Jump to content
IGNORED

Cardiff Home End


BCFC1512

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

Fair enough, its a forum after all and people have different views on most topics.

There is a clear difference between alternative views and talking about holding a vote on whether somebody should have to leave the forum.  Particularly so when that person has not trolled, bullied, insulted or threatened anybody at all.  Albeit it would be wrong even if the forum user had done that (noting there is a difference between a poll and a decision by mods to suspend on the basis of breaching forum rules).

Frankly, I think the proposal from Tetbury Massive, and the way it has been communicated is utterly appalling and unedifying.  I'm embarrassed by it appearing on this forum as a proposal, hence feeling moved to make this comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion a poll isn't necessary. I don't always agree with Julie's points or the viewpoint of the police on issues such as this but it is useful to have her on here just for dialogue.

Take SAG for example; no transparency, total secrecy, apparent disdain for supporters and they're quite rightly scrutinised by us. If they were on here to explain their reasoning for some of their bizarre decisions perhaps the relationship would be a little easier and we could work with them.

At least with Julie on here she does engage. Perhaps not always with the most satisfactory answers but I appreciate that the effort is there. If you really don't want to read her posts then put her on ignore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Red Army 75 said:

Went there twice. Remember we beat them 3-0 . Absolutely pissed down. My old man put me against the wall at the back. As all sorts of things were being chucked over the wall. Thank god for that umbrella. Raining coins . :englandsmile4wf:

That was my fave game at Ninian...I was stood by the wall at the back too, even the stewards were throwing stuff at us!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

In what way ? - genuine question.

Same point being repeated verbatim, zero listening to reason, debate or logic and what appears to be increasing anger as either the point someone is making being overlooked or dismissed out of hand.

The 'I don't agree with you, I think you should stop posting on here' is a personal favourite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

Same point being repeated verbatim, zero listening to reason, debate or logic and what appears to be increasing anger as either the point someone is making being overlooked or dismissed out of hand.

The 'I don't agree with you, I think you should stop posting on here' is a personal favourite.

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am gonna give a bit of a wider context here.

I did a bit of reading on FSF yesterday and basically, it transpires Barnsley's capacity reduced by 4,300 in their huge away end...by SAG/Police. Don't know how long for or if it was just for specific games.

Was it because of for example a safety fault? No. Was it maybe an electrical wiring loose or a damaged pillar? Definitely not.

Mainly because of some concourse trouble...but SAG's and especially secretive ones really need looking at in a major way! Allocation at Barnsley is 2,000 in general, though the away end holds 6k+ just to give a bit of context.

Also did a bit of reading on Cardiff forum, apparently they have had quite a few bubbles and travel restrictions down the years.

These SAG's really need to learn transparency- agreed not all are like that, but quite a few are...

I would also wager that it's fairly rife the SAG interference in capacity- in home and away but mainly away in the UK. SOMETIMES it might be for valid reasons, but generally it ain't!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone else extremely uncomfortable with the kind of vitriol JulieH gets? I'm not a fan of the profession she's in but none of us know her and I'd rather have a police officer we can communicate with than one lurking on here as a guest.

How childish is it to say that if you want someone to leave the forum! It's a forum for ***** sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, ZiderEyed said:

Anyone else extremely uncomfortable with the kind of vitriol JulieH gets? I'm not a fan of the profession she's in but none of us know her and I'd rather have a police officer we can communicate with than one lurking on here as a guest.

How childish is it to say that if you want someone to leave the forum! It's a forum for ***** sake.

I increasingly think I'm in a minority of actually appreciating the role of 'police' in general.

I'd much rather live in a society where the rule of law is upheld than some banana republic where justice is only available to the wealthy or armed.

Yes, I understand that some people may (for example) considered the police a bit OTT in some respects - such as watching football, but if you thought your kid had been snatched by a wrong un, you'd be straight on the blower begging them to help and investigate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's rather a shame that @TETBURY MASSIVE has seen fit to derail this thread with what appears to be little more than a vendetta against Julie and the police in general.  Let's remember that Julie is here in an official capacity and that limits what she can say.  I completely disagree with her stance on this, but I still respect the fact that she is willing to directly engage with us on a very contentious issue.  Whether we agree or not is rather besides the point, but her presence here does add to the debate.  Proposing to hold a vote on whether someone should continue to contribute is embarrassing verging on shameful.

We should also remember that Julie being here gives us a chance to direct our comments to the police and air our grievances about the way we have been treated as a group of supporters - that may influence future decisions in our favour.  That can't be a bad thing.

Why don't we get back to debating the issue at hand and leave Julie to comment on that, rather than having to defend her very presence on the forum.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

I increasingly think I'm in a minority of actually appreciating the role of 'police' in general.

I'd much rather live in a society where the rule of law is upheld than some banana republic where justice is only available to the wealthy or armed.

Yes, I understand that some people may (for example) considered the police a bit OTT in some respects - such as watching football, but if you thought your kid had been snatched by a I love you, you'd be straight on the blower begging them to help and investigate.

What's a ' I love you '  ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bluebirdccfc said:

Hi Guys, i know im not likely to be welcome here.... but i thought i would let you  know its not the club itself its the police making this issue. 90% of Cardiff fans want you to be treated like us, same amount. So we aren't overly happy ourselves.

I kinda like the banter between both clubs.

You will be fine. We have a few Rovers on here who add a great deal of debate and banter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JulieH said:

Don’t know why that has happened, I always look forward to my rubbish and snake reactions. Perhaps dolly Marie may be able to reactivate? 

With respect to you after 18 years policing football alone I am in a position to say that disorder increases with the risk of away fans in home areas, it happens and the police and clubs will do all we can to try and stop it before the game . 

Why don't you focus your efforts then on increasing the capacity of the club that you represent? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, bluebirdccfc said:

Hi Guys, i know im not likely to be welcome here.... but i thought i would let you  know its not the club itself its the police making this issue. 90% of Cardiff fans want you to be treated like us, same amount. So we aren't overly happy ourselves.

I kinda like the banter between both clubs.

If you want to see not being made welcome try gaschat.

Do you know that though? Some on here have said your SAG have got involved to make the decision with the police?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ZiderEyed said:

If you want to see not being made welcome try gaschat.

Do you know that though? Some on here have said your SAG have got involved to make the decision with the police?

not from our understanding, there is little obviously a club can do if the police decide its high risk. I'm sure they could even cancel or force behind closed doors. Which is totally over the top.

Like i said, you should get the tickets you want. no reason why not. More money for both clubs, makes for a better experience and derby.

We've been banned completely from clubs (like Wolves) because one drunk fan threw a pie on the pitch. didn't even get kicked out for it. So we know what its like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ZiderEyed said:

If you want to see not being made welcome try gaschat.

Do you know that though? Some on here have said your SAG have got involved to make the decision with the police?

The police form part of the SAG. It was the overall SAG who made the decision, not the police solely 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is nothing obliging them to release it unfortunately, @Busterrimes .

Do they release it for example, all SAG meetings about Cardiff or once a season- or something else that's adhoc? It could be available under FOI...but the following opt out would probably cover it.

31 minutes ago, ZiderEyed said:

If you want to see not being made welcome try gaschat.

Do you know that though? Some on here have said your SAG have got involved to make the decision with the police?

The SAG play God unfortunately. What they say goes- yes it will benefit Cardiff on the pitch which may have played a part, but more likely it's they deemed a large allocation on our part to be a risk.

Regards the chances of FOI success? I suspect.

Quote

Public safety

We believe this exception to be engaged by minutes in their entirety. 
The exception states that ‘a public authority may refuse to disclose 
information to the extent that its disclosure would adversely 
affect…public safety.’ The Safety Advisory Group meetings are for the 
discussion of the details of policing, security and safety measures 
currently in place, the perceived effectiveness of those measures and 
the discussion of any remedial steps that may be necessary. There can 
therefore be little doubt that this exception is engaged.

Whilst there is a public interest in transparency in the workings of 
a public authority, it must be taken into account that Bristol City 
FC are not a public authority and therefore subject to EIR. Whilst 
SAG meetings are chaired by the Council and it is appropriate that a 
request such as this is dealt with in accordance with the appropriate 
access regime, the Council, in conjunction with other bodies with 
responsibilities for safety, is providing oversight and input on the 
football club’s safety arrangements in a non-public forum. We are of 
the view that the public interest is better served by the Council 
being able to chair this meeting within an environment that enables 
frank discussion of the arrangements in place. To disclose the 
requested minutes would potentially inhibit the communication between 
the bodies sitting on the SAG. Furthermore, the information contained 
in the minutes would be of assistance to an individual wishing to 
cause disruption on match day.

Confidentiality of proceedings

We believe this exception to be engaged by minutes in their entirety. 
The exception states that ‘a public authority may refuse to disclose 
information to the extent that its disclosure would adversely affect 
the confidentiality of the proceedings of that or any other public 
authority where such confidentiality is provided by law.’

We are of the view that SAG meetings constitute proceedings for the 
purposes of this exception and, for the reasons outlined in the 
section above considering the public interest test, that the public 
interest is in withholding this information.

Is my view they will hide behind this and this. Especially the bits in bold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, bluebirdccfc said:

not from our understanding, there is little obviously a club can do if the police decide its high risk. I'm sure they could even cancel or force behind closed doors. Which is totally over the top.

Like i said, you should get the tickets you want. no reason why not. More money for both clubs, makes for a better experience and derby.

We've been banned completely from clubs (like Wolves) because one drunk fan threw a pie on the pitch. didn't even get kicked out for it. So we know what its like.

What sort of pie?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...