[Albion] The "Official" Albion Fan Advisory Board thread

[Greg Bobkin]

I'll happily welcome an end to lyrics being put on the screen the moment everyone to a man, woman, non-binary and everyone else religiously SIGNS the chorus as:

"Oh Sussex, Sussex by the Sea
Good old Sussex by the Sea'

and NOT:

'Good old Sussex by the Sea' TWICE.

Because I'm willing to bet it will NEVER happen. Think how long the 'And we're going up to win the cup' line was in regular use (and no doubt some people still sing that) before the majority got it right, FFS!

All the time that people can't/won't/don't use the correct lyrics, I'm firmly #TeamLyricsOnTheScreens

 

[seagullwedgee]

Now we know why the board canned the last meeting with the FAB, because the club wanted to accelerate and simplify the ST renewal process, both of which are to the detriment of fans (and that’s without knowing the outcome of travel review either) and the Club realised that just stuffing these substantial changes in front of FAB as a fait accompli without any notification or consultation would look bad, so they just canned the meeting, and did the fait accompli closure that way instead.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

You’ve appeared to completely ignore the root of the issue and focussed on certain ‘types’. Reasonable is ok but consistency and transparency is another thing. I’d suggest an unwavering approach to things doesn’t always sit within the parameters of fairness.

From memory there’s been punishments for abuse, lobbing things, fighting and running on the pitch. I presume we agree the bans for these were fair.

The most contention arises with the bans for passing on away tickets; these usually get a 5 or 10 game ban which seems fair to me. I know all the high profile cases had extenuating reasons….but then no one is guilty of anything until they get caught and punished.

 

[Dave the OAP]

I am not sure why having the words on screen upsets some people.
If you know the words you don´t need to look. If you don´t, it helps you to join in.
I was at the Marseille game and joined in where I could but have to confess that I cannot remember all the words.
Should I be banned?

Yes

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I am not sure why having the words on screen upsets some people.
If you know the words you don´t need to look. If you don´t, it helps you to join in.
I was at the Marseille game and joined in where I could but have to confess that I cannot remember all the words.
Should I be banned?

If you have to ask……

 

[maltaseagull]

Yes

You sir and Herr Tubthumper are pretentious twa*s

 

[Talby]

From memory there’s been punishments for abuse, lobbing things, fighting and running on the pitch. I presume we agree the bans for these were fair.

The most contention arises with the bans for passing on away tickets; these usually get a 5 or 10 game ban which seems fair to me. I know all the high profile cases had extenuating reasons….but then no one is guilty of anything until they get caught and punished.

Acts that are clearly sanctionable - don’t disagree. My comment were based on what happens when it all becomes all about protecting the brand, based on a set of values that aren’t defined. That then becomes a moral judgement, which you’re not allowed to question.

Listen, I’m not here to fall out with anyone on this but there have been a number of cases where the

From memory there’s been punishments for abuse, lobbing things, fighting and running on the pitch. I presume we agree the bans for these were fair.

The most contention arises with the bans for passing on away tickets; these usually get a 5 or 10 game ban which seems fair to me. I know all the high profile cases had extenuating reasons….but then no one is guilty of anything until they get caught and punished.

no one is guilty until they are caught and punished. That’s true but it’s the process of determining guilt that’s proved to be flawed / pointless and, we should all expect to be treated fairly. From the training ground investigation (settled out of court), to various decisions on sanctions, banning fans for actions/comments that weren’t punishable by law, ignoring the police & courts re. ending banning orders or the club not following their own procedures - that’s not ‘fair’, it’s just setting people up to fail and it’s a peculiar moral code to judge other and not reflect on your own failings (ie. Accepting doing something wrong or believing in basic forgiveness). Just makes the club look autocratic. And that’s not the society we live in. That’s what happened in the Post Office scandal, forget you’re dealing with people.

 

[Horses Arse]

I'll happily welcome an end to lyrics being put on the screen the moment everyone to a man, woman, non-binary and everyone else religiously SIGNS the chorus as:

"Oh Sussex, Sussex by the Sea
Good old Sussex by the Sea'

and NOT:

'Good old Sussex by the Sea' TWICE.

Because I'm willing to bet it will NEVER happen. Think how long the 'And we're going up to win the cup' line was in regular use (and no doubt some people still sing that) before the majority got it right, FFS!

All the time that people can't/won't/don't use the correct lyrics, I'm firmly #TeamLyricsOnTheScreens

Yet the lyrics don't achieve this, so why have them? Plus, it really doesn't matter

 

[Horses Arse]

Acts that are clearly sanctionable - don’t disagree. My comment were based on what happens when it all becomes all about protecting the brand, based on a set of values that aren’t defined. That then becomes a moral judgement, which you’re not allowed to question.

Listen, I’m not here to fall out with anyone on this but there have been a number of cases where the

no one is guilty until they are caught and punished. That’s true but it’s the process of determining guilt that’s proved to be flawed / pointless and, we should all expect to be treated fairly. From the training ground investigation (settled out of court), to various decisions on sanctions, banning fans for actions/comments that weren’t punishable by law, ignoring the police & courts re. ending banning orders or the club not following their own procedures - that’s not ‘fair’, it’s just setting people up to fail and it’s a peculiar moral code to judge other and not reflect on your own failings (ie. Accepting doing something wrong or believing in basic forgiveness). Just makes the club look autocratic. And that’s not the society we live in. That’s what happened in the Post Office scandal, forget you’re dealing with people.

Well said. Totally agree

 

[Stat Brother]

Acts that are clearly sanctionable - don’t disagree. My comment were based on what happens when it all becomes all about protecting the brand, based on a set of values that aren’t defined. That then becomes a moral judgement, which you’re not allowed to question.

Listen, I’m not here to fall out with anyone on this but there have been a number of cases where the

no one is guilty until they are caught and punished. That’s true but it’s the process of determining guilt that’s proved to be flawed / pointless and, we should all expect to be treated fairly. From the training ground investigation (settled out of court), to various decisions on sanctions, banning fans for actions/comments that weren’t punishable by law, ignoring the police & courts re. ending banning orders or the club not following their own procedures - that’s not ‘fair’, it’s just setting people up to fail and it’s a peculiar moral code to judge other and not reflect on your own failings (ie. Accepting doing something wrong or believing in basic forgiveness). Just makes the club look autocratic. And that’s not the society we live in. That’s what happened in the Post Office scandal, forget you’re dealing with people.

That doesn't take into account the fact the club is for arguments sake a 'Private Members Club' and to that end can pretty much do as it pleases.

 

[Dave the OAP]

You sir and Herr Tubthumper are pretentious twa*s

Thankyou good sir

 

[Goldstone1976]

Acts that are clearly sanctionable - don’t disagree. My comment were based on what happens when it all becomes all about protecting the brand, based on a set of values that aren’t defined. That then becomes a moral judgement, which you’re not allowed to question.

Listen, I’m not here to fall out with anyone on this but there have been a number of cases where the

no one is guilty until they are caught and punished. That’s true but it’s the process of determining guilt that’s proved to be flawed / pointless and, we should all expect to be treated fairly. From the training ground investigation (settled out of court), to various decisions on sanctions, banning fans for actions/comments that weren’t punishable by law, ignoring the police & courts re. ending banning orders or the club not following their own procedures - that’s not ‘fair’, it’s just setting people up to fail and it’s a peculiar moral code to judge other and not reflect on your own failings (ie. Accepting doing something wrong or believing in basic forgiveness). Just makes the club look autocratic. And that’s not the society we live in. That’s what happened in the Post Office scandal, forget you’re dealing with people.

You have very strong feelings about the club not behaving fairly and being autocratic for a ‘new’ member. I take it you or someone very close to you has been on the receiving end of a punishment meted out by the club; why not use your main account to have a pop?

 

[Horses Arse]

You have very strong feelings about the club not behaving fairly and being autocratic for a ‘new’ member. I take it you or someone very close to you has been on the receiving end of a punishment meted out by the club; why not use your main account to have a pop?

I can imagine why, which is an example of what the club has become.

You could take it as the cost of success, but many successful clubs don't seem to follow the same route.

That said, other clubs don't sort things out such as making sure away games and season tickets aren't a closed shop.

Swings and roundabouts I guess.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Thankyou good sir

I’m in good company.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Acts that are clearly sanctionable - don’t disagree. My comment were based on what happens when it all becomes all about protecting the brand, based on a set of values that aren’t defined. That then becomes a moral judgement, which you’re not allowed to question.

Listen, I’m not here to fall out with anyone on this but there have been a number of cases where the

no one is guilty until they are caught and punished. That’s true but it’s the process of determining guilt that’s proved to be flawed / pointless and, we should all expect to be treated fairly. From the training ground investigation (settled out of court), to various decisions on sanctions, banning fans for actions/comments that weren’t punishable by law, ignoring the police & courts re. ending banning orders or the club not following their own procedures - that’s not ‘fair’, it’s just setting people up to fail and it’s a peculiar moral code to judge other and not reflect on your own failings (ie. Accepting doing something wrong or believing in basic forgiveness). Just makes the club look autocratic. And that’s not the society we live in. That’s what happened in the Post Office scandal, forget you’re dealing with people.

First of all my “no one is guilty” comment wasn’t clear. What I mean is that people always swear blind they’re not guilty, or have extenuating circumstances etc. This was almost always the case with away tickets but under investigation it shows they broke very clear rules.

You seem very fixated on actions which aren’t punishable by the law. As long as the club don’t break any laws of the land they, like any other business, can run their house how they see fit. You see this everywhere.

What have you, or a friend or family member, got into trouble for?

 

[Talby]

That doesn't take into account the fact the club is for arguments sake a 'Private Members Club' and to that end can pretty much do as it pleases.

Which isn’t right.

 

[Talby]

First of all my “no one is guilty” comment wasn’t clear. What I mean is that people always swear blind they’re not guilty, or have extenuating circumstances etc. This was almost always the case with away tickets but under investigation it shows they broke very clear rules.

You seem very fixated on actions which aren’t punishable by the law. As long as the club don’t break any laws of the land they, like any other business, can run their house how they see fit. You see this everywhere.

What have you, or a friend or family member, got into trouble for?

First of all my “no one is guilty” comment wasn’t clear. What I mean is that people always swear blind they’re not guilty, or have extenuating circumstances etc. This was almost always the case with away tickets but under investigation it shows they broke very clear rules.

You seem very fixated on actions which aren’t punishable by the law. As long as the club don’t break any laws of the land they, like any other business, can run their house how they see fit. You see this everywhere.

What have you, or a friend or family member, got into trouble for?

Running your house as you see fit…that’s carte Blanche to do as you want. Frankly that’s ludicrous.

 

[Talby]

You have very strong feelings about the club not behaving fairly and being autocratic for a ‘new’ member. I take it you or someone very close to you has been on the receiving end of a punishment meted out by the club; why not use your main account to have a pop?

Main account? Don’t have one/

As for the club behaving fairly. They get a lot right, when they don’t they’re abysmal.

Probably because the Club don’t appreciate anyone having a pop at their integrity.

 

[Stat Brother]

Which isn’t right.

You don't have to like it, none of us do, but it very much is right.

It's Mr Bloom's 'ball' he can do what he wants with it.

 

[dazzer6666]

I can imagine why, which is an example of what the club has become.

You could take it as the cost of success, but many successful clubs don't seem to follow the same route.

That said, other clubs don't sort things out such as making sure away games and season tickets aren't a closed shop.

Swings and roundabouts I guess.

Agreed. The club have to tread a fine line……….low tolerance for antisocial (but not necessarily illegal) behaviour and thinks like passing on tickets, with stated sanctions applied pretty abruptly if they think there’s sufficient evidence to ding someone for it. I don’t personally know anyone that’s been subject to any of these sanctions but I do know people that have been affected by twattish behaviour at games, home and away. Very difficult to strike a balance - been enough threads and comments on here from people complaining about other fan’s behaviour at games for example to balance those moaning about the club being too quick and draconian with their punishment when their rules are broken