JgFc wrote:

---

Heard the club asked the fans where to segregate the oppo tonight...

They listened to the fans and gave them a vote. Unfortunately there was a small turnout (i didnt see it on any agenda) and the vote went to give the oppo the new stand.. less than 3% of our home support voted yes.

Lost for words, dont blame the club on this when it bites us on the arse in points and financially and our fans moan at being in the wet.

Fair play to the club for asking the fans, shame only 20 odd people got to vote on it, probably 20 odd people who stand behind the goal. It wont be the clubs fault...

My  gripes are that it should have been an email vote for the full membership (We can ask all members to vote on Player of the month but not an important issue?)  OR... a ballot at say the Orient match to be a true vote. Hopefully it was just a sounding out vote and common sense prevails for the benefit of the team and financially.

 

---

 There was a mix of fans who stand behind the goal, fans who stand on the cricket ground side, fans who sit in the main stand and fans that sit in the new stand. 

Bertie

This is about hundreds of fans, not 20 people that turn up to a wusa meeting to vote on an important issue not on the agenda.

I feel it was a rushed vote by a small section of under 3% of OUR support.


I strongly feel we disadvantage our team and we aren't looking after a lot of our fans, instead we make it easy for the oppo fans to make noise and support in comfort.


We need to use every advantage we can. We won't get the best areas when we go away ever. We won't get cover at Woking for example.

the impact of this will only be evident when It's happened, it WILL impact on gates and points.

Daisy ha said our fans being loud away is a big help... And we want to put that on a plate for the oppo? Have a word.

Tom, if there was a plausible option to segregate away fans safely and give our fans and team greater benefit, as you describe, I would have voted for it.  I agree with you and I believe most of our supporters would wish for a better way.  However, it boils down to finances, time and practicality.  Yes, I would have thought that such a measure would need to be carried out (along with other works) to safeguard our place in the national conference should we do the business on the field. But, at the moment, I think Daisy needs all the dosh he can get. A bit of netting to achieve the most desired option is not particularly viable. 

I'm whincing at the fact that after we were treated ****e by Dartford.... It's possible they will have 1000 fans in the best area of the ground. They will dine out on that forever and will have bent us over.

We had the CLT open terrace at Woking and our fans whinged, people said Hill ordered it to keep us quiet and in the wet... So let's put their 500 under cover in seats.

Dean

You will know that WUSA have discussed and looked into funding or getting quotes for perimeter fencing, resiting of new tea bar, new carpets in bar, lighting, seating.

That may have now changed. Then I fail to see where the five figure sum they hold could be used for the benefit of the club and fans unless we offer Cambridge 10p for Pugh.

-- Edited by JgFc on Friday 14th of June 2013 01:09:11 PM

If WUSA aren't required to help towards improvements as you suggest then maybe the club can source the fencing required.

Polo wrote:

---

Chris, we may not be allowed to serve them beer. Some games, the police will request that on segregation supporters are not given access to beer. It may also be possible that Police will force the closure of local pubs. Again all speculation but possible.

---

 I can't see why the Police would stop them from drinking if they had their own  bar. 

Right some facts.

I was at the meeting and there were ONLY two options put forward by the club.

Option A was to give over the new stand side over to away supporters.

Option B was to give the one end to opposition fans but somehow fence/net an area off so we can provide toliet and catering facilities for them.

Graham proposed a motion giving the road end to opposing fans - I think a lot agreed with his argument in principal but logistically it would prove very difficult.

Therefore the decision was voted upon and, purely for logisitical purposes, it was decided Option A was the easiest way forward. There were also assurances that season ticket holders in the new stand would be seated in the old stand in the event of segregation.

We should also bear in mind that this will probably be 4 or 5 games over the season so 75%+ of our home league games will hopefully NOT be segregated.

I am sure we would all rather have a different arrangement but the way our ground is set up I don't think we have any viable alternative.

If the police dish out Twix instead of minstrels I might change my mind.

As proposer of the "road end" motion at the meeting, I think that one thing that needs to be emphasised on this thread is that it was made clear as soon as the matter was discussed that the club would not consider moving the existing fencing/gates or erecting new ones to implement road end segregation. The option put to the meeting was that supporters would be segregated by netting after one section of the new stand and at the road end near the main turnstiles.  Although I feel that there was a high proportion of "behind the goal fans" at the meeting who obviously wanted to retain the ability to change ends, I think even those really in favour of road end segregation voted against it due to the difficulty everyone felt there would be in adequately stewarding netted segregation.  I have to admit that I even had difficulty supporting my own motion on that basis.  Unless the club is prepared to seriously consider changing the fencing/gates arrangement, I reluctantly accept that there is no viable alternative but to give the away fans the best area of the ground.  I suspect there will be occasions when this arrangement will increase the sale of umbrellas in the club shop!

Quite frankly, there really was not much of an option without the club undertaking, and financing, major works to aid segregation - a bit of netting is not really a plausible option. (Obviously, this is the kind of task, to the benefit of our fans, which needs to be carried out if we stay in the national division).  I would have thought that segregation would apply possibly five or six times during the coming season. The important factor was to consider the interests of the season ticket holders with seats in the new stand who would have to be moved at times of segregation.  I am assured that they will be looked after - and I think it is necessary that on those particular occasions that they have named, reserved seats, in the old stand.  Also, I think if we are to have more detailed discussions about this issue they should be conducted on the supporters' forum.

I think Barrie has said that he will offer away fans seats though.

I agree if we could give the oppo just a terrace, with access to toilets, bar etc. no problem. But  if we have to let them have seats i can't see any other way.

Wingnut wrote:

---

JgFc wrote:

---

Ok change that to 1000 Aldershot or Barnet fans. 400 wrexham or Lincoln (remember their last visit? I do)

Imagine 1000 oppo 600 in stand,and rest standing along pitch... Imagine It's lashing down, where would they make more noise and give better support? Where would our fans be more comfortable and give better support?

---

You know as well as anyone it kicked off at the Lincoln game due to a ruck with Charlton fans at a previous game between those two clubs - nothing at all to do with WUFC or segregation (or a lack of it)

Dartford has never been segregated before so I don't see why it would be. Woking likewise - they have a few bellends who follow them away from home but a bout of handbags with stewards is hardly cause for segregation.

As far as I can recall, when it has rained at PVR, not everyone dives for the stand and there certainly has never been a home choir in there. Noise at PVR for home fans is notoriously difficult regardless of the weather conditions.

I agree our fans should come first but there were people there last night who sit in that stand and are going to be inconvenienced maybe five times next season. They may not have been happy about it but I am sure they will tolerate it and come and support their club.

Maybe in the longer term we can come up with a better solution but that will involve time and money and we don't have much of either.

 

---

 I agree. If they are in WUSA and attended the AGM they are a committed enough supporter not to quit supporting the club because their seat has been removed for the odd game.

The principle for me is our fans should be put first and foremost. Sadly that isn't often the case.

Chris wrote:

---

Kevin wrote:

---

If they had the road end would it bankrupt the club to put a metal fence up rather than a net. Clearly a net will not suffice. Less than a grand to do surely.

I would have thought, with many WUSA people sitting in the new stand, it could be something those people ask WUSA to organise and pay for on behalf of the club ?? Just a thought.

---

Just giving away supporters the Road end is not an option. They are entitled to seating, toilets, refreshments and their own entrance.

 

The biggest scandal is how all these away supporters (in the 4 or 5 segregated matches) will be in PVR thirsty for beer which WUFC will have no means of supplying without a deal with E&B&Q. And god knows what the Wings bar will be like for the majority of matches with no segregation and 800-1,000 fans.  

---

 Bloody busy hopefully.