Steward abuse and standing

[Jerry St Clair]

So, the gist is that the club are "forced" into these actions by the council and FLA? Seems we're targetting the wrong people. Who are the contacts at the council and FLA? I'd love to meet them.

Also, I'd love the club to actually come out and say "these are the rules, we don't like them but we're forced to abide by them and this is why". It would, at lease, head off the perception that is held by most fans that away supprters are getting special treatment.

[STAR Liaison]

Also, I'd love the club to actually come out and say "these are the rules, we don't like them but we're forced to abide by them and this is why". It would, at lease, head off the perception that is held by most fans that away supprters are getting special treatment.

It is not 'the Reading Way'.

[Seal]

Harold actually nailed the point there. This is not the clubs fault. If enough fans really wanted to stand they could.

As STAR campaigns has said, the reason Man U fans weren't told to sit down was because the stewards have no way of getting 4000 people to sit down.

If 4000 Reading fans all stood in the East stand in unison, the stewards couldn't stop them. The 'problem' as such is simply that there isn't a large area of the ground were 90% + of people want to stand for the duration of the game.

Only at the back of the East stand is there a concerted group who all want to stand. The rest of the stand polices itself as fans tell others to sit down.

The fact that we barely ever stand away from home clearly indicates that there just isn't the demand amongst Reading for a large standing area. Therefore RFC are not going too worry to much about people like RoyalBlue's concerns.

It's up to the fans to change things, and not by moaning to the club that the naughty boys in the away end are allowed the stand.

[Jerry St Clair]

Good point, well made.

[Silver Fox]

If 4000 Reading fans all stood in the East stand in unison, the stewards couldn't stop them.

but they could ban them all from the next game

[Seal]

If 4000 Reading fans all stood in the East stand in unison, the stewards couldn't stop them.

but they could ban them all from the next game

No chance. Even if they tried it (which I doubt they would), it would a logistical nightmare.

Anyway, this is irrelevant as my point was this type of concerted stadium will never happen due to the nature of the fans.

[Magnus]

If 4000 Reading fans all stood in the East stand in unison, the stewards couldn't stop them.

but they could ban them all from the next game

I very much doubt they either could or would. A few hundred maybe. Strength in numbers it's what's required here, as Winchy mentioned.

[Skin]

STAR:

I got the feeling from Tues nights game the stewards had been told to leave the home fans standing at the back of Y24/5/6 as they were powerless to make the away fans sit?
PLEASE CONFIRM. It seems that the words 'common sense' are in the Safety Officers vocabulary after all. Even the CCTV cameras were aimed at the big screen, beaming the game into the control room? Lets be honest, they don't really see a problem either but like you have said they have to be seen to be enforcing the rules.
We know no-one was injured or died as a result of the standing and more importantly that stewards had an easy night and the fans were left alone to enjoy the game and atmosphere.
There's a clue in there somewhere for the council, but will anyone have the bottle to tell them?

Also, does this mean whenever the away fans stand en-mass the same 'common sense' protocol will apply to home fans again in the future? or aren't we meant to know?

[Sharpy]

pompey will stand as will liverpool!!!

[T.R.O.L.I.]

And Newcastle - especially the two fatties who go topless to games

[STAR Liaison]

STAR:

I got the feeling from Tues nights game the stewards had been told to leave the home fans standing at the back of Y24/5/6 as they were powerless to make the away fans sit?
PLEASE CONFIRM. It seems that the words 'common sense' are in the Safety Officers vocabulary after all. Even the CCTV cameras were aimed at the big screen, beaming the game into the control room? Lets be honest, they don't really see a problem either but like you have said they have to be seen to be enforcing the rules.
We know no-one was injured or died as a result of the standing and more importantly that stewards had an easy night and the fans were left alone to enjoy the game and atmosphere.
There's a clue in there somewhere for the council, but will anyone have the bottle to tell them?

Also, does this mean whenever the away fans stand en-mass the same 'common sense' protocol will apply to home fans again in the future? or aren't we meant to know?

No, as far as I aware there was no deliberate policy but it may just be that the control room was so occupied with the Man U fans that they did not spend as much time as usual on the home fans.

I was not able to attend the SAG meeting but I am aware that the FLA and council were determined that if the Man U fans did stand that their allocation will be reduced for their next visit. This will not leave more seats for us as the instruction is that as they stand you must only sell a percentage of the allocation and so it will hit RFC income.

From the report I have had about the SAG meeting the council and FLA were told (and not for the first time) that no-one died etc but apparently that is not sufficient reason to allow standing and so the rules are still there and still to be enforced - as has been said many times on here there is little political will to change the rules by those who enforce them and they are the ones that have to be lobbied not RFC who are told to enforce them.

[RoyalBlue]

Ok I accept that we can't change the rules by moaning to STAR/RFC but we damn well should be able to ensure that RFC cut out the crap/excuses and enforce the rules even handedly.

It is completely unacceptable that the whole of the away support were allowed to stand throughout Tuesday's game (how many were quietly ejected or are the club still refusing to tell STAR?), whilst stewards like steward number 315 were getting agitated with home fans who stood up momentarily during genuine moments of excitement.

To cap it all, my 15 year old son was told to 'calm down' (he wasn't swearing, gesturing or doing anything else unacceptable) by a steward during the second half of Tuesday's game! This at one of the most exciting games ever seen at the Mad Stad!

So STAR, please don't deflect/concentrate the debate on the rights and wrongs of standing alone. There is the very serious issue of uneven handed application of those rules that needs addressing/resolving by you and the club.

[Harold]

Have a high vis day at a game - all dress like stewards and stand the entire game.

Cheap high vis in JJB and costco.

[STAR Liaison]

So STAR, please don't deflect/concentrate the debate on the rights and wrongs of standing alone. There is the very serious issue of uneven handed application of those rules that needs addressing/resolving by you and the club.

So are you coming to the stewards forum that JSC has asked for, you may find that your appreciation of what actually happens is not as accurate as you think?

As for the debate, at the last time this was discussed we were told in no uncertain terms that the club is not willing to even contemplate whether you think that two rights make a wrong or not - the rules are what the rules are and they are applying them to both home and away supporters with varying degrees of success.

As to your specfic comment about your experience on Tuesday I suggest you raise your complaint with STAR formally and we will take it further.

[T.R.O.L.I.]

I am aware that the FLA and council were determined that if the Man U fans did stand that their allocation will be reduced for their next visit. This will not leave more seats for us as the instruction is that as they stand you must only sell a percentage of the allocation and so it will hit RFC income.

Will RFC receive compensation from the FLA and the council (or maybe Man Utd) for this reduction in income? If not, the club should tell them (the FLA / the council) where to go.

[STAR Voice]

I am aware that the FLA and council were determined that if the Man U fans did stand that their allocation will be reduced for their next visit. This will not leave more seats for us as the instruction is that as they stand you must only sell a percentage of the allocation and so it will hit RFC income.

Will RFC receive compensation from the FLA and the council (or maybe Man Utd) for this reduction in income? If not, the club should tell them (the FLA / the council) where to go.

They won't receive anything, and they have told them - in no uncertain terms.

The club don't have the power to do that - RBC (on FLA advice) set the reduced allocation as a condition of granting the club a safety licence.

Nothing the club can do about it! Just another example of how unfair and unworkable the current regulations are.

[RoyalBlue]

So STAR, please don't deflect/concentrate the debate on the rights and wrongs of standing alone. There is the very serious issue of uneven handed application of those rules that needs addressing/resolving by you and the club.

So are you coming to the stewards forum that JSC has asked for, you may find that your appreciation of what actually happens is not as accurate as you think?

As for the debate, at the last time this was discussed we were told in no uncertain terms that the club is not willing to even contemplate whether you think that two rights make a wrong or not - the rules are what the rules are and they are applying them to both home and away supporters with varying degrees of success.

As to your specfic comment about your experience on Tuesday I suggest you raise your complaint with STAR formally and we will take it further.

[RoyalBlue]

So STAR, please don't deflect/concentrate the debate on the rights and wrongs of standing alone. There is the very serious issue of uneven handed application of those rules that needs addressing/resolving by you and the club.

So are you coming to the stewards forum that JSC has asked for, you may find that your appreciation of what actually happens is not as accurate as you think?

As for the debate, at the last time this was discussed we were told in no uncertain terms that the club is not willing to even contemplate whether you think that two rights make a wrong or not - the rules are what the rules are and they are applying them to both home and away supporters with varying degrees of success.

As to your specfic comment about your experience on Tuesday I suggest you raise your complaint with STAR formally and we will take it further.

I thought I had already made it clear that whilst some may quite happily put up with being fed deep piles of stinking bullshit and even lied to, I resent it. So I definitely will not be attending any meetings, unless I can be sure that I will be treated a bit more seriously than STAR appear to have been in the past. The club can show that by declaring the numbers of away supporters that have been so called 'quietly ejected'. But, of course, you know only too well what their response has been to that request.

Once again I stress that I am not asking the club to consider whether two rights make a wrong, I am demanding that they enforce the regulations in an equal manner, regardless of whether the offenders are home or away supporters.

I'm sure there are ways of tackling the 'difficulties' of away supporters (I've even suggested some) but it appears to me that the club can't even be *rsed to give the matter proper thought, let alone adopt any action that might be a little 'difficult'.

I do not believe that the club are applying the rules equally to home and away supporters and would deeply question whether I could ever trust anyone who came out with such a visibly absurd claim. Once again, the club could prove that I am wrong and that they are telling the truth by providing STAR with the data requested. However, I suspect that only when someone at the club actually tells STAR to **** off will they finally realise that is the message that they have been giving all along!

As for my experience of Tuesday night, I have no intent whatsoever of formally raising it with STAR. I'm sure STAR would raise it to the best of their ability on my behalf (although doubt anyone at the club will worry that much). However, I raised the matter purely to illustrate the completely different planet that Mr Doyle and some of his stewards inhabit.

Football supporters getting excited at a game such as Tuesdays - whatever next?!!! Damn hooligans should sit quietly in their seats at all time, apart from the occasional polite ripple of applause.

[Magnus]

Ladies and gentlemen, if you'll allow me, I'm going to post an unhelpful comment.

My dilemma in this thread, and what's stopped me from not contributing more, is that I'm not sure who I despise more - STAR or the stewards.

Glad to see them both taking a hammering though.

[Harps stay sharp]

As far as I can see RFC have no power to stop away fans from standing but will ban home fans due to Season Ticket info etc. So if the home fans want to risk their season ticket stand up.

If RFC don't comply with the rules by attempting to deal with the offenders then RBC will withdraw their licence. End of football being played in front of a crowd at the Madejski (ok extreme but that's what I am hearing)

FLA just make up the rules, but the clubs have to enforce them.

If none of this is working go back to what I said a few pages ago. If the crowd are not safely seated the referee should have the power to abandon the match on safety grounds This would nip it the bud once and for all.