of the game being so self-aware, they concern themselves more with homophobic chants than watching the game, and giving it the big 'un to rival fans who are separated by police and stewards.

disagree, club's job to enforce their policies clearly and explicitely to supporters.

the fan was also sitting down in these vids and yet was still dragged out when hundreds of other fans were left.

This policy of picking off at random is disgusting and wrong and the GMP nor showsec nor the club have a leg to stand on.

The fan's done fuck all wrong and been assaulted for it.

That's splitting hairs mate, and you know it.

If the club was to enforce their policies, every match would be a war zone. They have to make examples until people get the message.

It's the reason why United's ticket allocation was reduced by City last season, as it was at Liverpool.

It was down to their persistent standing, irrespective of the fact they know they can't throw the other 2,000 out for all doing it.

It's clear Smoking is not allowed, all the same, fans believe a 'safety in numbers' stance will see them all right, make it unenforceable by the letter of the law.

That's down to simple intimidation at the end of the day, which is why City operate snatch-squads.

It's the same with standing and, on this occasion, as I say, the guy did himself no favours by his behaviour to prolong the flashpoint.

As for him sitting down, let's not kid and kidder. He was sat down so they couldn't drag him out easily, same with the dying swan routine.

No it wouldn't, if the club came out and said "we saw the incident on saturday and it was out of order and too far and we're looking into ways to sort out this issue in a suitable fashion as soon as possible" the attitude in this thread would be a lot different.

If the club don't want people to stand there don't fucking tell them to move there if they want to at season ticket purchase/renewal and then send them a letter 2 months later saying actually, fuck you, we're changing it.

Kicking random people and unfairly achieves fuck all other than a lot of pissed off fans who'll start to want blood for it.

If they came out and said can all members of 109 please login to this vote and complete it, and the results come back either way then publish them(Without doctoring) and then say, right from now this is the policy, if you want to move call up and we'll sort it out for you.

The smoking issue is years old now and still hasn't been sorted, and it could be if the club could be arsed instead of kicking random people out. Same with standing, picking one guy out of hundreds to kick out is wrong and even if he was standing having a word, knowing that their position is untenable and the situation cannot be solved at a game and the fact that they deliberately, eagerly and willingly man handled him(I don't care if he milked it, if that was a City player in the penalty area you'd suck him off if he won a penalty for it) is completely wrong and it should be dealt with disciplinarily, not to mention that the fundamental way in which the club communicates with the fans and security procedures, bans, appeals are looked at should be massively revamped and improved regardless of the ever increasing list of matchday incidents.

At the end of the day fans use safety in numbers because they feel they have no other option because the club doesn't help them at all, I'm not saying it's right but man handling and kicking individuals, sometimes who are innocent, is wrong as well. 2 wrongs don't make a right.

The club could make very clear changes and then there'd be no excuses either way, but it's always wishy washy and half-hearted and poorly communicated and that, I think more than anything else, pisses people off.

As for avoiding a flashpoint, I can see clearly why the fan felt he had done no wrong and as above it's wrong to kick him out and not most of the block for standing. He stood his ground in a non-violent way and was assaulted basically. If you really believe just bowing to authority and doing as your told and not standing your ground is right then I ask whether you as a Nazi official would have turned on the gas showers at the concentration camp or got your friends arrested because somebody in authority told you it was right and you should do it no questions asked? an extreme example but the inherent point is that just because somebody has been given "authority" it does not make them right, as proven by Fletcher and his cronies ever increasing list of wrongful actions.

If that's splitting hairs and would lead to a war zone then god help us all, I think I'd call it common sense and being reasonable.

 

[waspish]

There can be little sympathy at the end of the day.

This guy was just unlucky that he was picked out, but ultimately, he doesn't have a leg to stand on, literally.

In the video, he is clearly being obstinate and some of his actions, quite laughable.

He is quick to state a heart problem when the flashpoint increases, however, not so serious, that a man of his age can stand up all game and is old enough to know better.

My old man was thrown out for smoking in toilets the other season, must have been 200 in there doing exactly the same.

Means fuck all.

The law is clear, City, nor any other club, are able to enforce it across the board, but they can't be seen to disregrading it.

The whole incident just seems to smack of escalation, sheep followers and those who just wanted to exacerbate it for the sake of mob rule and handbags with police and stewards.

By the same people who spend the majority of the game being so self-aware, they concern themselves more with homophobic chants than watching the game, and giving it the big 'un to rival fans who are separated by police and stewards.

Also, I fail to see any hypocrisy in my earlier statement, I'm bemused in fact...

FUCK THAT. Explain this to me. If the twats wanted the block to sit down, why not start going from left to right of the front row, then second row and third and so on? Why pick an old man with heart problems a few rows back? go on....

This I have to agree with you with! You start at the front row and politely ask everyone on the front row to sit down because their are city fans in this section who can't stand for a whole game! If they tell you to f off you say it again politely if again they are abusive you just say to them you will receive a letter of warning and next game I will come back and ask them all again to sit down if you refuse and abusive you get another letter of warning within it saying this is the last warning if you stand in the next match you'll be asked politely again if you do not sit down your season ticket will be took of you for the next 3 games! But I think what their method is pick on one person and kick them out so they can say to the next one you'll be next if you don't sit down! If I was asked to sit down I'd sit down and when they go stand back up..

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

What about a petition and a candlelight vigil?

FFS it's our best season for donkeys years and you want people to boycott matches?

it's whether you care about a game of football more than other people getting assaulted and wrongly kicked out because some power crazy egomaniac who has far too much power gets a kick from it?

It's the same old "I'm alright Jack" which leads to these apathetic fans who don't care until the day it happens to them, then they'll woman, and guess what? if you'd make the sacrifice to make a proper stand something could have been done about it.

Same way if fans made proper sacrifices their quests for ticket prices to go down, TV prices to go down, safe standing would be a hell of a lot further down the line.

Instead it's always a load of hot fucking air and posts on a football forum. I, for one, would rather get a change to lead to a fair football club and fair policy than have to put up with the debacle that is currently going on.

When it comes to "I'm alright Jack", the fans who stand regardless of the wishes of people behind them are in a class of their own.

there's a line isn't there, and it's clear a reasonable solution has to be agreed that is in the best interests of all parties. It's clear from this thread people over time in various situations have been told it's ok to stand there, in fact encouraged to move there to stand.

A conflict in policies from the club is not the fault of the fans and they should not be punished for it, it's the club's responsibility to fairly, unbiasedly and non-violently sort the issue out.

 

[Prodigal Son]

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?

 

[jonmcfc]

I sat oppsite the trouble in cb L1 and just before it went off, i noticed a showsec push a woman as she went to sit down at front of block so it looked to me they were wound up from the start.

I don`t think it adds to this page just thought i`d share.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

May not go down well but I propose a boycott of a City game, certainly some form of action until:

-Fletcher is removed from the club in all aspects.
-Showsec's contract is terminated and the new stewards are brought in on a permanent basis in the same areas of the ground and are prohibited from man handling and any violent acts towards supporters.
-The club immediately with consultation from the fans addresses the status of 109 and other blocks and makes it immediately clear whether it is seating or standing, and offers alternative seating for those affected negatively by the decision. I also propose on this that every listed seat holder in 109 hold a vote which decides whether it is standing or seating. The club must also clarify and label on every chart/season ticket package which areas are deemed part of the "singing section" and that this decision is applied consistently and unwaiveringly at all points during that season, bar for any clear changes in seating policy ie. the South Stand move for the Villarreal game.
-The club appointing a new head of security operations who, along with other City staff will have a duty to meet and communicate with City fan representatives who will discuss progress and issues and any emails/calls etc. from fans with issues must be responded to with fairness and neutrality.
-A major overhaul in the smoking ejection policy with a new strategy implemented ie. level 1 gates opened with police and stewards monitoring said opened gates and card readers used to re-admit people into the ground, the club should discuss with the aforementioned City reps on a manageable way forward.
-No ejection resulting in a ban until the security staff give the fan in question the opportunity to appeal and call forward any eyewitnesses as evidence. Ideally a neutral individual should hear the appeal to ensure that blatant backstabbing of fans in favour of keeping the status quo of the security staff happy and in the good books is ended.

Anybody else want to add anything?

What about a petition and a candlelight vigil?

FFS it's our best season for donkeys years and you want people to boycott matches?

I agree mate...thats got to be the worst fuckin post ever,BOYCOT A GAME is he for fucking real.....clown!

Cut the insults, I've said it would be the clearest and the strongest form of action we could take to sort the issue out, as I said there can be other courses of actions and I offered the thread up to suggestions on what we could do.

If you don't give a shit about this issue then why the fuck contribute to the thread?