The Stewarding/policing Thread

[Shaka]

I know I don't need to stand up, but I want to. I don't understand why anyone would have an issue with this.

i dont need to stand at the cinema, but I want to! i dont know why folk had such an issue with this last time i was there!

[Pepper]

i dont need to stand at the cinema, but I want to! i dont know why folk had such an issue with this last time i was there!

You weren't behind the yellow line!

[Busta Nut]

On a side note, What does everyone think of these side by side protests across scotland regarding "the bill" stuff?

[Neil]

Not going to be effective unless something is done en masse and at the moment it's only a handful of people at each ground that seem to care.

[sbcmfc]

On a side note, What does everyone think of these side by side protests across scotland regarding "the bill" stuff?

You guys on the podcast have covered it pretty well.

 

In the grand scheme of Scottish politics, it's not even on the radar.

 

As long as there's smoke bombs, flares, folk running on the park and general misbehaviour amongst fans, they are very easy dismissed as a bunch of neds that think they can do what they want because there's 20 of them with matching jackets and expensive scarves.

 

I'm not saying that's what I think (don't want labelled a "porridge dribbler"), and I know that the reaction to and reporting of minor incidents in ground is sensationalist and over the top, but there's no smoke without fire (poor pun!) and as long as the Bois, the green brigade or whoever give the police reason to wade in, no matter how little, it's a losing battle.

[Kmcalpin]

You guys on the podcast have covered it pretty well.

 

In the grand scheme of Scottish politics, it's not even on the radar.

 

 

It needs to be raised at election time when politicians are desperate to win our votes.

[Lobey_Dosser]

It needs to be raised at election time when politicians are desperate to win our votes.

Maybe need to wait a few years until the SNP have any sort of competition.

[Sieb Dykstra]

On a side note, What does everyone think of these side by side protests across scotland regarding "the bill" stuff?

 

Thought it was quite ironic that both sets of 'Bois' at Perth on Saturday, home and away, seemed to be co-ordinated in displaying their 'anti-Bill' banners at kick off then at full time some of them were kicking seven shades of shite out of each other down where the buses were parked. Yeah, it's the establishment's fault....arseholes.

[Al B]

In any walk of life, if you want to change rules, you have to abide by the ones that currently stand. Only then will they give credibity to widening them. As it stands it seems like the attitude is "if we just ignore the rules then eventually they will just get rid of them". That's an extremely naive and youthful way of looking at life, and I think is whats largely responsible for the group being viewed as a bunch of kids. It's not an age thing...its that to an outsider looking in their approach to authority is extremely childlike. As long as thats the case, progress will never be made.

 

"Im just going to do what I want until I get my own way" is Kevin the teenager behavior at best.

 

I approve of the goal and the aim, but the methods are generally embarrassingly counter-productive.

[Frazzie]

Everyone knows what the rules are, but there are many that are not enforced. Does everyone always sit in their allocated seat? Does nobody bring in their own sweeties? My issue is as extension of those- fully aware it's not allowed, but it's never caused an issue and if left alone, never would. We stood at the back for the full game in Perth on Saturday and - hold the front page - no issues.

[Spiderpig]

Everyone knows what the rules are, but there are many that are not enforced. Does everyone always sit in their allocated seat? Does nobody bring in their own sweeties? My issue is as extension of those- fully aware it's not allowed, but it's never caused an issue and if left alone, never would. We stood at the back for the full game in Perth on Saturday and - hold the front page - no issues.

Yes people often sit in a different seat to their allocated one I do but I am still sitting down so no problems, your quote re the sweeties ridiculous, and your issue is not an extension of those, your issue is taking exception at being told not to do something on several occasions and continuing to do it and then trying to justify your actions as correct and that you are somehow being unfairly treated by the stewards. If it had been a police officer that told you to get behind the line / sit down etc would you have taken the same stance, probably not.

Personally I don't want to stand at matches anymore but I have no problem with it if the club was allowed to open a dedicated standing area, then those who wanted to could go there, but until the current legislation and the SFA rules etc change we have to live with all seated stadiums so no standing is allowed. Your reference to The game at McDiarmid park on Sat just means that the StJ FC stewards are obviously not doing there jobs. Did you never stop to think that after the recent publicity the Motherwell has had re stewarding, fan behaviour etc that the club may be enforcing the rules a bit more rigorously to demonstrate that there are no issues at the club, remember we have the 18 month suspended sentence hanging over us.

There are many ways to voice your opinions re Standing at matches, write to the club, the SFA, your MP or anybody who will listen, start an online petition etc, etc but winding up the stewards by failing to comply with their directions on more than 1 occasion is not a good approach, all that will get you is huckled out of the ground.

[Frazzie]

Yes people often sit in a different seat to their allocated one I do but I am still sitting down so no problems, your quote re the sweeties ridiculous, and your issue is not an extension of those, your issue is taking exception at being told not to do something on several occasions and continuing to do it and then trying to justify your actions as correct and that you are somehow being unfairly treated by the stewards. If it had been a police officer that told you to get behind the line / sit down etc would you have taken the same stance, probably not.

Personally I don't want to stand at matches anymore but I have no problem with it if the club was allowed to open a dedicated standing area, then those who wanted to could go there, but until the current legislation and the SFA rules etc change we have to live with all seated stadiums so no standing is allowed. Your reference to The game at McDiarmid park on Sat just means that the StJ FC stewards are obviously not doing there jobs. Did you never stop to think that after the recent publicity the Motherwell has had re stewarding, fan behaviour etc that the club may be enforcing the rules a bit more rigorously to demonstrate that there are no issues at the club, remember we have the 18 month suspended sentence hanging over us.

There are many ways to voice your opinions re Standing at matches, write to the club, the SFA, your MP or anybody who will listen, start an online petition etc, etc but winding up the stewards by failing to comply with their directions on more than 1 occasion is not a good approach, all that will get you is huckled out of the ground.

I hope you are moved from the next seat you sit in that is not your own, you absolute menace to society.

[sbcmfc]

I thought you were talking about standing on the concourse behind the seated area?

 

Standing in the back row or in an area where a blind eye is turned to standing and you're not stopping anybody seeing the game is fine.

 

Standing on the concourse out with the seating area is a bit different.

[Kmcalpin]

I hope you are moved from the next seat you sit in that is not your own, you absolute menace to society.

Come on Fraz...chill out

[Jay]

In any walk of life, if you want to change rules, you have to abide by the ones that currently stand. Only then will they give credibity to widening them. As it stands it seems like the attitude is "if we just ignore the rules then eventually they will just get rid of them". That's an extremely naive and youthful way of looking at life, and I think is whats largely responsible for the group being viewed as a bunch of kids. It's not an age thing...its that to an outsider looking in their approach to authority is extremely childlike. As long as thats the case, progress will never be made.

 

"Im just going to do what I want until I get my own way" is Kevin the teenager behavior at best.

 

I approve of the goal and the aim, but the methods are generally embarrassingly counter-productive.

 

This is pretty much my thoughts on it 100%.

 

The argument itself is perfectly sound - the legislation is poorly written which makes it problematic in practice due to the grey areas it creates. A situation where policy being implemented raises questions due to the actual legislation not being written well enough is hardly something radical and rare, it happens on occasion (just look at the furore over the so-called 'rape clause' regarding women having to prove they have been raped in order to claim tax credits for a third child when, in reality, and in my opinion, it is actually just down to very poor wording and lack of thought in the legislation itself). It happens at times with legislation in governments across the world and it should be raised, challenged and debated until those responsible for the legislation see the error of their ways.

 

But as Al B points out, a very solid argument about poorly formed legislation is continually lost and diluted in amongst the consistent breaking of the rules, cherry picking stories and scenarios to suit the argument, and firing out bizarre conspiracy reasons for the legislation in the first place (I've heard a good number of them from it being an anti-Catholic attack or an attempt at class warfare, to the theory it is designed specifically to target Rangers fans because they're all Unionists). The folk at the forefront of campaigning against the Act in its current form make it far, far too easy for them to be dismissed by the other side (or those who are undecided) as simply being a tiny minority of misbehaving football fans angry and upset at not being allowed to act how they want.

 

Kmcalpin mentions it being a topic of discussion for when politicians are seeking votes but even then, it's a complete irrelevance in Scottish politics and is far from a game-changer in terms of votes (particularly when the SNP are so dominant). From things I've read on social media there seems to be a number of supporters who believe it to be a big deal when in reality, outwith a section or two of fans on a Saturday, it is a complete non-issue which is barely mentioned across mainstream Scottish politics or across wider Scottish society.

 

Unfortunately, as much as I believe the Act needs to be revised, I think it being a minor footnote in politics combined with those campaigning against it making it so, so easy for their arguments to be dismissed will result in the legislation just carrying on as is for the foreseeable future.

[weeyin]

Everyone knows what the rules are, but there are many that are not enforced. Does everyone always sit in their allocated seat? Does nobody bring in their own sweeties? My issue is as extension of those- fully aware it's not allowed, but it's never caused an issue and if left alone, never would. We stood at the back for the full game in Perth on Saturday and - hold the front page - no issues.

People speed every day on the M74 and only a few get a ticket. "Everyone else is doing it" won't pass legal muster.

[Frazzie]

Clearly speeding can and has caused all manner of horrific deaths over the years so should be clamped down on. I'm talking about a victimless crime, hence the comparison to sitting in the wrong seat or bringing your own sweets- although the tongue in cheek nature obviously passed a few folk by.

[Big Stall]

Trying to follow this thread, the last 4pages are a tough read. Frazzie, are you complaining about being told not to stand in the end section of the east stand where it seems to be allowed, standing in the back row of the east stand where its allowed or standing watching the game from the concourse where its only allowed behind the line?

[weeyin]

Clearly speeding can and has caused all manner of horrific deaths over the years so should be clamped down on. I'm talking about a victimless crime, hence the comparison to sitting in the wrong seat or bringing your own sweets- although the tongue in cheek nature obviously passed a few folk by.

 

Many people that speed don't cause accidents, though. It's just a few that do.

 

Same with crowd control. Most fans don't cause problems, but some do.

 

So rather than pick and choose which regulations to enforce against which motorists or which fans, the authorities just apply them to every motorist and every fan.

[Well Well]

my god are people still going on about this. I have been to thousands of games, standing, sitting, home ,away whatever, never once had an issue with stewards, police or the view. I just can't fathom how some people on here seem to have nightmare issues every bloody week.

[something else]

Are we there yet?

[john_M_F_C]

In any walk of life, if you want to change rules, you have to abide by the ones that currently stand. Only then will they give credibity to widening them. As it stands it seems like the attitude is "if we just ignore the rules then eventually they will just get rid of them". That's an extremely naive and youthful way of looking at life, and I think is whats largely responsible for the group being viewed as a bunch of kids. It's not an age thing...its that to an outsider looking in their approach to authority is extremely childlike. As long as thats the case, progress will never be made.

 

"Im just going to do what I want until I get my own way" is Kevin the teenager behavior at best.

 

I approve of the goal and the aim, but the methods are generally embarrassingly counter-productive.

 

Can you point to the singing of any offensive sectarian songs sang at Fir Park this season, by the 'Well Bois? the "rules" were brought in to tackle sectarian abuse. As it stands it's to tackle anything offensive, which again, there's not been anything offensive from the 'Well Bois.

 

There's been individual incidents where individual Motherwell fans have acted in a way that might incite disorder, part of the act, but on the whole, the "rules" have been adhered to by those trying to change it.

 

The problem here doesn't lie with the 'Bois, it's with the "holier than thou" folk, who seem incapable of a better solution to change things yet feel the need to call everybody else's "childlike".

[Frazzie]

Trying to follow this thread, the last 4pages are a tough read. Frazzie, are you complaining about being told not to stand in the end section of the east stand where it seems to be allowed, standing in the back row of the east stand where its allowed or standing watching the game from the concourse where its only allowed behind the line?

None of the above.

[Frazzie]

 

Many people that speed don't cause accidents, though. It's just a few that do.

 

Same with crowd control. Most fans don't cause problems, but some do.

 

So rather than pick and choose which regulations to enforce against which motorists or which fans, the authorities just apply them to every motorist and every fan.

That's exactly my point. No they don't. And when they do at Fir Park, it is without consistency or reason.

[weeyin]

They don't need to be consistent, though. They can pick on anyone who breaches a regulation and whoever that is has no real cause for complaint. Same way that while the vast majority of speeding motorists get away with it, and despite the fact that speed traps will often ignore offenders, if you are the one that gets done, you have no real grounds for complaint.

 

For all that, and my facetious comments, I am actually on the side of the fans (including you) who think that the goverment, police and clubs have gone too far in their stewarding of fans. I'm old enough to have enjoyed standing on the terraces and changing ends at half time. The way to deal with that, however, is to get the regulations changed, not to act like some 13 year old, entitled kid. Rosa Parks this is not.

 

Unfortunately, it's very easy for the authorities to hark back to the days of drunk, sectarian numpties causing all sorts of problems around the country. Then there was the Casuals movement, plus the Hillsborough and Bradford disasters that had the government of the time (who despised football and its fans with a passion) overreact.

 

Every time fans run onto the pitch, or ignore stewards instructions or get into fights, it plays directly into the anti-football mob (which is signifcant) and ensure the restrictive regulations remain in place.

 

The way to get some sanity back into the game is to suck up the current restrictions while actively working to change them. That will take a coordinated and concerted effort, but it can be done. Look at how we, the fans, influenced the decison to keep Newco Rangers out of the top flight. A similar, sustained effort aimed at the Scottish government might produce similar results - if not quite as quickly.