Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Isle Of Bute Saint

Safety Of Our Fans

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

Witnessed it several times at Love Street and in the family stand at new ground when used to sit in there. One of my earliest memories as a football fan in late 80s early 90s was a Rangers fan getting chucked out. 

Do you genuinely not think they buy home tickets? 

That was 30 years ago for goodness sakes. I dont even think we were all seater then.

Everything is diffeent now.

Do you have any evidence of OF fans in the home end from this millenium? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, bazil85 said:

This is another issue that fans can't assume they're in the majority over.

 

Let's find out. I have created a poll. Fill your boots.

If someone could alert the "ignore" weasels and let them know in case they want a say, I'd be very grateful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

As GLS said they considered all options and this was the best. I think the worry of trouble is potentially clowning your judgement a bit. If they did it that way you still have the risk of fans crossing paths. You’ll never fully stop that. 

Bazil

GLS and the board will be at the match early and away late. Personally,  I enjoy having away fans and , as with our own fans the vast majority are decent and we'll behaved.  The safety aspect would have been of concern to the board as they are ultimately responsible for crowd safety.  My main take is simplifying things and improving the atmosphere by having Saints fans on 3 out of the 4 sides. Personally,  I prefer that option and believe it would also reduce potential flashpoints.  I respect your views however. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Drew said:

I only just noticed that my first pic seems to feature a QotS player, but that's a mere technicality....:ph34r:

I don't have many memories of Rangers or sevco supporters invading the home ends in significant numbers.

Never remember fans getting thrown out at these games? I find that very surprising 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Let's find out. I have created a poll. Fill your boots.

If someone could alert the "ignore" weasels and let them know in case they want a say, I'd be very grateful.

I think you’ll be lucky to get a sample that means anything. The most active members on here are the ones that want to criticise everything anything the club do. See almost every comment LPM has ever made 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

That was 30 years ago for goodness sakes. I dont even think we were all seater then.

Everything is diffeent now.

Do you have any evidence of OF fans in the home end from this millenium? :lol:

That was first time, I’ve seen it since.

Sure I won’t be the only fan to witness them being tossed out. Someone 100% got chucked out the Christmas Eve won from the family stand. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Never remember fans getting thrown out at these games? I find that very surprising 

I've seen sevco,sellic and motherwell fans thrown out of the Main Stand.

Mind you,I did have to point them out to the Polis first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

I think you’ll be lucky to get a sample that means anything. The most active members on here are the ones that want to criticise everything anything the club do. See almost every comment LPM has ever made 

Maybe, maybe not, but as fans we have few other options.

You never know, people might actually vote in favour of both stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Maybe, maybe not, but as fans we have few other options.

You never know, people might actually vote in favour of both stands.

Possibly, I think it’s a bit of a moot point though, done now I’d say. I’m all for rinsing every penny out of them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, zico said:

If SMiSA are genuinely interested in Saints fans safety then they would organise a boycott of all Old Firm games.

 

Is it just a 1200 Fan boycott?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, zico said:

If SMiSA are genuinely interested in Saints fans safety then they would organise a boycott of all Old Firm games.

 

Not all SMISA supporters are against it though, again some see it as a necessary evil. A boycott would also hurt our club. It’s a club we aren’t far away from buying, then we can properly make these decisions so it would be massively counterproductive 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, bazil85 said:

Witnessed it several times at Love Street and in the family stand at new ground when used to sit in there. One of my earliest memories as a football fan in late 80s early 90s was a Rangers fan getting chucked out. 

Do you genuinely not think they buy home tickets? 

Infestation or infiltration?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, bazil85 said:

Feel free to show evidence that this decision wasn’t lawful. 

Then explain how we could logistically have a vote for every decision of similar level. (Like ticket prices, other allocations, shirt prices, etc) because you don’t like a decision by the board doesn’t mean it should have been voted on by SMISA

I know you are desperate that people should ignore it, but it was The Board, GLS and Smisa who said the members would be involved in any decision to throw families and children out if their seats..! Thats an irrefutable fact.

what is also an irrefutable fact is they then went ahead and made the decision without involving the very people the pledged to consult.

what is an even bigger laugh is your silly comments that Smisa members (near 30% shareholders in smfc) effectively have no right to be involved in how the company is run. What absolute guff..! you are running scared of a growing sense that the club has got it badly wrong, and has lied to smisa members and the support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

I know you are desperate that people should ignore it, but it was The Board, GLS and Smisa who said the members would be involved in any decision to throw families and children out if their seats..! Thats an irrefutable fact.

what is also an irrefutable fact is they then went ahead and made the decision without involving the very people the pledged to consult.

what is an even bigger laugh is your silly comments that Smisa members (near 30% shareholders in smfc) effectively have no right to be involved in how the company is run. What absolute guff..! you are running scared of a growing sense that the club has got it badly wrong, and has lied to smisa members and the support.

Again show me where it is 1. Illegal 2. Specifically where is says this wouldn't happen?  

Again show me where they pledged to consult specifically on this? Seems like your mincing facts for your agenda (as usual) 

Again You clearly said 'legally' Show me your proof please. Again claiming we're breaking laws.

Thought I would just repeat myself in one post, since you ignore anything that doesn't back up your rubbish 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Again show me where it is 1. Illegal 2. Specifically where is says this wouldn't happen?  

Again show me where they pledged to consult specifically on this? Seems like your mincing facts for your agenda (as usual) 

Again You clearly said 'legally' Show me your proof please. Again claiming we're breaking laws.

Thought I would just repeat myself in one post, since you ignore anything that doesn't back up your rubbish 

Ha, ha, ha,.... you melting down. The chairman and Smisa made the joint pledge during BtB. You go find it if you need to.

no idea why you kero going onnabout breaking laws... oh yes sorry... i forgot thats your go to default setting when yir erse is oot the windae (deflection).

 At least 1300 other prople know what was pledged!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, WeeBud said:

I'd reckon that most fans sit in the West and Main Stands because there is a preference to watch the game from the touchlines rather than behind the goals. It may be easier to police but I don't see giving up "the best seats in the house" to the knuckle-draggers as being a goer!!

I consider my seat in Family stand to be best seat in the house. What we think doesn't matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Lord Pityme said:

Ha, ha, ha,.... you melting down. The chairman and Smisa made the joint pledge during BtB. You go find it if you need to.

no idea why you kero going onnabout breaking laws... oh yes sorry... i forgot thats your go to default setting when yir erse is oot the windae (deflection).

 At least 1300 other prople know what was pledged!

Believe it or not, I have read pretty much everything regarding BtB and I've never seen anything that suggests what's going on here is illegal or we MUST have been consulted on this, so yet again please feel free to share. I can't find something that isn't there. 

You clearly highlighted legality when talking about 30% ownership, did you not?

Yes they do, it isn't what you're stating. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Believe it or not, I have read pretty much everything regarding BtB and I've never seen anything that suggests what's going on here is illegal or we MUST have been consulted on this, so yet again please feel free to share. I can't find something that isn't there. 

You clearly highlighted legality when talking about 30% ownership, did you not?

Yes they do, it isn't what you're stating. 

For someone who insists they are the Smisa fountain of all knowledge you are either "at it" or "crap". Its been committed to print on numerous occasions, and openly stated at public meetings.

i really have no idea why you keep banging on about "breaking the law" and "illegality"..? I can only guess you may be taking what i said about a thity percent company shareholder having rights under company law to be involved in major decisions, and then time-sing it by 1000 to make your silly claims.

the issue at the nub of this is Smisa, through its director and committee members failed to canvass their members at any point in this decision, completely contrary to their stated aims, objectives, constitution and the agreement they had with GLS. They were posted AWOL, deciding to hide, rather than call Scott on his U-turn and broken promises. Hell mend them when the inevitable occurs!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lord Pityme said:

For someone who insists they are the Smisa fountain of all knowledge you are either "at it" or "crap". Its been committed to print on numerous occasions, and openly stated at public meetings.

i really have no idea why you keep banging on about "breaking the law" and "illegality"..? I can only guess you may be taking what i said about a thity percent company shareholder having rights under company law to be involved in major decisions, and then time-sing it by 1000 to make your silly claims.

the issue at the nub of this is Smisa, through its director and committee members failed to canvass their members at any point in this decision, completely contrary to their stated aims, objectives, constitution and the agreement they had with GLS. They were posted AWOL, deciding to hide, rather than call Scott on his U-turn and broken promises. Hell mend them when the inevitable occurs!

So you can't provide any evidence of legal wrong-doing (Clear as mud in referencing company law when it has absolutely no foundation in breaching a legal process)  or documented evidence that we had to be consulted in this decision? Didn't think so.

Below is one of the main points communicated before finalising BtB, if you want to share any update on that to back-up your point that would be great. My ultimate feeling is, you have none. 

However, while SMISA director will be able to raise issues on behalf of the members, ultimately SMISA will not control club decisions - the club will continue to run club affairs, as has always been the case.

yet again, you have shown yourself to post unsubstantiated rubbish. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not a SMISA member but read what others are writing.  There is,  in my opinion,  some validity in both arguments.  I think that the presence on the board of a SMISA representative might be taken as involving SMISA in all decisions.  The onus then falls on that person to ensure that they represent the views of the SMISA members and are held accountable by them.  SMISA,  not GLS,  has the role of listening to and representing members through the available communications.  There are items which,  by law will require the agreement of SMISA.  How this is handled internally by SMISA is a matter for the committee and members as they have decided to structure their own governance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

So you can't provide any evidence of legal wrong-doing (Clear as mud in referencing company law when it has absolutely no foundation in breaching a legal process)  or documented evidence that we had to be consulted in this decision? Didn't think so.

Below is one of the main points communicated before finalising BtB, if you want to share any update on that to back-up your point that would be great. My ultimate feeling is, you have none. 

However, while SMISA director will be able to raise issues on behalf of the members, ultimately SMISA will not control club decisions - the club will continue to run club affairs, as has always been the case.

yet again, you have shown yourself to post unsubstantiated rubbish. 

Yes i cant provide evidence of something i never claimed to be the case.

it must really be ripping you apart that Scott & Smisa have really strung themselves out on this? What drives you to either deny. Promises were broken, or even admit they were made? You are really hurting yourself here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

So you can't provide any evidence of legal wrong-doing (Clear as mud in referencing company law when it has absolutely no foundation in breaching a legal process)  or documented evidence that we had to be consulted in this decision? Didn't think so.

Below is one of the main points communicated before finalising BtB, if you want to share any update on that to back-up your point that would be great. My ultimate feeling is, you have none. 

However, while SMISA director will be able to raise issues on behalf of the members, ultimately SMISA will not control club decisions - the club will continue to run club affairs, as has always been the case.

yet again, you have shown yourself to post unsubstantiated rubbish. 

I'm not one to be shy on calling out LPM when he's "at it" and neither am I saying I'm for or against away supporters being in the family stand however this is from an interview GLS gave to the Herald in June 2016 purely for balance:-

"You look at the Rangers game [at the end of the season when St Mirren gave an additional stand to the Ibrox support]. The right thing would have been to go to the fans and say “we can make X amount of money but we’ll need to move a group of fans, what do you think?” and let them have their say. It would never be in my interest to go against the fans’ wishes. Things like league reconstruction or going back to the Rangers situation in 2012 – these are the things that supporters will get to vote on. And unless I felt it was an option that would put the club in peril I would go with what the fans want. That is the whole ethos of this.”

Share this post


Link to post
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.

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.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...