JM91 Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Fans weren't given the things you speak of, you may remember quite a hoorah about flag(s) being banned, for example. I would say 'behave yourself!' but don't think that'd be helpful. 'Fans' you speak of, want autonomy. This is the sticking point. Bristol Sport, despite their words, want and like people who buy into their cooperate vision for our Football Club. The conflict is with people who's idea of a Football Club isn't compatible with their cooperate vision. Negotiation can and will be made, imo. Now wave that scarve, there's a good boy which is what everyone else is saying. it doesn't matter what Bristol Sport do, you're going to disagree with them. the "ultras" would have far more credibility if they had something more constructive to say than "I hate it because it's Bristol Sport". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTMS Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 which is what everyone else is saying. it doesn't matter what Bristol Sport do, you're going to disagree with them. the "ultras" would have far more credibility if they had something more constructive to say than "I hate it because it's Bristol Sport". What Ultras? It is just a word. Forza Eastend had an element of ironic joke about it. It was vehicle for ideas, bad, good, silly - megaphones, yellow marigolds ... Aspects were catered towards children. And that is the context. It doesn't matter what Bristol Sport do, you're going to disagree with them ... A timely and sensible review of the flag bans could easily lead to a positive improvement. There are constructive ideas amongst fans always waiting to happen, all they require is nurturing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 WTMS_BCFC Please explain what I have said is a mistruth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTMS Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 WTMS_BCFC Please explain what I have said is a mistruth. You have posted nothing untruthful, but unfortunately there are several posters who are more than happy to post barbed opinion disguised as fact. When challenged to evidence base their "facts", or asked to meet in person they disappear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickJ Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 which is what everyone else is saying. it doesn't matter what Bristol Sport do, you're going to disagree with them. the "ultras" would have far more credibility if they had something more constructive to say than "I hate it because it's Bristol Sport". Show us where anybody has said "I hate it because it's Bristol Sport". While you're about it you could answer the other questions I have asked. Won't hold my breath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londoner Posted February 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Probably too cool for that, he's from LDN. You wasted a precious second typing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 WTMS_BCFC Thank You for clearing that up. As I said, I do think the Rovers game had a massive impact on the Club's decision, it is a touch ironic that after this game there was a lot of suggestions that the Wheelchair Area should have been at the other end of the Williams Stand. Also, the original East End I stood upon, was at the opposite end to the away fans, and that never spoiled the experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezgimed Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 You wasted a precious second typing that. Saved a second! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRaw Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 So your denying that you personally didn't accuse me of working for or having a connection with the club? So your denying that you personally didn't accuse me of working for the club or BS? Yes. Others made that observation. Can you provide links to these constant accusations? The answer will be a no as it also was with the "demands". Not wishing to rehash this argument as its been done to death and is probably rather tedious but you asked for links to your accusations so I have provided them. YOU and others have continually accused me of working for the club and or having 'connections' just because I don't share your views. To clarify, the only 'connection' I have is the fact the company I work for is one of many sponsors of Bristol Rugby, I am not employed by or have any connection at any level with BCFC or BS or attend any corporate offerings. Working for a company that happens to sponsor a club does not suddenly 'connect' people directly with any level of that club or align that persons views or opinions to that of the club. What I post are my own personal views and opinions, I accept you and your like-minded fans don't agree with many things I post and, quite clearly, the feeling is mutal....... accept that and we move on As our posts tend to be wordy at times, I have just included the salient points of your accusations. Your constant accusation that I am employed or somehow linked with the club/BSL just because I have a different opinion to you is quite frankly immature and embarrassing......more than happy to confirm those credentials with the likes of Tomarse. Contact WTMS ... The "suspicion" will be treated in total confidence. If it is wrong an apology will be offered. The only link that I can see with anything at AG8 is the company he works for is a sponsor (I'm not going to say on what level) at Bristol RFC My employment or views have no connection with BCFC/BSL. The fact that my company have sponsor arrangements with Bristol Rugby is irrelevant, they have done so for years and with Glos CCC The company you work for sponsor a part of the BS family = Bristol rugby club. The company you work for will be using the corporate facilities at Ashton Gate .. That is a connection. Your views are understandable. You have a connection to BS/the club beyond being a fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickJ Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 So basically: - WTMS "accused" RR of having a connection with the club beyond a fan - and WTMS is right in a tenuous sort of way through employer sponsorship. - RR said that WTMS had "accused" him of being employed by the club or BS - and RR is wrong because WTMS merely "suspected" that of being the case Fascinating stuff, but there are others on here who work for BS and are not playing their hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTMS Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Not wishing to rehash this argument as its been done to death and is probably rather tedious but& you asked for links to your accusations so I have provided them. YOU and others have continually accused me of working for the club and or having 'connections' just because I don't share your views. To clarify,& the only 'connection' I have is the fact the company I work for is one of many sponsors of Bristol Rugby, I am not employed by or have any connection at any level with And that was all you could muster. Not ONE explicit accusation that you are a Bristol Sport employee or an employee of Bristol City, but only vague inference that you have a connection via your employers. A connection you confirmed. Your employers are / have been a sponsor. Detail is a devil ... Just like your facts regarding the as of yet unsubstantiated "demands". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View from the Dolman Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 The Royal Naval Reserve appears to be paying Bristol City for sponsorship. For the avoidance of doubt, as a British taxpayer, I am connected with Bristol City and Bristol Sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SARJ Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 The Royal Naval Reserve appears to be paying Bristol City for sponsorship. For the avoidance of doubt, as a British taxpayer, I am connected with Bristol City and Bristol Sport. God Save The Queen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRaw Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 And that was all you could muster. Not ONE explicit accusation that you are a Bristol Sport employee or an employee of Bristol City, but only vague inference that you have a connection via your employers. A connection you confirmed. Your employers are / have been a sponsor. Detail is a devil ... Just like your facts regarding the as of yet unsubstantiated "demands". Yes, I have stated myself in many posts that my employer sponsor the Rugby club and you clearly like to suggest that somehow that 'connects' me to the BCFC/BS. What I fail to grasp is how you feel this somehow has any bearing on what I post on a football forum?? If the company you work for sponsor a team or club, would that by default affect or influence your opinions or views? If the company you work for started sponsoring NLBR, does that mean you automatically become a gas head? Fans that are members of the Supporters Club & Trust, FAN, Community Trust, Senior Reds etc are all 'connected' to the club, does that mean they dont have their own opinions? There are many fans that have been on these threads over the past 12 months that don't share your views, are they all employed or connected to the club? If No is the answer to the above, please explain why you feel it does for me? Its very clear you don't agree or like my views and it suits your agenda to imply they don't count as "I am connected to the club" therefore am only toeing the party line. You couldn't be further form the truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phileas Fogg Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Seen the disabled section placement mentioned. In my view the club made an error there. In games vs rovers where people congregate in that area of the Williams to be near the away support, there will inevitably be issues. Cue people saying "well there shouldn't be issues". Being realistic, there were and always will be issues against rovers, especially in that area of the ground as it was. That was 100% the clubs error - the disabled section should never have been there in the first place. View isn't good, pillars, and access make it problematic before even factoring in a game like the bristol derby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View from the Dolman Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Some clubs have had success with the disabled section being near the away end though. At Old Trafford, there's a disable section in front of the away end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTMS Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Yes, I have stated myself in many posts that my employer sponsor the Rugby club and you clearly like to suggest that somehow that 'connects' me to the BCFC/BS. What I fail to grasp is how you feel this somehow has any bearing on what I post on a football forum?? If the company you work for sponsor a team or club, would that by default affect or influence your opinions or views ............... Saturday at the Three Lions there were people who were genuinely concerned about their continued support of BCFC. They are not part of some elite ever "demanding" Eastend cabal as you would like them to be perceived as. Meanwhile you use the forum as sport. At least keep your game factual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRaw Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Saturday at the Three Lions there were people who were genuinely concerned about their continued support of BCFC. They are not part of some elite ever "demanding" Eastend cabal as you would like them to be perceived as. Meanwhile you use the forum as sport. At least keep your game factual. I do not see any correlation between your post and mine so take it you are ignoring the content and ducking the questions........as you clearly wont want to lose face by accepting that your puerile accusations are false and have no bearing on my thoughts or posts, I'ts best we leave it there. However, to continue your campaign of trying to discredit my posts, your latest accusation is that I am using this forum as a 'sport'.........well, if defending myself whilst being falsely accused is a sport then so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Phileas Fogg The wheelchair area you describe as poor , provides the only current above pitch level viewing experience for wheelchair users and I will check tomorrow to see how many pillars block my view, but I think it is none. Its usage would suggest that it is quite popular. Where should it have been situated? The experiences of wheelchair users who attended the Rovers game, was due to individuals behaviour rather than the clubs decision on its positioning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phileas Fogg Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Phileas Fogg The wheelchair area you describe as poor , provides the only current above pitch level viewing experience for wheelchair users and I will check tomorrow to see how many pillars block my view, but I think it is none. Its usage would suggest that it is quite popular. Where should it have been situated? The experiences of wheelchair users who attended the Rovers game, was due to individuals behaviour rather than the clubs decision on its positioning. Fair enough, I can't really comment on another place but just seems like the club didn't help themselves choosing that exact place. In my eyes it was inevitable it would be problematic due to it's proximity to away support. All it took was a game like Rovers, Cardiff, Leeds etc where people gather there to, really, give away fans stick and misbehave a bit to make it the wrong area. I thought when they announced it that it was a poor choice and this was vindicated. Could have been avoided by the club choosing somewhere else. What about the other side of the Atyeo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Not sure where you mean by the other side of the Atyeo, as there are ground level wheelchair areas on both sides. There are a great deal of grounds where facilities for wheelchair supporters are provided with atrocious views, and the excuse give is old stadia, Bristol City looked for a solution which could be incorporated quickly until the redevelopment took place. If anything perhaps they were a little naive in trusting their supporters to treat fellow supporters with a bit of respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phileas Fogg Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 Not sure where you mean by the other side of the Atyeo, as there are ground level wheelchair areas on both sides. There are a great deal of grounds where facilities for wheelchair supporters are provided with atrocious views, and the excuse give is old stadia, Bristol City looked for a solution which could be incorporated quickly until the redevelopment took place. If anything perhaps they were a little naive in trusting their supporters to treat fellow supporters with a bit of respect. Sorry meant Williams, other side of there. I do see your point and you're right, I am just trying to look at it objectively. At games like Rovers, people buy tickets in those areas to be near away supporters and some of them do it to misbehave a bit.. It always happened there. I believe the club made a mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 The issue with the other end of the Williams was that it was step access, whereas its current position can be accessed by a ramp (steep). I accept it is not perfect, and I think the Club were caught a bit off guard by the Rovers game, and I am glad to say this has not been repeated. It does show the problems any organisation has if they have to factor in the potential behaviours of the minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTFiGO!?! Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 which is what everyone else is saying. it doesn't matter what Bristol Sport do, you're going to disagree with them. the "ultras" would have far more credibility if they had something more constructive to say than "I hate it because it's Bristol Sport".I'm not going to disagree with them out of principle. Bristol Sport would have far more credibility if they sat in the back ground doing their cooperate job and left those who want to retain Bristol City Football Club's face as a Football Club, to do just that. I don't see why the two shouldn't run in tandem but currently it seems far from a two way process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTFiGO!?! Posted February 17, 2015 Report Share Posted February 17, 2015 Just for clarity, I view 'Ultra's' as a philosophy of freedom of expression in this context. There's no 'group'. As explained before, I've sat in the posh seats, sat with family, gone in the role of carer, gone with my Dad and stood where ever them noisy buggers are. Whilst passions run high (and despite satire), pigeon holing wasn't the intention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.