Barnsley FC Reply: West Stand Update

A previous CEO actually held his hands up and said he misjudged the feeling his change might have brought. He still refers to it today as far as I'm aware. As daft as it was, its what happens when you actually engage fans. You get the feedback.

So, how's about they tell the truth, apologise and rectify it (if they actually can)

We can be a forgiving bunch, but it goes on much longer and they can't even man up and state the truth, forgiveness will be hard to find in any section of the crowd

And I say this, as one of the folk who didn't actually mind their approach until the 750k being sucked out the club, and now this.....

 

It could be you that's the problem!

 

That had entered my mind.

 

As unpopular as it might sound to some, if that’s what it was I could get past it, if someone held their hands up and said they made a mistake and will rectify by…….

Of course that wouldn’t excuse or condone the decision but at least it would show some honesty & humility.

 

A prompt and polite response that, as almost everyone has pointed out, doesn't say very much. But a prompt and polite response is considerably better than what many fan groups have received from their clubs over the years.

What I take from this response is the club want dialogue to remain open but can't tell you why they closed the stand. So why can't they tell you?

I'd ask just two questions: is the club in financial difficulties? If so, to what extent?

The only reason I can think of to take such a radical decision to close a stand is they can't afford operating costs. Making money from Sheffield Utd ticket sales makes little sense as an argument when this will be entirely offset by season ticket refunds. I would imagine they hope to break even, but make a saving going forward by not having the operating costs of opening the stand in future games. It won't be a huge saving which makes me worry just how bad things are when they would have known just how unpopular the decision would be.

 

An objective and logical viewpoint expressed there.
In addition you've raised the spectre of another possibility which is well within the realms of possibilities.

 

Best excuses? How about:
"When responding to criticism about the filth on the seats on opening day, a rare breed of Dung Beetle was discovered. David Attenborough was engaged and the West Stand Dung Beetle is to debut in a new David Attenborough mini-series Planet Grove Street. The West Stand will remain closed until filming has concluded".

 

Ooh, that's just given him another idea.
Endangered bats roosting in the media gantry. Can't do anything with it until March.

 

Great crested newts in the west stand bogs......

 

I'd rather no response rather than a **** attempt at pacifying the fans. Let's be clear, the reason given in the initial letter was safety. All we need to know is what the safety issue is and how they plan to rectify it and some sort of timescale. It's very simple.

 

Good points made, but I think attempting to argue financial difficulties after removing £750k of cash from the business to the owners' benefit would be the least tenable argument they could offer, from my perspective.

 

I don't know if they are taking the piss using a photo of a stand their fans aren't in because it makes Oakwell look a dump or because they think it's a laugh that they have extra tickets only because that stand is shut.

 

I would say neither of those. I think it is a good stock photo given it says what team it is and is nothing more than that.

 

Both?

 

Could be. A good article would use a photo of the stand their fans are sitting in.

 

That's not an article it's a tweet. The actual article has the east stand on it which suggests very much to me that they're just photos of oakwell and there's no conspiracy

 

Spot on Helen & I might just add : Why is it safe for the press/ media ? surely it is either safe or unsafe

 

In fairness, this is a bit of a non-argument.

The structural stresses and health and safety requirements for over 1,000 people in a stand is massively different to a couple of dozen people and some gear.

But the closure of the stand is probably* nothing to do with structural safety or crowd safety...

*More than likely

 

It literally can't be about structural safety. The lower tier is completely separate to the upper tier and built around 100 years apart. If it was just the lower tier then yeah, the upper tier fair enough. But both separate stands? The only thing they share is a name