@PragueAddick I know that the follow up to the FOI has moved on to other parties but are you aware if they are highlighting this issue as an example of just how ridiculous that contract is?
Definitely (and by the way I am still involved, just those goons need to be aware that it isn't just a Charlton thing any more, so its no good launching a cyber attack on CL :-)). Personally I think the Police clause was one they most wanted to keep secret, as it is an embarassing and unnecessary giveaway that will really piss off the other clubs. For example both Manchester clubs pay just shy of a million a year to GMP.
I've seen info that indicates E20 have budgetted something like £620,000 p.a. for 'security', but that seems to mean both stewards and police. We don't think that would be enough for stewarding alone. So if you get large and increasing police bills on top, that will wipe out their "profit" plan.
Maybe if the local borough and the stadium owners start getting huge bills that they dont have the money to pay it will trigger a rethink on the whole deal. If there are crowd issues at lower key games then the stadium probably needs to be flooded with stewards and police at the higher risk ones.
There is one advantage the stadium design does have of course and that is there should be room at the side of the pitch to park a water cannon and give the scufflers a quick blast if they get out of hand.
So, fans ate fighting amongst themselves, and the stwards dont get involved, so WHU answer is to report the stwards!? Nothing about reporting the fans!
If it's described as a stewarding issue then it's the security companies problem, if it's a described as a fan issue then they'll need more policing and the associated costs. So until such time as it can't be passed off as poor stewards not doing their job, that's the way the club will spin it.
@PragueAddick I know that the follow up to the FOI has moved on to other parties but are you aware if they are highlighting this issue as an example of just how ridiculous that contract is?
Definitely (and by the way I am still involved, just those goons need to be aware that it isn't just a Charlton thing any more, so its no good launching a cyber attack on CL :-)). Personally I think the Police clause was one they most wanted to keep secret, as it is an embarassing and unnecessary giveaway that will really piss off the other clubs. For example both Manchester clubs pay just shy of a million a year to GMP.
I've seen info that indicates E20 have budgetted something like £620,000 p.a. for 'security', but that seems to mean both stewards and police. We don't think that would be enough for stewarding alone. So if you get large and increasing police bills on top, that will wipe out their "profit" plan.
Maybe if the local borough and the stadium owners start getting huge bills that they dont have the money to pay it will trigger a rethink on the whole deal. If there are crowd issues at lower key games then the stadium probably needs to be flooded with stewards and police at the higher risk ones.
There is one advantage the stadium design does have of course and that is there should be room at the side of the pitch to park a water cannon and give the scufflers a quick blast if they get out of hand.
Now, if only we knew of a buffoon who might have a couple of these going spare!!!! You gave them the stadium Boris...may as well offload those dodgy 2nd hand cannons as well!
I haven't watched the footage yet but understand the segregation inside the stadium is not very robust.
Doesn't seem right to me that the stadium operator picks up the tab for the West Ham fans being a rowdy and upset bunch being annoyed both with the stadium move and their team being pony.
You can bet a decent wedge though that the contract is either clearly in west hams favour or at least unclear and West Ham will try and force the issue to move that entity into bankruptcy so they can but the stadium outright for a nifty.
If it's described as a stewarding issue then it's the security companies problem, if it's a described as a fan issue then they'll need more policing and the associated costs. So until such time as it can't be passed off as poor stewards not doing their job, that's the way the club will spin it.
I think a bobby based at each end should be enough to remind them all to behave. Any other costs down to the club if they can't even control their own fans.
I am sure the FA will be deducting points if this unacceptable behaviour continues. I have complete faith in their ability to solve this issue.
There must be a decent amount of old bill outside to manage the crowds on the way out.
On a normal, non-protest match day at Charlton we must have around 10 horse on Floyd road , maybe others on other the two other approaches and 30-50 non mounted officers.
That's in a ground that's fairly easy to police and with only around 10k supporters.
Can imagine Arsenal and Chelsea away to West Ham being a bit more of an issue.
Surely there's a clause in the contract that LLDC will pay for a few new players for West Ham so they don't lose so many home games, solving the issue.
So Lady Brady was so focused on flogging cheap season tickets, and goading the rest of the Premier League to reduce their prices, that no-one thought to point out that you need to think about where you sit people!
Is there anything about this whole episode that isn't amateurish?
So Lady Brady was so focused on flogging cheap season tickets, and goading the rest of the Premier League to reduce their prices, that no-one thought to point out that you need to think about where you sit people!
Is there anything about this whole episode that isn't amateurish?
Not the whole episode, we the taxpayers have been professional in the way we have been handing over money.
I must say that this is all going pear-shaped at a speed beyond the wildest dreams of anyone in the OSC.
When the final contract was released, it wasn't obvious to me which clauses they had been so desperate to keep secret. The obvious candidate was the stuff about what the taxpayer gets back when Gullivan sell, but that wasn't easy to unpick, it took City AM to do that. There seemed to be no obvious smoking gun. But my money was always on the police clause, because of what I had learnt from Mick Everett about how tough an issue it is for clubs who have to pay. That is, all other clubs....
Naturally we will be all over the actual police cost figures as the season unfolds.
Some West Ham are planning a walkout after 66 minutes (yes) of the next home match, which I think is Southampton on the tele. The fights between fans are mostly siddarners versus people who thought that because they could stand in the Bobby More at Upton Park they could stand at the Bobby Moore in the new ground. And when it rains they all get wet because the roof is so high.
Some West Ham are planning a walkout after 66 minutes (yes) of the next home match, which I think is Southampton on the tele. The fights between fans are mostly siddarners versus people who thought that because they could stand in the Bobby More at Upton Park they could stand at the Bobby Moore in the new ground. And when it rains they all get wet because the roof is so high.
It doesn't help that 'Lady' Brady has instructed stewards to eject anybody standing (with the possible exception of those who haven't actually had their seats installed yet!)
Some West Ham are planning a walkout after 66 minutes (yes) of the next home match, which I think is Southampton on the tele. The fights between fans are mostly siddarners versus people who thought that because they could stand in the Bobby More at Upton Park they could stand at the Bobby Moore in the new ground. And when it rains they all get wet because the roof is so high.
It doesn't help that 'Lady' Brady has instructed stewards to eject anybody standing (with the possible except those who haven't actually had their seats installed yet!)
By the look of things, the West Ham defence on Saturday must have been ejected as well!
I admit not to having followed the last few weeks of PL football closely, but is there a reason for the crowd trouble? Is it an influx of new fans who are not there just for football, is it about standing, is it bad segregation, or is it because the football is so far away spectators can't see anything so have to find other ways to entertain themselves?
I imagine the low raking and sheer distance from the pitch means anyone standing will inevitably block a lot of people's view of the action, so tempers are going to fray when this happens continually.
Some West Ham are planning a walkout after 66 minutes (yes) of the next home match, which I think is Southampton on the tele. The fights between fans are mostly siddarners versus people who thought that because they could stand in the Bobby More at Upton Park they could stand at the Bobby Moore in the new ground. And when it rains they all get wet because the roof is so high.
But they wasn't allowed to stand at their old ground. Law of the land says that, its just that London FC couldn't or wouldn't impose this law, unlike Greenwich council used to make Charlton. The siddarners are the future for their club but it hasn't dawned on them yet.
Ah, the satisfaction as i look forlornly at my payslip... safe in the knowledge that one fat claret n blue arse is polishing the seat i will be paying for in years to come! Oi you... sidarnnn!
I've raised the very question with the Sports Ground Safety Authority - though it's predominately down to the Local Authority.
Maybe this tweet from Dan Roan touches on a relevant issue (radio network).
If you do find out anything interesting from your question, the OSC would love to be able to use it. And at the same time, I am sure this thread is being monitored (Good afternoon, your Ladyship) so it might be good to get anything juicy to the press before it appears on here. And if an FOI might help get an answer, i'm ready to help :-)
Out of interest, how is it that games can go ahead if they seem to think they need a police presence inside the ground and the police won't provide one ? (Apologies if that's already been covered/asked)
Out of interest, how is it that games can go ahead if they seem to think they need a police presence inside the ground and the police won't provide one ? (Apologies if that's already been covered/asked)
If you put the words advised, preferred, recommended etc then basically you don't need to do anything.
We have been advised that WHUFC would prefer to have a police presence within the ground, and have recommended they upgrade the radio systems within the stadium, however none of us actually give a flying fuck as we won't be paying towards it, unlike you silly taxpaying pricks, hahahah
Comments
There is one advantage the stadium design does have of course and that is there should be room at the side of the pitch to park a water cannon and give the scufflers a quick blast if they get out of hand.
Doesn't seem right to me that the stadium operator picks up the tab for the West Ham fans being a rowdy and upset bunch being annoyed both with the stadium move and their team being pony.
You can bet a decent wedge though that the contract is either clearly in west hams favour or at least unclear and West Ham will try and force the issue to move that entity into bankruptcy so they can but the stadium outright for a nifty.
I am sure the FA will be deducting points if this unacceptable behaviour continues. I have complete faith in their ability to solve this issue.
( te hee).
On a normal, non-protest match day at Charlton we must have around 10 horse on Floyd road , maybe others on other the two other approaches and 30-50 non mounted officers.
That's in a ground that's fairly easy to police and with only around 10k supporters.
Can imagine Arsenal and Chelsea away to West Ham being a bit more of an issue.
West Ham want E20 to arrange for police and more experienced stewards inside stadium.
Is there anything about this whole episode that isn't amateurish?
When the final contract was released, it wasn't obvious to me which clauses they had been so desperate to keep secret. The obvious candidate was the stuff about what the taxpayer gets back when Gullivan sell, but that wasn't easy to unpick, it took City AM to do that. There seemed to be no obvious smoking gun. But my money was always on the police clause, because of what I had learnt from Mick Everett about how tough an issue it is for clubs who have to pay. That is, all other clubs....
Naturally we will be all over the actual police cost figures as the season unfolds.
This thread has a lot of information about the stadium itself, the photos on page 57 show what it looks like inside...
The siddarners are the future for their club but it hasn't dawned on them yet.
More expense coming our way.
How did it get a safety certficate
If you do find out anything interesting from your question, the OSC would love to be able to use it. And at the same time, I am sure this thread is being monitored (Good afternoon, your Ladyship) so it might be good to get anything juicy to the press before it appears on here. And if an FOI might help get an answer, i'm ready to help :-)
We have been advised that WHUFC would prefer to have a police presence within the ground, and have recommended they upgrade the radio systems within the stadium, however none of us actually give a flying fuck as we won't be paying towards it, unlike you silly taxpaying pricks, hahahah