North stand stewards

[Pogue Mahone]

To answer your first part about would I remain seated...er...yes,because being disabled I have difficulty standing more than a few minutes.
I have been to away games before and have had someone stand up in front so we could'nt see,see some of you say that if you were asked to sit down so the person behind can see that they would...have you tried it....see how many F. offs you can count.
Agree with starting at the front...said so earlier...but come on,there was standing allowed in the back rows,but that's not good enough,you all want to stand. There should be a safe standing area but at the moment there is'nt,so why try and have a go at the club you supposedly support. Do it the proper way and you will get more support, (including mine) form a Quorum,between 4 and 10 of you. Write to club and ask to see Paul Hebberd with a representative of the stewards and ask for explantions and future developments in allowing standing areas.
All this talk of boycotts,strikes gets you and the club nowhere.
I don't want sanistied football anymore than you do,I love hearing the North Stand in full flow,maybe I'm requesting too much of people that when asked to sit ,not to go off the deep end and lay the blame on the stewards.

I agree with you that there should be a safe standing area, and I agree with you that there currently, officially, isn't one. I'm not 'having a go at the club I supposedly support', I'm questioning the way that the stewards went about enforcing ground regulations on Tuesday.

I sit in the WSU, so none of this affects me directly, but looking down onto the incident it was clear that everyone in the rows in front of the incident was standing. It would not have been hard to, politely, start at the front of the stand, asking people to sit down. Anyone who spent any time in H Block at Withdean will be familiar with this way of organising things.

But the stewards seemed to ignore the front of the stand. If they are going to start further back it is bound to antagonise people and this is entirely unnecessary.

Nobody wants to go back to the days of boycotts, mass walk outs etc. It's brilliant being an Albion fan these days, and it makes all the protests of yesteryear worthwhile. But if relations between stewards and fans in the North Stand break down over something that with a bit of common sense on both sides could easily be sorted, that would be a shame.

 

[Commander]

Look, I'll try and explain. We accept you, and others, want to see every single rule and regulation enforced 100%. A lot of us don't share your puritanical zeal, but fair enough, we'll let it pass, it's still at the moment a 'free' country. However you must understand that persistent standing IS allowed, I'll repeat that, persistent standing at football matches, in all-seater stadiums IS allowed. Yes I know 'computer says no' and technically the fans are breaking the law and clubs face penalties (such has having offending areas closed by the SGSA*), but a de facto situation has arisen where large blocks of fans, several thousand strong from each club, stand for entire matches. You could argue that they're all very selfish and naughty boys who should have more respect for the Laws of The Land and it should have been ruthlessly stamped out years ago, but it happens anyway. Consequently, as trying to enforce the letter of the law in the stadiums would result in a breakdown in public order, and enforcing the Licencing regulations would result in loss of revenue for clubs, a blind eye is turned.

Now because standing IS allowed (usually by away fans as they tend to be a 'critical mass' of the more passionate supporters as opposed to the more docile football watchers who make up a large proportion of home crowds), any Brighton fan who is evicted for standing up, for whatever reason, IS being victimised. Why pick on individual home fans when there's a whole block of away fans doing exactly the same thing? (Answered in the first paragraph).

Until this situations is resolved (i.e. by the introduction of safe standing or by the SGSA closing down stands as opposed to just issuing empty threats to revenue-aware clubs) a bit of support for the individual victimised fans wouldn't go amiss.


*SGSA - Sports Ground Safety Authority. Replaced the old FLA in 2011

Yes but Brovion, you're not allowed to stand in all seater stadiums. Remember Hillsborough.

 

[Gazwag]

I don't want sanistied football anymore than you do,I love hearing the North Stand in full flow,maybe I'm requesting too much of people that when asked to sit ,not to go off the deep end and lay the blame on the stewards.

At no time in any match to date has anybody in my section "gone off the deep end" when being told to sit - there has always been a bit of banter, stand up song etc which, so far, 35 odd matches into the Amex experience, has been taken in good humour by ALL parties. Tuesday changed that in the atitude of the stewarding team. It seems the "do as you're told because its the law" brigade are putting there points of view across on the matter of sitting or standing - that is NOT the issue - the issue IS three fans were picked on RANDOMLY to be made an example of. One fan who I stand touching distance away from was ejected following the incorrect report of two female stewards not for STANDING but for SINGING - the fact he was standing was immaterial.

 

[Acker79]

Look, I'll try and explain. We accept you, and others, want to see every single rule and regulation enforced 100%. A lot of us don't share your puritanical zeal, but fair enough, we'll let it pass, it's still at the moment a 'free' country. However you must understand that persistent standing IS allowed, I'll repeat that, persistent standing at football matches, in all-seater stadiums IS allowed. Yes I know 'computer says no' and technically the fans are breaking the law and clubs face penalties (such has having offending areas closed by the SGSA*), but a de facto situation has arisen where large blocks of fans, several thousand strong from each club, stand for entire matches. You could argue that they're all very selfish and naughty boys who should have more respect for the Laws of The Land and it should have been ruthlessly stamped out years ago, but it happens anyway. Consequently, as trying to enforce the letter of the law in the stadiums would result in a breakdown in public order, and enforcing the Licencing regulations would result in loss of revenue for clubs, a blind eye is turned.

Now because standing IS allowed (usually by away fans as they tend to be a 'critical mass' of the more passionate supporters as opposed to the more docile football watchers who make up a large proportion of home crowds), any Brighton fan who is evicted for standing up, for whatever reason, IS being victimised. Why pick on individual home fans when there's a whole block of away fans doing exactly the same thing? (Answered in the first paragraph).

Until this situations is resolved (i.e. by the introduction of safe standing or by the SGSA closing down stands as opposed to just issuing empty threats to revenue-aware clubs) a bit of support for the individual victimised fans wouldn't go amiss.


*SGSA - Sports Ground Safety Authority. Replaced the old FLA in 2011

I can't speak for others. But for me, the citing of the ground regulations and highlighting that persistent standing is prohibited within them (even if it is not consistently enforced), is not about necessarily supporting the regulations, but about highlighting that it is in the regulations, and that if you act contrary to the regulations the stewards can act. Maybe it's not always fair, but neither is it fair to hurl abuse at people who are doing their job enforcing laws/regulations as instructed by their superiors, but that doesn't stop people doing it.

If someone acts contrary to laws or regulations, they risk authorities acting. I'm not going to have sympathy with people if they do, regardless of how inconsistent the authorities are in clamping down.

 

[Brovion]

I can't speak for others. But for me, the citing of the ground regulations and highlighting that persistent standing is prohibited within them (even if it is not consistently enforced), is not about necessarily supporting the regulations, but about highlighting that it is in the regulations, and that if you act contrary to the regulations the stewards can act. Maybe it's not always fair, but neither is it fair to hurl abuse at people who are doing their job enforcing laws/regulations as instructed by their superiors, but that doesn't stop people doing it.

If someone acts contrary to laws or regulations, they risk authorities acting. I'm not going to have sympathy with people if they do, regardless of how inconsistent the authorities are in clamping down.

Fair enough. Needless to say I have completely the opposite view.

 

[Postman Pat]

Another letter about standing in the North Stand in today's Argus. I think that is two in a couple of weeks.

Standing in the north stand From The Argus)

Given that there were a large number of new seats available to season ticket holders to move to, I don't understand why more of them didn't move to another part of the stadium.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Rules are rules, and people pay a lot of money for their tickets. I wouldn't want to be seated behind someone who persistently stands, and I'd expect the club to do something about it.

That said, there will always be fans who prefer to stand and the example of Germany has shown this can happy safely. If a group of fans started a nationwide campaign to get safe standing re-introduced there would be hundreds of thousands willing to sign a petition in support. I imagine someone like, say, Ed Miliband might be happy to consider championing such a cause given the amount of votes he might pick up.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Rules are rules, and people pay a lot of money for their tickets. I wouldn't want to be seated behind someone who persistently stands, and I'd expect the club to do something about it.

Agreed. Anywhere other than the North Stand.

 

[Brovion]

Rules are rules, and people pay a lot of money for their tickets. I wouldn't want to be seated behind someone who persistently stands, and I'd expect the club to do something about it.

That said, there will always be fans who prefer to stand and the example of Germany has shown this can happy safely. If a group of fans started a nationwide campaign to get safe standing re-introduced there would be hundreds of thousands willing to sign a petition in support. I imagine someone like, say, Ed Miliband might be happy to consider championing such a cause given the amount of votes he might pick up.

Ditto for me if I found some miserablist behind me who wanted to sit down! "Swap" I might be tempted to say.

 

[Commander]

Another letter about standing in the North Stand in today's Argus. I think that is two in a couple of weeks.

Standing in the north stand From The Argus)

Given that there were a large number of new seats available to season ticket holders to move to, I don't understand why more of them didn't move to another part of the stadium.

"I was at Brighton and Hove Albion’s game last Saturday against Bolton, in the north stand.

Everyone was standing and we just could not sit to see the game.

Tickets are not cheap and we were appalled we couldn’t watch the game comfortably.

Last season I sat in these seats and a steward got the supporters to sit, but when I called one over he said he couldn’t do it this time.

It was very disappointing. Everyone can see just as well sitting and it makes a mockery of having seats when everyone stands up.

Barbara Doust, Hailsham"

Well don't go in the f***ing North Stand then Barbara you bitch. If you want to 'watch the game comfortably' then sit in one of the other twenty-two thousand seats available.

 

[Mayfair Seagull]

"Well don't go in the f***ing North Stand then Barbara you bitch. If you want to 'watch the game comfortably' then sit in one of the other twenty-two thousand seats available.

Exactly.

 

[Gazwag]

Well don't go in the f***ing North Stand then Barbara you bitch. If you want to 'watch the game comfortably' then sit in one of the other twenty-two thousand seats available.

Well quite, what about the following games: Liverpool, Palace, Leeds x 2, Newcastle, Portsmouth, Bolton, Southampton - there may have also been others - where the whole NS stood for the whole of the game - did she not go to those games then.

If she did go to those from last season, MOVE TO THE ES, I'm sure the ESU sides are the same prices as the NS

 

[Commander]

Well quite, what about the following games: Liverpool, Palace, Leeds x 2, Newcastle, Portsmouth, Bolton, Southampton - there may have also been others - where the whole NS stood for the whole of the game - did she not go to those games then.

If she did go to those from last season, MOVE TO THE ES, I'm sure the ESU sides are the same prices as the NS

I just cannot understand why anyone who wants to 'watch the game comfortably' and stay sat down the whole game would go in the North Stand. The view is the worst in the ground, it's the smallest stand, most of the idiots in the crowd are in there, people are constantly going to stand up and it's the only stand where there is any realistic possibility of any trouble.

 

[Gazwag]

I just cannot understand why anyone who wants to 'watch the game comfortably' and stay sat down the whole game would go in the North Stand. The view is the worst in the ground, it's the smallest stand, most of the idiots in the crowd are in there, people are constantly going to stand up and it's the only stand where there is any realistic possibility of any trouble.

I think many of those who who are unhappy are those who, due to whatever reason, didn't appreciate what the North Stand meant. After all its not called that because it points north, the whole ground seems to be based on the North being the one behind the goal and the others follow a compass even though the true aspect is quite different.

This being the case maybe they went for the cheapest seats and were not prepared to climb to the top of the WSU for, at the time of initial ST sales, the other equivilent costs. However, now that season one has been and gone there is absolutely no excuse why they are still sitting there. There was ample opportunity to move (with priority I might add) to the East Stand which has, in some peoples eyes, a better view or even to the SW corner both of which (or at least the ES sides) I assume are comparable to the NS for cost.

I can therefore fully understand why some (maybe newer supporters) got a bit of a shock last season, but there is no excuse this season.

 

[Eurobound]

Wonder if any North stand BHAFC stewards have been drafted in to help CPAFC stewards tomorrow?
Go lads! (My only EVER message of support for stewardsds) Ha!

 

[Billy the Fish]

"I was at Brighton and Hove Albion’s game last Saturday against Bolton, in the north stand.

Everyone was standing and we just could not sit to see the game.

Tickets are not cheap and we were appalled we couldn’t watch the game comfortably.

Last season I sat in these seats and a steward got the supporters to sit, but when I called one over he said he couldn’t do it this time.

It was very disappointing. Everyone can see just as well sitting and it makes a mockery of having seats when everyone stands up.

Barbara Doust, Hailsham"

Next week Barbara is going to complain that she went to the Kebab house in Hailsham and she's appalled because she doesn't like Lamb and she wanted a chinese.

 

[Dr. Notthenineo'clocknews]

Next week Barbara is going to complain that she went to the Kebab house in Hailsham and she's appalled because she doesn't like Lamb and she wanted a chinese.

or booked a hotel on Ipanima beach during February and complained that 'them Brazilians' made a lot of noise

 

[HAILSHAM SEAGULL]

Next week Barbara is going to complain that she went to the Kebab house in Hailsham and she's appalled because she doesn't like Lamb and she wanted a chinese.

Bet she hasnt got the balls to tell Mehmet, likely to come afterher with a meat cleaver.

 

[Gazwag]

"I suppose the main problem is that to have to work as a steward in a football ground you aren't exactly going to be the sharpest tool in the box, either that or you are a twat on a power trip. You're never going to get intelligent people with good people skills doing it. But they should be trained to avoid confrontations with the crowd, while enforcing the ground regulations, wherever possible. At the moment, they don't do that"

Right, let me start by saying, I am a Steward. I don't work in the North Stand, so I an unable to comment on last nights event's and it wouldn't be fair to comment on what might/ might not of happened. However based on my own experience, a fan would not of been removed for the pure fact that he was "singing a song", there would of been several other factors involved in his removal, however like I said before I couldn't possibly comment.

However what I am slightly offended by is the comment "I suppose the main problem is that to have to work as a steward in a football ground you aren't exactly going to be the sharpest tool in the box, either that or you are a twat on a power trip"

I decided to become a steward for my love of football, and to be involved in something as exciting as the Amex. I have a full time job during the week ( which I have to have some intelligence to do) I am not thick or a " twat" on a power trip. You should not tarnish all stewards with the same brush as its highly unfair, just as i don't with every single fan. The majority of supporters i come across are really nice friendly people who I enjoy having banter with, you get the odd exception who think the rules don't apply to them and cause a scene, but with a capacity of over 25,000 people thats bound to happen. I like to think i have good common sense and a good sense of humour, both of which i feel help me have a good rapport with the fans in my block. In fact i am lucky enough not to get much trouble, but when i do, i try and deal with it in the best way possible where everybody can be happy with the outcome.

We are trained to deal with confrontation and other such issues, in fact the club run an NVQ course for us, so we can officially have a qualification. I feel i have exceptionallly good people skills and anybody who works with me at the Amex and my dayjob can verify this. I'd also like to think that supporters who sit near where i work can back this up.

Please don't suggest we don't have any common sense or people skills, because we do. I apologise if you feel you haven't come across one as yet, but I can assure you that we do exist, and i would love to give the opportunity to prove everybody wrong. We aren't here to make your lifes a nightmare, in fact the opposite and if you do have issues with the stewarding i can only apologise but we aren't as bad as you all make out.

Lastly, we do read the posts on her and the guy who got punched is a massive Albion fan, im sure he isn't as egotiscal as you make him out to be, remember he is only doing his job and only doing what he is told. Some of the comments can be quite hurtful and you have no idea if he, his friends or his family read these posts and it would be a shame to cause any unneccesary offense. Please just bear that in mind.

I hope you are one day, happy with us! As I for one always try my best to look after you guys as best as i can!

I had a conversation today with a policeman who was at the Bolton game as a spectator, a colleague of his was on duty at the game and said it was the heavy handedness of the stewards in the away end that sparked the trouble.

 

[Eurobound]

First bloke ejected at BRISTOL
Bannned till Derby game (3 games and Newcastle Cup game) - didnt even do what they said he had
He didnt start the anti standing song
He didnt swear at the Stewards
And he sat down for 2 seconds when told to- when there was 4 rows in front standing- so he stood up again

And this Club prides itself on being fair! Ha!

MADNESS