Jump to content
JG13

Club statement-north stand

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, Mycroft said:

SAG are covering their backs any incident it allows them to wash their hands of it.  

 

They are not dealing with the issues just preempting their get out excuse. 

If an organisation in charge of ensuring crowd safety is given a report from the police that says part of the ground is unsafe it takes a very, brave organisation  - which ultimately means brave people - to go against it. Given the report that was submitted it's entirely predictable.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rickygoo said:

If an organisation in charge of ensuring crowd safety is given a report from the police that says part of the ground is unsafe it takes a very, brave organisation  - which ultimately means brave people - to go against it. Given the report that was submitted it's entirely predictable.

 

I agree, SAG really had no option. It is the agenda driven report commissioned by SYP that is the real issue.

 

As many have said, the most baffling thing is that the report purports to solve an issue that isn't really there whilst making an existing problem in the egress onto a dual carriageway even worse.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shandypants said:

I disagree. The SAG is necessary; it’s just it’s the draconian nature of its policies, rulings and decisions that is the problem. The decisions coming out of this group could relate to the makeup of its membership - is it too political; is it informed enough; is it truly independent? 

 

If the SAG is disbanded then it’ll probably pop up again with another name, the same members and a strong agenda against SWFC and SUFC but if the membership is changed for being too draconian then those new members will have to demonstrate that their decisions are more measured and inclusive for all parties. 

 

Are there any examples of a SAG agenda against SUFC? I thought one of our biggest gripes was how fans enter & exit their place, yet no prohibition notices are issued to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There didn't seem to be any noticeable segregation of Palace fans on Sunday.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since DC bought SWFC, his agenda for the stadium has not really been made clear. Either way, this latest situation (especially if the appeal is upheld), will force his hand with regard to the Lepp and North access.

The quickest fix I feel is to remove the former gym/ now club shop and get some decent access to the rear of the North from that side, and utilise a plot of land across from the ground to build a superstore that actually belongs in the 21st century.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The only way is S6 said:

 

Are there any examples of a SAG agenda against SUFC? I thought one of our biggest gripes was how fans enter & exit their place, yet no prohibition notices are issued to them.

 

56 minutes ago, A12owl said:

There didn't seem to be any noticeable segregation of Palace fans on Sunday.

 

From memory the away and home turnstiles are very close together, in fact the away ones are flanked by home ones aren't they? The walk away from the ground is grim with fans waiting at the corner of the ring road. Ingress and egress are impossible without fans coming together. I don't think there is space on the concourse to hold fans back and there is no pedestrian area directly outside other than a pavement. 

 

If we are subject to the measures imposed I cannot see any reason why united shouldnt be as well. Surely the risk of trouble is identical at both grounds. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that the hotbed of disorder - Millwall - saw our supporters and their supporters walking in and out of the ground together without any bother at all .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad enough for these type of unnecessary restrictions for local derbies but Luton on a Tuesday night!?!??!

Ridiculous!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, S36 OWL said:

SAG 

 

1172046832_giphy(1).gif.b6b97f64b641ce3550f9c8754c24fa67.gif

beardedwankers in sandals, who drive 2vc's.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, stevie snerklebox said:

The quickest fix I feel is to remove the former gym/ now club shop and get some decent access to the rear of the North from that side, and utilise a plot of land across from the ground to build a superstore that actually belongs in the 21st century.

 

This is definitely the best solution. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, rickygoo said:

If an organisation in charge of ensuring crowd safety is given a report from the police that says part of the ground is unsafe it takes a very, brave organisation  - which ultimately means brave people - to go against it. Given the report that was submitted it's entirely predictable.

 

I know I know, but for FFS just getting my frustration out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, stevie snerklebox said:

Since DC bought SWFC, his agenda for the stadium has not really been made clear. Either way, this latest situation (especially if the appeal is upheld), will force his hand with regard to the Lepp and North access.

The quickest fix I feel is to remove the former gym/ now club shop and get some decent access to the rear of the North from that side, and utilise a plot of land across from the ground to build a superstore that actually belongs in the 21st century.

 

Unfortunately the plot of land opposite the ground already has planning permission for retail/food outlets with construction due to start any time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, lanzaroteowl said:

 

It's about time the Club looked into sueing these half wits.

Take them to court to justify their arguments, without bias against us.

Show the court precedents from other grounds around the country.

Make them pay for their blatant discrimination against us.

It's beyond a joke now.

Good idea. Would love to see them explain why it is safe for blades to share a stand with away fans at lane and their home fans can then form a pincer movement from the other to stands to complete the encirclement.!

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who still believes this is not a vendetta by SY Plod against wednesday to pass the blame is living in cloud cuckoo land. Its funny this has come about as one of their own (Duckenfield )  is about to stand trial again charged eith the deaths of 95 supporters.

 

SYP are a disgrace and currupt to the core.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mogbad said:

 

Unfortunately the plot of land opposite the ground already has planning permission for retail/food outlets with construction due to start any time.

 

Nowt to stop the club taking one of the new units.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sham67 said:

 

Nowt to stop the club taking one of the new units.

 

Can't we get in & out of the cantilever through your garden? :ph34r:

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...