Jump to content

Club statement please on police activity in W7


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, StMurnBois said:

Wish people would understand that there is more to what they see posted online. 

I feel a lot of fans jump to the conclusion that those who sit in W7 just take to the internet every time something doesn't go their way (acting like petulant children, spitting dummy out pram etc as what people have posted on this thread).

This is simply not the case.

Taking to Social Media is a last resort for the boys involved and before every post there is a significant of back and forth with all parties involved (W7/Northbank, the club, GS, SLO etc) and the recurring theme is that when disagreements are had, the club shut the door and close the discussion. If they cannot come to an agreement and solve any issues via email then this is when the conversation is usually taken to social media, this then usually reopens to door to discussion once the club/anyone involved have realised that the issue won't just go away if they ignore it.

 

The people in W7 have put in a tremendous amount of effort, time and money into supporting the team over the past 2 years, and it seems like they have had to jump through some very unreasonable hoops just to be allowed to bring some colour and noise to SMP, how many of you fans would continue to push for this after being told no at every opportunity?

I don't think you'll find anyone denying or disagreeing with this viewpoint, bud.

The issue for many is that when something like a banner or a display is vetted by the club and seen as undesirable (be correctly or incorrectly) and they are requested not to display it at the game, you'll struggle to find a lot of public backing when it looks to us not involved in the process that those in the group said 'ah well, f**k the club, we'll do it anyway'.

It instantly puts those in charge of SMFC in a no-win situation and makes those defying the request look petulant and completely juvenile.

I personally didn't care either way about the banner but clearly someone at the club did and put the kaibosh on it. That decision should have been respected and talks taken place at a later time. At the end of the day, yes we are all supporters but we are still paying guests of the club.  To me, it really smacks of disrespect to those in charge of the club to just do whatever you want on their premises. You wouldn't walk through your pals house with trainers covered in shite if asked to remove them at the door.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


5 minutes ago, stlucifer said:

But would it not be reasonable in this instance to publicly declare what was so offensive about the banner while allowing a far more offensive one to continue being displayed in the away end?

Does this not cover the reason ... ?

In the lead up to the game the group in W7 had asked us for permission to display the banner in question which we refused on grounds that the message it carried was absolutely nothing to do with the team, the manager or the club.

This discussion is about the W7 banner which the Club had already refused in advance.

However the only other banner I saw in the Away end was one referring to Leigh Griffiths which I assume the Club had no prior warning of and may have been advised by the police to leave it alone but like everyone else I do not know the details. I believe for example that it is police advice not to enforce some restrictions to Away support. I know that we as Away support have stood at Away games while Home fans were sitting.

Edited by Sonny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that Josh and the boys should just stop all activities in the ground and it should go back to what it was like before those guy's took it up upon themselves with the club's permission to create an atmosphere. Then people will be happy and we can watch as we all sit there looking on in silence at a team in black and white looking at us to give them encouragement, and some posters on here will be happy aswell. And on another note if the club gave out my personal information to whoever and they came to my door for a chat I would be pissed aff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

I reckon the banner in question was pretty innocuous.

 

So do I, given that the folk who made and displayed it did so following police visits to homes at 9am in the morning, when the people being visited are not criminals and are not being accused of being involved in criminal acts, or planning to be involved in any.

However, the fact remains that part of the deal in the ‘W7 section’ being sanctioned by the club is that banners must be pre-approved, and in this instance, the club said the banner could not be displayed. Someone, or more than one person deliberately chose to ignore this, and from that point on, things seem to have deteriorated.

You don’t need to take the club’s side, you don’t need to take the W7 crew’s side, but as an outsider looking in, there seems to be a legitimate cause for concern with these police visits, but simply cocking a snoot to the club’s directive, to my eyes, smacks of an immature attitude to what is a serious issue at heart. There also clearly appears to be two individuals rubbing each other up the wrong way here, but if the attitude from one of them is simply ‘fcuk it, we’ll just display the banner anyway’, then there’s only going to be one winner, which could end up being to the detriment of what has almost universally been a success in what was a characterless shoebox of a stadium.

Just get round the table and get it sorted.

Edited by pozbaird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Further comment on this topic is redundant.  The purpose has been achieved.  The Board have issued a Statement and Guidelines.  All that remains is for W7 to continue using the present system.  To repeat this is W7 - SLO - Board - Decision - SLO - W7. There is no reason for the board to grant W7 a direct route to the board.  As said earlier, this would bypass the SLO and make the position redundant.  There is therefore every reason not to give W7 a direct route to the board.  W7 have every right to put ideas forward but the board have the right of decision and this should be respected.  Move on please! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jkd said:

I think that Josh and the boys should just stop all activities in the ground and it should go back to what it was like before those guy's took it up upon themselves with the club's permission to create an atmosphere. Then people will be happy and we can watch as we all sit there looking on in silence at a team in black and white looking at us to give them encouragement, and some posters on here will be happy aswell. And on another note if the club gave out my personal information to whoever and they came to my door for a chat I would be pissed aff.

 

Do the W7 guys improve the atmosphere around the club? Without a shadow of a doubt. They've turned it from a morgue and added a great amount to the matchday experience.

Does the improvements they have made give them free reign to do what ever they like and to veto pre-agreed decisions made by the club? Nope. And nor should it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sonny said:

Does this not cover the reason ... ?

In the lead up to the game the group in W7 had asked us for permission to display the banner in question which we refused on grounds that the message it carried was absolutely nothing to do with the team, the manager or the club.

This discussion is about the W7 banner which the Club had already refused in advance.

The only other banner I saw in the Away end was one referring to Leigh Griffiths which I assume the Club had no prior warning of and may have been advised by the police to leave it alone but like everyone else I do not know the details. I believe for example that it is police advice not to enforce some restrictions to Away support. I know that we as Away support have stood at Away games while Home fans were sitting.

Not really. Perhaps a reasonable explanation is what I should have asked for because that is a bunch of crock.

It doesn't explain why an extreme  picture of a gnashing panda is anything to do with the club yet is allowed. North Bank aggro is a banner that I've seen brandished. What has that to do with the team, the manager or the club. That's been allowed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

I don't think you'll find anyone denying or disagreeing with this viewpoint, bud.

The issue for many is that when something like a banner or a display is vetted by the club and seen as undesirable (be correctly or incorrectly) and they are requested not to display it at the game, you'll struggle to find a lot of public backing when it looks to us not involved in the process that those in the group said 'ah well, f**k the club, we'll do it anyway'.

It instantly puts those in charge of SMFC in a no-win situation and makes those defying the request look petulant and completely juvenile.

I personally didn't care either way about the banner but clearly someone at the club did and put the kaibosh on it. That decision should have been respected and talks taken place at a later time. At the end of the day, yes we are all supporters but we are still paying guests of the club.  To me, it really smacks of disrespect to those in charge of the club to just do whatever you want on their premises. You wouldn't walk through your pals house with trainers covered in shite if asked to remove them at the door.

Completely agree with the points you make here.

The only issue, for me at least, is that when all efforts to communicate are made in vain, he boys quite rightly don’t want to just give up and allow the wrongdoings to take place. 

If something is against the clubs rules then absolutely 100% this should be accepted, but if reasons are plucked from thin air as to why things aren’t allowed, you can understand why people would be frustrated about this.

It was definitely a risk doing the banner after already being told no, and I’m sure they where all well aware of the backlash it could receive, but as you can imagine people are very disgruntled about the backstory behind the banner and the events that led up to it. If the door is continuisly being shut in their faces every time they try to create noise & colour (ie drum, West stand being all saints, displays, flags etc) and having to jump through hoops for these things to be allowed you can imagine how p*ssed off they would be after being contacted by police to inform them they are being watched with regards to “organised violence”. 

Its a total kick in the teeth after all the effort they’ve made and I completely understand why they feel the way the do. It’s just a shame the club haven’t made any effort to show they stand by them, appreciate their continued efforts and haven’t exactly made things easy for them to say the least. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, djchapsticks said:

 

Do the W7 guys improve the atmosphere around the club? Without a shadow of a doubt. They've turned it from a morgue and added a great amount to the matchday experience.

Does the improvements they have made give them free reign to do what ever they like and to veto pre-agreed decisions made by the club? Nope. And nor should it.

Hear, hear... but oops hang on a minute! The club said fans would be consulted regarding any suggestion of kicking tne families and kids out there seats to accommodate non stop sectarianism. What hapened to that pre-agreed decision?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

 

Do the W7 guys improve the atmosphere around the club? Without a shadow of a doubt. They've turned it from a morgue and added a great amount to the matchday experience.

Does the improvements they have made give them free reign to do what ever they like and to veto pre-agreed decisions made by the club? Nope. And nor should it.

THIS is exactly what it seems, going by the posts made on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that Josh and the boys should just stop all activities in the ground and it should go back to what it was like before those guy's took it up upon themselves with the club's permission to create an atmosphere. Then people will be happy and we can watch as we all sit there looking on in silence at a team in black and white looking at us to give them encouragement, and some posters on here will be happy aswell. And on another note if the club gave out my personal information to whoever and they came to my door for a chat I would be pissed aff.
That's right... I forgot they were the only supporters to sing!

FWIW, from the family stand, they can hardly be heard.

I hear plenty of vocal support from the South and West 1-5.

Whilst I admire and applaud the enthusiasm of the W7 fans, there is a real danger in them coming across as getting too big for their boots.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, stlucifer said:

Not really. Perhaps a reasonable explanation is what I should have asked for because that is a bunch of crock.

It doesn't explain why an extreme  picture of a gnashing panda is anything to do with the club yet is allowed. North Bank aggro is a banner that I've seen brandished. What has that to do with the team, the manager or the club. That's been allowed. 

As I am fed up saying - the Club decides what is allowed and what is not allowed, not some fans. If GLS reckons a pic of a Panda is acceptable then that's it.

Edited by Sonny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

 

Do the W7 guys improve the atmosphere around the club? Without a shadow of a doubt. They've turned it from a morgue and added a great amount to the matchday experience.

Does the improvements they have made give them free reign to do what ever they like and to veto pre-agreed decisions made by the club? Nope. And nor should it.

I'm saying those boy's have to go through alot to do stuff why should they bother giving up there time and money if it's looking like one step forward two steps backwards. 

Gordon said in his statement that they did not give permission to that banner as it never supported the club, team or management, so why was the jack Ross banner took off them last season a banner that was supporting our manager at the time .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sonny said:

As I am fed up saying - the Club decides what is allowed and what is not allowed, not the fans. iF GLS reckons a pic of a Panda is acceptable then that's it.

I'm not arguing with that. I AM saying that using the, "not to do with club/manager/team" excuse is a load of crock. 

Just come out and admit it was because they thought it might embarrass them. Don't tell what, on the face of it, seems like blatant lies about it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Sonny said:

The thing is the Club have the final say as they have the responsibility of running the Club. Bitching on social media harms your case and does not help it. Debate calmly and reasonably with the Club to achieve your aims but they will always have the final say taking into account the law, other supporters (Home and Away), and the Club's image. Washing dirty linen in public is a retrograde step to your ambitions.

And I think it is unfair to criticise the Club for giving you a hard time. GLS is always praising W7. Allocated the group to that part of the stadium. He allows standing (contravening the law) and engages with W7.  But he has responsibilities which he has the final say on.

I understand what you’re saying, but at what point does that become a dictatorship of what Gordon Scott says goes, and anyone that disagrees will be ignored and demonised until they’re forced into submission? 

 

It seems that posting on Social Media gets the club to pay attention to W7 and what their requests are, whether these be reasonable or not.

Surely that fault lies with the club for shutting off communications and not with the boys trying to reopen the conversation by gaining support from other fans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

 

Do the W7 guys improve the atmosphere around the club? Without a shadow of a doubt. They've turned it from a morgue and added a great amount to the matchday experience.

Does the improvements they have made give them free reign to do what ever they like and to veto pre-agreed decisions made by the club? Nope. And nor should it.

Agree with both of your points DJ. 

I don’t think anyone is saying it gives us a right to do what we like - of course none of you know what goes on within the W7 group, but these decisions are discussed at length. For anyone to accuse josh of leading some one man crusade against the club is 100% wrong. 

The decision to display the banner wasn’t made lightly, some for it, some against it. 

The fact remains that our group are treated differently to most groups. Personally I want what’s best for St Mirren and to avoid this getting worse. Arrangements being made so will have updates in due course. Hopefully can come to an agreement. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

That's right... I forgot they were the only supporters to sing!

FWIW, from the family stand, they can hardly be heard.

I hear plenty of vocal support from the South and West 1-5.

Whilst I admire and applaud the enthusiasm of the W7 fans, there is a real danger in them coming across as getting too big for their boots.

Where in my statement did I at they are the only supporters that sing? 

 

The ground was soulless before those guy's formed most of the time it was like being in a libary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, StMurnBois said:

I understand what you’re saying, but at what point does that become a dictatorship of what Gordon Scott says goes, and anyone that disagrees will be ignored and demonised until they’re forced into submission? 

 

It seems that posting on Social Media gets the club to pay attention to W7 and what their requests are, whether these be reasonable or not.

Surely that fault lies with the club for shutting off communications and not with the boys trying to reopen the conversation by gaining support from other fans?

It's a 'dictatorship' because someone always has to make a final decision like your boss, a father to his young children, or the Police because the bottom line is they are responsible for the outcome. Everyone puts forward their thoughts but someone has to make the final decision.  I had a boss who said 'This is not a debate. What I say goes'. And he was right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not my proposal to do the banner I proposed a silent protest with everyone with there mouths shut. 

But yes we did decide as a group to do this banner and then after the club said not to do it we decided as a group to display it together. 

Not me the group. 

 

Were not out to get the support from other supporters. 

 

We want to support the team without being treated as criminals when you’ve done nothing wrong. 

is that such a hard thing to do? 

Make your stance at the main entrance then not by disobeying the rules Josh with bringing banners into the ground , that’ll not help. Or get a face to face meeting & sort it out. The banner shenanigans go on from last season as you well know. Go about it the right way, right now the club could do without all this. We do appreciate your support in W7 but the right way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, StMurnBois said:

I understand what you’re saying, but at what point does that become a dictatorship of what Gordon Scott says goes, and anyone that disagrees will be ignored and demonised until they’re forced into submission? 

 

It seems that posting on Social Media gets the club to pay attention to W7 and what their requests are, whether these be reasonable or not.

Surely that fault lies with the club for shutting off communications and not with the boys trying to reopen the conversation by gaining support from other fans?

Please understand.  I support W7 as a lot of us do but you are in danger of shooting yourselves in the foot on this.  What you clearly want is to bypass the present system not to utilise it.  This shouldn't happen.  A system has been set up.  Use it or lose it.  You have placed the SLO in a terrible position.  Do you care?  I hope so.  If not then you clearly want the head of the SLO  on a plate.  Use the process and respect the decisions made  whilst privately making your case by all means. By the way - making a difference anywhere takes a lot of time and energy and tests resilience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, StMurnBois said:

I understand what you’re saying, but at what point does that become a dictatorship of what Gordon Scott says goes, and anyone that disagrees will be ignored and demonised until they’re forced into submission? 

 

It seems that posting on Social Media gets the club to pay attention to W7 and what their requests are, whether these be reasonable or not.

Surely that fault lies with the club for shutting off communications and not with the boys trying to reopen the conversation by gaining support from other fans?

Do you think the manner of plenty of posts on here has done that? 

Quite the opposite was said by the main mouthpiece in an earlier post.

I've said plenty of times, this whole affair, and both sides are not blameless, is a shambles.

There's no doubt this group have been a great addition, overall, to the match day experience but their seems to be a "we are better than every other supporter" attitude which has done the opposite to what you suggest, alienating some of the support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WeeBud said:

What would have happened if the club had disagreed with the police and said we didn't need 2 officers at each game??

I have to disagree.................................

 

I think we should allocate 3 officers to W7.

 

The guys have to understand the consequences of stepping out of line.

 

 

 

 

 

policeladies.thumb.jpg.fa83a322af08b4bfe7e76f5af6d61c58.jpg  

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sonny said:

It's a 'dictatorship' because someone always has to make a final decision like your boss, a father to his young children, or the Police because the bottom line is they are responsible for the outcome. Everyone puts forward their thoughts but someone has to make the final decision.  I had a boss who said 'This is not a debate. What I say goes'. And he was right.

But  GLS is NOT their father, the police are the very reason for the dispute and you weren't paying to go to work so your point is?

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.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...