parklane1
Tony Galvin
But its all right to break/ignore SOME rules according to some, i wonder who has the right to decide which rules we can all break.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
The London Taxpayers' Stadium Shambles
- Thread starter ArcspacE
- Start date
But its all right to break/ignore SOME rules according to some, i wonder who has the right to decide which rules we can all break.
StephenH
David Ginola
As long as you can bloody see what's going on in the game why stand IF you are in a seated area.
I don't give monkeys who stands if they do not block anybody's view. If they do, sit!
But I personally have big problems with numpties who think that standing is some right of passage, it's not!
It's a pain in the arse!
I don't give monkeys who stands if they do not block anybody's view. If they do, sit!
But I personally have big problems with numpties who think that standing is some right of passage, it's not!
It's a pain in the arse!
Do you go to away games? do you "sit" in Park lane lower? ( get rid of that core of support there will be little atmosphere )
The whole stadium is "sitting" so following letter of the law there will be no standing, either give the option of officially(or unofficially) standing areas and the standers will gravitate to them - And then if you want to sit it is your fault.
ever use "threatening or abusive words or behaviour or disorderly behavior" towards opposition players or fans? if so you are breaking rules but chose to anyway
StephenH
David Ginola
I was being a tad mischievous - I'm very short and use a whellchair most of the time these days!
But people standing must first think of others........
True but if there are "standing areas" of 100's like minded and you chose to sit there I think its a bit rich to expect it. If the club are putting people there who have no way of seeing (disabled / kids) then the club probably have an agenda.
I think in West Hams case the club have purposely caused this in order to change the make-up of the fan base. How better to force Standers to sit then show them causing offence to disabled and kids. If I was Machiavellian about it this would mean turning other fans who would normally support the Standers against them...
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
no they are not - likewise we do not sell Park Lane lower as standing but it is known that this is what they are. At WHL they have been trying to force PLL to sit for years unsuccessfully so it is an unofficial Standing area.
At Upton Park there were a number of areas like this, and when they were buying the tickets they were told with a nod and a wink that they are like for like. Regardless of this in almost every ground there is an unofficial standing area.
Those Season ticket holders then went to the new ground and there were kids and "new fans" in these areas. There is no family stand / area (which also goes against prem rules). And trouble occurred.
Karen Bradey wants a different class of fan, a social engineering of the fan base, I know a lot on here are "owners prerogative / they can do what they like" but I don't agree. We have seen many times over the past few years (even in football) that a protest can keep owners honest /improvements for al (£30 away tickets).
If they try to make PLL sit once the new stadium goes up we will see the same, if they put kids and families in the stand there will be the same backlash.
I for one don't think I would want to go to the football without the atmosphere, this is largely created (country wide) by the standers.
At Upton Park there were a number of areas like this, and when they were buying the tickets they were told with a nod and a wink that they are like for like. Regardless of this in almost every ground there is an unofficial standing area.
Those Season ticket holders then went to the new ground and there were kids and "new fans" in these areas. There is no family stand / area (which also goes against prem rules). And trouble occurred.
Karen Bradey wants a different class of fan, a social engineering of the fan base, I know a lot on here are "owners prerogative / they can do what they like" but I don't agree. We have seen many times over the past few years (even in football) that a protest can keep owners honest /improvements for al (£30 away tickets).
If they try to make PLL sit once the new stadium goes up we will see the same, if they put kids and families in the stand there will be the same backlash.
I for one don't think I would want to go to the football without the atmosphere, this is largely created (country wide) by the standers.
at the new stadium unless we have PR super admin type raring to go on this tricky problem.
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
they try to make PLL sit repeatedly during games in my experience, I tend to sit in the Paxton these days but when I did frequent the PL i'd say I spent more time sitting than standing, thats 4/5 years back though
ultimately the rules are that they should sit, just because "thats not the way it used to be" doesn't excuse the childish behaviour
ultimately the rules are that they should sit, just because "thats not the way it used to be" doesn't excuse the childish behaviour
OK I will stretch an analogy to illustrate the point.
Without people illegally downloading music it is very likely that Netflix and iTunes would not exist as the 'establishment' had no desire for change. People breaking the rules led to an improvement.
Without people breaking the rules and standing owners would not be interested in safe standing (where we should be)
Some times the establishment does not know best.
The Metropolitan Police Act of 1839 also means it is illegal to “sing any profane, indecent, or obscene song or ballad” in the street.
Without people illegally downloading music it is very likely that Netflix and iTunes would not exist as the 'establishment' had no desire for change. People breaking the rules led to an improvement.
Without people breaking the rules and standing owners would not be interested in safe standing (where we should be)
Some times the establishment does not know best.
The Metropolitan Police Act of 1839 also means it is illegal to “sing any profane, indecent, or obscene song or ballad” in the street.
Last edited:
mudshark
Chris Armstrong
They did go through phases where stewards were instructed to try and get people to sit, but they eventually recognised it was a losing battle. They didn't bother at all last season and haven't done so far this term either. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a strategy aimed at defeating it in the new stadium on a few upstairs computers.
If they're that serious about it, they should just start ejecting persistent offenders, whoever's nearest the pitch. Just make an example, one at a time. You've no excuse if there's no-one standing in front of you, and people would soon stop if they knew they were risking getting chucked out.
Why would they want to though, they create the atmosphere, if you sit them down its detrimental to the whole stadium. As I said it is an unofficial standing area and if you want to sit there then you are really in the wrong.
K.D.D.D.D.Soc
Ian Walker
Machiavellian the West Ham owners? They think Machiavelli was £30m striker who turned them down.
mudshark
Chris Armstrong
That's why I said, "If they're that serious about it." If they're just paying lip-service, then nothing will happen, will it. I don't mind whether I sit or stand, personally, but I want to do one or the other. I don't want to be up and down like a yo-yo every five minutes.
Finney Is Back
Luka Modric
They turned a blind eye to it at Upton Park. Any fines/closures/etc imposed as a result of persistent standing at Upton Park would've been West Ham's problem. However at the Athletic's stadium it is not up to West Ham, it is instead up to the stadium operator. West Ham are merely leasing the stadium and therefore have to comply with the rules imposed by the landlord. I would imagine the rules will include no persistent standing (as the operator will need to protect themselves from fines/stadium closures etc)....
It's a bit like owning/leasing a flat. For example, if you own a flat then you are free to keep a pet there. However if you lease that flat the landlord is within his rights to put a 'no pets' rule into the lease.
West Ham lost their ability to turn a blind eye to persistent standing when they decided to become guests in a stadium that they do no own.
StephenH
David Ginola
Last edited: