Thinking ahead to our next promotion to the Prem

we'll probably..........................

have moved the US owned franchise to a retail park near the M1 by then

 

the away carpark isn't behind the north stand

in actual fact, their is a gate between the carpark and north stand which when locked would segregate fans more than they are segregated at present.

 

Hmm, how come they can't split the north stand in half-ish?
FA claim it's not safe?
what a load of B*ll*cks. we used to have both fans in that stand. All it would take is a few more coppers sitting next to the segregation.
Saying that.. would we even fill it?

 

i'm confused

where has it been claimed that the fa or the police have said it cannot be split (as per its design)? I've seen lots of people mention it but not sure where it has come from.

 

I read it on here

 

Why would Sting object? nt

 

RE: i'm confused

The police wouldn't allow the North stand to be split on this occasion that's why Chelsea have the full 6,000 allocation. (Not enough man power on the day given Chelsea are classed Category A fans + police comitments at other games on the day).

 

really?

I'm afraid I cannot believe that for one minute.

Nor can I believe it was not possible to put chelsea fans in the west stand.

Funny how BFC are plagued by tyranical SY police when other teams seem to do exactly what they want.

 

Thanks city tyke. That was never explained on the official site, nor in the trusts explanation, it was only explained that the police wouldnt allow segregation of west stand.

Out of interest do you know if the club/trust put if forward as a serious suggestion to the FA that for segregation issues chelsea would only be able ot have the north side of the west stand? That is what liverpool did with barnsley, they didnt give us extra for segregation issues, they gave us less as do most teams in cups. I only ask as the clubs statement says there wasnt enogh seats in the west LOWER but it has an upper tier too.

 

RE: really?

Not sure what I can do if you can't believe the facts mate.

 

he has a point though

Not necessarily about the chelsea game but in general why is it that the police seem unable to allow us to play on certain days/times yet other teams are allowed. Is it that we are a soft touch and accept whatever they say without argument? or is it that the oakwell set up (physically) is particularly bad which makes it harder?

 

apparantly we can give piggies part of the west stand when it suits

but not chelsea, nor can we partition a stand which was designed for that purpose despite the fact we have?? divided it in the past. how strange.

 

I understand all possibilities were looked at but the circumstances mentioned transpired against all but the north stand outcome. There are season ticket holders in the upper tier by the way (Farnham and his Dad for instance).

Something else I find interesting is that as Chelsea have requested 6,000 tickets they are obliged to pay for them all even if they don't sell them. I know someone mentioned this with regards to our tickets from Liverpool but I assumed they were talking ******.

 

Not really.

Did you see the bit when I mentioned Police comittments on the day at other games/engagements? And the fact that Chelsea fans get a Cat A risk from the police? League games are planned/resourced months ahead of time with regards the police. Unfortunately we are talking about a couple of weeks for this unplanned game.

 

RE: he has a point though

Im not sure to be honest but Alan Bloore knows a hell of a lot about this sort of thing and speaks to the police liason people a lot. I think he goes to some of the safety meetings so if you really wanted to know he would be the person to ask. I guess there's not a lot the club can do if the Police make a decision with regards to a game - it can't go ahead without their backing.

 

I'll wager ts more about

minimising policing / stewarding costs and maximising profits coupled with minimising wasted seats than any restrictions imposed by the police.

Sell 6000 tickiets to chelsea restrict supply to Barnsley fans to try and sell it out.

Now if they had come clean out and said that instead of hiding behind a host of excuses then I would have more respect.

Tea time telly or the boozer is going to be attractive to many.

 

RE: I'll wager ts more about

Well you would lose your wager.

 

so you say

or been told.

 

But my point (which I think gets lost due to how i worded it) is that as the north stand cannot be split due to police instructions then in order to give them 15% or less for segregation issues then the west stand is the next obvious choice. To give them the full stand would again cause segregation issues so they should be given the north side of the west upper and lower tier, roughly 2,500 seats. This allows proper segregation under 15% which I believe is acceptable to the FA.

What I wanted to know is was this put forward to the FA and denied?