The CEO’s monthly chat

[santheman]

12 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

I can understand the logic behind this age restriction. Despite how it's dressed up, its all about protecting the organisation legally in our increasingly litigatious world. That being the case, just say so. 

It's quite ludicrous though that there's no consistent standard being applied throughout Scotland. Why not? 

I'm sure all the CEOs of the clubs meet up regularly so that's something that should be on the agenda.

Its daft having different ages at different clubs because it just causes confusion 

[wellgirl]

15 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

I can understand the logic behind this age restriction. Despite how it's dressed up, its all about protecting the organisation legally in our increasingly litigatious world. That being the case, just say so. 

It's quite ludicrous though that there's no consistent standard being applied throughout Scotland. Why not? 

It's not just about protecting the club - it's about safeguarding young people surely. As for there not being a consistent standard - that must be down to the SFA

[wellgirl]

2 minutes ago, joewarkfanclub said:

There seems to be a lot of folk getting their knickers in a twist about what ultimately is the Safeguarding of Children in a football stadium.

I get the fact that when we were younger we all had the opportunity to attend the football unaccompanied at a younger age, but times have moved on.

As KMcAlpin quite rightly says, we live in a far more litigious society than ever these days. 

Clubs and organisations are held accountable to far higher standards than ever before, so rightly or wrongly, there has to be some sort of legislation or guidelines to cover these things.

I do think that there should be a benchmark that all Scottish clubs should adhere to so that it is the same for everyone but as there isnt, the club has to pick a number and there will never be unanimous agreement on these kind of things.

Motherwell have picked 14.

Rangers have picked 13.

Some clubs in England (I checked Sheffield United and West Ham) are 16 for goodbess sake!

There are loads of things folk could quite rightly have a go at the club for. Im just not sure this is one of them.

I agree. Man u and Liverpool have exactly the same rules as us. 

[stv]

25 minutes ago, wellgirl said:

I agree. Man u and Liverpool have exactly the same rules as us. 

They have a lot more supporters inside the ground than us

[Kmcalpin]

1 hour ago, wellgirl said:

It's not just about protecting the club - it's about safeguarding young people surely. As for there not being a consistent standard - that must be down to the SFA

Of course, its a bit of both.

Its totally absurd though that one of our fans, aged 13, cannot attend one of our home games unaccompanied but could attend an away game on their own. You couldn't make it up. Yes, its down to the SFA or SPFL to set a common standard but in its absence, you'd think the clubs could unofficially agree one. This is 2024 not 1224.

On another topic, Brian mentioned the banning protocol. There are 3 issues here. Firstly, the protocol itself, which needs amending. Its wrong to ban someone simply because they've been arrested. If found guilty thats a different matter entirely. Steelboy's comment about Police "blacklists" and banning orders has some merit. That of course is a Scottish wide arrangement and needs changed at that level. Thats not down to us, although we could put forward suggestions for change. Secondly, there are clearly problems with its implementation. If Police are not present at games, which they most usually aren't, then the club must be passing information to them.  It would appear that mistakes are being made here for example in terms of identification. Also, the Police should be notifying those involved before the club informs those parties of bans. This clearly hasn't been happening in all cases. Again, a system failure, by Police Scotland. Its all very well having protocols but once you set them up, you have to adhere to them. Thirdly, when mistakes are made, then the affected individuals should be offered compensation i.e. free entry to X number of games. Brian didn't cover these points off. All that said, fans must behave and responsibility lies with all of us in that respect.

A final word on his interview. He mentioned that there is a need to replace seats in the South Stand. That may well be the case, I'm not familiar with them. However many seats in the POD Stand are far, far older and not in good condition either. They are for home fans not away fans. He makes no mention of replacing them. 

Good on Brian for coming out and communicating with fans; thats a start. However, there's a few issues he skirts over or doesn't address. That needs to change too. 

[0Neils40yarder]

9 hours ago, wellgirl said:

I agree. Man u and Liverpool have exactly the same rules as us. 

What a garbage example...those clubs don't need or (probably) want to sell cheap tickets to weans...unfortunately we do, to ensure the clubs survival. 

I'm thinking of weans who's parents support the old firm, but the wean gets into 1st year, meets new pals and fancies going to Fir Park with them but can't...but he can go to Ibrox or Parkhead with his da.

We are shooting ourselves in the foot

[David]

I personally know of a few lads who used to go to games together and had season tickets. They've had to cancel this season. Could that mean season tickets that might eventually become adult season tickets, with all the associated spending in places like the Cooper Bar, on merchandise, Society membership, and so on over the next 10, 15, or 20 years? Potentially.

If we're prepared to let that go to enforce this rule, then so be it. That's the club's choice.

One thing I would point out is that while the CEO is approving these policies, it's not solely his decision. There are other departments, individuals, and opinions involved.

[Kmcalpin]

We need to be encouraging young fans to attend games. Now, I appreciate thats complex and requires a bit of effort but they are the future lifeblood of the club. Could a small supervised section be set up for youngsters in the affected age group? Some creative thinking required.

So its ok for a 13 year old to travel some distance on his/her own to a game but not to actually get in?

As for "unofficial" or de fact blacklists banning, its absurd that if someone commits misdemeanours at away stadia but behaves themselves at home games its ok for them to attend all home games freely. We all know who that would affect. Laughable.

[steelboy]

24 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

 

So its ok for a 13 year old to travel some distance on his/her own to a game but not to actually get in?

 

The crazy thing is we have a CEO admitting that he can't make the stadium a safe place for 13 year olds despite the stadium having been a safe place for 13 year olds for the past few decades. 

He's on the video giving it a Helen Lovejoy 'but there might be a fire alarm'. What happens if there is a fire alarm in McDonalds, or Asda or Vue Cinema where there are unaccompanied youths? What's makes Fir Park riskier than than those places. There is a clear culture nowadays of management people who are unable to deliver the core tenets of their job so they create daft rules to enforce so they can point to having achieved something. I saw a Scottish Government idiot on Twitter the other day bragging about Scotrail only having a 2% cancellation rate despite the fact that they achieved  that by removing 29,000 services from the timetable. Caldwell seems to be cut from the same cloth.

[santheman]

The problem seems to stem from youngsters who turn up at the game having bought tickets online then getting knocked back because they can't prove their age at the gate.

Surely then the club could come up with some sort of register where if you're 14-16 say, you register with the club providing proof of your D.O.B and emergency contact details, (important if someone takes ill during the game for instance)

An online account could then be set up by the club and some kind of ID card issued to be shown to ticket staff and stewards that would avoid the majority of the scenes we currently witness at the turnstiles.

Not foolproof by any means and there would be a cost and some effort required by the office staff but surely something worth looking into.

Assuming there's no real problem if they have season tickets??.

[Kmcalpin]

I can't be bothered trawling through club websites as information is often buried away but Claretamberb posted on Pie and Bovril "The information isn't always that easy to find online but Dundee Utd the age limit is 12. St Johnstone is 12. Rangers is 13." We seem to have set the bar a bit high.  

[wellgirl]

1 hour ago, 0Neils40yarder said:

What a garbage example...those clubs don't need or (probably) want to sell cheap tickets to weans...unfortunately we do, to ensure the clubs survival. 

I'm thinking of weans who's parents support the old firm, but the wean gets into 1st year, meets new pals and fancies going to Fir Park with them but can't...but he can go to Ibrox or Parkhead with his da.

We are shooting ourselves in the foot

I didn't post what I posted as an "example". I was responding to another poster. My wee brother started going to Fir Park and away games at the age of 8 (with my mum). I'm quite aware how important it is to get fans engaged young. 

[wellgirl]

10 minutes ago, santheman said:

The problem seems to stem from youngsters who turn up at the game having bought tickets online then getting knocked back because they can't prove their age at the gate.

Surely then the club could come up with some sort of register where if you're 14-16 say, you register with the club providing proof of your D.O.B and emergency contact details, (important if someone takes ill during the game for instance)

An online account could then be set up by the club and some kind of ID card issued to be shown to ticket staff and stewards that would avoid the majority of the scenes we currently witness at the turnstiles.

Not foolproof by any means and there would be a cost and some effort required by the office staff but surely something worth looking into.

Assuming there's no real problem if they have season tickets??.

Im not 100 per cent sure but I think a pass ID card or a young Scot card is sufficient for ID. Part of the issue does seem to come from over zealous stewarding - maybe a reminder from the club for young fans to bring ID with them. 

[santheman]

10 minutes ago, wellgirl said:

Im not 100 per cent sure but I think a pass ID card or a young Scot card is sufficient for ID. Part of the issue does seem to come from over zealous stewarding - maybe a reminder from the club for young fans to bring ID with them. 

Aye something as simple as a message on the online platform to that effect.

Not every kid carries ID though.

[Kmcalpin]

I'm struggling to find the relevant guidance on age restrictions on the official website. I first heard about it through a relative, not the club.

[wellgirl]

10 minutes ago, santheman said:

Aye something as simple as a message on the online platform to that effect.

Not every kid carries ID though.

If you go to the ticketing information for our next game there's a bit that says that 13 years olds and unders have to be accompanied by an adult 

[dennyc]

Liverpool appear to be 16 minimum as well.

Strangely, and I know SPFL and SFA are different entities, The SFA have a ruling that U16s need to be accompanied if attending Internationals and the Scottish Cup Final at Hampden. But can Rangers apply SPFL/their own rules when hosting matches there.? And what rules apply for the League Cup Final which is SPFL run? Perhaps at Hampden SFA rules apply at all times. The whole thing is a minefield.

The ruling needs standardised across Scotland, if not the UK.  Surely the SPFL/SFA should just issue a uniform rule and take the matter out of Clubs' hands. In my opinion, 14 minimum age for unsupervised attendance makes sens but when did common sense ever come into it? Maybe some good can come out of this whole issue. And can the WS, via Motherwell, ask for it to be put on the Agenda for the next meetings of the Governing bodies?

A uniform ruling might then stop individual club security officers interpreting guidance for their own purposes and establish a basis for discussion if matters are not operating smoothly.

Meantime I'm off to Perth hoping for a decent atmosphere, plenty of team support and no goings on that break St Johnstone ' house rules'. 

[andalg]

12 hours ago, Mootherwell86 said:

Totally understand your point regarding legally protecting the club.

However, the standard is set by SPFL guidance which is Under 12s. The club of its own volition has decided to make it Under 14s. That is the part that I cannot understand.

I assume that is to be on the safe side 

[Kmcalpin]

Update: St Mirren and Dundee also 12 years of age and Ross County appears to be the same. 

[Big Stall]

Do we actually enforce it? Pretty sure i was 14 and dogged school to go to the Dortmund game. I cant imagine them saying to all of us, naw your not getting in (even if it had been the rule).

[wellgirl]

18 minutes ago, Big Stall said:

Do we actually enforce it? Pretty sure i was 14 and dogged school to go to the Dortmund game. I cant imagine them saying to all of us, naw your not getting in (even if it had been the rule).

Some stewards seem to be turning teens away if they cant show they are 14. 

[steelboy]

3 hours ago, dennyc said:

 

The ruling needs standardised across Scotland, if not the UK.  Surely the SPFL/SFA should just issue a uniform rule and take the matter out of Clubs' hands. In my opinion, 14 minimum age for unsupervised attendance makes sens but when did common sense ever come into it? 

Why? What makes you thinks that kids who are sitting in Third Year at school today can't go to Fir Park unaccompanied without a safety issue?

[steelboy]

1 hour ago, Big Stall said:

Do we actually enforce it? Pretty sure i was 14 and dogged school to go to the Dortmund game. I cant imagine them saying to all of us, naw your not getting in (even if it had been the rule).

Aye the stewards have been enforcing it and even knocking back older kids who don't have ID. 

Complete idiocy. 

[dennyc]

2 minutes ago, steelboy said:

Why? What makes you thinks that kids who are sitting in Third Year at school today can't go to Fir Park unaccompanied without a safety issue?

I don't. But the age limit whatever it is needs to be made uniform. That's the point.  I suggested 14 because that's a middle ground that I think most parents and Clubs would be comfortable with. Maybe as a starting point to be reviewed.  I really couldn't care less what age it is, make it 12 if you like.  That way everyone knows exactly where they stand, every ground has the same rules, and security officers cannot make up rules to suit their own agenda. I thought that was actually what you wanted?  But no matter where it is set someone will complain. I know 12 year olds I would have no concerns about but I also know 14 year olds I would not trust to cross the road. A number is only a number, but for clarity it needs to be set and uniform.

But what age would you suggest? And do you accept that the Club have the right to ask for proof of age?  Like happens at other venues, even the cinema you referred to. Or is that a step too far? More authority to challenge?  I did agree with your point re Fire Safety by the way. If this is going to be resolved there needs to be compromise and willing on both sides. There appears to be no acceptance of that from some. Is the issue the rule? Or is the issue Bob Park?

On a broader note, I asked you previously if you attended away matches. In response to your comment that you have not witnessed any questionable fan behaviour within Fir Park. You did not answer that one. So I'll give you another question. If a Motherwell fan of any age is found to have taken pyros into a ground, or set them off, or entered the playing area, or abused stewards, or thrown objects onto the pitch do you think they should be banned from all grounds in Scotland? Some folk suggest that if it does not happen within Fir Park it should not affect attending Fir Park. Where do you stand on that one? And how about away fans that do the same at Fir Park.....you can add seat damage to the list. Should they also  be allowed to carry on elsewhere, regardless?

[steelboy]

28 minutes ago, dennyc said:

 

But what age would you suggest? 

On a broader note, I asked you previously if you attended away matches. In response to your comment that you have not witnessed any questionable fan behaviour within Fir Park. 

If there has to be an age limit then make it high school age. Councils say that kids are capable of travelling up to three miles a day to school unsupervised so going to Fir Park shouldn't be an issue at this age. 

I don't go to many away games since the lockdown, probably less than a dozen in that period. I don't like pyro so banning people for that wouldn't bother me and might cut back on it but the process has to be above board and transparent with a right to defend yourself. The current system which magically appeared with Brian Caldwell clearly isn't.