[Football] Drinking in sight of the pitch - a survey

[Guinness Boy]

I would be OK with and would like to be able to take a single drink to your seat before the game or at half time.

Any more and you end up with an annoying procession of people buying beer and going for a leak - and a higher risk of flying beer when a goal goes in.

Yep

There has to be a compromise between getting covered in beer and getting up all game and being told what to do by a law that's mired in the 80s. Especially if it takes people into the open air instead of concourses.

 

[ac gull]

reason fan led review are advocating this is when non league clubs get promoted to National League this rule kicks in and they lose a lot of bar related income as a consequence of their success

thus they are recommending this rule change is trialled at National League and League Two to start with

went to a League one game recently where three women in 20's ( suspect player other halves ) all carried a pint of lager into seats with them, no one stopped them, they drank them all well before game started and was no bother to anyone - apart from all highly illegal and all should have been arrested and thrown out immediately etc

this rule to me was bought in as all soccer fans assumed to be potential hooligans - where as rugby and cricket fans are not

will take a long time to introduce this rule change - I would reverse current rule from League One downwards - keep Championship and PL as is - responses on this survey seem to be that everyone assumes everyone will spend two hours non stop drinking rather than watching the match

 

[Cotton Socks]

One drink per person would mean even more people squeezing past to get to the bar. I can't see that the one drink rule would prevent luzzing as I'm guessing the morons that are so inclined wouldn't think about that!

I would like to drink in sight of the pitch but the cons far outweigh the pros.

Not if the bar was closed during the game...

 

[jonny.rainbow]

I agree, but only for people in unreserved safe standing areas of the ground.

 

[Hampster Gull]

Nope, too many pissed dickheads already at our matches

 

[Wardy's twin]

I would like the option to be able to get to the ground early, have a pint and sit watching the warm-ups with it. I also would quite enjoy a post-match pint looking at the pitch and enjoying the moment.

I don't want people squeezing past during the match every few moments balancing three pints.

If you can resolve that I would appreciate it.

This especially in the current situation with COVID the only issue I see is someone then stocking up 3 or 4 pints to drink through the game. Afterwards not an issue....

 

[mr sheen]

I'm too young to remember, but did people drink much in the stands and on terraces pre ban?

 

[Swansman]

English football crowds looked great at the final of the Euro's.

We already know there's a big marching powder issue at games these days, is adding more alcohol into the mix a good idea? Do you not think that part of the reason why it has been better over the past 36 years is because you can't drink during the game?

It is just seems an unnecessary thing to spend any time over changing. I can't see any particular benefit in changing the law at all, only problems.

beer

 

[Weststander]

I'm too young to remember, but did people drink much in the stands and on terraces pre ban?

I can’t remember it at all. Crowd surges and friendly bundles would’ve soon emptied any drinking vessels.

On quieter terraces such as the Chicken Run, older blokes sneaked in traditional canteens of Scotch.

 

[sparkie]

I'm too young to remember, but did people drink much in the stands and on terraces pre ban?

Grounds were different and I can't remember there being any bars to buy drinks in general admission areas. Might be wrong

 

[atfc village]

I once read a study about late licensing and how it had the opposite effect and instead of allowing pubs to open beyond 11pm and people spreading their drinking out it just led to them consuming more and getting even more annihilated. Study was in the north east of England though.

Not so many Southern Shandy drinkers up there?

 

[Billy the Fish]

reason fan led review are advocating this is when non league clubs get promoted to National League this rule kicks in and they lose a lot of bar related income as a consequence of their success

thus they are recommending this rule change is trialled at National League and League Two to start with

went to a League one game recently where three women in 20's ( suspect player other halves ) all carried a pint of lager into seats with them, no one stopped them, they drank them all well before game started and was no bother to anyone - apart from all highly illegal and all should have been arrested and thrown out immediately etc

this rule to me was bought in as all soccer fans assumed to be potential hooligans - where as rugby and cricket fans are not

will take a long time to introduce this rule change - I would reverse current rule from League One downwards - keep Championship and PL as is - responses on this survey seem to be that everyone assumes everyone will spend two hours non stop drinking rather than watching the match

Great Post. Too many people are looking at this from their own point of view.

 

[drew]

Great Post. Too many people are looking at this from their own point of view.

Isn't everyone looking at it from their own point of view? That is a) I want to drink whenever and wherever I like and b) I don't want some pratt throwing their beer over me.

I struggle to believe that those voting for a rule change are doing so for the benefit of the club finances in Leagues One and Two!

 

[Bry Nylon]

Isn't everyone looking at it from their own point of view? That is a) I want to drink whenever and wherever I like and b) I don't want some pratt throwing their beer over me.

I struggle to believe that those voting for a rule change are doing so for the benefit of the club finances in Leagues One and Two!

Agreed. And even if they were, I don't know how much additional net revenue a League 2 club would generate if drinking in view of the pitch were permitted but it doesn't seem like a very sustainable business model. A far more useful thing for a fan-led review to focus on would be a more equitable share of broadcasting revenues through the football pyramid, for example - even if it is the top clubs that mostly generate it.

Other things a fan-led review could turn their collective attention to could be:

- the rigour of the 'fit and proper person' test for club ownership
- reasonable lead-times for broadcasting companies changing fixture dates / times
- refundable train fares for supporters affected by fixtures changed for tv
- the fairness of current penalties for clubs entering administration
- the constant flaunting of FFP regulations (when they are applicable) through creative accounting that either rewards clubs unfairly or destroys clubs
- getting serious about prosecuting racist and homophobic abuse in stadiums

Plus a whole host of other things.

But then the review probably is looking at all these things - and more, I expect. But with so many structural and systemic issues surrounding football ownership and governance that directly affects supporters, the 'drinking in view of the pitch' issue and the creation of a Beer Luzzer's Charter hardly feels like a priority right now - especially as it is such a divisive issue and the grief it will cause is all too predictable.

 

[Sheebo]

Don’t think people will get covered in beer - shouldn’t have that in the poll imo… I’d like to see it - as it feels a bit school like that we as football fans can’t do this yet other sports can!

 

[Invicta]

Too much TV coverage of beer throwing at World cups and Euros that has now made it the thing to do.

Cant imagine anything worse than getting drenched when we score in the 87th min when already 3 down to Burnley or someone !

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Agreed. And even if they were, I don't know how much additional net revenue a League 2 club would generate if drinking in view of the pitch were permitted but it doesn't seem like a very sustainable business model. A far more useful thing for a fan-led review to focus on would be a more equitable share of broadcasting revenues through the football pyramid, for example - even if it is the top clubs that mostly generate it.

Other things a fan-led review could turn their collective attention to could be:

- the rigour of the 'fit and proper person' test for club ownership
- reasonable lead-times for broadcasting companies changing fixture dates / times
- refundable train fares for supporters affected by fixtures changed for tv
- the fairness of current penalties for clubs entering administration
- the constant flaunting of FFP regulations (when they are applicable) through creative accounting that either rewards clubs unfairly or destroys clubs
- getting serious about prosecuting racist and homophobic abuse in stadiums

Plus a whole host of other things.

But then the review probably is looking at all these things - and more, I expect. But with so many structural and systemic issues surrounding football ownership and governance that directly affects supporters, the 'drinking in view of the pitch' issue and the creation of a Beer Luzzer's Charter hardly feels like a priority right now - especially as it is such a divisive issue and the grief it will cause is all too predictable.

If it were the Government suggesting this idea there would be posters claiming it is all a distraction from inactivity on other fronts. You have neatly summarized a number of much more important issues not being dealt with by the FSA…….

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

this rule to me was bought in as all soccer fans assumed to be potential hooligans - where as rugby and cricket fans are not

True. But now, unfortunately, there are a lot of football supporting prats who throw beer around. You see it in pubs, those Boxpark things, the streets and even inside Wembley.

All things considered I think I prefer old school football trouble to the lager luzzing flare-up-the-arse bell-ends we see today. There was always something a bit more respectful and honest about a firm.

 

[Worried Man Blues]

Only if they allow umbrellas to be bought in.........................

 

[Brovion]

I can't help thinking the people behind this will be a little disappointed with the results, if our poll is the norm and not an outlier.

I imagine the 'not fussed' option would be used to swing the argument in favour of removing the ban so they can 'Do A Johnson' by giving us something we don't actually want.


For what it's worth, nothing, I'll repeat myself from the previous thread.

The ban is ridiculous, pathetic and insulting.

But sadly it's also very much needed by virtue of the fact the minority that will abuse drinking in sight of the pitch are ridiculous, pathetic and insulting.

Agreed. With the 'Not fussed' option, at the time of this post (with 226 votes cast) you can spin the result either way: "At Brighton less than half of the fans polled wanted the law changed." Or: "At Brighton less than half of the fans polled wanted the law to stay the same."