Safe standing

And as has been said before, your security is only as good as your weakest point. The rest is meaningless if some people are not taking of hats and jackets. No point doing it to 80% of the people but not the other 20%. Makes all your security useless.
 
Ken Baileys Ghost said:
I can understand the searching to deter flares
But why confiscate umbrellas and flasks if it's flares they are looking for, once a steward establishes that my umbrella is an umbrella why can't I take it in?
There must be more to it Jim
Click to expand...

Without sounding like a broken record on the subject :blah:Jim 'implied' last night that people snuck pyros in, in flasks and since they've been banned we've 'had zero pyro in the Vitality ' .

I find it hard to believe that a 16 year old Stone Island merchant would go to the trouble of bringing a flask to a game and immediately attract attention to himself in the process, when he could stick a smoke bomb down his boxers. It's nuts if you excuse the pun. These things are tiny, you don't need a flask.

Of course banning flasks increases revenue for the club but hey they've had no pyros since so that amazing coincidence is totally justified in their eyes . The brolly ban is on another level of complete stupidity. Perhaps they could risk assess hypothermia in the process, which means Chris G never did Wolves away :)
 
Druss_the_Legend said:
And as has been said before, your security is only as good as your weakest point. The rest is meaningless if some people are not taking of hats and jackets. No point doing it to 80% of the people but not the other 20%. Makes all your security useless.
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily agree. If you have 30 minutes to search 300 people you'd be more effective (and create a safer outcome) if you profiled those you searched and spent more time on those most likely to be a risk. I just don't think it would be legal.
 
Last edited:
Kudos said:
I don't necessarily agree. If you have 30 minutes to search 300 people you'd be more effective (and create a safer outcome) if you profiled those you searched and spent more time on those most likely to be a risk. I just don't think it would legal.
Click to expand...

Agree or not, its true ;)
 
red_house said:
Without sounding like a broken record on the subject :blah:Jim 'implied' last night that people snuck pyros in, in flasks and since they've been banned we've 'had zero pyro in the Vitality ' .

I find it hard to believe that a 16 year old Stone Island merchant would go to the trouble of bringing a flask to a game and immediately attract attention to himself in the process, when he could stick a smoke bomb down his boxers. It's nuts if you excuse the pun. These things are tiny, you don't need a flask.

Of course banning flasks increases revenue for the club but hey they've had no pyros since so that amazing coincidence is totally justified in their eyes . The brolly ban is on another level of complete stupidity. Perhaps they could risk assess hypothermia in the process, which means Chris G never did Wolves away :)
Click to expand...
As a note, we banned umbrellas the next game after a north stand supporter hit a steward multiple times with a golf umbrella earlier this season.

If we wanted to ban flasks for drinks revenue, we wouldn’t allow clear flasks in still. It’s about the pyro. And other things than can be hidden in unclear flasks.
 
Jim Frevola said:
As a note, we banned umbrellas the next game after a north stand supporter hit a steward multiple times with a golf umbrella earlier this season.

If we wanted to ban flasks for drinks revenue, we wouldn’t allow clear flasks in still. It’s about the pyro. And other things than can be hidden in unclear flasks.
Click to expand...

Could you not just ban the person? 11,000 people manage to go without committing an assault. What if he'd have punched the steward?
 
Jim Frevola said:
As a note, we banned umbrellas the next game after a north stand supporter hit a steward multiple times with a golf umbrella earlier this season.

If we wanted to ban flasks for drinks revenue, we wouldn’t allow clear flasks in still. It’s about the pyro. And other things than can be hidden in unclear flasks.
Click to expand...

That was a golfing umbrella, where's the problem with folding umbrellas once a steward has assessed it and found that it wasn't a cunningly disguised flare?

(I walk from Bournemouth station and have now been soaked to the skin twice thanks to me consciously not taking a folding umbrella.

Sat for 90 minutes pissed wet through isn't conducive to me thinking warm thoughts when it comes to AFCB off the field.

Also, if you can't bring in a golfing umbrella why are walking sticks allowed? :throw:

Without wishing to give people ideas, my weapon of choice would be steel toe capped boots/shoes/trainers.

My point is, if you're looking for trouble, just about anything can be used as a weapon.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
No idea why you appear to be holding me responsible for the way you are searched in whatever stand you sit in. I am patted down going into the East Stand just as I am going into away games. Old people treated the same and I don't see what the issue is. Jim F has said you can email the guy, ask him.

They don't make me take my belt and shoes off and put it through a scanner at DC so I don't see why you think I've said it's the same as the airports. The point I was making is that people don't generally get special treatment in security searches.
Click to expand...
If you can’t see the issues then why comment ad museum?
 
Jim Frevola said:
As a note, we banned umbrellas the next game after a north stand supporter hit a steward multiple times with a golf umbrella earlier this season.

If we wanted to ban flasks for drinks revenue, we wouldn’t allow clear flasks in still. It’s about the pyro. And other things than can be hidden in unclear flasks.
Click to expand...
To me that sums up a disproportionate approach. It would make equal sense banning all supporters in that case ;-)
 
RobTrent said:
If you can’t see the issues then why comment ad museum?
Click to expand...

I can see the issues and I'm speculating on what the cause might be. I know people like to instantly jump to the conclusion that it's always down to the faceless people at the club and their villainous intentions but I tend not to assume that. Why would they just intentionally piss people off for no reason?

Try to reason why the may have implemented some of these policies though and people react like I've accosted some poor old lady myself.

I don't talk to myself on here so if it's ad nauseum it isn't just down to me.
 
Ken Baileys Ghost said:
That was a golfing umbrella, where's the problem with folding umbrellas once a steward has assessed it and found that it wasn't a cunningly disguised flare?

(I walk from Bournemouth station and have now been soaked to the skin twice thanks to me consciously not taking a folding umbrella.

Sat for 90 minutes pissed wet through isn't conducive to me thinking warm thoughts when it comes to AFCB off the field.

Also, if you can't bring in a golfing umbrella why are walking sticks allowed? :throw:

Without wishing to give people ideas, my weapon of choice would be steel toe capped boots/shoes/trainers.

My point is, if you're looking for trouble, just about anything can be used as a weapon.
Click to expand...

I think the only possible solution to this is some sort of scientific experiment where a number of volunteers are twatted round the head with umbrellas of increasing size until the appropriate rain protection/potential injury size of brolly is identified.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
I can see the issues and I'm speculating on what the cause might be. I know people like to instantly jump to the conclusion that it's always down to the faceless people at the club and their villainous intentions but I tend not to assume that. Why would they just intentionally piss people off for no reason?

Try to reason why the may have implemented some of these policies though and people react like I've accosted some poor old lady myself.

I don't talk to myself on here so if it's ad nauseum it isn't just down to me.
Click to expand...
Jim kindly gave a reason for brollygate and I thought it showed an imbalanced response.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;