The club is unlikely to ban anyone over this unless the steward was assaulted. It's standard practice to force the fan to have a discussion with the club, but it doesn't mean he'll be banned. He'll get his ticket back. If the steward assaulted the fan, I agree it should be pursued.
Watching from the east stand, it seemed like a silly over-reaction by the club that could have provoked more trouble than it did. The banner was harmless. The advertising excuse is so much nonsense. If the club wanted to provoke fans into bringing many more banners in future, well, it just did.
The club is unlikely to ban anyone over this unless the steward was assaulted. It's standard practice to force the fan to have a discussion with the club, but it doesn't mean he'll be banned. He'll get his ticket back. If the steward assaulted the fan, I agree it should be pursued.
Watching from the east stand, it seemed like a silly over-reaction by the club that could have provoked more trouble than it did. The banner was harmless. The advertising excuse is so much nonsense. If the club wanted to provoke fans into bringing many more banners in future, well, it just did.
The club is unlikely to ban anyone over this unless the steward was assaulted. It's standard practice to force the fan to have a discussion with the club, but it doesn't mean he'll be banned. He'll get his ticket back. If the steward assaulted the fan, I agree it should be pursued.
Watching from the east stand, it seemed like a silly over-reaction by the club that could have provoked more trouble than it did. The banner was harmless. The advertising excuse is so much nonsense. If the club wanted to provoke fans into bringing many more banners in future, well, it just did.
Blimey, that be the first case of the regime wanting to talk with a proper fan then. Hallelujah, they've seen the light!
The club is unlikely to ban anyone over this unless the steward was assaulted. It's standard practice to force the fan to have a discussion with the club, but it doesn't mean he'll be banned. He'll get his ticket back. If the steward assaulted the fan, I agree it should be pursued.
Watching from the east stand, it seemed like a silly over-reaction by the club that could have provoked more trouble than it did. The banner was harmless. The advertising excuse is so much nonsense. If the club wanted to provoke fans into bringing many more banners in future, well, it just did.
The more I read about it and what the lady has put on Facebook page the more i infuriated it is making me. I am adamant we have to have banners at the next home game.
The more I read about it and what the lady has put on Facebook page the more i infuriated it is making me. I am adamant we have to have banners at the next home game.
The more I read about it and what the lady has put on Facebook page the more i infuriated it is making me. I am adamant we have to have banners at the next home game.
The club is unlikely to ban anyone over this unless the steward was assaulted. It's standard practice to force the fan to have a discussion with the club, but it doesn't mean he'll be banned. He'll get his ticket back. If the steward assaulted the fan, I agree it should be pursued.
Watching from the east stand, it seemed like a silly over-reaction by the club that could have provoked more trouble than it did. The banner was harmless. The advertising excuse is so much nonsense. If the club wanted to provoke fans into bringing many more banners in future, well, it just did.
If you take a banner in and then keep passing it round it will be harder for the stewards to get it back, also just obstruct the stewards from getting near it, make yourself busy stand in the way play them at their own game it's OUR protest nothing to do with them.
The club is unlikely to ban anyone over this unless the steward was assaulted. It's standard practice to force the fan to have a discussion with the club, but it doesn't mean he'll be banned. He'll get his ticket back. If the steward assaulted the fan, I agree it should be pursued.
Watching from the east stand, it seemed like a silly over-reaction by the club that could have provoked more trouble than it did. The banner was harmless. The advertising excuse is so much nonsense. If the club wanted to provoke fans into bringing many more banners in future, well, it just did.
The club is unlikely to ban anyone over this unless the steward was assaulted. It's standard practice to force the fan to have a discussion with the club, but it doesn't mean he'll be banned. He'll get his ticket back. If the steward assaulted the fan, I agree it should be pursued.
Watching from the east stand, it seemed like a silly over-reaction by the club that could have provoked more trouble than it did. The banner was harmless. The advertising excuse is so much nonsense. If the club wanted to provoke fans into bringing many more banners in future, well, it just did.
Need to make Bristol City banner day
I have a serious plan. Will be making a request to the fund
If you take a banner in and then keep passing it round it will be harder for the stewards to get it back, also just obstruct the stewards from getting near it, make yourself busy stand in the way play them at their own game it's OUR protest nothing to do with them.
A banner being passed up and down, through the center of a block, would be a complete and utter nightmare to stop. Plus, any form of movement gets more attention, and more attention means a rather more thoughtful response.
I believe there is something in ground regulations banning banners of a certain size. In which case I assume the club will also be pursuing the Blackburn fans who draped a great big flag over upper Jimmy Seed plus the fans who had CAFC flags either side of N Lower (one of which I think is Seb).
I have pics of the other flags but lack the ability to upload after a few post match beers.
I went down to the concourse to help him and it seemed to me, that there were more than one, getting ejected. Although they could have been leaving "willingly" with him, it appeared to me that the stewards were ejecting them.
I went down to the concourse to help him and it seemed to me, that there were more than one, getting ejected. Although they could have been leaving "willingly" with him, it appeared to me that the stewards were ejecting them.
His mum and brother came back but not sure if that's who you are talking about.
I doubt the stewards wouldn't have acted on their own initiative to remove the banner, after all they wouldn't be able to see it stood at their posts in the north upper. I can only assume they have been instructed by the club safety officer who has clocked the banner from the control box. The club and stewards have a responsibility to prevent objects being thrown, pitch incursions and racist, homophobic or obscene chanting. Their is nothing in the FA's stadium safety best practice guidance about criticism of club ownership and to my mind the club have acted outside of the guidance just to prevent their own embarrassment (and only made it more embarrassing in the process).
The club should be getting their grovelling apology to their 'customers' in order right now.
Look at what it provoked - bloody ridiculous. They could have left it in place, it was hardly offensive and ludicrous to claim it as a health and safety issue - but why not just confiscate it until the final whistle? Are they oblivious to the current mood? Do we have to make it more obvious?
Well from that video, the obvious place to put a banner is on the white border either side of the nike swoosh, cos then it's not obscuring anything :-)
Good point but it's OUR protest not theirs, Safety in numbers, keep them away from the banners,and get the message accross we can look after ourselves.
You customers should realise that no form of protest will be allowed under our great leaders regime , it works in North Korea so why not The Valley , it's only 2% unhappy anyway
And LOL @ the YouTube channel it's been uploaded on.
The relevant bit is 0:37 - playing it at full screen it does look like there's a clear snatch/grab to pull him towards the staircase, done by the (supervisor?) in the blue jacket? Doesn't seem to be anything else though, unless there was initial confrontation prior to filming?
Comments
Not a judgment, but why did the stewards in question feel it was safe for them to do this?
Perhaps an air of increased hostility at matches would make them rethink their risk assessments.
Watching from the east stand, it seemed like a silly over-reaction by the club that could have provoked more trouble than it did. The banner was harmless. The advertising excuse is so much nonsense. If the club wanted to provoke fans into bringing many more banners in future, well, it just did.
I believe there is something in ground regulations banning banners of a certain size. In which case I assume the club will also be pursuing the Blackburn fans who draped a great big flag over upper Jimmy Seed plus the fans who had CAFC flags either side of N Lower (one of which I think is Seb).
I have pics of the other flags but lack the ability to upload after a few post match beers.
By the way, great to see/ meet lots of you today.
The club should be getting their grovelling apology to their 'customers' in order right now.
And LOL @ the YouTube channel it's been uploaded on.