EAST END CAPACITY

[cider head]

Thing is we've gone through this a million times about trouble in the EE, it's like a repeat on uk gold,

it's old news and not proven so much so steve lansdown has said he could not point to one punch being

thrown in that stand unlike the prem seating this season with coventry, the meeting with the club

the fans and the ST proved this to be a no case for trouble in the EE, EVEN THE SO CALLED CHESTERFIELD

£1 A KID NIGHT which the club said they had cctv for proved a nothing as the flyer below proved chesterfield

fans giving praise to city fans and not wanting to kick the crap out of them,

thing is reading this forum about the EE a few people have popped up from

nowhere giving a anti EE stance and they must be old bill, work for the club or stewards becuse i really can't

see why fans would go against another fan on where they would want to sit in ashton gate, if robbored wants to

sit in the dolman then fine fair play to him but why is there a constant block on those who want to sit in the EE???

trouble is a proven myth.

if the potential threat for trouble is so bad then the whole of ashton gate should be shut not just the EE.

[Redtilldead]

If an away following can fill it and there is not the demand for home tickets then we will let them.

You said we only use 3 sides of the ground- we don't. Here is a list of teams in our division, who I believe have 4 seperate stands. I have starred any clubs that I think City fans have to share a stand with.

1 S****horpe

3 Nottm Forest* (not sure if the fans in the top tier could be put else where- but if away following is small they still leave the rest of the lower tier empty)

4 Yeovil

5 Oldham

6 Blackpool

7 Tranmere

10 Carlisle (not sure)

11 Millwall

12 Port Vale

13 Crewe

14 Huddersfield

15 Northampton

16 Brighton

17 Leyton Orient* (but don't have 4 stands)

18 Gillingham

19 Bournemouth (how do they do it these days?)

20 Bradford

21 Chesterfield

22 Cheltenham

23 Brentford

24 Rotherham (not sure)

so basically- I don't think any club in our division, that has 4 seperate stands, then make the away fans share with home unless they need the extra space for home fans.

My point was, (and I am sure you knew it) was that the main gripe is that when the stand is empty, which it mostly is, why do they not utilise it for the fans that want to go in there and use it.

Did you ever stand in the East End in the late 60s and 70s?, because you seem to know an awful lot about trouble in the East end.

[Percy Parrot]

You haven't identified a single reason why not, despite trawling over old ground about potential violence which has been proven incorrect-PROVEN, not thought, anticipated or imagined.TRIALED & PROVEN.There are no reasons from a financial or an H&S standpoint for not allowing similar numbers into that part of the ground and that's why I said, it's starting to look like spite-Not it is being done for spite or a con as you ridiculously spin it.Like I said, take it back

[Percy]- there has only been one game which has such a risk of trouble that has passed the test (Rovers). I do not think Brentford or Boro are the same. So I would not say that anything has been PROVEN and City are right to remain cautious.

Why Rovers, not Forest? I don't know- perhaps police have specific intelligence? Perhaps City plan to push Forest fans deeper in to the East End and away from the Williams Stand? Perhaps the Police are insisting on it and will insist on more police if the fans are closer together? Perhaps City will open another block but are waiting to see if demand dictates first? Either way- I am still going to trust the police and club who know far more about this than you or I and have no reason to believe they are trying to "spite" the fans.

[Percy Parrot]

PP:It makes it more difficult for people who wish to sit in the East End to sit there.

BB:So paying customers should be stopped from doing what they'd like.LSE? I hope you don't make Chancellor

[Percy]- a) I did history! b) yes- you should stop fans doing what they like if it could potentially cause a security problem!

PP:This including normal well behaved fans. But it also includes people looking for trouble.

BB:Oh, that's all right then

[Percy]- yes that is ok then. Sometimes normal fans have to be inconvenienced because of the idiots. A normal fan may wish to take his hunting gun in to the ground- unfortunately due to the idiots this is not allowed.

PP:IF everyone can go in the east end then you will find those idiots who have already bought tickets for other areas of the ground will swap them for the East End.

BB:You mean, Idiots with Season Tickets who our club has welcomed, who are the lifeblood of our club-Those idiots-Gee thanks

[Percy]- and you accuse ME of spin!?! Most season ticket holders are not idiots who look for trouble. Unfortunately SOME are- and you know what I mean BB so maybe you can stop the spin? Perhaps we should be more worried about your career in politics!

PP:As it is you are more likely to have 600 families and not so die-hard fans who decided to go to their first game for a while.

BB:Who won't even know the songs never mind sing them.Why not put them in the vacant seats-Better Seats in a more family orientated part of the ground such as the aptly named family enclosure.Why hand the football initiative to Forest??

[Percy]- err...because they've already been sold! and because if you swap them all round then you run the risk of the idiots ending up in the East End as I said.

[Percy Parrot]

Thing is we've gone through this a million times about trouble in the EE, it's like a repeat on uk gold,

it's old news and not proven so much so steve lansdown has said he could not point to one punch being

thrown in that stand unlike the prem seating this season with coventry, the meeting with the club

the fans and the ST proved this to be a no case for trouble in the EE, EVEN THE SO CALLED CHESTERFIELD

£1 A KID NIGHT which the club said they had cctv for proved a nothing as the flyer below proved chesterfield

fans giving praise to city fans and not wanting to kick the crap out of them,

thing is reading this forum about the EE a few people have popped up from

nowhere giving a anti EE stance and they must be old bill, work for the club or stewards becuse i really can't

see why fans would go against another fan on where they would want to sit in ashton gate, if robbored wants to

sit in the dolman then fine fair play to him but why is there a constant block on those who want to sit in the EE???

trouble is a proven myth.

if the potential threat for trouble is so bad then the whole of ashton gate should be shut not just the EE.

I would love for any City fan to sit where they want as long as it does not cost too much or risk trouble.

In this case the club have decided that it is too complicated or dangerous to allow it to happen. I trust them to have genuine reason for it.

And thanks for using that flyer- one that I made and printed and handed out. I hope this will remind people that I am a supporter of the East End and in an ideal world I would love to see it packed with City fans making loads of noise without the need to intimidate the away fans and threat of misbehaviour or trouble.

[Percy Parrot]

My point was, (and I am sure you knew it) was that the main gripe is that when the stand is empty, which it mostly is, why do they not utilise it for the fans that want to go in there and use it.

Did you ever stand in the East End in the late 60s and 70s?, because you seem to know an awful lot about trouble in the East end.

you said:-

"As far as I can see, we must be the only club in the Football league to only use 3 sides of a ground, Why?, everyone else seems to be ok to use all 4 sides !, not including clubs improving their ground. "

I simply pointed out that our format is the same as pretty much every club with a similar ground lay out. We are VERY typical.

[HIGHRIDGE BCFC]

Unfortunately people do still cause trouble inside grounds, despite the CCTV. We are lucky at City in that we have had very little in recent years- perhaps because we have a safety team that do a good job?

But to suggest trouble doesn't happen in grounds let me remind you:-

- Forest fans throwing stuff on us earlier in the year

- Exchanging of chairs at Hull couple of years back

- The warm "welcome" from Cardiff fans a few years back

- The Spurs fans at Chelsea on Monday (that was on TV as well as CCTV!)

- Tiny amount of trouble at Yeovil and Cheltenham

- Plymouth fans at AG few years ago

I said trouble. These were all minor incidents involving no punches actually being thrown.

Anyone can lob something at a safe distance knowing they cant be touched, i would hardly

call that hooliganism. You obviously weren't around in the 70s & 80s.

I don't think you can say this weeks Chelsea incident was hooliganism.

The offender was a first time offender from university who by his own admission

had spent all day on the lash & temporarily lost his marbles.

[Percy Parrot]

I said trouble. These were all minor incidents involving no punches actually being thrown.

Anyone can lob something at a safe distance knowing they cant be touched, i would hardly

call that hooliganism. You obviously weren't around in the 70s & 80s.

I don't think you can say this weeks Chelsea incident was hooliganism.

The offender was a first time offender from university who by his own admission

had spent all day on the lash & temporarily lost his marbles.

If Lamps had been..err..lamped then it is trouble.

If you were on the receiving end of a coin or lighter at Forest- you'd call it trouble.

Or if you're been lucky enough to catch one of those low flying chairs at Hull or Cardiff you wouldn't be too pleased.

If you want examples of more serious stuff- City vs Rovers 1996- there were plenty of cameras that day.

The reason those incidents didn't turn in to anything more major was because there was suitable segregation of fans and police who were in the way. And you can't use the argument that "the odd missile doesn't matter" because it does. I would be appalled if any club knowingly allowed fans a good opportunity to throw things at other sets of fans. In some ways you could argue it is worse than punches being thrown- as at least with a punch you know who you're hitting. When objects are thrown they can hit any child, mother or me!

[Barrs Court Red]

If Lamps had been..err..lamped then it is trouble.

If you were on the receiving end of a coin or lighter at Forest- you'd call it trouble.

Or if you're been lucky enough to catch one of those low flying chairs at Hull or Cardiff you wouldn't be too pleased.

If you want examples of more serious stuff- City vs Rovers 1996- there were plenty of cameras that day.

The reason those incidents didn't turn in to anything more major was because there was suitable segregation of fans and police who were in the way. And you can't use the argument that "the odd missile doesn't matter" because it does. I would be appalled if any club knowingly allowed fans a good opportunity to throw things at other sets of fans. In some ways you could argue it is worse than punches being thrown- as at least with a punch you know who you're hitting. When objects are thrown they can hit any child, mother or me!

If you actually knew more on the subject you would know that the stand at Forest that objects were thrown from has had this problem all season. Hardly City to blame.

Same goes for Hull and Cardiff, long standing problems that do not involve City.

Interesting you only seem to find examples for AWAY matches, with the home fans bing responsible.

You seem stuck in the midset that trouble is inevitable. Funnily enough object throwing has not been mentioned once as a problem with the East End. Talk about making problems up that simply don't exist.

[HIGHRIDGE BCFC]

If Lamps had been..err..lamped then it is trouble.

If you were on the receiving end of a coin or lighter at Forest- you'd call it trouble.

Or if you're been lucky enough to catch one of those low flying chairs at Hull or Cardiff you wouldn't be too pleased.

If you want examples of more serious stuff- City vs Rovers 1996- there were plenty of cameras that day.

The reason those incidents didn't turn in to anything more major was because there was suitable segregation of fans and police who were in the way. And you can't use the argument that "the odd missile doesn't matter" because it does. I would be appalled if any club knowingly allowed fans a good opportunity to throw things at other sets of fans. In some ways you could argue it is worse than punches being thrown- as at least with a punch you know who you're hitting. When objects are thrown they can hit any child, mother or me!

I was at Cardiff having bottles of piss thrown at me, Hull with the chairs also and Forest.

Whilst agreeing with you its not nice for the families, believe it or not these incidents happened

EVERY week in the 70s & 80s and much, much worse !!!!

[Percy Parrot]

If you actually knew more on the subject you would know that the stand at Forest that objects were thrown from has had this problem all season. Hardly City to blame.

Same goes for Hull and Cardiff, long standing problems that do not involve City.

Interesting you only seem to find examples for AWAY matches, with the home fans bing responsible.

You seem stuck in the midset that trouble is inevitable. Funnily enough object throwing has not been mentioned once as a problem with the East End. Talk about making problems up that simply don't exist.

1. I never said City were to blame (don't put words in my mouth).

2. I simply used the object throwing as an example of trouble inside a stadium (don't try to change my argument)

3. For the "if you actually knew more on the subject" point- exactly my point! WE (as fans) do not know as much. If YOU knew more on the subject of Forest's visit, just like the police and BCFC do, then maybe you would have a different opinion.

4. The examples are to prove that problems do still happen inside stadia- that's all (again, don't try to move my argument- I am not saying that City fans cause lots of trouble at home because they don't. However there HAVE been isolated cases of problems inside the ground)

5. I never said throwing things is an ongoing problem. I said that it has happened else where and that it has the potential to happen in the East End.

[Percy Parrot]

His argument was lost some time ago.

No- I have answered every point one by one and maintain that I trust BCFC and the police, who have more experience on this and know more about it, than you guys. Sorry but I do. I think that is a fair position.

If City make the decision that they can put more fans in that stand or if they decide not to- then I will still trust them on it more than you.

Do I believe that the club would deliberately lose money to spite their own fans? no. Not at all. That's utter rubbish. I believe whatever decision they come to will be done after careful consideration of money and safety.

[Percy Parrot]

I was at Cardiff having bottles of piss thrown at me, Hull with the chairs also and Forest.

Whilst agreeing with you its not nice for the families, believe it or not these incidents happened

EVERY week in the 70s & 80s and much, much worse !!!!

I don't care that it was much worse in the past.

The clubs and police should still do all they can to rid the game of it now.

Just because there may have been more racist murders in the US a few decades ago, it still doesn't mean we shouldn't worry about any that take place today because "nevermind, it was far worse in the 50s and 60s"

[Barrs Court Red]

1. I never said City were to blame (don't put words in my mouth). The behaviour of other fans is irrelevant.

2. I simply used the object throwing as an example of trouble inside a stadium (don't try to change my argument)It never happened in all the times the East End has been open in "recent" times.

3. For the "if you actually knew more on the subject" point- exactly my point! WE (as fans) do not know as much. If YOU knew more on the subject of Forest's visit, just like the police and BCFC do, then maybe you would have a different opinion.Surely the CCTV we pay for and obviously the large amount of police and stewards are there to allay such a slight risk.

4. The examples are to prove that problems do still happen inside stadia- that's all (again, don't try to move my argument- I am not saying that City fans cause lots of trouble at home because they don't. However there HAVE been isolated cases of problems inside the ground)It's inevitable that there will be small incidents given the thousands of individuals that go to football each week. You are saying that the East End makes it easier for these incidents to happen

5. I never said throwing things is an ongoing problem. I said that it has happened else where and that it has the potential to happen in the East End.Which is an absurd point of view as far as I'm concerned. And I don't say that lightly, as on most matters that you post on, you do so in a thoughtfull way

[Percy Parrot]

1. I never said City were to blame (don't put words in my mouth). The behaviour of other fans is irrelevant.

[Percy]- Not really. If Forest fans decide it's a great opportunity to cause trouble then it is very relevant. Besides- my point was simply that trouble still happens inside football grounds. It is not a matter that can be totally ignored and forgotten about.

2. I simply used the object throwing as an example of trouble inside a stadium (don't try to change my argument)It never happened in all the times the East End has been open in "recent" times.

[Percy]- I never said it did- just that it was an example of trouble inside a ground recently.

3. For the "if you actually knew more on the subject" point- exactly my point! WE (as fans) do not know as much. If YOU knew more on the subject of Forest's visit, just like the police and BCFC do, then maybe you would have a different opinion.Surely the CCTV we pay for and obviously the large amount of police and stewards are there to allay such a slight risk.

[Percy]- Yes but we still have a responsibility to make their job as easy as possible. Otherwise we are putting police officers safety at risk, stewards safety at risk and fans safety at risk.

4. The examples are to prove that problems do still happen inside stadia- that's all (again, don't try to move my argument- I am not saying that City fans cause lots of trouble at home because they don't. However there HAVE been isolated cases of problems inside the ground)It's inevitable that there will be small incidents given the thousands of individuals that go to football each week. You are saying that the East End makes it easier for these incidents to happen

[Percy]- Yes, I am. I think the number of issues stewards had to deal with and number of arrests at BCFC games did go up during some of the East End trials. It is a very sad fact. But yes- having a "second front" and fans in close proximity to each other does raise the risk of trouble to a certain extent.

5. I never said throwing things is an ongoing problem. I said that it has happened else where and that it has the potential to happen in the East End.Which is an absurd point of view as far as I'm concerned. And I don't say that lightly, as on most matters that you post on, you do so in a thoughtfull way

[Percy]- what is so strange about being concerned for fans safety?

[HIGHRIDGE BCFC]

I don't care that it was much worse in the past.

The clubs and police should still do all they can to rid the game of it now.

Just because there may have been more racist murders in the US a few decades ago, it still doesn't mean we shouldn't worry about any that take place today because "nevermind, it was far worse in the 50s and 60s"

I cant be bothered arguing with you.

You've got your opinion & i've got mine.

[Percy Parrot]

I cant be bothered arguing with you.

You've got your opinion & i've got mine.

I think you're right. I've wasted enough of my life on this topic!

Only got 6 hours sleep last night as spent most of it writing on here!!! (this severly reduces my already slim chances of pulling a hottie tonight )

Perhaps we can agree on this:-

City have opened the east end for Forest with some restrictions (can't swap tickets and limited number).

The reasons for doing this may or may not be correct. But while I am willing to believe they are done after thoughtful consideration- some of you guys think they are rash and some even say "spiteful". Not too sure how either of us could ever prove our view on this.

Does this mean I have to actually do some work now!?! Oh well, only hour and a half to go.

[HIGHRIDGE BCFC]

I think you're right. I've wasted enough of my life on this topic!

Only got 6 hours sleep last night as spent most of it writing on here!!! (this severly reduces my already slim chances of pulling a hottie tonight )

Perhaps we can agree on this:-

City have opened the east end for Forest with some restrictions (can't swap tickets and limited number).

The reasons for doing this may or may not be correct. But while I am willing to believe they are done after thoughtful consideration- some of you guys think they are rash and some even say "spiteful". Not too sure how either of us could ever prove our view on this.

Does this mean I have to actually do some work now!?! Oh well, only hour and a half to go.

Good luck ###### hunting !!!

[yeovilmac]

Genuine question.

We visit on 14th April for the "War Of The West" and we've sold our initial allocation of 2,000 tickets. I believe we're expecting another 1,000 tickets to be sent down next week.

Knowing the club as you do, if we sold that lot relatively quickly, what would City do?

1. Call it a day at 3,000; segregate a few seats then sell more to you?

2. Give us another 500-1,000 and not let City in at all, making sure there was a gap between the Dolman and the EE?

3. Say sod it and let us have the whole end?

I don't think there was any City in the EE last season when we brought 2,700 fans.

[Bristol Boy]

Genuine question.

We visit on 14th April for the "War Of The West" and we've sold our initial allocation of 2,000 tickets. I believe we're expecting another 1,000 tickets to be sent down next week.

Knowing the club as you do, if we sold that lot relatively quickly, what would City do?

1. Call it a day at 3,000; segregate a few seats then sell more to you?

2. Give us another 500-1,000 and not let City in at all, making sure there was a gap between the Dolman and the EE?

3. Say sod it and let us have the whole end?

I don't think there was any City in the EE last season when we brought 2,700 fans.

I would have given you the same number as you gave us-about 1,000 and filled the rest of the end, bar one block of seats, with City Fans.With you having sold 2,000, I'd leave it at that, segregate by one block and give City the rest.

The club will give you 3,000, Us 600 and have about 1,400-1,900 seats empty at £19 a piece.

[Portland Bill]

They never predicted mass brawls and violent disorder. Would like to see a quote of the club saying that- start looking.

They said that the trials had been misused by some (which they were) and that some people had caused trouble in there (which they did).

This caused the police and club to be cautious about opening it again and that was disappointing (especially as I was one of those who had put a lot of effort in to getting it re-opened) but I can understand it.

I was writing to the club, putting messages on the forum, printing flyers, calling the radio and all sorts to get that stand re-opened to City fans. When the trials were stopped it was not the club I felt let down by- it was those dozens of fans who felt it necessary to abuse their place in that stand by intimidating away fans and stewards.

For the record- I hope that recent successful trials will see a cost-effective way to let City fans back in there on a regular basis without the stupidity.

Please tell me how people can intimidate away fans from 50 yards away with 100 seats between them ?. Mate, going to football now is like going to a nursery school compared to 20 years ago.

The over reaction from some of you on here is laughable

[Portland Bill]

Genuine question.

We visit on 14th April for the "War Of The West" and we've sold our initial allocation of 2,000 tickets. I believe we're expecting another 1,000 tickets to be sent down next week.

Knowing the club as you do, if we sold that lot relatively quickly, what would City do?

1. Call it a day at 3,000; segregate a few seats then sell more to you?

2. Give us another 500-1,000 and not let City in at all, making sure there was a gap between the Dolman and the EE?

3. Say sod it and let us have the whole end?

I don't think there was any City in the EE last season when we brought 2,700 fans.

War of the west ?? . Oh come on you cant be serious

[yeovilmac]

Come on Bill, it was only tongue in cheek... :noexpression:

[Guest]

Please tell me how people can intimidate away fans from 50 yards away with 100 seats between them ?. Mate, going to football now is like going to a nursery school compared to 20 years ago.

The over reaction from some of you on here is laughable

Spot on there; pride and passion is being strangled to death by the p.c brigade, how long before any sort of noise is frowned on bar polite applause

[NickJ]

They never predicted mass brawls and violent disorder. Would like to see a quote of the club saying that- start looking.

The club have consistently said the EE could not be opened due to the trouble there would be. The insinuation is fighting, brawling, etc, unless you think that it means something else.

I was at a meeting where Sexstone said there had been disorder in the EE when it was opened last season. When asked to define "disorder" he said lots of people had been "standing up and moving around".

Like Bristol Boy and Cynic, I wouldnt necessarily go in the EE if it was opened. But I respect the wishes of those who would, unlike Sexstone, Lansdown, Draisey, etc, who clearly had no idea of the strength of feeling on this matter. If they still haven't they're either stupid or simply unwilling to listen to a very simple and reasonable request from long standing fans of this club, people that will be around long after they are gone.

[NickJ]

.... the East End opens up a second front- ask Hitler about such difficulties.

[Percy Parrot]

Spot on there; pride and passion is being strangled to death by the p.c brigade, how long before any sort of noise is frowned on bar polite applause

It's nothing to do with noise. Totally different matter.

Anyone who's been to a City match with me knows that I am far from quiet. I love a great atmosphere. I just think that every step to avoid trouble should be taken.

[Flaxbourton Red]

No- I have answered every point one by one and maintain that I trust BCFC and the police, who have more experience on this and know more about it, than you guys. Sorry but I do. I think that is a fair position.

If City make the decision that they can put more fans in that stand or if they decide not to- then I will still trust them on it more than you.

Do I believe that the club would deliberately lose money to spite their own fans? no. Not at all. That's utter rubbish. I believe whatever decision they come to will be done after careful consideration of money and safety.

trust the club on the premier seats?

trust the club on junior city strikers?

trust the club on the east end?