Jump to content

The CEO’s monthly chat


SteelmaninOZ
 Share

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, steelboy said:

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. 

Seems fair enough. I could agree with what you propose and the logic behind it, along with the transparency, which should cut both ways. I do think there has to be a minimum age or else at what age does it become too great a risk....11. 10. 9?

But what about the points you did not cover? Those other behaviours....I have witnessed all of them in recent years... and whether bans should cover all grounds, as long as the bans are based on evidence.  Or is pyro the only misbehaviour you think merits a ban? And what about proof of age? Is that a compromise worth accepting to show willing? Might even make Stewards' jobs a bit more straightforward. If not, why not.... on both counts?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, dennyc said:

Seems fair enough. I could agree with what you propose and the logic behind it, along with the transparency, which should cut both ways. I do think there has to be a minimum age or else at what age does it become too great a risk....11. 10. 9?

But what about the points you did not cover? Those other behaviours....I have witnessed all of them in recent years... and whether bans should cover all grounds, as long as the bans are based on evidence.  Or is pyro the only misbehaviour you think merits a ban? And what about proof of age? Is that a compromise worth accepting to show willing? Might even make Stewards' jobs a bit more straightforward. If not, why not.... on both counts?

 

We are talking about two different things here. I don't think young high schooler are the ones causing bother.

As far as the bad behaviour goes I don't really care. It's part and parcel of football in a working class area, it's like going to Spoons and complaining that people are drinking irresponsibly. We all know that going to Motherwell games is a very safe experience and no one was crying out for any of this prior to Caldwell being appointed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you’re old enough to take yourself to high school, you’re old enough to take yourself to a football match.

14 and above is ridiculous. This policy is unbelievably shortsighted and will undoubtedly cut off a significant proportion of the next generation of kids from becoming regular paying fans. Access to football is already prohibitive enough without implementing this nonsense.

I’m really disappointed in Caldwell over this. It’s completely changed my view on the Club in this context and made me question signing up my wee man to be a junior WS member, as what’s the point?! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, wellfan said:

I’m really disappointed in Caldwell over this. It’s completely changed my view on the Club in this context and made me question signing up my wee man to be a junior WS member, as what’s the point?! 

Don't be too hard on the Society as don't know its view on this issue. I'm not in favour of running to the Society over every single issue but this does impact directly on fans. As such  why not email the Society about this. Its an important issue and has caused a fair bit of online discussion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, wellfan said:

If you’re old enough to take yourself to high school, you’re old enough to take yourself to a football match.

14 and above is ridiculous. This policy is unbelievably shortsighted and will undoubtedly cut off a significant proportion of the next generation of kids from becoming regular paying fans. Access to football is already prohibitive enough without implementing this nonsense.

I’m really disappointed in Caldwell over this. It’s completely changed my view on the Club in this context and made me question signing up my wee man to be a junior WS member, as what’s the point?! 

 

This is not a Motherwell thing a quick search on Google and most of the English premiership seems to be under 16's need to be accompanied so I would assume the FA, EPL, EFL SFA , SPFL etc are all issuing guidelines for the clubs to follow.

Caldwell mentions in his update he thought 16 was too high so Motherwell made it 14, so there is obviously some leeway for the clubs to set their own policies. The clubs obviously have legal and regulatory constraints on them so limits need to be set.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgot to add Quote before replying. Comments in response to the following

 

"We are talking about two different things here. I don't think young high schooler are the ones causing bother.

As far as the bad behaviour goes I don't really care. It's part and parcel of football in a working class area, it's like going to Spoons and complaining that people are drinking irresponsibly. We all know that going to Motherwell games is a very safe experience and no one was crying out for any of this prior to Caldwell being appointed. "

 

I don't think it matters what age we are talking about. It's about behaviours, respect and common decency. If it is not the youngsters, then fair enough, I accept that. If it's an older set then that almost makes the goings on more questionable. But, yes, if the youngsters are being accused of things they are not guilty of then that is wrong. But from what I have witnessed at games there is a mix of ages involved.

As for accepting that the behaviours I described are part of football and should just be written of as life, sorry but that's just nonsense and a cop out. Will you still be saying that when someone you know gets injured?  Maybe tell that to the young boy that got hit in the face by a flare at Dunfermline. " Man up son. It's life. You chose to go to the game so live with it"

And these things were an issue long time before Caldwell signed up. But it is a good excuse for you to have a go at him and maybe his handling of things could have been better. Maybe it's just that he is the one that is addressing matters whereas others have refused to act. Type in 'Pyrotechnics at Scottish football grounds in Scotland' in Google and read the top article which pops up. Dated May this year I think and covers attending football matches. That maybe gives a clue as to why Clubs are now being forced to intervene. Might explain a lot in fact. Pressure has certainly been applied. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

Don't be too hard on the Society as don't know its view on this issue. I'm not in favour of running to the Society over every single issue but this does impact directly on fans. As such  why not email the Society about this. Its an important issue and has caused a fair bit of online discussion. 

I’m not blaming the Society, I just think the Club’s policy is at odds with the Society’s drive to encourage childhood support. I’m sure WS directors are reading and will take action. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

This is not a Motherwell thing a quick search on Google and most of the English premiership seems to be under 16's need to be accompanied so I would assume the FA, EPL, EFL SFA , SPFL etc are all issuing guidelines for the clubs to follow.

Caldwell mentions in his update he thought 16 was too high so Motherwell made it 14, so there is obviously some leeway for the clubs to set their own policies. The clubs obviously have legal and regulatory constraints on them so limits need to be set.

The difference is that EPL clubs have an unlimited supply of fans willing to pay into their model, but we don’t. We need to hook local kids early and this will prevent that.

The 14 and over is absolutely a Motherwell thing. It should be 12 at worst. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Busta Nut said:

The amount of examples given for that are teams that rake in 40k people is fucking wild.  

They might be wild and as you say the issue won't be a problem for teams with huge crowds every game. But the guidelines  / policies in effect are not based on attendance figures so they apply equally to every club.

Given the guidelines seem to give the clubs a fair bit of leeway I have no doubt  Motherwell could reduce the age limit to 12 if they wanted to, so they must have their reasons for choosing 14.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
9 minutes ago, grizzlyg said:

Also never answered why the buses are a ridiculous £20 for semi final

If you really want to know, I've found the club pretty responsive any time I emailed them a question. Or maybe contact someone from the Well Society.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, grizzlyg said:

New contracts for Kettlewell and Frail, apparently sorted at start of season, I must have missed that announcement but not complaining 

Apart from a few posts on here, an official club announcement, the Well Society newsletter, articles in the newspapers, SK's presser just after it was announced and SK's post-match just after it was announced, they kept it pretty quiet :whistling:

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, weeyin said:

Apart from a few posts on here, an official club announcement, the Well Society newsletter, articles in the newspapers, SK's presser just after it was announced and SK's post-match just after it was announced, they kept it pretty quiet :whistling:

Is this the 2nd extension he has signed? If first I knew about that but if this is another one I would have been on my adriatic cruise and missed it😁😁

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, grizzlyg said:

Also never answered why the buses are a ridiculous £20 for semi final

Everythings dear now as a bus driver posted before upkeep and running of a bus is very expensive now a days , the steelworks one is only £3 cheaper. You could get a train I suspect that would be even dearer.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/10/2024 at 4:21 PM, grizzlyg said:

Is this the 2nd extension he has signed? If first I knew about that but if this is another one I would have been on my adriatic cruise and missed it😁😁

You might have been away bud.

It was extensively trailed.

They are both now on 1 year rolling contracts.

Consensus was that was good for the club as we never get into a position again where we are having to pay 3 managers at the same time.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/10/2024 at 6:56 PM, StAndrew7 said:

Anyone else think there's a dig at Douglas/the previous WS heads in there? Interesting wording around the engagement and communications...

Not sure it was a dig.

But its hard for it to not sound that way when you just talk openly about the changes and the difference thats been made.

I thought he handled it as diplomatically as he could.

No personal references to anyone not have accepted the invitation etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hopefully the CEO is going explain when he's going to stop ticketless Celtic fans coming into ground. If the Green Brigade are the ones who are assualting stewards to open the doors then tell Celtic no more tickets for the Green Brigade. If they don't like it no tickets at all.

There's not so much big talk from him, PC Plod and alleged SLO when it's not Motherwell supporting children trying to get in the ground.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats several games in a row now against that lot where the away end is clearly over populated and it will continue to happen as long as the club and the authorities let it.if it gets to the point where there's some kind of disaster due to the overcrowding you can be sure the green bigots will play the victim,the police will play dumb and it will be our club thats left with serious questions to answer,there's only going to be one loser if this continues and it will be us.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's time their allocation was cut and told it won't return to normal levels until Celtic and authorities get control. It might hurt us financially but that's better than life's being lost. This issue can't continue.

Ban all their support, much like The Rangers on safety grounds. We might actually benefit on the playing field if they are surrounded by our support only.

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...