Forest Game Postponed (merged)

[WellRedPhil]

I suppose all those who think it's H&S gone mad would never dream of sueing Notts Forest if they slipped and broke an arm.

No, no I wouldn't. It's ridiculous that you'd even have a case. So you'd sue would you? Lets shut Cabot Circus down in case people slip there.

[Ian M]

Also very annoying as we are in good form, what's the luck now that we have loads of injuries and are off form when the match is played

Hopefuly some time in the New Year when we have had a chance to bed Nicky in alongside Stead

[Donald]

I can remmeber over 15 years ago City v Rovers match was called off due to freezing rain making the roads around Ashton Gate very sliipery but the pitch was unaffected so I have to disagree with your assement with on modern day cultrue.

I remember the game, unfortunately there was no website, mobile phones and radio Bristol didnt even know till late on, came up for the game from mid Xmas holiday from Cornwall

If I recall rightly, roads and area wasn't an issue and alot of people had made the match.

no one had thought to gritt the stands!!!! Game was then called of less than 90mins before kick off. Farcical situation back then

[Chivs]

I am too proud mate. I won't bore you with the details, but my job carries with it great risk, but the key is not to eliminate that risk but to manage it sensibly. You are at risk during almost any activity you care to mention, whether it's ironing a shirt, crossing a busy road or taking a dump.

The only thing more ludicrous than an individual suing a football club because they fell over on an icy footpath is the fact that under our judicial system they may be ABLE to. Christ....

I am unable (and stubbornly unwilling as well) to differentiate between a football club being held responsible for someone slipping while en route to a game of theirs, to any public amenity, service or attraction being responsible for the same. Society would collapse if the same standard as applied to football was applied equally.

I hope your risks stay well managed.

As to suing Notts Forest because I slip over on the pavement...madness.

[Alex_BCFC]

Most people wouldn't be so pathetic to sue. But unfortunately there is a minority who would and that is why football clubs have to make these kind of decisions.

[Kenn Loyal]

At least the wine will be on ice.

[Oldlander]

Sat in a pub in Nottingham. Raining outside- hope I don't slip. They just didn't fancy playing us today!

[Ryan 7]

When do people think the re-arranged fixture will be?

Any idea when they will announce this?

I'm hoping to still be able to go but we'll have to see.

[Ron]

&lt;br /&gt;Presumably you endorse the enforcement of confining all members of the public inside their homes until this cold weather has passed, unless they are lucky to live on a main road with all the pavements and roads cleared of ice by the council &lt;img src='http://www.otib.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/default/whistle.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='<img src='http://www.otib.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/default/whistle.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />' /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;

<br />Of course, that's exactly what I said. All you need to say now is 'political correctness gone mad'.

[luke_bristol]

..but it is exactly what you are advocating.

Are you not going to address my point? Why should a public attraction like a football match, and ONLY football matches, be cancelled if access routes tonthem are deemed hazardous, but no other attractions or amenities?

[Jordan Tansley]

No, no I wouldn't. It's ridiculous that you'd even have a case. So you'd sue would you? Lets shut Cabot Circus down in case people slip there.

I agree with you more often than not, Phil. However, I think the attitudes on this thread are typical of much that is wrong with this forum.

Just because you or Luke, or any other like-minded person would not sue does not A) make that the correct choice or B) make that the choice every member of the public would take.

Luke said it, as did you that people DO have a case. That's where the argument stops. The rights and wrongs to that are a separate debate, but whilst there are "injurylawyers4U" and there ilk about, people who run attractions etc. will always take the safe option.

That seems logical. I do sometimes wonder why people harp on about the "good old days" surely having people who take assessments of risk and decide that for some people the risk could be dangerous is a positive thing?

[beaverface]

I can remmeber over 15 years ago City v Rovers match was called off due to freezing rain making the roads around Ashton Gate very sliipery but the pitch was unaffected so I have to disagree with your assement with on modern day cultrue.

Remember that game well also. I was travelling from Hanham to the game on the bus, and the freezing rain basically made it like walking on ice cubes, impossible to walk on.

Even so, if the game would of went ahead, I would have got there.

I agree with a lot of the other posts on here, so long as inside the ground is safe, why should a game be called off because of pavements/roads being icy - it doesn't cancel any other entertainment business ie. cinema, theatre, shopping

[WellRedPhil]

I agree with you more often than not, Phil. However, I think the attitudes on this thread are typical of much that is wrong with this forum.

Just because you or Luke, or any other like-minded person would not sue does not A) make that the correct choice or B) make that the choice every member of the public would take.

Luke said it, as did you that people DO have a case. That's where the argument stops. The rights and wrongs to that are a separate debate, but whilst there are "injurylawyers4U" and there ilk about, people who run attractions etc. will always take the safe option.

That seems logical. I do sometimes wonder why people harp on about the "good old days" surely having people who take assessments of risk and decide that for some people the risk could be dangerous is a positive thing?

I know people would have a case I'm just saying I wouldn't sue, it wouldn't even cross my mind. I just don't see how this argument is valid for say football grounds but not for shopping centers, cinemas, retail parks etc. If you slipped outside the Mall would you have a case? I honestly don't know but I don't think you should. I think we should judge whether it's safe for ourselves and if we get hurt it will be as a result of our decisions. I personally don't think having a certain degree of ice around the ground is a reason for a game to be called off, this is obviously where our opinions on the matter differ.

[dezgimed]

I doubt there would be a case for approach roads that Forest aren't in charge of. You'd do well to argue they have a duty of care to everyone walking on a public pavement. Plus there must be some sort of contributory negligience by the person who falls over, it's their choice to walk on the bloody icy pavement, Forest aren't forcing them to attend the match.

[Nogbad the Bad]

That seems logical. I do sometimes wonder why people harp on about the "good old days" surely having people who take assessments of risk and decide that for some people the risk could be dangerous is a positive thing?

We don't want other people making these assessments for us, that's the point.

I hoped the nanny state was going to be booted into touch by the new government - outlawing these parasitical lawyers would be a good start.

[Jordan Tansley]

We don't want other people making these assessments for us, that's the point.

I hoped the nanny state was going to be booted into touch by the new government - outlawing these parasitical lawyers would be a good start.

But if those assessments weren't done, and someone did hurt themselves, you know for a fact that the first question that would be asked in the aftermath would be "why wasn't I told the conditions were dangerous?" and with that there is evenmore case for legal proceedings?

Just because me and you have the capability to walk on ice and judge whether it is too dangerous to go out for ourselves doesnt mean a disabled person or an elderly person or anyone else for that matter can.

If one person would sue, or one person could seriously injure themselves then a game of football isn't as important to the money men in charge. That makes sense.

[Nogbad the Bad]

But if those assessments weren't done, and someone did hurt themselves, you know for a fact that the first question that would be asked in the aftermath would be "why wasn't I told the conditions were dangerous?" and with that there is evenmore case for legal proceedings?

Just because me and you have the capability to walk on ice and judge whether it is too dangerous to go out for ourselves doesnt mean a disabled person or an elderly person or anyone else for that matter can.

If one person would sue, or one person could seriously injure themselves then a game of football isn't as important to the money men in charge. That makes sense.

These assessments never used to be done and don't need to be done now.

People used to get on with life quite happily without having others dictate what was safe for them or not and without having parasitical lawyers urging them to seek money for every little mishap.

You venture out of your front door "At Your Own Risk".

If you have an accident, bad luck, that's life.

It's a sick system where anybody would think they should seek financial compensation from a football club for slipping over near the ground, and needs to be got rid of.

[Redcliffe 78]

These assessments never used to be done and don't need to be done now.

People used to get on with life quite happily without having others dictate what was safe for them or not and without having parasitical lawyers urging them to seek money for every little mishap.

You venture out of your front door "At Your Own Risk".

If you have an accident, bad luck, that's life.

It's a sick system where anybody would think they should seek financial compensation from a football club for slipping over near the ground, and needs to be got rid of.

Where there is blame theirs a claim. Society gone mad.

[Redcliffe 78]

These assessments never used to be done and don't need to be done now.

People used to get on with life quite happily without having others dictate what was safe for them or not and without having parasitical lawyers urging them to seek money for every little mishap.

You venture out of your front door "At Your Own Risk".

If you have an accident, bad luck, that's life.

It's a sick system where anybody would think they should seek financial compensation from a football club for slipping over near the ground, and needs to be got rid of.

Where there is blame theirs a claim. Society gone mad.