medibot
1st team Player
Posts: 1,341
|
Post by medibot on Aug 19, 2009 18:57:41 GMT
As part of the preparation of the Club's Football Development Plan I have been travelling to many lower league Clubs as well as our own league grounds and I have to say that until you put football into perspective this way you cannot truely appreciate how well the Club is run and how good is our reputation. Some months ago a Carshalton supporter came onto the site to comment about the Dos incident but in doing so he did acknowledge grudgingly that Sutton do things the right way. Some of you will think the Board limited in ambition and a bit too conservative but having examined how things are run elsewhere I think we are very fortunate. It may seem a small point, but not allowing drink outside the Bar is a restriction that larger Clubs are obliged to adopt and one which sets a standard. This type of standard is the sort of thing that has enhanced our Club's reputation over the years. As many of you will know the Trust in conjunction with the Club are expanding our community involvement and this requires working with the FA and other partners to develop the Plan for how the Club will progress. This will encompass all elements of the Club will have a heavy emphasis on developing greater connection with the Colt's sides. In this context I am not sure that allowing drinking on the terraces (whist possibly adding a bit to our revenue) will assist our aim of achieving Community Status. Then maybe we should ban smoking in the ground as another step in the right direction. ;D Some superb devil's advocation* there! *yes, i know i just made that word up...
|
|
|
Post by Burtie on Aug 19, 2009 20:50:57 GMT
How about "advocacy"? I'm pretty sure that's a real word - I talked about it to our CEO at work the other day, so I hope so...
Anyway... I see the argument for treating spectators as responsible adults, but it only takes a few to spoil it for the majority. On balance I really think it's the right stance to take.
As for banning smoking, it's an interesting point but I guess the difference is that there's plenty of room at GGL so that it doesn't become anti-social. Though I'm assuming it's banned in the stand?
|
|
|
Post by vern on Aug 19, 2009 21:06:45 GMT
Why not allow it while we're not in the Conference then?
|
|
|
Post by os on Aug 19, 2009 21:16:45 GMT
As for banning smoking, it's an interesting point but I guess the difference is that there's plenty of room at GGL so that it doesn't become anti-social. Though I'm assuming it's banned in the stand? The smoking argument always amazes me, it does not lead to riotous behaviour and I would argue that it has saved more physical harm then its ever caused? Also if you want to look at smoking then why not take a look at cars entering and leaving car parks at grounds, each one belches out @1000 times that of a cigarette and no one calls parking up anti social?
|
|
|
Post by vern on Aug 19, 2009 21:41:33 GMT
Do we want the BSG to be a Puritan site like those nutter Brethren places dotted around Sutton? Let us grown men have a drink while we enjoy the game in our leisure time.
Stop controlling and start chilling!
|
|
|
Post by fox on Aug 19, 2009 22:01:30 GMT
Ok a different point, how about we don't want our stand stinking of booze!
The answer is no, there is minimal benefit which would be negated by people like myself not bringing kids to the games.
As said before 45 mins is not long to go with out a drink - if it is not possible maybe you need to consider the 12 step program?
Do we have this debate at the cinema? I enjoy a dink whilst watching a film, but they don't allow it!
|
|
rich
Spectator
Posts: 7
|
Post by rich on Aug 19, 2009 22:07:49 GMT
Not a drinker myself, but it's not an irrational argument from "vern" and I thought it would be worth an ordinary person speaking up to say so - as always on this site, if someone raises a point not approved by the "SUST mafia" they are immediately attacked and put down. In fact vern was just asking a question in a polite way - why the abuse?
And the smoking analogy is a good one, as smoking is banned to protect other people's health in other public places, which is the argument being forwarded here for the drink ban. The ground may not be packed but it's easy enough to get a lungful of of smoke when you are in amongst other people. The 'what about cars' argument is completely facile - not from a self-justifying smoker by any chance?
To me the irony is that you can and do still get obnoxious drunken pillocks at GGL - if someone wants to be drunk the club bar's open before and during the game isn't it??? So I wonder if vern's suggestion would really lead to anything worse.
|
|
|
Post by vern on Aug 19, 2009 22:13:03 GMT
This idea that having a steady sup while watching the game....instead of folks necking them at half time...how comes there are no riots at the Stoop and the Oval?
It smacks of treating football fans like animals again.
|
|
Millsy
1st team skipper
Posts: 2,246
|
Post by Millsy on Aug 19, 2009 22:18:32 GMT
A few seasons ago an inebriated Hayes fan 'smuggled' a pint out of the bar and later on, mid-match, threw the contents at the programme editor. Wasn't it only last season that after some pontificating from our neighbours that one of their fans threw a pint at the match officials? I'm yet to hear a story of someone throwing a small diet coke.
I'm fairly sure these incidents wouldn't have happened without the involvement of alcohol and yes, he could still have been a bit ratted and thrown a soft drink if it not lager but I can't see it!
Unfortunately, just one unsavoury incident can lead to fines, censure and all sorts, not forgetting that volunteers for stewarding may suddenly dwindle and people with children shy away, very important point also made reference community status / trust / development activities.
|
|
|
Post by vern on Aug 19, 2009 22:26:42 GMT
So the reason why SUFC chuck away the opportunity to make a lot more revenue and offer the same leisure opportunities available at Quins, Surrey CCC, Carshalton Athletic and so on, is that some muggy get threw his pint at the 'programme editor' several years ago?
Talk about cutting your nose off to spite yer face.
|
|
medibot
1st team Player
Posts: 1,341
|
Post by medibot on Aug 19, 2009 22:44:25 GMT
As for banning smoking, it's an interesting point but I guess the difference is that there's plenty of room at GGL so that it doesn't become anti-social. Though I'm assuming it's banned in the stand? The smoking argument always amazes me, it does not lead to riotous behaviour and I would argue that it has saved more physical harm then its ever caused? Also if you want to look at smoking then why not take a look at cars entering and leaving car parks at grounds, each one belches out @1000 times that of a cigarette and no one calls parking up anti social? Because i don't watch the match standing next to a car exhaust pipe?
|
|
|
Post by vern on Aug 19, 2009 22:50:41 GMT
I don't want to watch the match next to some 40-yr old virgin stinking of BO, so I move ten yards upwind.
We'll all be in hermetically sealed cubicles watching football soon enough, untampered by the presence of extraneous humanity.
|
|
Millsy
1st team skipper
Posts: 2,246
|
Post by Millsy on Aug 19, 2009 23:32:18 GMT
So the reason why SUFC chuck away the opportunity to make a lot more revenue and offer the same leisure opportunities available at Quins, Surrey CCC, Carshalton Athletic and so on, is that some muggy get threw his pint at the 'programme editor' several years ago? Talk about cutting your nose off to spite yer face. You seem to have missed the other points in your summation, there is a bigger picture but on the one point you have fixed on, I would be interested to know how much Carshalton got fined (maybe they didn't, I don't know) for the incident at their ground last season. As far as the cricket and rugby comparisons are concerned, most games right up to international aren't even segregated and generally pass without incident, try that with football and for some reason (way beyond me) the whole complexion is different.
|
|
|
Post by os on Aug 20, 2009 0:05:05 GMT
The smoking argument always amazes me, it does not lead to riotous behaviour and I would argue that it has saved more physical harm then its ever caused? Also if you want to look at smoking then why not take a look at cars entering and leaving car parks at grounds, each one belches out @1000 times that of a cigarette and no one calls parking up anti social? Because i don't watch the match standing next to a car exhaust pipe? Well you did on Tuesday ;D
|
|
Rambo
1st team Player
Posts: 1,668
|
Post by Rambo on Aug 20, 2009 8:07:43 GMT
Vern, there were plenty of away fans who turned up "tanked up with alcohol " last season, who, if they had been allowed to have even more booze whilst on the terraces, would probably & most likely, have "lost control" and therefore would have needed even more "stewarding" to ensure that nothing "happened". As you'll probably see, we don't have that many stewards, and those who do steward, are only "volunteers", who don't need to have to worry about "drink induced incidents" !
|
|