Jump to content

The Stewarding/policing Thread


Razz1074
 Share

Recommended Posts

its an all seated stadium the SFA / Spfl or whoever makes the rules does not allow standing at games so until this is changed we need to live with it. So why dont people just sit down in the seats and watch the game instead of standing in passages giving people grief and blocking access to and from the stand, 99% of everybody else at the game manages it so its not difficult.

I don't think that actually happens, to be fair....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the area behind the seats is a designated concourse. Not a problem with the last 2-3 rows of seats plus the end sections being allowed to stand but why do some folk always rip the arse out of it?

 

Its a fucking concourse,its to allow folk to walk to the bogs/pie stall/leave the ground etc safely and WITHOUT OBSTRUCTION! not for watching a game, would you go to a gig/theatre show/cinema and stand in the concourse area?

 

The club must feel like theyre pishing into the wind here,we have a 3000 seat capacity terrace,fans greet cause they want to stand,club designate 25-30% of the seats in said stand to become an area the club "will turn a blind eye to standing" in. Now we have fans greeting cause they cant stand in the fucking concourse to watch the game.

Sums it up exactly. I am sure there is some health and safety guidelines about people standing there.

 

I have been moved on several times when i am just waiting for a break in the game to get back to my seat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The area is never congested. I don't understand some of the pant-wetting over this.

I don't think there's any pant wetting really, just some folk can kind of see why the club/stewards don't want folk standing there.

 

It doesn't bother me, I can just understand the clampdown on it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there's any pant wetting really, just some folk can kind of see why the club/stewards don't want folk standing there.

 

It doesn't bother me, I can just understand the clampdown on it.

I understand the club/stewards position too- it's the complainants that I don't understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand the club/stewards position too- it's the complainants that I don't understand.

See your point.

 

The complaint has been about the behaviour of another fan, more than where he was standing.

 

Probably reinforces the fact that when fans do get a bit of Lee way, some idiot will spoil it.

 

(This is why, while I think we should be able to buy a beer at the football on one hand, but I know some idiots will spoil it if it were allowed on the other!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See your point.

 

The complaint has been about the behaviour of another fan, more than where he was standing.

 

Probably reinforces the fact that when fans do get a bit of Lee way, some idiot will spoil it.

 

(This is why, while I think we should be able to buy a beer at the football on one hand, but I know some idiots will spoil it if it were allowed on the other!)

 

With regards the East Stand, given the layout, the facilities are not there to be able to offer beer. Policed correctly as it is in England (seen no evidence in many visits to say otherwise) the concept will work easily as it already does at oval ball matches - unfortunately we have the dark cloud that is the mould firm & it will forever be used as a big stick to beat the more respectable from enhancing the matchday experience & for our clubs to boost much needed income.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

No doubt I will get slated as you aren't allowed to comment on fan behaviour but if you take a flare into a game and set it off it is asking for trouble. You can cause a surge which could result in a crush and causing injury. Yep I know other teams let off flares but I am only interested in the mighty Well and how our fans conduct themselves.

 

Every away game seems to have an incident these days but obviously if you comment on that you are accused of over-reacting. oh and by the way...CMON YE WELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a smokebomb not a flare I believe?

 

Might seem pedantic, but quite a difference in the level of danger posed. (Zero to almost zero :lol: )

 

I agree it's daft, but the punishment is disproportionate to the crime.

 

I saw on one of the Facebook groups he's appealing it.

 

Good luck to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a smokebomb not a flare I believe?

 

Might seem pedantic, but quite a difference in the level of danger posed. (Zero to almost zero :lol: )

 

I agree it's daft, but the punishment is disproportionate to the crime.

 

I saw on one of the Facebook groups he's appealing it.

 

Good luck to him.

For letting off a flare or smoke bomb, I agree. Once you start breaking bail conditions or banning orders or whatever, you are asking for trouble though. The courts will take a harder line as they feel they cut you a break the first time and you didn't take that chance.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For letting off a flare or smoke bomb, I agree. Once you start breaking bail conditions or banning orders or whatever, you are asking for trouble though. The courts will take a harder line as they feel they cut you a break the first time and you didn't take that chance.

It was 5 months for the "crime" and 2 months for breaching bail conditions.

 

I see your point though about the impression that could give.

 

(Although the breach was going to a 'well game, hardly fleeing to Venezuela or starting a pub brawl)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with Jam20 on both points.

 

The Bois are great, and I go to more away games and take more enjoyment from home games as a result of their presence.

 

However I do agree that they appear (from the outside) to be unwilling to accept any responsibility when there's aggro.

 

The policing is often over the top, and they do appear to be under the microscope, but part of that is self inflicted, and I've no doubt that plenty of them enjoy the cat and mouse stuff with the police and stewards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have to be honest here, when I read the article I was delighted to see something done. 5 months for being a wee fanny who, with no regard for those around him, set off a pyrotechnic device without have a clue what it did? Naw. I have no complaints.

 

 

Although, I think if the club were allowed to use professional equipment to create that atmosphere I would be all for it. Similar to the use of flare and fireworks at Scotland Rugby games.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would never say I was "delighted" with such an outcome, but the boy only has himself to blame. His choices, and his alone, put him in the postion he has found himself in.

When that happens, his future is then out of his hands, which is not a good place to be.

 

Is the sentence harsh? Perhaps, but it's very simple - don't do things you're not meant to and you won't find yourself up in court.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have to be honest here, when I read the article I was delighted to see something done. 5 months for being a wee fanny who, with no regard for those around him, set off a pyrotechnic device without have a clue what it did? Naw. I have no complaints.

 

Would you apply such strict punishments to things like speeding in a built up area?

 

I don't think anyone's saying there shouldn't be some sort of punishment for the boy if he gets caught, but I'm surprised anyone thinks a custodial sentence is necessary.

 

Appears to me, this boys been made a real example of, as it's a hot topic (no pun intended).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would you apply such strict punishments to things like speeding in a built up area?

 

I don't think anyone's saying there shouldn't be some sort of punishment for the boy if he gets caught, but I'm surprised anyone thinks a custodial sentence is necessary.

 

Appears to me, this boys been made a real example of, as it's a hot topic (no pun intended).

If you get a ban for driving offences and decide to flout that ban ,would you expect a court to say 'oh well never mind'
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would you apply such strict punishments to things like speeding in a built up area?

 

I don't think anyone's saying there shouldn't be some sort of punishment for the boy if he gets caught, but I'm surprised anyone thinks a custodial sentence is necessary.

 

Appears to me, this boys been made a real example of, as it's a hot topic (no pun intended).

 

I think anyone who doesn't follow laws and regulations deserves to be punished. If a car travel by a shook at anything over 20 MPH they should face a criminal charge. Your pleasure does not take priority over safety!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...