Does my chances of getting cancer and tarring up my lungs increase when you have a beer next to me? Not at all, does smoking? Yes. That's why it's illegal in football stadiums.
KA, Over the last 50 years I've been assaulted five times to varying degrees at football matches...all assaults were fueled by alcohol. Strangely enough I've never been assaulted by a smoker.
A few barriers around one of the exits in the west, some around one of the exits in the north, and sectioned off areas at the back of the east and south. Only allowed out at half time, allowing the barriers to be removed before the end of the game. They will each need to be supervised by 2 stewards. Problem solved.
No, problem not solved. You'd need permission from the police and local authority to do that first. I'd guess you'd need more than two stewards as well.
Plus Stewards and barriers cost money
Problem solved in theory then.
Which means not solved at all : - ) As I said above you need action and the will to change as well.
Simply put, I don't think the club will do anything unless it's hand is forced. This means somebody being willing to report the club to environmental health and therefore introduce the risk of a large fine. The club would then be forced to weigh up the costs of creating outside smoking areas against the cost of repeated fines for failing to stop smoking inside.
It's not a step I'd be keen to take, but if the situation is getting worse (I've only been to a handful of games this calendar year), then it is something that will happen sooner or later it seems.
Why is the answer always to make someone else enforce it? It really is simply. Stop being totally bloody selfish, stop breaking the law and stop smoking in the goddamn toilets.
Not really how things get resolved though is it?
From both points of view no matter how extreme and selfish one or the other may seem the solution can be found as a compromise somewhere in the middle. No two ways about it smoking in the toilets or indoors is not on but even the most casual of social smokers can be stressed out to the the point of gasping for a cigarette. Not an excuse I know. But all the while smoking in the toilets is tolerated iy will carry on
I can be horny beyond reason, I still wait til I get home from the pub to bash one out. Don't like having to wait to have a cigerette? Don't come to a public place for 2 hours where smoking is illegal. Can't believe some of the excuses getting wheeled out in this thread, smoking in a public place like the valley is illegal and is terrible for not only the smokers health but the people around them as well. Can't wait for a ciggy? Don't come to a game, then realise your drug habit is infringing on the things you enjoy in life and then realise that by smoking you will eventually be at such a state where you can't do anything without being on an oxygen tank. Does my chances of getting cancer and tarring up my lungs increase when you have a beer next to me? Not at all, does smoking? Yes. That's why it's illegal in football stadiums.
Smoking is not illegal at football stadiums. Charlton imposed a complete smoking ban. This is not a rerquirement by law. As for not not coming to the game, i was coming here when this was perfectly acceptable, so don't get on your fucking high horse about who should/shouldn't come to watch football. However, smoking in the toilets is not acceptable. I would not lower myself to do this. On the few occasions i go now, i would just go out on the forecourt of the east stand and have one, and if by standing on the bank of the Landsdown Mews entrance having a cigarette annoys you, then bollocks to ya. Thats my lot on this subject.
I think you'll find smoking indoors is illegal and as the toilets are inside, then smoking there is illegal.
A few barriers around one of the exits in the west, some around one of the exits in the north, and sectioned off areas at the back of the east and south. Only allowed out at half time, allowing the barriers to be removed before the end of the game. They will each need to be supervised by 2 stewards. Problem solved.
No, problem not solved. You'd need permission from the police and local authority to do that first. I'd guess you'd need more than two stewards as well.
Plus Stewards and barriers cost money
Problem solved in theory then.
The barriers would have to be placed where they wouldn't, potentially, block the exit routes. I forget now but I'm sure we need to be able to empty the whole stadium in five minutes. Barriers, by their very nature, prevent this. I suspect that the club have never carried out a feasibility study of this but if they did they might find that it is physically impossible to provide what is being asked for.
I certainly think that opening up the exit gates and allowing some fans to go out and come back in (all the while policing segregation and preventing people from getting in when they haven't got a ticket - with all the potential risks to exceeding safety capacities) is asking too much.
I suspect that there is not an easy (or even practical - logistically or financially) solution to this. That is why the ground has been designated non-smoking. Turning a blind eye has clearly worked for a while, and might continue to do so in the short or medium term, but sooner or later someone will complain to the wrong (or right - depending on your view) person or institution and the club will have to deal with it.
When there are rumors that the club hasn't paid it's milk bill and/or they need a loan from a Director to pay the players wages it is a bit indulgent to expect the club to fund four smoking areas (one for each stand).
I suspect that those demanding smoking zones are probably the same fans that demand that we spend £5m a year in transfer fees while they pay £199 a season for a season ticket and the club runs at a loss of £7m a year.
I think Henry has nailed it on the head. I'd gladly pay £1 to go outside for a smoke and not piss off my fellow supporters. We're all Charlton at the end of the day, we should really all be getting on.
If your that desperate you'd surely pay £10 - yes ?
I'm never desperate, I can easily go the whole game without lighting one up. I just enjoy a smoke when I have a beer.
Does my chances of getting cancer and tarring up my lungs increase when you have a beer next to me? Not at all, does smoking? Yes. That's why it's illegal in football stadiums.
KA, Over the last 50 years I've been assaulted five times to varying degrees at football matches...all assaults were fueled by alcohol. Strangely enough I've never been assaulted by a smoker.
Does my chances of getting cancer and tarring up my lungs increase when you have a beer next to me? Not at all, does smoking? Yes. That's why it's illegal in football stadiums.
KA, Over the last 50 years I've been assaulted five times to varying degrees at football matches...all assaults were fueled by alcohol. Strangely enough I've never been assaulted by a smoker.
Banning smoking in public has had a significant and positive influence upon the nations health.
What someone does with their own lungs is up to them but why should my health and comfort be affected by this?
Walking into a Toilet where multiple fans have smoked very quickly is more than just passive smoking.
Smokers can either hold on for a couple of hours or get an e cigarette .
This illegal and the Clib has a ,legal responsibility to uphold the ban.
Shame Steve Dowman had to be sarcastic - Still smokers are always defensive and passive aggressive about their addiction.
Out of interest, assume you spend 4 minutes in the bog (quite a long time for a piss) and go to every league home game. That's 92 minutes of passive smoking over the course of a season.
Considering the body starts to return back to normal immediately after the last puff of a cigarette, what long term damage does 92 minutes of passive smoking cause?
Rather than the passive smoking argument, I just thinking walking in to a bog under a cloud of smoke, especially when kids have to use the toilet, is wrong.
MY argument is simple. Smoking is hazardous. passive smoking is also hazardous. Smoking in a public place like a stadium is illegal as part of a response to this. The cLub has a legal obligation to enforce this ban. The fact that the toilets around the valley are full of concentrated cigarette smoke every match, all match, means that they are failing in their duty to take this seriously and enforce it effectively. It is not rocket science to tell if someone is smoking.
Recently I too have seen smokers outside of the toilets and on the concourse, emboldened maybe by the apparent indifference of the Club and Stewards
Incidentally the concentration of smoke is not from one cigarette but many, smoked in a room with little ventilation in a concentrated space of time. Add in all of the other smoke smokers are so generous as to share with me throughout the year and there is an effect!
Research is already showing how even a limited time in a similar environment, such as a car can have a significantly adverse effect on health. The only difference is that most people don't smoke scores of cigarettes in a car in 90 mins.
Smoke if you want to but don't expect me to breathe the smoke which is dangerous and offensive.
Don't delude yourself that smoking is anything else but dangerous to your health and increasing viewed as anti - social and offensive. Don't presume to make assumptions based on your own warped views regarding what is acceptable damage for my health to support others inconsiderate behaviour.
Passive smoking is dangerous when you are frequently exposed to it. From that I assume they tend to mean spending a regular amount of time in a smoke filled environment; be that a pub a few nights a week, smoking in the house, etc.
If during the day you are subjected to frequent concetrated periods of a heavy smoked filled environment then I'm sure it'll have an affect, but walking through a cloud of smoke a couple of times a day doesn't seem to cause long term affects does it?
Otherwise with general pollution & emissions from all manner of things I guess you wear a mask?
I think the extremely long term nature of that table kind of reinforces my point doesn't it? Normal = as in still an increased risk of heart disease, stroke, cancer, etc, etc...
A few barriers around one of the exits in the west, some around one of the exits in the north, and sectioned off areas at the back of the east and south. Only allowed out at half time, allowing the barriers to be removed before the end of the game. They will each need to be supervised by 2 stewards. Problem solved.
No, problem not solved. You'd need permission from the police and local authority to do that first. I'd guess you'd need more than two stewards as well.
Plus Stewards and barriers cost money
Problem solved in theory then.
The barriers would have to be placed where they wouldn't, potentially, block the exit routes. I forget now but I'm sure we need to be able to empty the whole stadium in five minutes. Barriers, by their very nature, prevent this. I suspect that the club have never carried out a feasibility study of this but if they did they might find that it is physically impossible to provide what is being asked for.
I certainly think that opening up the exit gates and allowing some fans to go out and come back in (all the while policing segregation and preventing people from getting in when they haven't got a ticket - with all the potential risks to exceeding safety capacities) is asking too much.
I suspect that there is not an easy (or even practical - logistically or financially) solution to this. That is why the ground has been designated non-smoking. Turning a blind eye has clearly worked for a while, and might continue to do so in the short or medium term, but sooner or later someone will complain to the wrong (or right - depending on your view) person or institution and the club will have to deal with it.
When there are rumors that the club hasn't paid it's milk bill and/or they need a loan from a Director to pay the players wages it is a bit indulgent to expect the club to fund four smoking areas (one for each stand).
I suspect that those demanding smoking zones are probably the same fans that demand that we spend £5m a year in transfer fees while they pay £199 a season for a season ticket and the club runs at a loss of £7m a year.
I think the extremely long term nature of that table kind of reinforces my point doesn't it? Normal = as in stil an increased risk of heart disease, stroke, cancer, etc, etc...
To be fair though Bournemouth after 15 years there is a very good chance that you would be as likely to die from cancer or heart disease as if you'd not smoked.*
*This is, of course, assuming you believe the results of a study that may well have been carried out, or funded, by those that make millions and millions of pounds a year by selling the little cancer sticks!
A few barriers around one of the exits in the west, some around one of the exits in the north, and sectioned off areas at the back of the east and south. Only allowed out at half time, allowing the barriers to be removed before the end of the game. They will each need to be supervised by 2 stewards. Problem solved.
No, problem not solved. You'd need permission from the police and local authority to do that first. I'd guess you'd need more than two stewards as well.
Plus Stewards and barriers cost money
Problem solved in theory then.
The barriers would have to be placed where they wouldn't, potentially, block the exit routes. I forget now but I'm sure we need to be able to empty the whole stadium in five minutes. Barriers, by their very nature, prevent this. I suspect that the club have never carried out a feasibility study of this but if they did they might find that it is physically impossible to provide what is being asked for.
I certainly think that opening up the exit gates and allowing some fans to go out and come back in (all the while policing segregation and preventing people from getting in when they haven't got a ticket - with all the potential risks to exceeding safety capacities) is asking too much.
I suspect that there is not an easy (or even practical - logistically or financially) solution to this. That is why the ground has been designated non-smoking. Turning a blind eye has clearly worked for a while, and might continue to do so in the short or medium term, but sooner or later someone will complain to the wrong (or right - depending on your view) person or institution and the club will have to deal with it.
When there are rumors that the club hasn't paid it's milk bill and/or they need a loan from a Director to pay the players wages it is a bit indulgent to expect the club to fund four smoking areas (one for each stand).
I suspect that those demanding smoking zones are probably the same fans that demand that we spend £5m a year in transfer fees while they pay £199 a season for a season ticket and the club runs at a loss of £7m a year.
All very good points that I hadn't thought of.
As I said, in theory it is problem solved, but the reality is a lot harder.
Out of interest, I wonder how many clubs provide smoking areas? I know of Derby, but how many other stadiums have them?
Still haven't had an answer as to why nobody mided there kids getting choked before the smoking ban.
The answer is basically ignorance. People didn't know and weren't told that exposing someone to your cigarettes smoke was lethal. Lots of information about smoking was suppressed for years by the vastly rich and influential tobacco companies that puts pressure on politicians and scientists alike to keep quiet or else.
Still haven't had an answer as to why nobody mided there kids getting choked before the smoking ban.
I'm sure they did, but there was nothing they could do about it, other than avoid places where people smoked.
As I said in my earlier post, I never heard a complaint.
Yes, before the smoking ban everyone was simply delighted to be covered in the smell of your fags and were falling over themselves to have their lungs, and those of their children, polluted by your second hand smoke. Everyone was happy!
Simply put, I don't think the club will do anything unless it's hand is forced. This means somebody being willing to report the club to environmental health and therefore introduce the risk of a large fine. The club would then be forced to weigh up the costs of creating outside smoking areas against the cost of repeated fines for failing to stop smoking inside.
It's not a step I'd be keen to take, but if the situation is getting worse (I've only been to a handful of games this calendar year), then it is something that will happen sooner or later it seems.
Why is the answer always to make someone else enforce it? It really is simply. Stop being totally bloody selfish, stop breaking the law and stop smoking in the goddamn toilets.
Not really how things get resolved though is it?
From both points of view no matter how extreme and selfish one or the other may seem the solution can be found as a compromise somewhere in the middle. No two ways about it smoking in the toilets or indoors is not on but even the most casual of social smokers can be stressed out to the the point of gasping for a cigarette. Not an excuse I know. But all the while smoking in the toilets is tolerated iy will carry on
I can be horny beyond reason, I still wait til I get home from the pub to bash one out. Don't like having to wait to have a cigerette? Don't come to a public place for 2 hours where smoking is illegal. Can't believe some of the excuses getting wheeled out in this thread, smoking in a public place like the valley is illegal and is terrible for not only the smokers health but the people around them as well. Can't wait for a ciggy? Don't come to a game, then realise your drug habit is infringing on the things you enjoy in life and then realise that by smoking you will eventually be at such a state where you can't do anything without being on an oxygen tank. Does my chances of getting cancer and tarring up my lungs increase when you have a beer next to me? Not at all, does smoking? Yes. That's why it's illegal in football stadiums.
Smoking is not illegal at football stadiums. Charlton imposed a complete smoking ban. This is not a rerquirement by law. As for not not coming to the game, i was coming here when this was perfectly acceptable, so don't get on your fucking high horse about who should/shouldn't come to watch football. However, smoking in the toilets is not acceptable. I would not lower myself to do this. On the few occasions i go now, i would just go out on the forecourt of the east stand and have one, and if by standing on the bank of the Landsdown Mews entrance having a cigarette annoys you, then bollocks to ya. Thats my lot on this subject.
I think you'll find smoking indoors is illegal and as the toilets are inside, then smoking there is illegal.
That's not strictly my understanding. I thought it was illegal to smoke in workplaces, be they indoors or outdoors. This is why it is illegal to smoke on a train platform despite it being outdoors - station workers include the platforms as their place of work. It is illegal to smoke anywhere in the stadium as the entire stadium is a workplace. However you can smoke in your home and car despite them being indoors.
It's my understanding that technically you are not allowed to smoke in a company vehicle, even if alone, as it is deemed a place of work.
I was reading up on this earlier and it looks like you can smoke in it if you are the only person who uses that vehicle. Even if 2 people have use of the vehicle and are never in it at the same time you still could not smoke in it.
I think the extremely long term nature of that table kind of reinforces my point doesn't it? Normal = as in still an increased risk of heart disease, stroke, cancer, etc, etc...
That's for a long term smoker after giving up. Not for someone who walks in & out of a toilet.
Still haven't had an answer as to why nobody mided there kids getting choked before the smoking ban.
I'm sure they did, but there was nothing they could do about it, other than avoid places where people smoked.
As I said in my earlier post, I never heard a complaint.
Yes, before the smoking ban everyone was simply delighted to be covered in the smell of your fags and were falling over themselves to have their lungs, and those of their children, polluted by your second hand smoke. Everyone was happy!
Sarcasm does not make you right and neither contributes to sensible debate. To try to imply that I think what you wrote is wishful thinking on your part only.
Still haven't had an answer as to why nobody mided there kids getting choked before the smoking ban.
I'm sure they did, but there was nothing they could do about it, other than avoid places where people smoked.
As I said in my earlier post, I never heard a complaint.
Yes, before the smoking ban everyone was simply delighted to be covered in the smell of your fags and were falling over themselves to have their lungs, and those of their children, polluted by your second hand smoke. Everyone was happy!
Sarcasm does not make you right and neither contributes to sensible debate. To try to imply that I think what you wrote is wishful thinking on your part only.
And what exactly does your point that "nobody complained before" contribute to the discussion?
Simply put, I don't think the club will do anything unless it's hand is forced. This means somebody being willing to report the club to environmental health and therefore introduce the risk of a large fine. The club would then be forced to weigh up the costs of creating outside smoking areas against the cost of repeated fines for failing to stop smoking inside.
It's not a step I'd be keen to take, but if the situation is getting worse (I've only been to a handful of games this calendar year), then it is something that will happen sooner or later it seems.
Why is the answer always to make someone else enforce it? It really is simply. Stop being totally bloody selfish, stop breaking the law and stop smoking in the goddamn toilets.
Not really how things get resolved though is it?
From both points of view no matter how extreme and selfish one or the other may seem the solution can be found as a compromise somewhere in the middle. No two ways about it smoking in the toilets or indoors is not on but even the most casual of social smokers can be stressed out to the the point of gasping for a cigarette. Not an excuse I know. But all the while smoking in the toilets is tolerated iy will carry on
I can be horny beyond reason, I still wait til I get home from the pub to bash one out. Don't like having to wait to have a cigerette? Don't come to a public place for 2 hours where smoking is illegal. Can't believe some of the excuses getting wheeled out in this thread, smoking in a public place like the valley is illegal and is terrible for not only the smokers health but the people around them as well. Can't wait for a ciggy? Don't come to a game, then realise your drug habit is infringing on the things you enjoy in life and then realise that by smoking you will eventually be at such a state where you can't do anything without being on an oxygen tank. Does my chances of getting cancer and tarring up my lungs increase when you have a beer next to me? Not at all, does smoking? Yes. That's why it's illegal in football stadiums.
Comments
Which means not solved at all : - ) As I said above you need action and the will to change as well.
I certainly think that opening up the exit gates and allowing some fans to go out and come back in (all the while policing segregation and preventing people from getting in when they haven't got a ticket - with all the potential risks to exceeding safety capacities) is asking too much.
I suspect that there is not an easy (or even practical - logistically or financially) solution to this. That is why the ground has been designated non-smoking. Turning a blind eye has clearly worked for a while, and might continue to do so in the short or medium term, but sooner or later someone will complain to the wrong (or right - depending on your view) person or institution and the club will have to deal with it.
When there are rumors that the club hasn't paid it's milk bill and/or they need a loan from a Director to pay the players wages it is a bit indulgent to expect the club to fund four smoking areas (one for each stand).
I suspect that those demanding smoking zones are probably the same fans that demand that we spend £5m a year in transfer fees while they pay £199 a season for a season ticket and the club runs at a loss of £7m a year.
If during the day you are subjected to frequent concetrated periods of a heavy smoked filled environment then I'm sure it'll have an affect, but walking through a cloud of smoke a couple of times a day doesn't seem to cause long term affects does it?
Otherwise with general pollution & emissions from all manner of things I guess you wear a mask?
I hope this goes someway towards answering your question.
You could throw bananas on the pitch at black players years ago and get a round of applause too.
Didn't make it right though.
*This is, of course, assuming you believe the results of a study that may well have been carried out, or funded, by those that make millions and millions of pounds a year by selling the little cancer sticks!
As I said, in theory it is problem solved, but the reality is a lot harder.
Out of interest, I wonder how many clubs provide smoking areas? I know of Derby, but how many other stadiums have them?