"They're only creating a bit of atmosphere"

But if it was blocked out like that surely they wouldn't allow them to buy a match day ticket there either. .in which case every single person sat or stood in that area of the ground needs banning

 

People go in the end block of the east despite it being blocked out. Unfair to ban people unless there is segregation netting blocking the area off in which case it's clear that you can't go there

 

No it isn't unfair? You have bought a ticket for a particular seat. You have broken the terms of your ticket purchase by refusing to sit in that seat and instead sat somewhere else, somewhere where criminal damage has occurred. You have absolutely zero defence when banned as you are suspected of being involved in causing the criminal damage

 

Club don't treat us as human beings !! Think some need to act like it first ...

 

They're bright as buttons aren't they. They must not realise that the club they supposedly support will have to pay to fix their criminal damage. They're nothing but knuckle dragging idiots.

 

I can't deny that technically yes you are correct, one is breaching the terms of the ticket by not sitting in the seat for which they have purchased it. It doesn't work like that in reality though, it never has and it never will, whether you like it or not people are always going to move around to sit with their mates etc. especially at away games. If you're going to ban someone for not sitting in the correct seat then you may as well tell people not to come as I'm sure everyone's done it, if you're paying on the day and going with a STH then one of you's going to have to sit somewhere other than the seat you've got a ticket for. If the club don't want people sitting in certain sections of the ground they need to put up segregation netting to send the clear message that sitting there isn't permitted.

 

No they don't. They don't need to pay to put up netting to stop dickheads from smashing their stands up.
The issue isn't strictly people sitting in the wrong seats, it's that people sitting in the wrong seats have smashed the stand up. My point is that they should all be banned and if any of them start crying and saying it wasn't me then they have no defence as they are SUSPECTED due to wrongly being in the area.

 

As I've said before the issue for me is that these same dickheads go to away games and therefore are somehow being sold tickets for away games regularly. Why?

 

I can't answer that but it seems the club can't either because it keeps happening and the behaviour of our idiot minority is one of the reasons why some have stopped going to away games.

 

I don't know whether that area is blocked out or not. I've never tried to purchase a ticket there. Regardless, even if it is, I don't believe that someone should be banned for being in an area where criminal damage has occurred, even if thats not the area their ticket is for. I've been around idiots smashing seats up loads of times at away games and I have probably not been standing in front of my allocated seat in 99% of cases, I never check. If the club were to ban those who are near the ****s when they damage seats you'd have loads of people that have never done anything wrong banned - apart from perhaps not sitting in the seat printed on their ticket. I don't think ignoring where you're 'supposed' to be sitting should incriminate anyone.

 

Then we'll just let it keep happening.

They break the rules and go and stand TOGETHER in an area where so e of them then commit criminal damage.

If I went to the cinema with friends and some of them were acting like dicks we would ALL be ejected from the cinema, I know because its happened to me when I was a teenager. They didn't conduct an investigation to find out which of us were guilty, they banned us all. The sake principle should easily apply, especially when they have the added bonus of people either having purchased that specific seat so they can be named or having broken the rules by sitting in the wrong seat. Either way they have no defence.

 

I'm no lawyer but I don't think saying someone must have done it proves an offence. If we were stewarding correctly they would be stopped on the day banned and processed.

 

They don't have to prove it to decline their custom. Tesco ban suspected shoplifters all the time without any proof whatsoever. In the case of bfc however they actually have numerous reasons to suspect

 

Would probably mean we would be sued. I was in Tesco's the other day the security guard took someone away who had been on the rob if they had arrested me as well it would not have been appropriate.vsame applies.

 

I'd be alright with that if they were all part of the same group. How do you know there's not people that also like to stand there who hold no affiliation with those who cause the damage? Why should they be banned? They've done nothing but - presuming that area is indeed blocked off - stand somewhere other than where their ticket says. And banning someone for being in the area where a crime was committed is a bit silly, I think. If the club can't narrow down specific people they can prove have caused damage, then the only option is to let it keep happening, because banning no-one is much much better than banning innocent fans, in my opinion. I don't think the club would have any trouble tracing those who damage the seats, though.

EDIT: seen you've raised the point that no proof is needed for BFC to ban anyone. No, it's not, the club are a private company, they can decline entry to whoever they like. But that just doesn't sit well with me. As I said, I think banning no-one is better than banning people who are innocent.

 

You can't get sued for declining somebodies custom (if it is for non discriminatory reasons).

As a more accurate comparison for you it is more akin to you and somebody else both being caught in the warehouse at the back of tesco where you know you don't have permission to be and a track manager finding that a load of stock went missing from the warehouse that day. They would rightfully ban both you and the other person from teach and even if it was him who nicked it all and you was just having a laugh in the warehouse you wouldn't be able to sue them for banning you.

Big difference between banning you and prosecuting you

 

if I wanted to have a bit of a laugh and go and stand where I shouldn't because it was more fun there but sadly the people around me (who I stood with even though I didn't know) started to smash the place up I'd be thinking 'oh ****, I'm going to get caught up in this'll and id move back to my original seat. If I stayed with the dicks and continued to deliberately stand or sit where I shouldn't then I would be a complete idiot to do that and not expect to be banned with them. By staying with them you ARE a part of of the problem and a part of the group

 

I think giving a banning order and stopping suspected shoplifters in tesco is abit different.

 

Not right in head, smashing your own seats up? In your own ground? When you've had a big win against a local rival?

They're all obviously smoking/snorting/swallowing something before the games.

 

I can definitely appreciate where you're coming from, but that's not the mentality that innocent fans should have to hold. They shouldn't have to be worried about whether if where they're standing is too close to the dickheads smashing seats up, they shouldn't have to move because of a minority of BFC fans causing damage. Folk should be able to go wherever they like in the stadium as long as they're not obstructing others' view, they're not causing trouble and they're being generally courteous to those around them. I like to stand at the back and sing at away matches as I've said, the atmosphere is much better, I like to stand up all match, you get a better view from higher up, 95% of those around me are like-minded fans wanting to have a good time. Why on earth should we have to move to avoid getting into trouble just because of some cnuts acting around near us?