Jump to content

Club statement please on police activity in W7


Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, St.Ricky said:

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.

I don't think any of them has the slightest appreciation of the privilege they are being extended by getting to discuss stuff face to face with our chairman in the first place.

It's absolutely tragic to watch them wilfully trampling all over this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


4 minutes ago, StMurnBois said:

Poor judgement it may be, but it was a hard decision that had to be made by the group. 

Regarding the police visits, the individual involved had done nothing to warrant this visit nor had any of the group members done anything to deserve being followed around the country by police watching their every move just looking for an excuse to warrant their decision. 

At least you can accept that the decision might  have been questionable. 

As to police visits - these are a private matter for anyone involved. 

I have no wish to become involved. I am not going to criticįse police in trying to ensure public safety. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, St.Ricky said:

Again.  How many times can this be said?  There is a system in place.  There is never going to be a position where the board agree to everything you put forward.  That is unrealistic. 

I welcome the fact that decisions are made in context by the board but guidelines are clear to me and I guess most fans.  Support the Club Support the Team.

The poor SLO is piggy in the middle and you appear to want to sideline him.  Not a viable idea and disrespectful.  If you don't get that then I can't explain it. 

The club has comunicated and issued a statement. 

You are wrongly thinking that  I am being critical or playing down the efforts involved but understand there are many people who have put years into the club. 

No one is asking for the club to agree on every idea out forward from those in W7, only that better communications are to be had, rather than a one sided “telling off” which I believe is how members of Northbank/W7 have felt at previous meetings with the club. 

Supporting the team is what they are all about, I can assure you no one in the group wants things to be as hard as they have been and would love if things were more of a two way street with the club but up until not this has not happened. I hope this will change from now on though. 

The club has issued a statement after the event has already happened, rather than allowing conversation to be had before it did? It’s all a bit backwards to me.

 

As I said I hope things will get to a point where both parties can compromise to  reach an agreement on all matters and that the can communicate better for all future matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, StMurnBois said:

Nothing to do wih an entitlement complex. 

Its down to the club to give adequate reasoning behind any displays / banners not being allowed, and in this occasion there was no club rules broken in the creation of this banner, so for what reason was it not allowed in? 

If it’s not against the clubs policies/rules, then what’s the issue? 

The issue is the W7 boys not learning and respecting that No means No and that you need to learn to accept that just because you want something really badly, doesn't mean you deserve it.

Gordon said No. It doesn't matter why. He said No, he is in charge. End of story. Why can't you accept that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, jkd said:

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 .

Was it cleared by the club?

Was it to big?

Was it made of non combustible material?

Did it clear all the health & safety rules that are no doubt on the books these days?

Personally, I admire W7 for the time and effort, and money,  they put into what is created.

But I don't agree with every banner. 

Work with the club.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, StMurnBois said:

Entitled to what exactly? Being treated fairly by police and the club, which is all the boys from W7 are looking for? 

You think you are entitled to an explanation which is satisfactory to you. You are not.

You think you are entitled to simply ignore Gordon's decision. You are not.

Until you guys get your heads around this basic problem you are going to struggle to get anything done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oaksoft said:

The issue is the W7 boys not learning and respecting that No means No and that you need to learn to accept that just because you want something really badly, doesn't mean you deserve it.

Gordon said No. It doesn't matter why. He said No, he is in charge. End of story. Why can't you accept that?

Just because someone closes you down with an outright no, does not mean you are not entitled to further conversations to investigate further into the reasoning behind this. 

With that reasoning no one would ever get a job/promotion they have previously been rejected for or achieve something they’ve been told “no” for before. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, St.Ricky said:

Then he needs to learn that the world wasn't created specially to meet any of our individual wants.  He has chosen this path,  is embarrassing himself and W7 and in the process making public police action designed,  I believe,  to ensure fan safety. Not a spectacular success so far.  On the other hand I love what W7 do when they stick to supporting the team. 

The procedure is clear W7 - SLO - Board - Decision - SLO - W7. I would be concerned if the board sidelined the SLO and if I were the SLO and thus happened,  I would resign. 

Respect decisions made please.  Keep personal grievances private. 

I agree there's  a procedure to be followed.  I was referring to the manner of his Facebook exchange with GS and why he may have reacted in such a way.  His chosen path IMO is only to support his football team and it's  easy to be understanding of police action when you weren't the one who experienced it. Designed to ensure fan safety? Supporting his team surely doesn't warrant an early morning police visit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, StMurnBois said:

No one is asking for the club to agree on every idea out forward from those in W7, only that better communications are to be had, rather than a one sided “telling off” which I believe is how members of Northbank/W7 have felt at previous meetings with the club. 

Supporting the team is what they are all about, I can assure you no one in the group wants things to be as hard as they have been and would love if things were more of a two way street with the club but up until not this has not happened. I hope this will change from now on though. 

The club has issued a statement after the event has already happened, rather than allowing conversation to be had before it did? It’s all a bit backwards to me.

 

As I said I hope things will get to a point where both parties can compromise to  reach an agreement on all matters and that the can communicate better for all future matters.

What is it you want?  I am now confused.

Are you complaining about the SLO - he is your point of contact? 

That is the system - Accept it. 

I do hope that the board are not manipulated into giving W7 a direct meeting following this sustained and negative campa8gn. 

Please,  please stop shooting yourself in the foot and alienating previous supporters. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, StMurnBois said:

Just because someone closes you down with an outright no, does not mean you are not entitled to further conversations to investigate further into the reasoning behind this. 

With that reasoning no one would ever get a job/promotion they have previously been rejected for or achieve something they’ve been told “no” for before. 

Absolutely but that is not what happened. You went behind his back and went ahead with the display anyway. That is not asking for clarification or seeking further discussion. It is non-violent dissent. Whilst I have no problem in theory with that practice, it's all about timing, behaviour and crucially getting popular support on your side FIRST. You did none of these things and you will almost certainly face greater problems as a result.

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, LargsBud said:

 

Imagine if the Celtic board were to shite themselves from a "fans not criminals" banner(or whatever it was). They'd be having full scale meltdowns every week with the GB banners.

Completely different and this goes with the territory of Celtic being a far larger club. There is already an extensive police presence at Parkhead on a weekly basis. A banner saying something about the police wouldn't have much of an effect on the presence. 

St. Mirren have a smaller, almost non existent police presence at most games thanks in no small part to the good behaviour of ALL our supporters and I'm sure this is something as a club, we are keen to continue with as it both gives off a good 'family friendly' image as well as driving costs down significantly. 

Things like the banner are going to correctly be a red flag for police. I'm not suggesting for a second anything untoward is happening but you must really understand that nothing is more suspicious and raising of police attention than very openly declaring 'we're not doing anything wrong'. 

It's very obvious why the club didn't want it displayed. Instead of this whole sorry issue just sliding and everyone moving on, the W7 group have now drawn not only the club's ire but the authorities attention now even more on themselves and this in turn means instead of 2 police at home games, there's a possibility of Police Scotland insisting on a greater presence which leads to more bad feeling and closer monitoring. 

I'm not at all surprised that GLS decided this was a potentially slippery slope that would have been best for everyone to leave well alone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, St.Ricky said:
8 hours ago, div said:

This answers the request for a club statement.  Sensible,  balanced,progressive but firm.  We can all sign up to this. 

Agree entirely, puts a new light on what actually transpired. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oaksoft said:

You think you are entitled to an explanation which is satisfactory to you. You are not.

You think you are entitled to simply ignore Gordon's decision. You are not.

Until you guys get your heads around this basic problem you are going to struggle to get anything done.

I’m afraid you’ve got this all wrong. 

I could continue this back and forth with you regarding this all night, but then again what’s the point?

You obviously have the image in your head that the boys in W7/Northbank are all selfish little children who don’t understand anything about the adult world and don’t have respect for anything or anyone.

If you ever become less judgemental and more open to other people’s point of view then let me know as I’d be happy to discuss this mater further with you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poor judgement it may be, but it was a hard decision that had to be made by the group. 
Regarding the police visits, the individual involved had done nothing to warrant this visit nor had any of the group members done anything to deserve being followed around the country by police watching their every move just looking for an excuse to warrant their decision. 
"had to be made by the group"?

NO it did not!

From what you say, a number were against it but the majority CHOSE to be defiant!

There was no "had to" about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, StMurnBois said:

I’m afraid you’ve got this all wrong. 

I could continue this back and forth with you regarding this all night, but then again what’s the point?

You obviously have the image in your head that the boys in W7/Northbank are all selfish little children who don’t understand anything about the adult world and don’t have respect for anything or anyone.

If you ever become less judgemental and more open to other people’s point of view then let me know as I’d be happy to discuss this mater further with you. 

Almost nobody on this thread is still backing you up.

Think on. 

As for respect, it wasn't me who disrespected Gordon Scott.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, pozbaird said:

W7 guys and the club just need to sit down and get it sorted. Should be simple enough to move on from this. I posted that I couldn’t see anything offensive on the banner. I still don’t, but if the club said ‘no’ in advance, the banner shouldn’t have been displayed. You can agree or disagree with the club saying ‘no’ to the banner, as is your right. Having said ‘no’ though, surely the way forward then was for the banner NOT to be displayed, then the W7 group to seek talks with the club.

Still holding it up, despite the club telling them not to, smacks of an attitude that says ‘fcuk you, we’re displaying it anyway’ - whether that was from a couple of individuals who thought that, or as a wider group-sanctioned action, who knows? I would hope that anyone who posted on here ‘disgraceful action from the stewards to remove this banner’ did so unaware that the banner had already been vetoed by the club. If anyone posted their outrage knowing full well the banner had been banned, then get a grip. You’ll know full well why the stewards acted as they did.

Surely any issues on both sides, can be discussed over a cuppa’ and sorted out? The W7 group are, in my opinion, very good with what they’ve been doing in a positive way at what was a somewhat soul-less stadium, but equally, the club have been doing well too, and acted swiftly to bag the Scouse dud and his sidekick... get it sorted lads. 

Edited 8 hours ago by pozbaird

I was one who thought it disgraceful, but given what has now been stated that the W7 group asked and were refused permission, I apologise to all and sundry. The club DO have the right to veto what they don't approve of, Club stadium, club rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gordon Scott has always struck me as a "it's ma baw: type of guy.  Problem is it's not his baw and  for a club chairman to have a go at a fan on clubs official Facebook page is embarrassing  from him. 

If he wants a non political stadium. Stop advertising politicians  on boards around pitch and maybe do something about sectarian  singing from away support. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, St.Ricky said:

What is it you want?  I am now confused.

Are you complaining about the SLO - he is your point of contact? 

That is the system - Accept it. 

I do hope that the board are not manipulated into giving W7 a direct meeting following this sustained and negative campa8gn. 

Please,  please stop shooting yourself in the foot and alienating previous supporters. 

 

What I want is for the club, SLO & W7/Northbank boys to work together for the future, whether this is what all involved parties want I’m unsure of as I cannot speak for any of them.

I am complaining about the lack of communication between the parties and the doors being slammed in faces with regards to this. 

Can I just point out that my views have absolutely no correlation to the views of the boys in W7, as I’m not a spokesperson for them, for lack of a better word. This is just what I think about the situation and what I think should be done about it.

I am in no way saying the club are all wrong and the boys in w7 are angels, as that would be a complete bare faced lie. There is wrong doing on both sides and until they can both come together to fix this mess I’m not willing to say any more about this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Absolutely but that is not what happened. You went behind his back and went ahead with the display anyway. That is not asking for clarification or seeking further discussion. It is non-violent dissent. Whilst I have no problem in theory with that practice, it's all about timing, behaviour and crucially getting popular support on your side FIRST. You did none of these things and you will almost certainly face greater problems as a result.

Can I just further point out that I am in no way a representative of W7 and all the things I have stated in here are my own personal opinions and thoughts. 

So no, I haven’t done any of these things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

"had to be made by the group"?

NO it did not!

From what you say, a number were against it but the majority CHOSE to be defiant!

There was no "had to" about it.
 

The decision of whether or not the banner should be made, had to be made by the group. 

As it is a group, if a suggestion is put forward there is a vote on this to determine whether or not it will be done, this vote was done and resulted in the banner being made. 

If one member of the group was to say they wanted to do it and everyone else said no then of course this would be ridiculous, but if the majority agree, the minority support the rest of the groups decision as it is made as a GROUP and represented by ALL members in the group.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:
1 hour ago, jkd said:
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.

Is it just coincidence that the team had been shite for years and there had been little to shout about?

The team was also shite at time's in love street but we screamed, shouted sang jumped about like loonies. We all miss the old ground that's a fact but this ground was soulless until these boy's came up and are doing well, some have tried before and failed. These guy's keep going and going, what I'm led to believe is the group's before this lot failed due to a lack of interest from the club and the club not wanting them there (I might be wrong).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, madball said:
9 hours ago, St.Ricky said:

This answers the request for a club statement.  Sensible,  balanced,progressive but firm.  We can all sign up to this. 

I disagree that it clears things up or that we can all sign up to it. I'll not defend the banner in light of the club explicitly refusing permission, however what prompted the banner was the club being complicit in providing details of supporters to police which infuriated many.

For Gordon to talk about return to positive atmosphere at the ground then go on a extremely negative rant for around two thirds of his update about banners doesn't quite match up. Gordon said "This atmosphere of positivity was however soured by the production of a banner in W7 which greatly disappointed me". The banner was displayed during the game, and the majority knew nothing about it until either halftime via twitter or post game, so it didn't affect any positive atmosphere at all. In fact it was the actions of stewards at the behest of the directors that could've soured things further.

Appreciate the need to be in compliance with Police and other regulatory bodies, however it is the compliant nature of the board without looking after fans interests that's not comfortable for me. I do understand that there could be cost of policing to be factored into their responses to Police, but seems like they have forgotten that fans are the lifeblood of the club and seems easier to piss them off.

Oh and for what it's worth I sit in W2 and have no personal involvement with W7, but targeting an area that have been largely responsible for the increase in noise, positivity and encouragement to the players seems counterproductive.

The BIG clue is the highlighted section, irrespective of what you or I think re the banner, bottom line was, permission was refused to display it ... really leaving the club no choice but to remove it . Fault, yes,  but NOT from the club. 

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...