PDA

View Full Version : R.I.P. Section 105



olioli
05-16-2009, 09:00 PM
Just a wanted to post a farewell to my section. It used to be a place where we could stand and jeer back at the opposing fans, sing stupid songs, chant, and just have a laugh and enjoy the game. For two-and-a-half seasons we were the ones who stood up at the back, every game, without fail, next to the away supporters' section and chanted them down.

I'll never forget the classics: "You've Got George Bush, We've got Health Care", "You're White, You're Black, Your City's Full of Crack, DC, DC" and of course, the concise and perfectly harsh: "You Live In Columbus". Never again will I get to stand and sing there, because BMO security and a nebbish-minded TFC-mandated mindset has erased our kind from what they want our scalper-ticket-defined section to be.

It was not designated as a 'supporters section' at the beginning of the year, therefore security had carte blanche to make us all sit down or be ejected.

Sigh...

Those of you who read this and think - sucks to be them, it'll never happen to us....

Sure. Go on thinking like that. I'll see you here complaining about exactly what I'm saying in years to come. When the prawn sandwich bunch invade your section and tut-tut about the 'boorishness' of the 'rabble', as they contemplate closing deals at half-time, just like at the Maple Laffs....

As for me, and the people near me? We're forced to sneak down to a real supporter's section, just to do what we used to do in the seats we paid for.

FUCK YOU MLSE.

Oli

egoodwin
05-16-2009, 09:03 PM
too bad this topic doesn't RIP

James Oliphant
05-16-2009, 09:04 PM
Everything sucks.

[/forums]

prizby
05-16-2009, 09:21 PM
maybe the few back rows standing up doesn't disturb 105, but what about thos sitting in 106?

Cambridge_Red
05-16-2009, 09:30 PM
http://www.flashgiochi.org/materiale-per-forum/immagini-old/img/Not.this.shit.again.jpg

olioli
05-16-2009, 09:32 PM
Don't worry, egoodwin, it's done.

It deserved a farewell though.

werewolf
05-16-2009, 09:37 PM
too bad this topic doesn't RIP

are you saying the topic of standing in a "non-standing" section shouldn't be brought now? or it should never have ever been brought up?

olioli
05-16-2009, 09:42 PM
Yeah, we tried that approach with security, but they told us "105 is a seated section", even though we were ALREADY AT THE BACK. I mean, how the hell do you trouble anyone sitting if you're already AT THE BACK? They had their marching orders and that was that. Those of you who ain't been there, ain't got no idea how mindless they can be.

Anyways, I can see that what I've got to say is unpopular here. Sorry that you lot think this is tiresome, but to some of us it matters. Hopefully when it happens to your own section, and security is cracking down on you, and you think how much it sucks because last season you got to do blah blah blah....

You'll look back to all these threads and realize "Shit... they were right"

Sleep tight, little innocents.

Oli

prizby
05-16-2009, 09:47 PM
Oli, how many rows are you guys

like the back 8 rows

what if im sitting in the back row 106, closest to 105, trying to look at the north goal, all of a sudden, i have to stand

MLSE policy is going to always choose you being outraged over them being sued by a fan in 106.

olioli
05-16-2009, 10:01 PM
Oli, how many rows are you guys

like the back 8 rows

what if im sitting in the back row 106, closest to 105, trying to look at the north goal, all of a sudden, i have to stand

MLSE policy is going to always choose you being outraged over them being sued by a fan in 106.

Yep, fair enough, then. BUT - we're only the back four rows, in the middle of the section. Anyone in 106 who objects to our standing is because they didn't get a fair view of the north-east corner of the Food Building, or the Gardiner Xpsway traffic, or maybe of the Away Supporters they had to crane their neck to the right a full 90 degrees to see. If you're in the back of 106 and you're looking at me, you ain't anywhere NEAR watching the game, I assure you.

But I'm a tart - I appreciate the flattery! ;-)

Oli

Kevvv
05-16-2009, 10:50 PM
too bad this topic doesn't RIP


are you saying the topic of standing in a "non-standing" section shouldn't be brought now? or it should never have ever been brought up?


I'm sure he means that the topic itself keeps coming around, like playoffs, East/West vrs single table. It reminds me of another thread:

http://www.redpatchboys.ca/forums/showthread.php?t=13353


We've discussed this. Last week. Same shit, different pile. We know MLSE's response. There's little left to do but list the sections, is there?

egoodwin
05-16-2009, 11:34 PM
I'm sure he means that the topic itself keeps coming around, like playoffs, East/West vrs single table. It reminds me of another thread:

http://www.redpatchboys.ca/forums/showthread.php?t=13353


We've discussed this. Last week. Same shit, different pile. We know MLSE's response. There's little left to do but list the sections, is there?
more or less, it's just the same complaint after every week, with the same replies, and like a car wreck, I just can't help but look

but considering the reports of security doucheness from all around the stadium today, I'm a bit more sympathetic this time

it's a shame that 105 and all the others are being seating enforced now, but like pookie said in the other thread, it's not like there wasn't notice

Personally, I'd like to see those wanting to stand, band together in the beer garden... and start chanting from inside there... that beer garden is such a wasted space, it's the standing area which everyone desires, but hardly any chants come out of it

olioli
05-16-2009, 11:35 PM
Nope, not much left to do, you're absolutely correct, Kevvv.

Thing is - when they posted the 'yay, there's more supporters sections!' message at the end of last season, a lot of us were caught out that they'd actually gung-ho enforce the new 'rules' to a ridiculously harsh level.

Whatever. MLSE can have their profit margins. Hope that the rest of you, who care about the optics of how the support of the team goes, don't have to read in the blogs/forums/emails of away supporters that laugh, laugh, laugh out loud about how our supporters sit and take their shit while they're here, because ain't nobody had the stones to stand up and taunt them right back....

Point is = we performed a vital role against the enemy. We've been undone. You will ALL be weakened by it, by reputation.

Sorry, it's just the way it is from now on. We tried. They forced us to stop.

Oli

pubboy
05-17-2009, 06:27 AM
There is obviously some very strong feeling on this topic, as it does get raised continuously as we all know. It strikes me that the OP had a perfectly reasonable solution, which has been suggested on thsi board before (maybe even by mlsintoronto ??), by standing at the back of the section so that nobody's view is blocked. It sounds as though things have moved on from this common sense approach with security, in that the specific circumstances are irrelevant - the rule book says dont stand, so dont stand. The purpose of the rule is immaterial to these security guys.
I know the head of security at BMO reads (or used to read) these boards, but has been very quiet in recent weeks. I really would be interested in the rationale behind this black and white approach, and whether the security guys couldnt exercise some common sense to ensure we all enjoy the game day - sitters and standers.

Jack
05-17-2009, 08:13 AM
I'd like to get an idea of numbers of people who are experiencing this problem.

Can people who are having this problem please PM me so I can get a list going and perhaps we can actually do something a little more organized rather than just bitching on the message board?

Pookie
05-17-2009, 08:25 AM
^ organizing and proposing solutions is the way to go.

If you were to provide an individual complaint to MLSE, they (MLSE) can fall back on the fact that they gave everyone notice and likely have just as many complaints about standers.

I highly advocate people using the exchange to move into more suitable sections but if there are only so many tickets available and the numbers are large, not everyone is going to be satisfied.

Whatever the proposed solution, be it standing sections at the back... removal of the beer garden... a second level i(212-218).... or simply more standing sections if the numbers warrant it.... I'd love to see action against known scalper seats taken and those seats seized and released back to the waiting lists.

The challenge to get action, IMO, is to demonstrate that the standers who are upset are sufficiently large in number to justify a revisit to the seating map.

bob
05-17-2009, 09:00 AM
Hey oliolii, I was down in mid 105 and watched how the security was telling the top row (beside 104) to sit down.

What gets me is another security guy in blue told us that (provided there were seats) you can stand on the top rows of 105, and security won't bother you. The main problem is that our pocket in the middle was blocking peoples views. So around the 75th min, a few of my buddies started to go to the top rows to stand and cheers (after one guy went to scout for open seats). When they got to the top the yellow security guy there blocked them for going up and then were tossed from the game.

egoodwin
05-17-2009, 10:10 AM
Hey oliolii, I was down in mid 105 and watched how the security was telling the top row (beside 104) to sit down.

What gets me is another security guy in blue told us that (provided there were seats) you can stand on the top rows of 105, and security won't bother you. The main problem is that our pocket in the middle was blocking peoples views. So around the 75th min, a few of my buddies started to go to the top rows to stand and cheers (after one guy went to scout for open seats). When they got to the top the yellow security guy there blocked them for going up and then were tossed from the game.



maybe they thought you were heading up there to cause trouble with the chicago people

Juanito
05-17-2009, 10:18 AM
That's great, let's turn BMO into the abyss of emotion that is the Air Canada Centre. IF WE CAN HELP JACK IN ANYWAY TO PRESENT THIS TO MLSE, THEN LET'S DO IT!!!

bob
05-17-2009, 10:47 AM
maybe they thought you were heading up there to cause trouble with the chicago people
It's a possibility. I guess telling them that they wanted to stand up and cheer up top, wasn't believable and maybe just an excuse to get up there and start shit with the visitors. Btw, I know that might sound sarcarstic, but I'm not. I can see that.


IF WE CAN HELP JACK IN ANYWAY TO PRESENT THIS TO MLSE, THEN LET'S DO IT!!!
I already notified Jack, and I encourage others to do the same. Thanks once again Jack!

leroy
05-17-2009, 11:14 AM
PM sent. thanks Jack.

maybe standers from 105 could join standers in 120? looks like it would be more expensive for a season's ticket, but would you be willing to pay more for the privilege and better 'seats'?

bob
05-17-2009, 12:34 PM
PM sent. thanks Jack.

maybe standers from 105 could join standers in 120? looks like it would be more expensive for a season's ticket, but would you be willing to pay more for the privilege and better 'seats'?

Aside for the guys up at the top of 105, the rest of us are in the same price range as 120, and I think the view is pretty much the same.

ilikemusic
05-17-2009, 12:47 PM
MLSE needs to realize that they can not have standing visitor's supporter sections in such direct contact with seated home supporters.

All of 104 and 105 need to be designated 'supporters sections'.

Away fans dont show up every game, but when they do, Toronto fans can not be expected to sit down and listen to their shit for 2 hours.

Roogsy
05-17-2009, 12:50 PM
MLSE needs to realize that they can not have standing visitor's supporter sections in such direct contact with seated home supporters.

All of 104 and 105 need to be designated 'supporters sections'.

Away fans dont show up every game, but when they do, Toronto fans can not be expected to sit down and listen to their shit for 2 hours.


Wrong.

Nowhere in the world is it a good idea to have two supporters sections so close to each other.

If this were to happen, it would eventually lead to the entire section being designated "away" including empty seats when the lame fans of other teams can't fill the seats.

In every other stadium in the league, we have our own section when we travel away. It won't change at BMO. The league will not allow supporters of opposing teams in close proximity.

EENIE MAN
05-17-2009, 12:57 PM
Please come join us in 120. We need more supporters. I went over to 119 yesterday ( because once again they told me to sit). Looking over at 120 , it was embarasing. Full of tourists and part time fans.
Great job MLSE. You fucking suck balls!

Pookie
05-17-2009, 12:57 PM
^ agreed with Roogsy

Does anyone know how many seats have to be made available for visiting supporters?

There are those small sections in the north end (128,129,130) that are separated from NEE by emptiness. There is also a small building behind it. Beer garden is to the right of it (looking head on).

That should be enough space to accommodate the few supporters that travel with their teams and ensure a reasonable buffer between fans. 104/105 could become standing supporters sections and could help raise the noise level from the north-east.

Cambridge_Red
05-17-2009, 01:03 PM
Heard Ricoh has some great seats :D. Give it time when our attendances drop, this will be a non issue. Lots of empty seats again out there yesterday. Must of been a hard sell for the scalpers this weekend.

pepher
05-17-2009, 01:17 PM
I'd like to get an idea of numbers of people who are experiencing this problem.

Can people who are having this problem please PM me so I can get a list going and perhaps we can actually do something a little more organized rather than just bitching on the message board?

Great initiative Jack. What exactly do you want people to pm you about? I know 104 also has issues though they may differ slightly from those being discussed between 105 and 106.

prizby
05-17-2009, 02:04 PM
Yep, fair enough, then. BUT - we're only the back four rows, in the middle of the section. Anyone in 106 who objects to our standing is because they didn't get a fair view of the north-east corner of the Food Building, or the Gardiner Xpsway traffic, or maybe of the Away Supporters they had to crane their neck to the right a full 90 degrees to see. If you're in the back of 106 and you're looking at me, you ain't anywhere NEAR watching the game, I assure you.

But I'm a tart - I appreciate the flattery! ;-)

Oli


I only say what I said because I spoke with someone who works for BMO Field and this is what I was told as the reasoning, which I think, makes sense, a bit drastic, but makes sense

I'd still push the limit though, do it everygame until your warned by security. Thats prolly the best you can do for the time being



I'd like to get an idea of numbers of people who are experiencing this problem.

Can people who are having this problem please PM me so I can get a list going and perhaps we can actually do something a little more organized rather than just bitching on the message board?


Section 120, prolly section 222 soon, when I was their for a game, there were some ppl standing up in hte middle of the section, sooner or later that will get a complaint.


What I would like to see is two things. A family seciton for people to stand up.

And, when BMO expands,

a letter sent out to all season ticket holders, so TFC can find out who wants to be a "supporter" and stand all game and then allocate enough seats to satisfy them to right section. Hopefully then, problems can be solved

Jack
05-17-2009, 02:08 PM
Great initiative Jack. What exactly do you want people to pm you about? I know 104 also has issues though they may differ slightly from those being discussed between 105 and 106.
Just PM me with your name and section.

If we can get some numbers and a handle on what the various issues are around the stadium, then we can give the management a better idea of the scope of the issue.

Dave67
05-17-2009, 03:19 PM
Young guy I work with has 6 seasons in 105. He's not part of any supporters group. He told me after the last game him and his buddies are thinking of bailing out. Basically echoing what has been said on this board lately. Not fun anymore, security has gone over the top.

Jack
05-17-2009, 03:23 PM
I've had a few PMs now from people about this so far, so we'll continue to gather information for a while and see where it goes.

Unfortunately, the security staff is within their rights to ask people to sit down :noidea:

That said, there are better ways to go about it than being heavy-handed.

The Oz
05-17-2009, 03:48 PM
I had a problem similar to this, but a little different. I was in 110 and most of 110 on the left side was standing up with no problem and I was a little towards the middle and was standing up for hte majority of hte game when a older gentleman and some lady behind him asked me to sit down, and I declined, but then they threatened to call security. I was with a friend who had never ben to a game and i didnt want to ruin it for him so i did anyways. But just a question, are we allowed to stand in 110 and where else? Or was i in the wrong?

ilikemusic
05-17-2009, 03:50 PM
Wrong.

Nowhere in the world is it a good idea to have two supporters sections so close to each other.

If this were to happen, it would eventually lead to the entire section being designated "away" including empty seats when the lame fans of other teams can't fill the seats.

In every other stadium in the league, we have our own section when we travel away. It won't change at BMO. The league will not allow supporters of opposing teams in close proximity.

Have you ever been told to sit down while away supporters verbally shit all over you and your father?

Either isolate the away fans better (with empty rows like you say) or allow the fans directly in front of and directly beside them to stand up.

There is no other option.

college st
05-17-2009, 04:21 PM
honeslty though in my row(seasons in 105) there are elderly people and children who cant see when everyone is standing up...there are designated supporters sections and thats where you stand and support your team..
as for the taking abuse from away fanss, im one of the crazier ones in 105 when it comes to the taunting and away fans chantss..but thats at the beggining of the game, a goal or the end, not in the middle of play when theres no real action directly in front of us.
105 is a seated section but by all means stand up when wynne streaks past uss with the ball, give the away supporters shit when we score(espeacially UM02..man i was on my seat givin them shit) but in conclusion 105=SEATED SECTION...AND IF YOU WANT TO STAND DO WHAT I DO....
buy tix in the south end for games u give away to other family or friends...

Dave67
05-17-2009, 04:41 PM
Have you ever been told to sit down while away supporters verbally shit all over you and your father?

Either isolate the away fans better (with empty rows like you say) or allow the fans directly in front of and directly beside them to stand up.

There is no other option.

And this nails exactly what the guy I work with has been saying. So a big +1 from me.

Yohan
05-17-2009, 04:45 PM
seems only way to solve this situation is to make it clear on next year's season ticket renewals about moving seats to supporter or seated sections, and open up a few more sections as supporter sections

or, just designate the top half of all the seated sections as standing sections. so people can still sit in their current section if they choose, without having to go to another section

oh, and write the email in big bold letter so that even the most numpty potatohead can understand

Toronto Ruffrider
05-17-2009, 04:58 PM
I had a problem similar to this, but a little different. I was in 110 and most of 110 on the left side was standing up with no problem and I was a little towards the middle and was standing up for hte majority of hte game when a older gentleman and some lady behind him asked me to sit down, and I declined, but then they threatened to call security. I was with a friend who had never ben to a game and i didnt want to ruin it for him so i did anyways. But just a question, are we allowed to stand in 110 and where else? Or was i in the wrong?

You're allowed to stand in the top of 110 (rows 20-33), as that part of the section has been given supporters-section status. However, the bottom part of 110 is not a supporters section.

olegunnar
05-17-2009, 06:08 PM
I'm going to say something that's not going to be received well here but hear me out.

They should move the RPB/usector to 104-105 and have 112 be the away supporters section.


The reason I say 112 as an away support section are the following:
1) it's the smallest or one of the smallest sections. You could further tarp up the western most 2 seats in each row as a barrier, except for down at the bottom, where security is.

2) The away support could go in a close entrace/exit that's barely used...Gate 3b.

3) post game their bus could be right at 3B Easy in easy out. Little or no interactions with home supporters and fans.

4) when we play teams from the SW that don't travel (RSL, Houston, KC etc) sell the cheap seats to kid soccer clubs.

5) on the positive side it would give the 2 groups far more seats than they have now

6) 113 could be the cheap sitting section that seems to be needed, when relocation happens.


To be honest though I think 118 is the best scenario given the current stadium configuration, the stairs going up to the west concourse are a good exisiting barrier and they could rope off sections of the south end concourse so the away support could have their own concessions and pissers. However with 118 there's no trade for 104/105 and you'd need to have a mass/group move to make this work. Can't have away support sandwiched between two supporter's sections.

I think with Philly coming into the league, and with the subtle shifting of support on the east coast and Pacific NW to more of a traditional support over the North American soccer mom styles, a more efficient way of dealing with away support is needed. I get that in the past it was a non issue...but not so much anymore.

Roogsy
05-17-2009, 06:17 PM
^ I don't see how that helps. In all honesty, I don't see a section in the entire stadium that could be ideal.

The only thing I can think of is the north end, those 3 or 4 rows of seats that are strangely never used. Right in front of the clubhouses or whatever they are. These sections are isolated. Difficult to get to, and there really isn't a whole lot of seating there which is good because few away supporters come anyways.

But 112 is probably the worst section to put them in.

olegunnar
05-17-2009, 06:37 PM
Not trying to argue and I know this website is the WORST place to suggest 112.

I took into account everything I could think of that would avoid mxing and mingling of supporters...pre-during and post game:
1. small amount of seats in an independent section--no mixing.
2. natural barriers--no mixing
3. access to independent entraces---no mixing
4. access to independent concessions and pissers.--no mixing.
5. ability to control easily by security (related to natural barriers) without putting up a fence (which would make selling the seats hard when no one shows up.
6. would allow more supporters access to supporter seats (104-105 are mch larger than 112-113)
7. would give a place for the cheap people that dont`want to be in supporters sections but won`t move due to cost. (113). Since they seem to be adverse to moving to the upper deck on the west side.

so those are my 7 reasons why I think it helps, especially with the major problem now of mixing them with us, which I think is stupid

That said I think it`s a moot point for now. Maybe an easier alternative will present itself if and when there`s expansion.

Roogsy
05-17-2009, 06:50 PM
104 has all the same "features" you claim 112 has and you don't have to move or keep thousands of supporters away from each other. In fact, 104 meets your criteria even better because there is no "north stand" like there is an "east stand" with more TFC fans and supporters.

And I am not saying this because 112 is the RPB home...it just holds no discernable advantages over 104. In many ways, I would say 104 does a far better job.

spark
05-17-2009, 06:52 PM
Wrong.

Nowhere in the world is it a good idea to have two supporters sections so close to each other.


Yeah but really "supporter section" is only a title. For the last 2 years there have been supporters standing in 105 shoulder to shoulder with away supporters. Can you tell me if there has been a riot/brawl?

Roogsy
05-17-2009, 06:55 PM
I don't think that would have been a good idea if you had thousands of supporters in 105 like you have in 111-119.

Pookie
05-17-2009, 07:12 PM
I don't think that would have been a good idea if you had thousands of supporters in 105 like you have in 111-119.

Is there anything wrong with using sections 128-130 for away support? It's small but there is a separation between those sections and others. Would make for easy crowd control.

Roogsy
05-17-2009, 07:13 PM
AH! Those are the ones I was referring to in my post. I think it makes sense.

AL-MO
05-17-2009, 07:23 PM
Except they can't be close to NEE. That would defeat the purpose of putting the away section there.

Also since we don't have a full North Stand, putting the Away support in 112 or anywhere near the South End is not an option.

rocker
05-17-2009, 07:29 PM
The only thing I can think of is the north end, those 3 or 4 rows of seats that are strangely never used. Right in front of the clubhouses or whatever they are.

those are group sales sections... with the bar inside for comfort ;)

the people for the seats are actually there at the game, but they stand inside the bar the whole game and watch through the windows. Since the weather's been so bad, they haven't hardly sat in their proper seats.

Walnut
05-17-2009, 10:15 PM
I posted on this subject a while ago -- and was basically told to shut up and stop whining (expecting the same thing to happen now).

The security and 'guest services' in section 105 are operating well out of any mandate they might have. I have been warned on too many occasions to be recount about standing, and now the harassment from the security staff is going to a new level. During the game on Saturday -- there was a Chicago free kick in our half, nearly in-line with where I sit in 105. We stood to get some TFC chants going to drown out the Fire, and within seconds security was wading in the row to make us sit down, or face ejection. This is after seeing numerous other fans ejected for doing the exactly the same.

I am in section 105 / row 27 -- and we are a few meters from the away fans, and we are been relied upon to support TFC in a vocal and enthusiastic manner to curb the away fan's antics. And yet -- for doing so we are been thrown out by the very club we support. I have never heard of anything like this, and have certainly never witnessed anything like this before -- a club throwing out it's own fans for supporting the team in a manner that would make every other team in the league envious.

The worst thing about Saturday -- the Chicago fans (once they realized what was going on), were pointing out home fans that were standing to security, and having security get them to sit and /or ejected!!!!!

Unreal.

Cambridge_Red
05-17-2009, 10:47 PM
Is there anything wrong with using sections 128-130 for away support? It's small but there is a separation between those sections and others. Would make for easy crowd control.

Those are premium plush seats right in front of a box. I'm guessing MLSE wouldn't want a bunch of sweats from Kolumbus near those phoncee people. It's bad enough they have to deal with our antics :D

Roogsy
05-17-2009, 10:51 PM
Visiting fans....particularly the ones from Cowlumbus....are not wanted in any part of the stadium.

It's kind of like sewage treatement plants. We know we need them, but nobody wants one built in their backyard.

Erkan16
05-17-2009, 11:08 PM
Young guy I work with has 6 seasons in 105. He's not part of any supporters group. He told me after the last game him and his buddies are thinking of bailing out. Basically echoing what has been said on this board lately. Not fun anymore, security has gone over the top.

i have already sold off my season tickets in 104. this year has turned into a joke.

nfitz
05-17-2009, 11:28 PM
Unfortunately, the security staff is within their rights to ask people to sit downWhy would security be in their rights to ask people to sit down in the back row? It's not a safety issue, as the back row of 104 is allowed to stand. And previously MSLE had been trying to arrange for people who wanted to stand to get in the back row ...

Either a major miscommunication - or Paul is on a power trip.

Pookie
05-18-2009, 06:32 AM
Those are premium plush seats right in front of a box. I'm guessing MLSE wouldn't want a bunch of sweats from Kolumbus near those phoncee people. It's bad enough they have to deal with our antics :D

True. Didn't realize it was a $70+ ticket in there.

What about 101-103? Same idea I suppose but I don't remember a box in behind there. Add a few rows and you've got about 50-60 seats available. That should be enough for visiting supporters. Columbus might get 100-200 fans but for the bulk of the games, they would probably be empty.

If there is stadium expansion, perhaps it could be considered. Seems like a bad business decision to alienate close to 2,000 fans that show up for every game for the sake of 100 fans that show up once a year (and don't buy the merchandise).

Suds
05-18-2009, 09:46 AM
Why would security be in their rights to ask people to sit down in the back row? It's not a safety issue, as the back row of 104 is allowed to stand. And previously MSLE had been trying to arrange for people who wanted to stand to get in the back row ...

Either a major miscommunication - or Paul is on a power trip.


You know what their reasoning will be, right? They'll say that they can't get into debates on where to draw the line, (or in which row so to speak), as to when it's OK for people to stand in an area which is non-standing. I can see this side of it. They don't to argue with people every week. So they are using the "either your in a standing area or you're not" standpoint.

For me personally, I don't see why anyone would care if you're standing in this case. If you are in the very last row you are not blocking anyone's view I would not care.

I do hope the more than a few postings about heavy handed tactics by security are not the norm. I have yet to witness this myself. There seem to be more of these postings coming up every week. It seems security has figured out how to work with some specific sections in BMO (most likely because of the pro-active work the SSG' have taken).

Louie Don
05-18-2009, 12:17 PM
I don't who's controlling this "no standing" situation,it's fucking bullshit.I'm at section 126 borderline 127 and had to move over,which I dont mind but what If I was in 125,124 etc.I lossed my cool on the 16th for being ID'd for beer after I dunn crack jokes with the chick she fully seen my ID the first time,yet she have fi ask me again...FUCK OFF!!!!
This is the first time ever I've had problems,now my boys at 120 got problems too for standing "what the fuck".They need to come up with something quick,they're(BMO field) ruining the vibes for real fans!!

CoachGT
05-18-2009, 12:36 PM
Personally, I've always thought that the visiting fans should be placed in either 219 or 227. The seats are up high and out of the way and it significantly reduces the chances of running into our supporters (they are father away and separated by the "barrier" of end private boxes) and reduce the volume of away supporters (right now, the sound reflects off the press box and can be heard in areas well away from their seats).

I think Jack's suggestion is the best. A common front is much better than lone voices.

Pookie
05-18-2009, 02:16 PM
^ with 227 being a family section, I'd go for 219. All they need is a situation like West Ham-Columbus where groups literally wade through children to get at each other. Think the taser was bad press...?

How many seats do they have to make available to visiting supporters anyways?

Pyeddo
05-19-2009, 11:15 AM
The worst thing about Saturday -- the Chicago fans (once they realized what was going on), were pointing out home fans that were standing to security, and having security get them to sit and /or ejected!!!!!

Unreal.

Yea that was pretty ridiculous (i'm 105, row 25) to watch. Also, seeing Chicago fans spitting on TFC fans, and the security standing around with thumbs in anus, only eyeing up TFC fans for ejection.

Walnut
05-19-2009, 11:28 AM
I had emailed TFC regarding the standing issue in 105, and suggested that if anyone wants to stand, they move the to the top of the section -- and if they want to sit, they move them to the front. Predictably, they didn't address this suggestion and instead provided me with the copy paste corporate reply.

C.Ronaldo
05-19-2009, 11:39 AM
I think its pretty obvious we are going to have to work together on this.

Hopefully something formal can get organized and propose

Yagbod
05-19-2009, 09:24 PM
I have season's in 104 (well, 3 partial packs plus the DC game, bought the hard way); the funny thing for me is that I am up and down like a jackrabbit and security has never even looked at me. For that matter, they rarely look in our direction. Does anyone know if 104 get's the benefit of the supporter's rules?

I see the 105 problems and also think that the visiting supporter section should be up in a corner of the 200's.

I also agree that the beer garden should organize. They have tents, so flag's would not block anyone's sightline. I spent most of last year and parts of this year in the beer garden and have thought a fair bit about it. It would not have to be sanctioned (i.e. designated), we could just come in when the gates open and take over the railing. It is basically chaos down there now. You need a buddy to guard your spot while you buy beer or visit the loo. So why not have volunteers take it over? Sing songs and not get tossed for standing.

PM me if you want to meet down there for New England. We can stand together as a group.