Persistent Standing Policy

[Kentishgreen]

I think the genius reply has already been given. We need a safety certificate for the refurbed grandstand and that is being jeopardised by a few people who want to do what they want to do irrespective of the rules and the impact of their actions on the club. Until we have safe standing areas people shouldn’t persistently stand. It’s very simple.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

I think the genius reply has already been given. We need a safety certificate for the refurbed grandstand and that is being jeopardised by a few people who want to do what they want to do irrespective of the rules and the impact of their actions on the club. Until we have safe standing areas people shouldn’t persistently stand. It’s very simple.

It is of my opinion that even when safe-standing areas have been introduced there will still be people who will want to stand in areas of grounds that don't have it.

 

[Ade the green]

Without having to go back through the thread, what happened to anyone that had their tickets blocked? Was it so they could be taken to one side and briefed or were they permanently curtailed in which case, have the club been forthcoming with refunds on what is essentially a seasons long ticket?

 

[Forest of Dean Green]

Would like to give my perspective on this as a season ticket holder in Block 14 that also happens to be disabled. I cannot stand, whilst I can walk with sticks, it is physically impossible for me to stand still for more than a few seconds and a struggle to get stood up in the first place. I originally had a ticket in Row A. Ideal I thought, plenty of leg room, no need to stand to let people pass, nobody standing in front of me. Unfortunately my seat was by the quaintly named 'Vomitory' aka Entrance/Exit. This means for the first five minutes of the game you see nothing towards the Dempot as the slow drinkers who cannot take their alcohol past that point stand in your way (Ignored by the stewards who seem to be on first name terms with them). Anyway, calms down then and you see some of the game. By 20 minutes our chums that have spent all lunchtime in the pub need to pee. Of they go, something happens and they stand in front of you again, 10 minutes to half time it starts again, 5 minutes after half time and for at least 10 minutes before the final whistle. What does this have to do with the standing in the stands policy? Well it is not just the two back rows is it? I moved up a few rows this year so I can see all the game. Bit awkward to get there but I manage. Unfortunately in the row in front of me now I have the Stone Island Twins. Overheard today, 'No f******s going to make me sit down innit'. And no they did not. This is not just in moments of excitement but throughout the game. Hence I have still only seen the goals we have scored at the Barn Park end this season. Ask them politely to sit and you get told to 'Go and sit with the Spackers, innit' I should say this is not young lads but men in their 40/50'.

I’m so ashamed of my club sometimes.

Me too - well, ashamed of a small proportion of our fans at least. Honestly, you wouldn’t believe it in this day and age. For some people the school playground just doesn’t stop being their preferred space even in their 40s and 50s. Pathetic and crass. It gets in the way of a proper (grown up) debate about the issue because of the kind of bile that comes out of these people’s mouths. Sadly some people just want to stand regardless of others because they are utterly selfish and couldn’t give a toss.

When everyone in the back row wants to stand, how does that affect anyone else. I'll wait for your genius reply.

I think it is pretty clear from this guys post that sitting on the back row was not where he was. The issue here, unless you haven’t spotted it, is the abuse he took for it. How can you try and dress this chaps experience up as a post about back row standing? It’s about fans that don’t give a damn about a disabled supporter! And the same would be true (and has been true from my own experiebce) for elderly fans or kids. This fella wasn’t sitting on the back row. And I put his rights well above those idiots who abused him and so should you.

 

[the corkscrew]

I think the genius reply has already been given. We need a safety certificate for the refurbed grandstand and that is being jeopardised by a few people who want to do what they want to do irrespective of the rules and the impact of their actions on the club. Until we have safe standing areas people shouldn’t persistently stand. It’s very simple.

Hiding behind the safety certificate spoof argument hardly genius. No doubt this has split the fan base in 2. And those that went running to the club to make official complaints against their own fans should be ashamed of themselves. As should all the others supporting them on here. Just the worst type of jealousy.

 

[Mork]

Without having to go back through the thread, what happened to anyone that had their tickets blocked? Was it so they could be taken to one side and briefed or were they permanently curtailed in which case, have the club been forthcoming with refunds on what is essentially a seasons long ticket?

That's four questions. Honestly would be easier if you DID read the thread. You'll find all your answers ..

 

[Pogleswoody]

I think the genius reply has already been given. We need a safety certificate for the refurbed grandstand and that is being jeopardised by a few people who want to do what they want to do irrespective of the rules and the impact of their actions on the club. Until we have safe standing areas people shouldn’t persistently stand. It’s very simple.

Hiding behind the safety certificate spoof argument hardly genius. No doubt this has split the fan base in 2. And those that went running to the club to make official complaints against their own fans should be ashamed of themselves. As should all the others supporting them on here. Just the worst type of jealousy.

So did you miss Forest of Dean Green's post above or are you just ignoring it?

Just the worst type of prejudice and discriminatory behaviour against older fans, kids and disabled supporters.
I sit in the 7th row back from the pitch, stand in front of me for the whole game and I will officially complain about you.
Stand in the back row? None of my business, crack on.

Doesn't take a genius to figure out the different points of view .... does it? :think:

 

[Kentishgreen]

I don’t think there’s any jealousy involved here perhaps you have a screw loose. It’s very very simple. You cannot persistently stand in an area where standing is not allowed. Sorry about that. I always stood on the terraces when they were there but now they’re not. I have never sat in the grandstand or Mayflower. Where is the justification for a few people to do what they want to do as and when they feel like it and sod everyone else? If you break the law you face the consequences. It’s very simple. It’s pointless trying to avoid the issue of safety certificates as if they don’t exist and don’t apply to us anyway.

 

[the corkscrew]

I think the genius reply has already been given. We need a safety certificate for the refurbed grandstand and that is being jeopardised by a few people who want to do what they want to do irrespective of the rules and the impact of their actions on the club. Until we have safe standing areas people shouldn’t persistently stand. It’s very simple.

Hiding behind the safety certificate spoof argument hardly genius. No doubt this has split the fan base in 2. And those that went running to the club to make official complaints against their own fans should be ashamed of themselves. As should all the others supporting them on here. Just the worst type of jealousy.

So did you miss Forest of Dean Green's post above or are you just ignoring it?

Just the worst type of prejudice and discriminatory behaviour against older fans, kids and disabled supporters.
I sit in the 7th row back from the pitch, stand in front of me for the whole game and I will officially complain about you.
Stand in the back row? None of my business, crack on.

Doesn't take a genius to figure out the different points of view .... does it? :think:

Apparently it does as you've clocked up 30 pages so far so conclude that rules iS rules and sAfEtY cErTiFicaTE innit. PASOTI really surpassing itself here.
You crack on. Let's go for 60. :thumbs:

 

[Pogleswoody]

I'll crack on with trying to get you to reply to the real issues on this thread (if you don't mind):
What is your view on standing in front of disabled and elderly supporters so that they can't watch the game? ... innit!! :crazy:

 

[Ham Green]

Either corkscrew isn't actually reading the posts or he's too stupid to understand what's being said.

I'll spell it out nice and simple.

It's not people standing at the back. That's not really the issue.

OK so far?

It's people at the front, standing and blocking the views of others, particularly those who physically cannot stand for long periods. That's what bigalf and others were complaining about.

Still with me? Well done if you got this far.

The point is, it's unfair that people should have their views blocked because others so lack self-control that they cannot remain seated. It's especially unfair that those people should then face abuse for complaining about it.

I can do the whole thing with sock puppets if it'll make it easier for you.

 

[the corkscrew]

Either corkscrew isn't actually reading the posts or he's too stupid to understand what's being said.

I'll spell it out nice and simple.

It's not people standing at the back. That's not really the issue.

OK so far?

It's people at the front, standing and blocking the views of others, particularly those who physically cannot stand for long periods. That's what bigalf and others were complaining about.

Still with me? Well done if you got this far.

The point is, it's unfair that people should have their views blocked because others so lack self-control that they cannot remain seated. It's especially unfair that those people should then face abuse for complaining about it.

I can do the whole thing with sock puppets if it'll make it easier for you.

Which rows have been closed?
I won't say I'll draw you a picture, because that's the sort of thing you say when you're getting all defensive and abusive because you're losing the plot.
Go lie down..... :wave:

 

[SWTT]

I think the genius reply has already been given. We need a safety certificate for the refurbed grandstand and that is being jeopardised by a few people who want to do what they want to do irrespective of the rules and the impact of their actions on the club. Until we have safe standing areas people shouldn’t persistently stand. It’s very simple.

It is of my opinion that even when safe-standing areas have been introduced there will still be people who will want to stand in areas of grounds that don't have it.

I think there's probably truth in this, likewise I'd say there's also likely those who will complain that those in designated standing areas should sit. Arse holes all over the shop.

There's some right petty bickering in this thread while seemingly agreeing. I don't think any advocating standing are suggesting anything other than the back rows and then those complaining about standing are not including the non-impeding back rows. :doh:

The club have closed two back rows, however. I'd be interested to hear from anyone who believes that the back 2 rows of Block 14 blocks their view?

 

[Stiffler]

28 pages and still nobody can give a valid reason for people being allowed to stand in block 3 and not block 14?

I tell you why, the word nepotism springs to mind.

 

[The Doctor]

28 pages and still nobody can give a valid reason for people being allowed to stand in block 3 and not block 14?

I tell you why, the word nepotism springs to mind.

Who is favouring their friends/relatives/family by allowing standing in Block 3 (and Block 6 and elsewhere) but not in Block 14?