It certainly seems to breach what the FA say about safety: "The last few decades have also seen many positive changes in the professional game and football stadia today are safe and welcoming places, offering good quality facilities to supporters. There are no pitch perimeter fences".
Regardless of the net, the pressure, the demonstrations were fantastic.
The only thing I am would have changed would have been a timing one.
If everyone was to chuck on what you had brought in the first couple minutes of the second half, a lot we brought to chuck on would have hit the pitch.
In Ireland (I presume we are subject to similar crowd-control/fire-safety rules), there are huge nets behind the goal at every "Gah" match - some of these have 80,000 spectators. The nets are similar to what the covered end were subjected to, but they are much higher.
In Ireland (I presume we are subject to similar crowd-control/fire-safety rules), there are huge nets behind the goal at every "Gah" match - some of these have 80,000 spectators. The nets are similar to what the covered end were subjected to, but they are much higher.
Only games at Croke Park have 80,000. And luckily for you there are not the same historical crowd issues. So your legislation is different. Ciarrai abu!
I don't know if it's relevant but someone told me they were barred access back into the East stand through a gate - the steward said they were told specifically not to allow it
I don't know if it's relevant but someone told me they were barred access back into the East stand through a gate - the steward said they were told specifically not to allow it
I left the north upper and went into the lower west after the game. I was told I couldn't go it. Didn't stop me.
Furthermore, potentially anyway the club also committed a criminal offence for not passing on the fact that seats they were selling now had a restricted view. See:
A single complaint to Greenwich Trading Standards by anyone affected is unlikely to result in formal action (due to the public interest test tbh) but several may result in the club being reminded of their responsibilities under the applicable civil and criminal laws.
I would think this something that CAST should raise. And hope that this thread will prompt them so to do. Given the Hillsborough decision it's mindblowing they should even contemplate doing this.
I've read it, and this is not the only thing I think CAST could look at, and take action on, from today. We need to find out first if it is against regulations. They (the nets) are still quite common across Europe; not that that is an excuse in a country still recovering from what we learnt from the Hillsborough inquest.
One thing is that we no longer have a mandate to "talk to the club". This does not stop us raising the issues with football authorities, but that brings a separate problem, that they appear to be useless. Well, we'll see.
Comments
The only thing I am would have changed would have been a timing one.
If everyone was to chuck on what you had brought in the first couple minutes of the second half, a lot we brought to chuck on would have hit the pitch.
Shit 0-3 loss again.
In Ireland (I presume we are subject to similar crowd-control/fire-safety rules), there are huge nets behind the goal at every "Gah" match - some of these have 80,000 spectators. The nets are similar to what the covered end were subjected to, but they are much higher.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3832/9656660012_14c5427402_b.jpg
Ciarrai abu!
Some of you people need to get a grip.
https://citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/event-tickets/event-tickets/complaints-about-events/
Furthermore, potentially anyway the club also committed a criminal offence for not passing on the fact that seats they were selling now had a restricted view. See:
http://www.tradingstandards.uk/extra/news-item.cfm/newsid/943
A single complaint to Greenwich Trading Standards by anyone affected is unlikely to result in formal action (due to the public interest test tbh) but several may result in the club being reminded of their responsibilities under the applicable civil and criminal laws.