Jump to content

If we stay up... Give us the family stand back.


Recommended Posts


Guest TPAFKATS
The comparison would need to be away fans only, I have pointed out why these figures are misleading. 855 is influenced by fluctuating home crowds NOT by the increased away attendances. If the claim that fans were staying away in numbers because of the decision was true, the home crowds would be very consistently down on other games, they are not. 
You only need to look at the difference in the Rangers crowds over the two comparisons to know there is mitigating circumstances. Why was one roughly 700 more than the other? A look at home fixtures around the 2018 Rangers game very quickly tells you why. Motherwell 4,001 Hearts 5,727 Hamilton 4,334. We were on a shocking run of form and fans were staying away of all games NOT JUST THE TWO STAND GAMES. Something that continued up until recently when we have seen more backing for the team in games like Dundee and away games like Hamilton. 
This is beyond simple, I don't believe for a second you or Oak don't understand it. 
You talk about rangers crowds but previously refused to take into consideration the crowd from the last time we played them in the championship.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sweeper07 said:

Let's just keep improving our team and results, and move up into the top 4  - 6.  Get into Europe quite often, win cups and grow the fan base in Paisley.

That way we can give minimal seating to opposition fans - and certainly not behind either set of goals. Then if we don't have enough space for our fans we can fill in some corners or add on a higher tier or two.    :magic

I wish we were focussing on how much we have been improving and speculating on what new gems Gus and Oran might be bringing in next - instead of arguing about seating and the ugly mob . . .  :spud6  Roll on Saturday and may our players rise to the occasion, and step closer to Premiership football guaranteed for next season.  :spud7

I think we can manage both and it's just not acceptable to let it be brushed under the carpet because it was a few weeks ago and we don't play them again this season.  It's an issue that won't go away, nor should it. It's wrong and it's not fair to our fans.  No time like the present to promise to change it next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, oaksoft said:

Absolutely but you have just spent 20 pages+ arguing twith BuddieInEK and others that home crowds have been going up over the same period. :lol:

That is just one reason why nobody is listening to you.

All you need to do is show what adjustment needs to be made to those figures I produced to get a more accurate estimate of the increase due to this experiment of moving OF fans from W6 to the Family Stand. You don't just get to carte-blanche dismiss the figures out of hand and expect to be taken seriously. :D

As a combat to your point and to support my argument that St Mirren fans don't seem to be turned off in attending games in the grand scheme by the arrangement. 

I don't agree the figures are a good comparison point of the income this deal has brought in. You have practically agreed the income is more than the equivalent of '855' paying fans in your other posts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

4 games out of 18 with 4000 less fans equals 16000 roughly equating to just under 1000 per game off the top of my head. Almost double their current "increase" so yes I can work how averages are calculated. You are correct bigot behaviour is hundreds of years old but the manager of KFC wasn't personally abused until a few months ago and he was very public in it's condemnation. If you think all these things are not related and this is all linked to Killie's centenary then carry on but most of us can see the bigger picture.  You sound as if you are indeed "only here to see the Rangers" as they love to tell us !!!! 

I don't think they are not related, what I'm saying is the financial benefit of increased crowds will not have zero impact in this decision. I have no doubt if their attendances plummet in the future, consideration will be given to reverse this call. 

I am in no way given any impression about 'wanting to see the Rangers' if it was an option I would walk them and their green brothers out of Scottish football in a heartbeat. What happens on here though is some people attach emotion to my realistic view. IMO the impact of a few fans having to move seat for 3/4 games max isn't as big as made out and our financial benefit outweighs it. Would love if we were filling three stands ourselves but we are not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

I don't think they are not related, what I'm saying is the financial benefit of increased crowds will not have zero impact in this decision. I have no doubt if their attendances plummet in the future, consideration will be given to reverse this call. 

I am in no way given any impression about 'wanting to see the Rangers' if it was an option I would walk them and their green brothers out of Scottish football in a heartbeat. What happens on here though is some people attach emotion to my realistic view. IMO the impact of a few fans having to move seat for 3/4 games max isn't as big as made out and our financial benefit outweighs it. Would love if we were filling three stands ourselves but we are not. 

Your boring as f**k!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, TPAFKATS said:
17 hours ago, bazil85 said:
The comparison would need to be away fans only, I have pointed out why these figures are misleading. 855 is influenced by fluctuating home crowds NOT by the increased away attendances. If the claim that fans were staying away in numbers because of the decision was true, the home crowds would be very consistently down on other games, they are not. 
You only need to look at the difference in the Rangers crowds over the two comparisons to know there is mitigating circumstances. Why was one roughly 700 more than the other? A look at home fixtures around the 2018 Rangers game very quickly tells you why. Motherwell 4,001 Hearts 5,727 Hamilton 4,334. We were on a shocking run of form and fans were staying away of all games NOT JUST THE TWO STAND GAMES. Something that continued up until recently when we have seen more backing for the team in games like Dundee and away games like Hamilton. 
This is beyond simple, I don't believe for a second you or Oak don't understand it. 

You talk about rangers crowds but previously refused to take into consideration the crowd from the last time we played them in the championship.

I imagine their away crowd would have still been close to sell out but feel free to quote if you want. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



What happens on here though is some people attach emotion to my realistic view.


IMO the impact of a few fans having to move seat for 3/4 games max isn't as big as made out and


our financial benefit outweighs it.


Arrogance in the extreme!
All those disagreeing with you are attaching emotion...

Whereas you alone are "realistic"!

Says the one who chastises others for not respecting the right to differing opinions.

What an arrogant twat you really are. I'm starting to think you are the Jim Traynor of the forum... You can't possibly believe the shite you make up but feel the need to oppose the common view just for the attention.

As for the second part, around FOUR HUNDRED are now conveniently "A FEW"!

[emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23]
Liar liar pants on fire!
"A few" indeed! LIAR!

Last part... You CANNOT prove that although God knows you have had many lose the will to live with your shapeshifting stories in an attempt to do so!

Now please stop lying and talking shite as I really honestly have no desire to discuss this any more.

But LIES need to be called out!

"A few" indeed!
[emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23]



Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

I don't think they are not related, what I'm saying is the financial benefit of increased crowds will not have zero impact in this decision. I have no doubt if their attendances plummet in the future, consideration will be given to reverse this call. 

I am in no way given any impression about 'wanting to see the Rangers' if it was an option I would walk them and their green brothers out of Scottish football in a heartbeat. What happens on here though is some people attach emotion to my realistic view. IMO the impact of a few fans having to move seat for 3/4 games max isn't as big as made out and our financial benefit outweighs it. Would love if we were filling three stands ourselves but we are not. 

No one is questioning there is a financial benefit - it's whether it's worth it.  There are plenty cons to that one pro (I can't see any other advantage other than financial).  I personally after the Celtic game am of the opinion it's not (I agreed with the decision to give them both stands reluctantly when it was made).  Why should we be subjected to any of the circus they bring and why give away home advantage when it surely has an influence (negative) to the team on the park. Why should fans feel they don't want to attend a game in our stadium or worse still not bring their kids and why should ST holders be forced to move seats for them. It's far more than financial and I applaud Killie's stance. If that little bit extra cash is so vital (it really isn't) then we must be up shit creek !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BuddieinEK said:


 

 


Arrogance in the extreme!
All those disagreeing with you are attaching emotion...

Whereas you alone are "realistic"!

Says the one who chastises others for not respecting the right to differing opinions.

What an arrogant twat you really are. I'm starting to think you are the Jim Traynor of the forum... You can't possibly believe the shite you make up but feel the need to oppose the common view just for the attention.

As for the second part, around FOUR HUNDRED are now conveniently "A FEW"!

emoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.png
Liar liar pants on fire!
"A few" indeed! LIAR!

Last part... You CANNOT prove that although God knows you have had many lose the will to live with your shapeshifting stories in an attempt to do so!

Now please stop lying and talking shite as I really honestly have no desire to discuss this any more.

But LIES need to be called out!

"A few" indeed!
emoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.png


 

 

Oh look he's back, more lies this time about leaving the chat... :rolleyes:

An example... are you trying to say you and LPM view that we can easily put incentives in place to increase our crowds to the Dundee game level for every single one is realistic or idealistic?  

Again you are lying, I have no issue with different opinions, I don't need to agree with them and I am well within my right to ask people how they've arrived at their opposing opinion. 

What exactly have I made up? I suppose calling me Jim Traynor is not as bad as shamefully hinting at me supporting one of the bigot brothers... Dropping down to their level, pathetic. 

Sorry, I didn't realise you were going to respond, if I knew that I wouldn't have given the benefit of the doubt that you have the common sense to know when I say a 'few' I didn't literally mean there are only a few season ticket holders in the family stand :lol: Most of the other people on this thread have the intelligence not to make such a literal and ridiculous conclusion. 

Again, show me where I have lied, you can't and haven't been able to since the start of this thread. 

Kilmarnock, Livi crowd, increased season ticket sales, increased crowds, away fan numbers are all evidence I am right Motherwell crowds are very likely indicators. They all elude to this arrangement represents a financial benefit. But for the millionth time, 'the financial benefit being worth it' IS MY OPINION. I have backed my reasons why it is my opinion.

Your opinion might be it does not, you have not backed it in the slightest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

No one is questioning there is a financial benefit - it's whether it's worth it.  There are plenty cons to that one pro (I can't see any other advantage other than financial).  I personally after the Celtic game am of the opinion it's not (I agreed with the decision to give them both stands reluctantly when it was made).  Why should we be subjected to any of the circus they bring and why give away home advantage when it surely has an influence (negative) to the team on the park. Why should fans feel they don't want to attend a game in our stadium or worse still not bring their kids and why should ST holders be forced to move seats for them. It's far more than financial and I applaud Killie's stance. If that little bit extra cash is so vital (it really isn't) then we must be up shit creek !

I see zero benefits outside finance, I think that's completely correct. I also don't think it is vital I just think the financial pro outweighs the cons. It is humbly my opinion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bazil85 said:

As a combat to your point and to support my argument that St Mirren fans don't seem to be turned off in attending games in the grand scheme by the arrangement. 

I don't agree the figures are a good comparison point of the income this deal has brought in. You have practically agreed the income is more than the equivalent of '855' paying fans in your other posts. 

Ach go away and play with someone else Baz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, shetland said:

He is only the third most boring on the Forum but his heart is in the right place, no harm to him. 

Oaksoft is second for obvious reasons. 

But the title to the most boring and tedious on the Forum is... 

SWEEPER07 

He is UNCLE COLM from Derry Girls. 

Baz does wear you down at times but seems a decent bud.  

Oh excellent. Another shull alias.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

I see zero benefits outside finance, I think that's completely correct. I also don't think it is vital I just think the financial pro outweighs the cons. It is humbly my opinion. 

Each to their own but you are in a pretty big minority I think. You have your opinion the same as I have mine but there is no right and wrong here.  Until Scottish football breaks ties from the coat tails of the OF and realise they can survive without cowtowing to them it will never improve. The uglies are not going anywhere so it's up to the other 38 clubs to adapt rather than letting them control us.  You just need to read some of the utterly pathetic "statements" in response to the Killie decision to see their attitude towards everyone bar themselves. We either suck that up and accept it or we look at ways to break the circle as Killie have done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh look he's back, more lies this time about leaving the chat... :rolleyes:
An example... are you trying to say you and LPM view that we can easily put incentives in place to increase our crowds to the Dundee game level for every single one is realistic or idealistic?  
Again you are lying, I have no issue with different opinions, I don't need to agree with them and I am well within my right to ask people how they've arrived at their opposing opinion. 
What exactly have I made up? I suppose calling me Jim Traynor is not as bad as shamefully hinting at me supporting one of the bigot brothers... Dropping down to their level, pathetic. 
Sorry, I didn't realise you were going to respond, if I knew that I wouldn't have given the benefit of the doubt that you have the common sense to know when I say a 'few' I didn't literally mean there are only a few season ticket holders in the family stand [emoji38] Most of the other people on this thread have the intelligence not to make such a literal and ridiculous conclusion. 
Again, show me where I have lied, you can't and haven't been able to since the start of this thread. 
Kilmarnock, Livi crowd, increased season ticket sales, increased crowds, away fan numbers are all evidence I am right Motherwell crowds are very likely indicators. They all elude to this arrangement represents a financial benefit. But for the millionth time, 'the financial benefit being worth it' IS MY OPINION. I have backed my reasons why it is my opinion.
Your opinion might be it does not, you have not backed it in the slightest. 
So your defence is that we are supposed to know that you don't mean what you say!
[emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23]
Hillarious.
We could actually have guessed that though!

When you said a few you didn't mean a few. Now I know.

If I apply that logic to ALL your posts, they might start to make sense!

Belter. Your best response yet!
I should have known you didn't mean what you said! [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Oh look he's back, more lies this time about leaving the chat... :rolleyes:

An example... are you trying to say you and LPM view that we can easily put incentives in place to increase our crowds to the Dundee game level for every single one is realistic or idealistic?  

Again you are lying, I have no issue with different opinions, I don't need to agree with them and I am well within my right to ask people how they've arrived at their opposing opinion. 

What exactly have I made up? I suppose calling me Jim Traynor is not as bad as shamefully hinting at me supporting one of the bigot brothers... Dropping down to their level, pathetic. 

Sorry, I didn't realise you were going to respond, if I knew that I wouldn't have given the benefit of the doubt that you have the common sense to know when I say a 'few' I didn't literally mean there are only a few season ticket holders in the family stand :lol: Most of the other people on this thread have the intelligence not to make such a literal and ridiculous conclusion. 

Again, show me where I have lied, you can't and haven't been able to since the start of this thread. 

Kilmarnock, Livi crowd, increased season ticket sales, increased crowds, away fan numbers are all evidence I am right Motherwell crowds are very likely indicators. They all elude to this arrangement represents a financial benefit. But for the millionth time, 'the financial benefit being worth it' IS MY OPINION. I have backed my reasons why it is my opinion.

Your opinion might be it does not, you have not backed it in the slightest. 

Well, you have given your opinion ad-infinitum, so it's time to shut up ald let everyone else have their say without you jumping in to answer EVERY post.  BORING!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, proudtobeabuddy said:

I think we can manage both and it's just not acceptable to let it be brushed under the carpet because it was a few weeks ago and we don't play them again this season.  It's an issue that won't go away, nor should it. It's wrong and it's not fair to our fans.  No time like the present to promise to change it next season.

^^^^This yes.    I do agree with you - we can do both ! I guess my emphasis would be higher on the improving than perhaps some folk - but that is fine ! We need people to shout and act to fix things - especially concerning our fan base. These are the folks who pay their money week in week out and support through thick and thin.

What I am really aiming at is that the fans don't just let off hot air, but ensure that the fans make it known to the club. Then the club have to ask, investigate and feedback their findings, which should be driven from a "customer service" perspective as well as a wise business logic.  

Edited by Sweeper07
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have zero issue with Celtic and Rangers being bigger than everyone else in terms of support (as they have always been) or financial clout (which has obviously become much greater over the last 30 years or so - in Celtic's case anyway).

What I have a problem with is that because they are bigger, everyone else feels the need to suck their metaphoric cocks and be happy for them to scoop up all the revenue, as well as having the voting rights completely sown up too. It still astonishes me that in Rangers absence, the other clubs didn't force a change of the voting structure.

I think the other 38 clubs need to step up and at least create the notion of a rebellion. It's arguable that without Celtic and Rangers in the league, the likely biggest hit on clubs revenue would be a loss or at least significant reduction in TV revenue. However, under the current arrangements, the Old Firm hoover up most of that anyway. In the sense that they can't play each other every week, they need us as much as we need them, so for me a rebellion has to be at least threatened.

Equal distribution of TV revenue, every club televised the same number of times, change the voting rules so the OF can't carve everything up for themselves. If that was to transpire I'd be happy. Even if the OF went on to still win pretty much everything by virtue of being the biggest clubs then so be it. That's life. Every country has its big clubs who win most things.

Of course, this will never happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, shetland said:

He is only the third most boring on the Forum but his heart is in the right place, no harm to him. 

Oaksoft is second for obvious reasons. 

But the title to the most boring and tedious on the Forum is... 

SWEEPER07 

He is UNCLE COLM from Derry Girls. 

Baz does wear you down at times but seems a decent bud.  

Sweeper is a total tool...blocked him a while ago but watch this space..he will reply with some shite post with stupid faces because he cannot help himself...the reply will be boring and unfunny as f**k...hurry up Sweeper...

Edited by gstretchuk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

Each to their own but you are in a pretty big minority I think. You have your opinion the same as I have mine but there is no right and wrong here.  Until Scottish football breaks ties from the coat tails of the OF and realise they can survive without cowtowing to them it will never improve. The uglies are not going anywhere so it's up to the other 38 clubs to adapt rather than letting them control us.  You just need to read some of the utterly pathetic "statements" in response to the Killie decision to see their attitude towards everyone bar themselves. We either suck that up and accept it or we look at ways to break the circle as Killie have done.

Not sure how true that is, there is probably a number of indifferent/ silent fans on this matter that see the benefit/ don't care about the impact. 

I hold onto hope an 'Atlantic' league or a journey to England for both could happen after Celtic get their 10 in a row. What a day of celebration that will be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

So your defence is that we are supposed to know that you don't mean what you say!
emoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.png
Hillarious.
We could actually have guessed that though!

When you said a few you didn't mean a few. Now I know.

If I apply that logic to ALL your posts, they might start to make sense!

Belter. Your best response yet!
I should have known you didn't mean what you said! emoji23.pngemoji23.pngemoji23.png

Did you genuinely think I meant literally there were only a few season ticket holders in the family stand? Are you Stevie G in disguise? :lol:

Should we ask the wider audience if that's what they thought I meant... 

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...