Jump to content
IGNORED

DISPLAY FOR BIRMINGHAM (H) - S25, S26 & S27 - PLEASE READ/SHARE


James

Recommended Posts

Well here’s my attempt at a balanced take on this.

- Section 82’s efforts to improve the atmosphere are generally a good thing and something to be applauded.

- It’s unusual and a little odd for those organise a card display to be evasive about the image or message they are asking people to endorse, even if it isn’t controversial.

- It’s not unreasonable for those being asked to endorse the message to want to know in advance what it will be.

- It’s not remotely comparable to a red and white night where the theme is obvious, known in advance and clearly not controversial or political.

- It isn’t a “sign of the country we are becoming” and no one is being difficult for asking a perfectly reasonable question.

- It’s probably nothing to worry about and likely a positive thing we can support.

Edited by ChippenhamRed
  • Like 14
  • Flames 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Well here’s my attempt at a balanced take on this.

- Section 82’s efforts to improve the atmosphere are generally a good thing and something to be applauded.

- It’s unusual and a little odd for those organise a card display to be evasive about the image or message they are asking people to endorse, even if it isn’t controversial.

- It’s not unreasonable for those being asked to endorse the message to want to know in advance what it will be.

- It’s not remotely comparable to a red and white night where the theme is obvious, known in advance and clearly not controversial or political.

- It isn’t a “sign of the country we are becoming” and no one is being difficult for asking a perfectly reasonable question.

- It’s probably nothing to worry about and likely a positive thing we can support.

Absolutely this.

 

I am all for things to be done to improve the atmosphere, I just find the very clear evasiveness (and clear contradiction to the original claim of not being ambiguous) to be more that a little strange.

The pushback to the question of "what is it" is if anything more likely to discourage participation, even though- as you say- it is more than likely a positive thing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Well here’s my attempt at a balanced take on this.

- Section 82’s efforts to improve the atmosphere are generally a good thing and something to be applauded.

- It’s unusual and a little odd for those organise a card display to be evasive about the image or message they are asking people to endorse, even if it isn’t controversial.

- It’s not unreasonable for those being asked to endorse the message to want to know in advance what it will be.

- It’s not remotely comparable to a red and white night where the theme is obvious, known in advance and clearly not controversial or political.

- It isn’t a “sign of the country we are becoming” and no one is being difficult for asking a perfectly reasonable question.

- It’s probably nothing to worry about and likely a positive thing we can support.

Who do you think you are, coming on OTIB with thoughtful and well balanced posts like this?!

Great summary. 

Just now, Lew-T said:

You could have stopped it here…

They did. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, italian dave said:

Would you sign a petition if I put one in front of you and asked you to but wouldn’t tell you what it said?

In some instances, people do have a right to know! Or at least a right to know before they participate in something.

The red and white night (and the Gow one mentioned above) were different simply because in those cases people did know.

Is it just a “design”? In which case, why not say so? I don’t think anyone’s demanding to see the detail of the design, just to know that’s all it is.

As opposed to something that carries a message. 

 

 60 percent of the time ...........it works everytime?     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Not really, because that isn’t the full story and the other points are relevant to the discussion and criticisms on both sides.

It’s going to be red, white and City related.  I really don’t understand what the big deal is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Lew-T said:

It’s going to be red, white and City related.  I really don’t understand what the big deal is?

People have explained why they're interested pretty clearly so if you still can't understand (it's not a "big deal" to anyone as far as I can see) that sounds like a you problem tbh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lew-T said:

It’s going to be red, white and City related.  I really don’t understand what the big deal is?

OK, I’ll spell it out.

- Football has a long history of political and controversial statement-making from the terraces; many of which people will agree with, some of which they might not.

- Generally any request to hold up a card comes with an up-front explanation of what it will say; the evasive answers to this entirely reasonable question naturally arouses suspicion at the nature of the statement.

- People want to know in advance what they are being asked to endorse. That isn’t unreasonable.

- ”City related” can mean many things. It could be a criticism of the club, the manager, the players or the board that not everyone agrees with or wants to promote. Even if it is “only positive”, what one person considers to be entirely positive might not align with someone else’s view.

- It isn’t a “big deal”, and it probably isn’t anything worthy of concern - but this could have been prevented with a more open approach by those organising it, as is the norm with these things.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

26 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

Again, no one has objected or even pushed back against it.

No one is trying to stop it happen

 

If a simple question of what they're going to be part of is such an obstacle then youre right it is no wonder nothing gets done, because the people apparently organising it dont want to cooperate with the people they're asking to join in with it

If the question "what am I going to be part of" is something that's going to disrupt creating an atmosphere for you then I'd suggest you're really not bothered about the atmosphere and it's more about your clique and wanting people to follow along blindly

Christ , what a world we live in. 
 

Maybe message James, imagine he would have a chat with you if you’re worried about Cliques. 

Edited by Wedontplayinblue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Wedontplayinblue said:

 

Christ , what a world we live in. 
 

Maybe message James, imagine he would have a chat with you if you’re worried about Cliques. 

Not worried about it at all, but perhaps the people involved should consider being more open with others if they want more people to get involved with improving the atmosphere at games.

Simply stated that's how it's coming across.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

OK, I’ll spell it out.

- Football has a long history of political and controversial statement-making from the terraces; many of which people will agree with, some of which they might not. 

When has there ever been a political or controversial display at Ashton Gate? By S82?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

OK, I’ll spell it out.

- ”City related” can mean many things. It could be a criticism of the club, the manager, the players or the board that not everyone agrees with or wants to promote. Even if it is “only positive”, what one person considers to be entirely positive might not align with someone else’s view.

Read the room.

We’re not bottom of League One are we?

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lew-T said:

Read the room.

We’re not bottom of League One are we?

Nope, which is why I said it’s likely something positive we can all get behind - but we don’t know for certain; that’s the point.

I’d also point out that we’ve also not been a top flight club for 40 years and support for the Lansdowns is not unanimous. Simply one example. It could even be a non-football issue that splits opinion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

Not worried about it at all, but perhaps the people involved should consider being more open with others if they want more people to get involved with improving the atmosphere at games.

Simply stated that's how it's coming across.

You clearly are if you saying it is a clique, James appears easily contactable, on here, Facebook, twitter etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it have been so hard to have started from a position of "we're going to do a display of xyz at the Birmingham game (insert rest of what the original post had)"

Rather than "we're gonna do a display, but you're not allowed to know what it will be"

 

I suspect the former would gave had all the support that the latter has, but without the 'pushback' of people asking what the display is (not a single person has actually objected to there being a display, despite the suggestions of a few comments)

Possibly even could have had a few people asking if they can get involved or help out in any way, rather than manufacturing an us (who arrange these things) and them (who only ever join in)-like dynamic 

Would it not be better for Section 82, the atmosphere and therefore hopefully City too if more people wanted to actively contribute towards these types of things going forwards?

2 minutes ago, Wedontplayinblue said:

You clearly are if you saying it is a clique, James appears easily contactable, on here, Facebook, twitter etc.

That's not what I said though, do try reading it again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Nope, which is why I said it’s likely something positive we can all get behind - but we don’t know for certain; that’s the point.

I’d also point out that we’ve also not been a top flight club for 40 years and support for the Lansdowns is not unanimous. Simply one example. It could even be a non-football issue that splits opinion.

We’ll see eh? Enjoy the game.

 

No pressure @James.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Well here’s my attempt at a balanced take on this.

- Section 82’s efforts to improve the atmosphere are generally a good thing and something to be applauded.

- It’s unusual and a little odd for those organise a card display to be evasive about the image or message they are asking people to endorse, even if it isn’t controversial.

- It’s not unreasonable for those being asked to endorse the message to want to know in advance what it will be.

- It’s not remotely comparable to a red and white night where the theme is obvious, known in advance and clearly not controversial or political.

- It isn’t a “sign of the country we are becoming” and no one is being difficult for asking a perfectly reasonable question.

- It’s probably nothing to worry about and likely a positive thing we can support.

Agree with all that.

In complete fairness, you are however entirely in their hands anyway. They could say it says ‘up the reds’ and you would have no way of telling it said ‘sack the Board’ until it was held up anyway. I suppose you either trust them or you don’t, and no reason not to.

Edited by cityexile
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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