PDA

View Full Version : How was your "pat down"?



Pages : [1] 2

Toronto_Bhoy
07-19-2009, 07:58 PM
Well, any one make any new friends?

London
07-19-2009, 08:01 PM
they checked my cargo shorts one time and that is all!!

some said they got checked 3 times

Yohan
07-19-2009, 08:14 PM
it was stupid how they were patting you down again 2nd (or even 3rd time)

do a thorough search once. that means no need to search 2nd time

like they didn't get a lesson on how to do a proper search or something

the half assed job they did, I could have easily snuck in drugs or booze in couple of places.

Boris
07-19-2009, 08:15 PM
the best feeling ive had in months...first time a lady has touched me like that in a while

Lennon
07-19-2009, 08:15 PM
Pat downs are useless ... if someone really wants to sneak something in they know where to put it

Klinsmann
07-19-2009, 08:16 PM
I got checked twice, the 2nd security saw me get checked by the 1st guy and he told me I needed to get checked a 2nd time!:picard:

Detroit_TFC
07-19-2009, 08:20 PM
It tickled.

TheHollister
07-19-2009, 08:22 PM
I was wearing Lululemon pants... when the guy went to pat me down, I looked at him and said, "Not to question your logic, but where do you seriously expect me to hide anything in these pants?" All the security people around laughed and then they let me right in (after a quick peek in my bag - they didn't even rustle anything around. Just glanced inside and said it was fine).
Easiest "heavy security" I've ever been through. :D

rocker
07-19-2009, 08:22 PM
didn't get patted down at gate 4 at all.
I'm high class prawn so they know I'd never do something illegal.

Belfast_Boy
07-19-2009, 08:23 PM
the pat down was nothing compared to the fucking we got on the field by the ref. I've seen better officials at my 9 years olds game.

FluSH
07-19-2009, 08:25 PM
Growing up in Scarborough... this wasn't anything new - it was soft actually. Try on your knees walking backwards with your hands behind you head on a bumpy road followed by a takedown pat down "You guys fit the description of someone we were looking for"

RedRum
07-19-2009, 08:28 PM
Coming back in at the half when the girl got down to my ankles she swayed forward and went head first into my crotch. It was fucking great!!

TheHollister
07-19-2009, 08:29 PM
Coming back in at the half when the girl got down to my ankles she swayed forward and went head first into my crotch. It was fucking great!!
:lol:

RedRum
07-19-2009, 08:33 PM
I was wearing Lululemon pants... when the guy went to pat me down, I looked at him and said, "Not to question your logic, but where do you seriously expect me to hide anything in these pants?" All the security people around laughed and then they let me right in (after a quick peek in my bag - they didn't even rustle anything around. Just glanced inside and said it was fine).
Easiest "heavy security" I've ever been through. :D

Label whore!!
:D

GingerNinja
07-19-2009, 08:41 PM
I got a single pat on the lower back, then he said he could see everywhere else. Didn't check my cargo pockets. I could have easily gotten stuff in.

DichioTFC
07-19-2009, 08:42 PM
i wanted to exit right after i got in so i could get pat down for a second time
;)

Beach_Red
07-19-2009, 08:43 PM
The guy who patted me down passed on the ten year old ahead of me and said, "I refuse to pat down a kid." That was good.

But in the stands during the game no vendors came by selling anything (section 221) but security people walked up and down a dozen times.

London
07-19-2009, 08:43 PM
I was wearing Lululemon pants... when the guy went to pat me down, I looked at him and said, "Not to question your logic, but where do you seriously expect me to hide anything in these pants?" All the security people around laughed and then they let me right in (after a quick peek in my bag - they didn't even rustle anything around. Just glanced inside and said it was fine).
Easiest "heavy security" I've ever been through. :D


not saying you , but those pants realy do hide alot on girls!!

i call them majic pants!!

Toronto_Bhoy
07-19-2009, 08:48 PM
The guy who patted me down passed on the ten year old ahead of me and said, "I refuse to pat down a kid." That was good.

But in the stands during the game no vendors came by selling anything (section 221) but security people walked up and down a dozen times.

Funny...I saw a kid selling tall boys...

Toronto Gunner
07-19-2009, 08:51 PM
My wife has a three compartment purse - they checked the same one twice (two different people). My uncle was asked to take of his TFC cap - anybody caught sneaking a beer under their hat?

TheHollister
07-19-2009, 08:52 PM
Label whore!!
:D
They were a gift! :p

flatpicker
07-19-2009, 08:53 PM
I was wearing Lululemon pants...



we all appreciate it!

;)

Yohan
07-19-2009, 08:57 PM
But in the stands during the game no vendors came by selling anything (section 221) but security people walked up and down a dozen times.
poor lads were selling bottled water got a lot of jeering (mostly in good nature though)

Yohan
07-19-2009, 08:58 PM
we all appreciate it!

;)
+1!! ;)

Yeoman
07-19-2009, 09:00 PM
i was talking to the cops until they searched me, and i asked if they were done and the cops were having a laugh.
what a joke

Oblio2
07-19-2009, 09:09 PM
Ok. WTF.
I get padded down at the gate (tried convincing security that Deltox had a mickey of booze in his anal cavity that needed retreiving :) )...then, not 4 steps later I get padded down again. I asked why and the guard just shrugged his shoulders. Ridicoulous
As for the lineups...people weren't getting in till after the 30 minute mark!
For Fucks sake...thats pathetic

Blizzard
07-19-2009, 09:20 PM
Ok. WTF.
I get padded down at the gate (tried convincing security that Deltox had a mickey of booze in his anal cavity that needed retreiving :) )...then, not 4 steps later I get padded down again. I asked why and the guard just shrugged his shoulders. Ridicoulous
As for the lineups...people weren't getting in till after the 30 minute mark!
For Fucks sake...thats pathetic


South entrance 3A - five minutes in the line-up at 12:30.

Yohan
07-19-2009, 09:22 PM
South entrance 3A - five minutes in the line-up at 12:30.
yep. me too

people were warned about increased security and was told to come early

not that Torontonians listen to anyone. lol

Toronto_Bhoy
07-19-2009, 09:29 PM
I guess if you were "felt up" twice you should have been there twice as early...was there anyone there at 11:00?

billyfly
07-19-2009, 09:32 PM
South entrance 3A - five minutes in the line-up at 12:30.


Same here. Do people not realize there is an entrance there??

TheHollister
07-19-2009, 09:47 PM
Do people not realize there is an entrance there??
Nope.
And I like it that way. Keeps the line short for me! :D


</selfish>

billyfly
07-19-2009, 09:50 PM
^true.

Shep
07-19-2009, 09:56 PM
Went in at around 12:20, one small pat down on my waistband, and my cargo pockets, nothing else.

MUFC_Niagara
07-19-2009, 10:01 PM
part of doing a proper frisk is to blade the breasts and the crotch and ass.....did they do that? if not the frisk was pointless. AND....women should have been doing men and men doing men.....for obvious reasons.

rocker
07-19-2009, 10:02 PM
to blade the breasts and the crotch and ass....

that sounds very hot

Shep
07-19-2009, 10:03 PM
part of doing a proper frisk is to blade the breasts and the crotch and ass.....did they do that? if not the frisk was pointless. AND....women should have been doing men and men doing men.....for obvious reasons.

I got no crotch action :(

It was a 23ish year old girl at gate 3 who had my number. It must have been my disarming smile that distracted her from her duties.

Roogsy
07-19-2009, 10:06 PM
I think it moved a little.

mighty_torontofc_2008
07-19-2009, 10:53 PM
it was bad enough the first time...but the second time was unneeded....

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 01:31 AM
Ok. WTF.
I get padded down at the gate (tried convincing security that Deltox had a mickey of booze in his anal cavity that needed retreiving :) )...then, not 4 steps later I get padded down again. I asked why and the guard just shrugged his shoulders. Ridicoulous
As for the lineups...people weren't getting in till after the 30 minute mark!
For Fucks sake...thats pathetic

Well sir, this is a case of people accepting far too much in that name of 'security'. It's funny that the fans had to endure these waiting times and violations because TFC cocked up. Also, when watching on the CPU, you could really see that the stands were much more empty and the overall atmosphere and chanting was dulled. So much for the theory about booze ruining chants!! Now all we need is Parkdale to let us know how TFC did a great job with this and it was done with the fans in mind and in the most ethical way!! Great stuff!!

Brooker
07-20-2009, 01:47 AM
this has got to be one of the worst run stadiums in all of North America.

the way they handled saturday was a complete joke. disgrace.

Shakes McQueen
07-20-2009, 01:49 AM
Well sir, this is a case of people accepting far too much in that name of 'security'. It's funny that the fans had to endure these waiting times and violations because TFC cocked up. Also, when watching on the CPU, you could really see that the stands were much more empty and the overall atmosphere and chanting was dulled. So much for the theory about booze ruining chants!! Now all we need is Parkdale to let us know how TFC did a great job with this and it was done with the fans in mind and in the most ethical way!! Great stuff!!

I mentioned this in another thread:

The overzealous pat-downs were probably due to a stipulation that if anyone was caught in BMO with booze while their liquor license was suspended, that there would be huge fines, or possibly a longer license suspension.

As for some people getting frisked multiple times, I imagine that had more to do with incompetent security people trying to carry out their task, than some power-play from MLSE to turn BMO into their own personal police state.

If the pat-downs don't return at our next home game, I'm going to guess that my suspicions were correct.

- Scott

redcard
07-20-2009, 07:09 AM
Same here. Do people not realize there is an entrance there??

SHHHHHHH, keep it on the dl!

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 07:14 AM
I mentioned this in another thread:

The overzealous pat-downs were probably due to a stipulation that if anyone was caught in BMO with booze while their liquor license was suspended, that there would be huge fines, or possibly a longer license suspension.

As for some people getting frisked multiple times, I imagine that had more to do with incompetent security people trying to carry out their task, than some power-play from MLSE to turn BMO into their own personal police state.

If the pat-downs don't return at our next home game, I'm going to guess that my suspicions were correct.

- Scott

I addressed that when I suggested this only came to fruition because TFC/MLSE "cocked up". So who had to pay - the consumer. Long waits... Fans missing portions of the game... Violations of basic rights... It's a sad state of affairs. There is no excuse, it's an error and with respect to security, it has been an issues since that first home game...

Steve
07-20-2009, 07:17 AM
Well sir, this is a case of people accepting far too much in that name of 'security'. It's funny that the fans had to endure these waiting times and violations because TFC cocked up. Also, when watching on the CPU, you could really see that the stands were much more empty and the overall atmosphere and chanting was dulled. So much for the theory about booze ruining chants!! Now all we need is Parkdale to let us know how TFC did a great job with this and it was done with the fans in mind and in the most ethical way!! Great stuff!!

WTF? As has been stated, I'm sure the crazy liquor laws in Ontario had something to do with the extra security (if anyone was drinking, there would have been steep punishments).

As for the "TFC cock up", was it actually a sale to a minor (which I would agree with you being a TFC mistake) or was it a handoff? If it was a handoff that started this whole thing, how the hell do you prevent that as TFC without assigning a security guard to follow everyone buying a beer?

RedRum
07-20-2009, 07:19 AM
There was supposed to be one search at the gate then another as you go into the section to prevent people passing alcohol through the fence that runs around the outside of the stadium.

I just dont understand the point of being searched twice within 10 feet, with at least 2 or 3 staff in between.

Suds
07-20-2009, 07:48 AM
I was disappointed with my pat down ... there was nothing sexually stimulating about mine ;).

As for the line ups, I was right at the back of a line at gate one. Only took me a little over 5 minutes to get from the grass beside the food building in to BMO. I think that was at about 12:45 when I to the line up.

prizby
07-20-2009, 08:24 AM
i was gonna make a big deal about it, but i was carrying some flags/2 sticks and so i only got patted down once...and then they proceeded to pat down the flags LOL

KrazyKanadian
07-20-2009, 08:34 AM
I'm sure BMO security will enjoy reading everyone's comments and adjust their practices to give everyone a thorough searching next game.

111_DrummerBoy
07-20-2009, 08:41 AM
"Violation of basic human rights"?!?!?!?! Wow Kingpin, way to make it sound more drastic than it was.

I was really hoping to get a girl to pat me down. I was going to tell her I had a mickey of whiskey strapped to my nuts. :D

Though what did piss me off is when I got through the first pat down, the next security gaurd let like 5 ppl through without a second pat down. But insisted I needed to get searched again within 5 feet of the other patdown he could SEE! Re-tard-ed!

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 08:48 AM
Long waits... Fans missing portions of the game... Violations of basic rights... It's a sad state of affairs.


hahahahaha. violation of human rights?

BMO isn't an internment camp in a war zone somewhere.
It's a sporting event in one of the safest cities in the world.

I've been given WAY more stringent searches at the ACC, the Dome
and almost every nightclub / concert / festival I've ever been too.

The only dumb thing was they asked me to take off my TFC cap,
so I made a joke about "but that's where I was hiding my 6-pack".
The cops laughed, and on we went. It's only an issue if you make it one.


and my details:

I got there at 12:40, went though the gates at the North End
(and stood in line patiently like everyone else) and still got to
my seats in time to see the player introductions. no biggie.

Roogsy
07-20-2009, 08:56 AM
I guess my rights get violated every time I go to a night club or to a concert. Hmmm...seems Canada has become a totalitarian state!

Carts
07-20-2009, 09:04 AM
I didn't mind being patted-down at all...

My two pat downs were very different...

First, at the gate, the girl did a full, proper pat down, including the crotch grab of my shorts - she didn't get a hold of anything else unfortunately LOL. But if I had something in there, she would have found it...

As I walked through, the guy was laughing at my reaction to the shorts-crotch grab and said "don't worry, she already checked there!" and laughed... He then though inspected my stomach - and joked "...I've seen that beer belly thing online I gotta check" LOL...

The secuirty people were friendly, professional, pleasant to deal with, and a sence of humour...

I spoke with one of the head police officers and he said things were going smoothly, but was hopefull more people would have arrived earlier...

At Gate-3, there was 2 security people patting-down for each line, except one, where this monster of a man just let the girl do everyone, and that line slowed to a crawl, pissing people off. He was just lazy and didn't want to do his job (he was the excelption, not the rule)...

Other than the wait, I had no problem being checked... I don't have anything to hide, so I don't mind being checked...

Carts...

Roogsy
07-20-2009, 09:09 AM
Ok. WTF.
I get padded down at the gate (tried convincing security that Deltox had a mickey of booze in his anal cavity that needed retreiving :) )...then, not 4 steps later I get padded down again. I asked why and the guard just shrugged his shoulders. Ridicoulous
As for the lineups...people weren't getting in till after the 30 minute mark!
For Fucks sake...thats pathetic


That was the silliest part. Not the pat downs but rather how long it took. If you're going to do this, open the gates early enough and have enough security people doing it.

adamdz
07-20-2009, 09:09 AM
Wait....so the anal probe was not part of the deal?!??

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 09:15 AM
That was the silliest part. Not the pat downs but rather how long it took. If you're going to do this, open the gates early enough and have enough security people doing it.


like I said before, I got to the north gates at 12:40 and was in my seats for player introductions.

no biggie at all.



well, other than having my basic human rights violated.

rocker
07-20-2009, 09:16 AM
well, other than having my basic human rights violated.

chad barrett violated my basic human right to see a second goal scored.

Jamaicanadian
07-20-2009, 09:20 AM
My search

Female Security: "Sir, is that, a gun???"

Me: "No....I'm just happy to see you!"



BTW, what do people hide under their hats LOL!

Roogsy
07-20-2009, 09:29 AM
The lady that patted me down said (and I am not kidding)

"Is that coins in your pocket?"

to which I replied

"it's my roll of quarters"

:D

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 09:38 AM
hahahahaha. violation of human rights?

BMO isn't an internment camp in a war zone somewhere.
It's a sporting event in one of the safest cities in the world.

I've been given WAY more stringent searches at the ACC, the Dome
and almost every nightclub / concert / festival I've ever been too.

The only dumb thing was they asked me to take off my TFC cap,
so I made a joke about "but that's where I was hiding my 6-pack".
The cops laughed, and on we went. It's only an issue if you make it one.


and my details:

I got there at 12:40, went though the gates at the North End
(and stood in line patiently like everyone else) and still got to
my seats in time to see the player introductions. no biggie.

On the money:


Now all we need is Parkdale to let us know how TFC did a great job with this and it was done with the fans in mind and in the most ethical way!!

nancymiranda
07-20-2009, 09:40 AM
some security girl asked me to step forward to be patted. I told her that if anyone's going to grab me its going to be the guy security! So I moved to his line. Cop beside me was killing himself laughing.... I guess I made the poor security guy nervous when I told him he didn't do a thorough job... ha ha ha ha.....

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 09:45 AM
On the money:


quoting yourself to prove your own points?


I think that violates my basic human rights.

http://photos.upi.com/story/t/181c2f54297d2773813cbf27fc7a4034/Tight-security-at-Olympics.jpg

flatpicker
07-20-2009, 09:47 AM
sometimes this forum violates my basic human rights!

yet, somehow I always find myself back here for more punishment!

The Professor
07-20-2009, 09:48 AM
We cleared the empty south gate at about 12:40 almost faster than any other game. The extra security was a joke. They looked under our hats, but didn't check the sunglasses case in my pocket that could easily have been a flask. Marianne had a small backpack and the first guard only asked her to open one of three compartments. We got stopped again inside the gates to check the backpack again, but the guard just took a quick look at the same open compartment. We take that backpack to most games and they always have us open all compartments and even take stuff out.

Human rights violation....:rofl::rofl::rofl:

AL-MO
07-20-2009, 09:49 AM
That was the silliest part. Not the pat downs but rather how long it took. If you're going to do this, open the gates early enough and have enough security people doing it.

The gates were open PLENTY early Roogs. I went in there with 6 or 7 others @ 11:30 to put up banners and had no issues.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 09:51 AM
quoting yourself to prove your own points?


I think that violates my basic human rights.

Look mate - I can walk into a 50,000 seat stadium in the UK with a ruck sack and never get touched. And this is in a country fraught with football violence. The searches are set out to supplant proper training, and this has always been the issue. I ran an even a few years back for Harley-Davidson, and the training was intense, but we had no problems whatsoever. BMO brings in untrained punters that create issues, it's that simple. Even the jokes here suggest very poor execution... If you remember me... You know i would be making jokes as I came in as well... But in the boardroom I'd be looking for answers and improvements. That is the role of RPB leadership in my opinion, to ensure the greatest fan experience possible as part of supporting the team.

prizby
07-20-2009, 09:51 AM
LOL!!!

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 09:51 AM
side note....


good thing I don't go to NFL games, because it seems they have a league wide policy on violating my basic human rights.

http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/2005/09/08/nfl_to_institute_patdown_policy_at_its_games2/


In order to further enhance fan safety and comfort, everyone entering Arrowhead Stadium for Kansas City Chiefs home games will be subject to hand searches beginning this season, by order of NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue.


Ticket holders are encouraged to arrive early at stadium gates to help facilitate this additional security measure. All persons entering Arrowhead will be subject to and should expect to be patted down by security personnel as they proceed through the gates.


“Pat downs” of ticket holders entering NFL stadiums have taken place throughout the league since the events of September 11. Following discussions at a recent league meeting, Commissioner Paul Tagliabue, along with team owners, determined that these hand searches should be a required stadium security policy at all NFL games beginning this 2005 season.

Roogsy
07-20-2009, 09:52 AM
When I posted that, I realized my error. I was more towards having more security than the gate issue itself since I myself didn't arrive till noon.

Seriously, knowing that there was a 1pm start, does anyone really expect people to arrive at 11:30 on a Saturday morning? Hence the only real solution is enough personnel to get the lines moving.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 09:53 AM
side note....


good thing I don't go to NFL games, because it seems they have a league wide policy on violating my basic human rights.

http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/2005/09/08/nfl_to_institute_patdown_policy_at_its_games2/

Oh, America... Sorry guys. That's right... America is known for it's... :facepalm:

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 09:54 AM
Look mate - I can walk into a 50,000 seat stadium in the UK with a ruck sack and never get touched.


like in most other cases, the Europe-North America comparison just doens't matter or apply.

Every NFL stadium has a policy of 'pat down searches', and we are part of a North American sports league.
Sure the EPL does things differently, but we've known that all along.

Roogsy
07-20-2009, 09:54 AM
Look mate - I can walk into a 50,000 seat stadium in the UK with a ruck sack and never get touched. And this is in a country fraught with football violence. The searches are set out to supplant proper training, and this has always been the issue. I ran an even a few years back for Harley-Davidson, and the training was intense, but we had no problems whatsoever. BMO brings in untrained punters that create issues, it's that simple. Even the jokes here suggest very poor execution... If you remember me... You know i would be making jokes as I came in as well... But in the boardroom I'd be looking for answers and improvements. That is the role of RPB leadership in my opinion, to ensure the greatest fan experience possible as part of supporting the team.

Why do you keep adding burdens and responsibilities to the supporters club when it suits your point Pat? I completely disagree. This is NOT our job.

And our job is also not to create an issue where it is well within the club's rights to search us if that is what the law allows them to do.

So if you could provide legal and regulatory proof that this actually does violate our human rights and is outside the team's legal right, your claim is unsubstantiated.

Roogsy
07-20-2009, 09:55 AM
like in most other cases, the Europe-North America comparison just doens't matter.

Every NFL stadium has a policy of 'pat down searches', and we are part of a North American sports league.
Sure the EPL does things differently, but we've known that all along.

The EPL also doesn't serve beer at their games no?

Apples to apples please.

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 09:57 AM
Oh, America... Sorry guys. That's right... America is known for it's... :facepalm:



Edmonton Eskimos (http://www.esks.com/page/fan_guide)


Security on Game Day
Due to heightened security measures at the gates, we strongly urge all fans to enter the stadium as early as possible to avoid delays. All patrons will be subject to an inspection of their belongings and a pat-down search prior to entering Commonwealth Stadium. By tendering a ticket and entering the stadium, fans consent to such searches. Individuals not consenting to the searches will be denied entry into the stadium. These premises are monitored by video cameras and your movements may be monitored and recorded.


oh no..... the human rights violations have crossed the border!

TorontoBlades
07-20-2009, 09:57 AM
Nothing like having a man rub your nads, while the game has already started and you can see half the stadium is full and the other half is behind you.

Please note that the whole drinking infraction was the fault of BMO and MLSE - and they clearly diverted the inconvinience back to the fan, by not staffing up properly to ensure that everyone got in on time. This was a penalty on BMO Field and we were made to be penalized as well...One of the worst atmospheres I've ever experienced at BMO and only the second time ever that I could hear the steel drums in Sec 111. Shame on you BMO, and shame on you MLSE.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 09:59 AM
Why do you keep adding burdens and responsibilities to the supporters club when it suits your point Pat? I completely disagree. This is NOT our job.

And our job is also not to create an issue where it is well within the club's rights to search us if that is what the law allows them to do.

So if you could provide legal and regulatory proof that this actually does violate our human rights and is outside the team's legal right, your claim is unsubstantiated.

Well it was the role when C_B was in charge, and when he with others began to organise. Maybe this has changed, but it was always a back-room mandate to make sure the club understood how positive support could be executed. So you could say this has been altered, but you can't say that it is "NOT our job". It was part of my job when I was working with C_B...

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 09:59 AM
So if you could provide legal and regulatory proof that this actually does violate our human rights and is outside the team's legal right, your claim is unsubstantiated.

there are many cases of people suing stadium in the States based on 4th amendment rights (protection against searches without a warrant). None of the cases made it very far, simple because it's a privately owned (and operated) sporting event.

Roogsy
07-20-2009, 10:00 AM
They warned us.

I think they should have moved the game to 1:30 or something.

I'd say it was poorly executed, but nothing I'd call shame to them for.

Steel drums...you mean the TRN drums from 118?

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 10:01 AM
We cleared the empty south gate at about 12:40 almost faster than any other game. The extra security was a joke. They looked under our hats, but didn't check the sunglasses case in my pocket that could easily have been a flask. Marianne had a small backpack and the first guard only asked her to open one of three compartments. We got stopped again inside the gates to check the backpack again, but the guard just took a quick look at the same open compartment. We take that backpack to most games and they always have us open all compartments and even take stuff out.

Human rights violation....:rofl::rofl::rofl:

This is the "crux" of the matter, and always has been... This is just another joke.

Boris
07-20-2009, 10:03 AM
Well it was the role when C_B was in charge, and when he with others began to organise. Maybe this has changed, but it was always a back-room mandate to make sure the club understood how positive support could be executed. So you could say this has been altered, but you can't say that it is "NOT our job". It was part of my job when I was working with C_B...

and of course this always goes back to how things were pat.
Lets try to keep things on topic. If you want to have a conversation about how things are run and what not then make a seperate thread about it.

EVERYONE STAY ON TOPIC....

The Professor
07-20-2009, 10:03 AM
For those of us who live in the GTA, you'd have had to be living under a rock not to have seen or heard the warnings about the longer wait times expected for Saturday's match. It was one of those weird press releases that caught on as a hot news story for a few days last week.

That said, from the heights of 224, it was pretty clear that a lot of people didn't change their habits one bit and took the last GO trains or streetcars possible before the start of the game. There were huge crowds just wandering to Gate 1 at about 1:00. Can't fault BMO or MLSE for people's refusal to listen to warnings.

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 10:04 AM
So you could say this has been altered, but you can't say that it is "NOT our job". It was part of my job when I was working with C_B...

your own agenda, not that of the group

Roogsy
07-20-2009, 10:04 AM
Well it was the role when C_B was in charge, and when he with others began to organise. Maybe this has changed, but it was always a back-room mandate to make sure the club understood how positive support could be executed. So you could say this has been altered, but you can't say that it is "NOT our job". It was part of my job when I was working with C_B...

I gotta call bullshit on this. I have never been part of the executive, but I have been associating with this group since weeks after RPB was created, and I have never heard this point being a part of our mandate. As supporters, we have always felt our job is to support the team and create the best atmosphere we can create ourselves, and in doing so, others will join in. We're not here to tell TFC or BMO how to run things. That would be incredibly pompous and arrogant.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 10:07 AM
your own agenda, not that of the group

So it was only me - at that time - that was trying to work hard to create a greater fan experience? Wouldn't that be a slap in the face to the former President who was in charge? I was working in line with his vision.

Sorry Boris - But Parkdale kept it going with that gross misnomer.

Boris
07-20-2009, 10:07 AM
So it was only me - at that time - that was trying to work hard to create a greater fan experience? Wouldn't that be a slap in the face to the former President who was in charge? I was working in line with his vision.

Sorry Boris - But Parkdale kept it going with that gross misnomer.

thats fine but that warning was to everyone.
lets stay on topic and leave politics out of it.

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 10:08 AM
IWe're not here to tell TFC or BMO how to run things. That would be incredibly pompous and arrogant.


pretty much

TorontoBlades
07-20-2009, 10:09 AM
Yeah I heard the warnings. That doesn't change the principal of the situation. BMO Field got fucked, and instead on shouldering that penalty and going out of there way not to punish the supporter as well, they made a big clusterfuck of the situation and brought half the fans down with it.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 10:09 AM
I gotta call bullshit on this. I have never been part of the executive, but I have been associating with this group since weeks after RPB was created, and I have never heard this point being a part of our mandate. As supporters, we have always felt our job is to support the team and create the best atmosphere we can create ourselves, and in doing so, others will join in. We're not here to tell TFC or BMO how to run things. That would be incredibly pompous and arrogant.

They asked us to... We were advising them on what is needed to create the atmosphere we all wanted. Why is this so difficult for everyone to understand??? They didn't really understand the difference coming from the NBA and Mexico (Cesar wasn't sure if the same style of support would translate). I was there. In the meetings. Ask Sean (U-Sec)... This is what the early meetings were all about... Anyway. Who has the agenda now.......

TorontoBlades
07-20-2009, 10:12 AM
They asked us to... We were advising them on what is needed to create the atmosphere we all wanted. Why is this so difficult for everyone to understand??? They didn't really understand the difference coming from the NBA and Mexico (Cesar wasn't sure if the same style of support would translate). I was there. In the meetings. Ask Sean (U-Sec)... This is what the early meetings were all about... Anyway. Who has the agenda now.......

I think you're living in a older, better time still my friend. It's not the same TFC, RPB or BMO Field.

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 10:15 AM
yep, a time when north american stadiums didn't do pat-down searches and you could still bring your 'rucksacks' into the game without having your basic human rights violated.

Roogsy
07-20-2009, 10:18 AM
yep, a time when north american stadiums didn't do pat-down searches and you could still bring your 'rucksacks' into the game without having your basic human rights violated.

Shoot...I must have been born yesterday because I was never around for this wonderful era.

Roogsy
07-20-2009, 10:19 AM
Can we get back on topic and can someone address my question about whether pat down searches are illegal?

Because if they aren't...then the rest of this argument is stupid and irrelevant. If BMO Field are allowed to pat us down, then it's dumb to complain. You have a choice. Go or don't go. But if it's not illegal, then it's dishonest to call it a "human rights violation".

I want to see proof please.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 10:20 AM
I think you're living in a older, better time still my friend. It's not the same TFC, RPB or BMO Field.

Maybe I am. I guess I'm out of the loop vs. year one. But security was always poor and it always will be until someone stands up. Unfortunately individuals such as Parkdale are more concerned with defending everything and anything to do with FO decisions. Ostensibly looking after their own interests vs. that of fans in totality. Some have earned a voice, but have forgotten how important it is to stay on message. I guess it has changed, maybe that's why so many of the old guard has moved on. R.I.P. Original R.P.B.?

Roogsy
07-20-2009, 10:22 AM
Oh lord get over yourself. I still see lots of the same people that were here at the beginning. Yes, the group has evolved, it's had to and will continue to do so. You need to let go of 2006.

acw
07-20-2009, 10:25 AM
i had a guy pat me down but he made a point of getting my permission first because i'm a woman...he was very polite about it...my sister's purse got checked twice..
the girl beside him made some little kids lift their baseball hats...we got there early & went into gate 3..it didn't seem to take any longer than normal & we got there at 12:30..

Pookie
07-20-2009, 10:27 AM
Was the cavity search necessary?

Surely, I can't be the only one...

hello?

olegunnar
07-20-2009, 10:29 AM
Nothing like having a man rub your nads, while the game has already started and you can see half the stadium is full and the other half is behind you.

Please note that the whole drinking infraction was the fault of BMO and MLSE - and they clearly diverted the inconvinience back to the fan, by not staffing up properly to ensure that everyone got in on time. This was a penalty on BMO Field and we were made to be penalized as well...One of the worst atmospheres I've ever experienced at BMO and only the second time ever that I could hear the steel drums in Sec 111. Shame on you BMO, and shame on you MLSE.

That's the point I think far too many are missing out on.
What did we as ticket holders do to deserve this crap? Nothing, but fior some reason we were forced to shoulder some of the consequences.

iansmcl
07-20-2009, 10:31 AM
Got to the line about 12:40-45. In before the player intros even started. Didn't TFC send out an email saying come early? Early doesn't mean when the game starts.

Do people just need something to complain about?

iansmcl
07-20-2009, 10:34 AM
And I don't think it's TFC/MLSE/BMO's fault that the atmosphere suffered. It's the fault of people who weren't singing.

Beach_Red
07-20-2009, 10:36 AM
Can we get back on topic and can someone address my question about whether pat down searches are illegal?

Because if they aren't...then the rest of this argument is stupid and irrelevant. If BMO Field are allowed to pat us down, then it's dumb to complain. You have a choice. Go or don't go. But if it's not illegal, then it's dishonest to call it a "human rights violation".

I want to see proof please.


We have these weird Human Rights Tribunals in Canada that you can bring up almost anything to and see what they say. They seem to make it up as they go. See the Macleans magazine and Mark Steyn vs. some law students from Osgoode Hall case recently.

In this case it would be a human rights violation if "some" people were singled out for security checks but not everyone.

jcplante
07-20-2009, 10:36 AM
I went through the little gate too (5 minutes at 12:55) and only got a hat check and one really quick feel up - no one wants to check the fat guy.
I coulda snuck in a keg under my gut.
No extra security once I got in, but I was disoriented by not having the beer carts there.

Roogsy
07-20-2009, 10:38 AM
I see...so since everyone was patted down, we can simply move on and admit this wasn't a "human rights violation" already?

TorontoBlades
07-20-2009, 10:41 AM
That's the point I think far too many are missing out on.
What did we as ticket holders do to deserve this crap? Nothing, but fior some reason we were forced to shoulder some of the consequences.


there is a brain in here!

prizby
07-20-2009, 10:46 AM
The gates were open PLENTY early Roogs. I went in there with 6 or 7 others @ 11:30 to put up banners and had no issues.

it was 11:30 and you weren't finished setting up the banners...it was more like 12:05 :P and there was no line whatsoever

Pookie
07-20-2009, 10:48 AM
re: legal

I think that as a private facility they have a legal right to ensure a level of safety. It is probably isn't limited to pat down searches. If they suspected someone of trying to smuggle in something illegal or in the post 9/11 world, something worse... I think they have the right to exercise any means... including getting the police involved in a strip search.

The police were on hand, as they always are, I would think that the pat down is well within their rights or else they would have be advised otherwise.

AL-MO
07-20-2009, 10:49 AM
it was 11:30 and you weren't finished setting up the banners...it was more like 12:05 :P and there was no line whatsoever

Alright I guess I lost track of time. :p

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 10:53 AM
The police were on hand, as they always are, I would think that the pat down is well within their rights or else they would have be advised otherwise.


exactly

besides, if you say to security "I do not wish to be searched" you still have the right to leave the grounds and go home.
It's not that way in Airports if you're dealing with the TSA. If you say "I do not wish to be searched",
they consider that grounds for an extra thorough searching - and that's legal for them too.


let's just all agree that calling this a 'human rights violation' is a big steaming load of bullshit right from the cow's ass.

http://www.fuckyou.com/images/smilies/bullshit.gif

Mark in Ottawa
07-20-2009, 10:54 AM
My search

Female Security: "Sir, is that, a gun???"

Me: "No....I'm just happy to see you!"

BTW, what do people hide under their hats LOL!
And she could have asked if your "gun" was loaded :facepalm:

Mark in Ottawa
07-20-2009, 10:56 AM
some security girl asked me to step forward to be patted. I told her that if anyone's going to grab me its going to be the guy security! So I moved to his line. Cop beside me was killing himself laughing.... I guess I made the poor security guy nervous when I told him he didn't do a thorough job... ha ha ha ha.....
That's why you looked so happy... and that was after the game...
Maybe he did a better job than you are letting on :rolleyes:

Mark in Ottawa
07-20-2009, 11:02 AM
I was at the park at 8AM... even saved $2. on parking :drum:
As always the tailgate was.., dare I say it... "world class"!!

Was a bit worried after helping to close down the tailgate and seeing the lineups but gate # 1 was pretty quick (even if I did get "frisked" twice within 20 feet... must have been the smile on my face after I told the secuity guard to smile and got him blushing).

No big deal... I had the option of staying away but was pretty sure the extra security would be just what it turned out to be... a minor inconvenience at best.

TFC Via Buffalo
07-20-2009, 11:12 AM
And I don't think it's TFC/MLSE/BMO's fault that the atmosphere suffered. It's the fault of people who weren't singing.

This. If you HAVE to be drunk to sing and chant and get into it, then it sucks to be you. I haven't had a drink in 2 1/2 years and I have problems talking after games.

Actually, top of 110 closer to 109 was much better then the last couple of games. Always big props to Sparta and that group for getting us going.

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 11:13 AM
but was pretty sure the extra security would be just what it turned out to be... a minor inconvenience at best.

exactly. I was in line for about 20 minutes.


on the flip side.... anyone else notice how easy it was to move around inside BMO without the beer lines cutting off the corridors? Plus there was almost no lines for the bathrooms. Funny how no beer = no pissing



oh wait.... I was looking at the positives. Guess that makes me a shill for ML$E right?

:facepalm:

Beach_Red
07-20-2009, 11:21 AM
That's the point I think far too many are missing out on.
What did we as ticket holders do to deserve this crap? Nothing, but fior some reason we were forced to shoulder some of the consequences.


You know, in some ways that's really just part of the eternal "individual vs. group" struggle that goes on. We benefit for being part of a large enough group to have a team and we suffer as a group.

Okay, so that's a little too philosophical for today, I know...

prizby
07-20-2009, 11:21 AM
Alright I guess I lost track of time. :p

lol that you were...good job organizing :)

koryo
07-20-2009, 11:24 AM
Unfortunately individuals such as Parkdale are more concerned with defending everything and anything to do with FO decisions. Ostensibly looking after their own interests vs. that of fans in totality. Some have earned a voice, but have forgotten how important it is to stay on message. I guess it has changed, maybe that's why so many of the old guard has moved on. R.I.P. Original R.P.B.?

1. absolutely no need for a personal attack.

2. no one's forcing you to hang out here

3. it's always easier to bitch and complain from afar isn't it?

Was it Parkdale who enforced the liquor ban in the first place? Is he suggesting that "we got what we deserved" on Saturday?

You were hell bent on a smear campaign against Naturegirl in year one, and now it's Parkdale's turn is it?

The one thing that hasn't changed is that you don't bloody think before you type.

PS: Mods, don't hesitate to ban me for this post. By the letter of the law, it does cross a line.

Shakes McQueen
07-20-2009, 11:36 AM
Pat-down searches aren't illegal, when they are performed as part of admittance to a sporting event/complex. It would be a potential human rights violation (but incredibly hard to prove), if the security folks singled out certain people to be searched based on ethnicity or sex.

There are all kinds of security checks at Olympic events, and other North American sports events.

Was it a pain in the ass? Absolutely. But portraying it as anything more than a pain in the ass, is just being a drama queen.

It was a one off inconvenience, to ensure that MLSE didn't get a steep fine, or lose the ability to sell booze at games for even longer. And it was done on private property, so it was 100% within their rights to do.

No, they don't perform these searches at football games in Europe. They also don't serve beer at football games in Europe. And my guess is after this past weekend, you won't be seeing the searches here again either.

At least until the next time someone buys a beer, and passes it along to a minor.

- Scott

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 11:52 AM
^ good call on the edit.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 12:05 PM
^ good call on the edit.

You know the truth Parkdale - and the rhetoric has moved to the laughable. I'm the pantomime villain, the one who "attacked Naturegirl"... The comedy has been endless. There are so many faces, it's tough to see which side they are talking out of.

If you strip away what I've been saying all along - security has been an issue since day one. It is still an issue that needs work, and at this point it's quite poor in comparison to so many other venues in Canada and other civilized countries. And I use this medium, along with conversations with others as a barometer of how things are improving - and they are not. Do I need to be there to understand the comparative analyses... No I do not. So all the little halo's surrounding my opinions are typical rhetoric stemming from this old story - one that suggested I was positioning myself for an RPB takeover from the UK.... The humour was endless.

So take my opinion for what it is - I think the office staff are overworked and don't have the capacity to manage the club and it's fans. They, in my estimation, do not have a solid security plan because they do not know how to formulate one. That is all...

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 12:10 PM
and saying that it was a 'violation of basic human rights' wasn't just a wee bit over the top?

jaahuuu
07-20-2009, 12:15 PM
Steel drums...you mean the TRN drums from 118?
I'm going to guess he meant he could hear the drums in 118 from his seat in 111. I'm in the top row of 110, that game was the first time I heard the TRN drums all season.



on the flip side.... anyone else notice how easy it was to move around inside BMO without the beer lines cutting off the corridors? Plus there was almost no lines for the bathrooms. Funny how no beer = no pissing
When I got in the stadium I went right to my seat and didn't leave until the game ended, but when it ended I was able to get out of the stadium alot quicker than normal. No beer = ability to walk down stairs?

Darlofletch
07-20-2009, 12:15 PM
For those of us who live in the GTA, you'd have had to be living under a rock not to have seen or heard the warnings about the longer wait times expected for Saturday's match. It was one of those weird press releases that caught on as a hot news story for a few days last week.

That said, from the heights of 224, it was pretty clear that a lot of people didn't change their habits one bit and took the last GO trains or streetcars possible before the start of the game. There were huge crowds just wandering to Gate 1 at about 1:00. Can't fault BMO or MLSE for people's refusal to listen to warnings.

Exactly, I left early, and even with the dufferin bus detour, got to the staidium at about 12:20 and waited about 10-15 minutes at gate 1. Walked past a lot of people sitting in the pub having a drink, also walked past a lot of people walking from the go train away from the stadium, presumably to have a pre match pint. I imagine a lot of those people were outside when the game started.

The pat downs were a minor inconvenience, and the second pat down about 10 yards away from the first was a bit confusing, but at least they were polite about it, asking permission, I imagine they wouldn't have taken no for an answer so more of an illusion than an actual choice, but it's something at least. If they did this before every game, i'd begin to get annoyed, but to call it a human rights violation is ridiculous.

legia_tfc
07-20-2009, 12:35 PM
missed the first 25 mins of the game cuz of these "pat downs"
fucking bullshit

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 01:04 PM
^ what time did you arrive? / which gate?

Jack
07-20-2009, 01:06 PM
That's the point I think far too many are missing out on.
What did we as ticket holders do to deserve this crap? Nothing, but fior some reason we were forced to shoulder some of the consequences.

Let's see...

People passing alcohol to minors and other alcohol violations.

The facility got busted, perhaps for serving people who were too drunk. I don't know the full details, though I guess I could find out.

Based on that, the violation occurred due in part to the actions of the facility staff and in part due to actions of the patrons. Unless they are now resonsible for protecting us from ourselves, that is.

They warned the seasons ticket holders that there were going to be searches ("pat-downs" if you will) ahead of the game and to expect delays, so show up early.

If there is a collective "we" here then yes, "we" as in TFC supporters are responsible for the alchohol violation for passing beers to underage drinkers and getting too drunk to control "ourselves".

If "we" are not responsible, then who is? Or in this case should we single out anyone we see handing off a beer and turn them over to security? I don't get it.

And if there is no "we" then you should be saying "what did I as a ticket holder do to deserve this crap?"

This is what happens when people violate the rules. TFC security is most certainly not perfect, but at the same time, you can't watch 20,000 people constantly for 90 minutes. Someone got busted and due to that person or group of people (most likely it was more than one) we had to go through this inconvenience.

I showed up a little earlier, stood in line for about 10-15 minutes and was in. I did miss the anthem, but that's about it.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 01:19 PM
and saying that it was a 'violation of basic human rights' wasn't just a wee bit over the top?

No I do not. I think going to a 'soccer game' does not warrant anyone having to touch my body for weapons and alcohol. It has been the slow acceptance of such activity that makes it acceptable. It's the slow deterioration of our privacy, running in tandem with street camera's or CCTV. I had to have an eye scan to move to the UK... It goes on. So yes, as a human, I feel compelled to suggest that having to be physically touched by a stranger is a violation, especially with the only alternative being ejection. I am forced to accept it in imperative circumstances, but that does not make me accept it's origins. I hope that clears it up a little.... But nice rhetorical stance and signature. I must say - I really do think you are showing your stripes more clearly by the day.

olegunnar
07-20-2009, 01:20 PM
If there is a collective "we" here then yes, "we" as in TFC supporters are responsible for the alchohol violation for passing beers to underage drinkers and getting too drunk to control "ourselves".

If "we" are not responsible, then who is? Or in this case should we single out anyone we see handing off a beer and turn them over to security? I don't get it.

And if there is no "we" then you should be saying "what did I as a ticket holder do to deserve this crap?"

This is what happens when people violate the rules. TFC security is most certainly not perfect, but at the same time, you can't watch 20,000 people constantly for 90 minutes. Someone got busted and due to that person or group of people (most likely it was more than one) we had to go through this inconvenience.

.

Why did you have to quote me, and then make it worse by posting the very debatable post you posted. Now I'm compelled to reply.

That's a pretty bad case of Stockholm syndrome you got there...might want to have it checked out. :D

Here's the facts Jack.
I don't get paid to work at BMO
I don't sell alcohol at BMO
I have nothing whatsoever to do with any AGCO charges against the management of BMO as it applies to the selling of alcohol.
Yet for some reason I was negatively affected.

NOW IF
and this is to cut off the non-sequitors about nets and fan behaviours, ticket holders repeatedly did something wrong, ie threw a beer etc. and BMO Field Management, did everything possible to curb the malcontents but to no avail, then I wouldn't be surpirsed to be lumped in with them.

I support the team...I don't run it or the venue. The charges were against the management of the venue, and the people they HIRE...not me or anyone of my "category".

fyi I know BMO field management is MLSE, I just didn't want to type MLSE so I could avoid the spin doctors changing the perception of my post into an anti-MLSE post that will be ignored.

olegunnar
07-20-2009, 01:22 PM
as an add on
I didn't mind having a dry game in the least.

My beef is that the consequences of the mistakes by venue management got pushed back on the supporters.

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 01:23 PM
It was by far the funniest thing I've read all day, hence the signature.
don't worry, I'll be bored with it by tea time.

The idea that it's a 'violation of our basic human rights' to be subjected to a pat-down....
to attend a sporting event, is absolutely laughable. That's why I'm still LOL'ing over it.



ps. Think Bono and Amnesty International will do a 'Supporters Aid' concert tour to help raise awareness for us?

Flipityflu
07-20-2009, 01:24 PM
No I do not. I think going to a 'soccer game' does not warrant anyone having to touch my body for weapons and alcohol. It has been the slow acceptance of such activity that makes it acceptable. It's the slow deterioration of our privacy, running in tandem with street camera's or CCTV. I had to have an eye scan to move to the UK... It goes on. So yes, as a human, I feel compelled to suggest that having to be physically touched by a stranger is a violation, especially with the only alternative being ejection. I am forced to accept it in imperative circumstances, but that does not make me accept it's origins. I hope that clears it up a little.... But nice rhetorical stance and signature. I must say - I really do think you are showing your stripes more clearly by the day.

^ i can't believe i'm biting, but whatever. no it is not a violation of human rights. you have every right to turn around and go the other direction if you don't want to submit, but in the end, as it is private property, they have every right to insure the safety of anybody who enters the stadium, as well as protect thier own interests so they don't get fined in the future.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 01:32 PM
^ i can't believe i'm biting, but whatever. no it is not a violation of human rights. you have every right to turn around and go the other direction if you don't want to submit, but in the end, as it is private property, they have every right to insure the safety of anybody who enters the stadium, as well as protect thier own interests so they don't get fined in the future.

I addressed your post with this statement: So yes, as a human, I feel compelled to suggest that having to be physically touched by a stranger is a violation, especially with the only alternative being ejection.

If they were concerned about safety, they would train security.

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 01:34 PM
I addressed your post with this statement: So yes, as a human, I feel compelled to suggest that having to be physically touched by a stranger is a violation, especially with the only alternative being ejection.



it wasn't 'ejection' - It's 'denial of entry'.

BIG difference.

Jack
07-20-2009, 01:36 PM
Why did you have to quote me, and then make it worse by posting the very debatable post you posted. Now I'm compelled to reply.

That's a pretty bad case of Stockholm syndrome you got there...might want to have it checked out. :D

Here's the facts Jack.
I don't get paid to work at BMO
I don't sell alcohol at BMO
I have nothing whatsoever to do with any AGCO charges against the management of BMO as it applies to the selling of alcohol.
Yet for some reason I was negatively affected.

NOW IF
and this is to cut off the non-sequitors about nets and fan behaviours, ticket holders repeatedly did something wrong, ie threw a beer etc. and BMO Field Management, did everything possible to curb the malcontents but to no avail, then I wouldn't be surpirsed to be lumped in with them.

I support the team...I don't run it or the venue. The charges were against the management of the venue, and the people they HIRE...not me or anyone of my "category".

fyi I know BMO field management is MLSE, I just didn't want to type MLSE so I could avoid the spin doctors changing the perception of my post into an anti-MLSE post that will be ignored.
You used "we" in such a way as to imply that we're all in this together and now you're saying "I". I personally did nothing to cause the situation either, but I also understand why it happened. This is not to say that the facility management does not need to step up their act big time, because they do. We all know that a lot of people use TFC games as an excuse to act like drunken asshats, which is a part of what caused this situation. The unfortunate thing here is that there is likely to be a tightening of the type of security we don't particularly like. At the same time a lot of people seem to think they can pretty much do whatever they like in the stands at a TFC game, so there's got to be some sort of middle ground where it works for all involved.

The whole pat-down thing was an inconvenience to me, but not much more than that. If that's Stockholm Syndrome, then I've got it.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 01:37 PM
it wasn't 'ejection' - It's 'denial of entry'.

SAME difference.

Semantics IMO. Regardless - you can't watch the game. I'm not hung up on the term, it's the force that bothers me. I'm forced to be touched by a stranger to enter a soccer game.

MUFC_Niagara
07-20-2009, 01:39 PM
No I do not. I think going to a 'soccer game' does not warrant anyone having to touch my body for weapons and alcohol. It has been the slow acceptance of such activity that makes it acceptable. It's the slow deterioration of our privacy, running in tandem with street camera's or CCTV. I had to have an eye scan to move to the UK... It goes on. So yes, as a human, I feel compelled to suggest that having to be physically touched by a stranger is a violation, especially with the only alternative being ejection. I am forced to accept it in imperative circumstances, but that does not make me accept it's origins. I hope that clears it up a little.... But nice rhetorical stance and signature. I must say - I really do think you are showing your stripes more clearly by the day.

If you have nothing to hide whats the big deal? It was basic pat down. If it prevents someone wack job from entering the stadium with a concealed weapon then I am fine with it. We don't know the details, maybe the police had some intel that something might be going down at that game. If you feel your civl rights were violated (albeit you're in the UK), then I suggest hire an attorney and allow the supreme court to decide the matter.

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 01:44 PM
Semantics IMO. Regardless - you can't watch the game. I'm not hung up on the term, it's the force that bothers me. I'm forced to be touched by a stranger to enter a soccer game.


this one time only.


and sure you can watch the game if you don't want to get searched - you watch it from home.

going to a TFC game isn't a right. No one has removed our rights.

Get In There
07-20-2009, 02:30 PM
If you have nothing to hide whats the big deal? It was basic pat down. If it prevents someone wack job from entering the stadium with a concealed weapon then I am fine with it. We don't know the details, maybe the police had some intel that something might be going down at that game. If you feel your civl rights were violated (albeit you're in the UK), then I suggest hire an attorney and allow the supreme court to decide the matter.

:facepalm:

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Yes, KP is pushing the envelope a bit with the human rights angle......but your statement is truly and woefully ignorant.

So easily coerced into giving away what others sacrificed to achieve

B

maninb
07-20-2009, 02:33 PM
We waited 3-4 minutes in line, I had a flask of single-malt, and walked in no problem after one really lame 'pat-down'....If people had shown up 20-30 minutes prior to kick-off they wouldn't have missed much of the match...

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 02:44 PM
:facepalm:

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Yes, KP is pushing the envelope a bit with the human rights angle......but your statement is truly and woefully ignorant.

So easily coerced into giving away what others sacrificed to achieve

B

I'm glad someone else said this... It's the union culture slippery slope... Look, let me look around your home for drugs, I mean .... If you have nothing to hide, what's the issue... WOW!!! I can't believe people are still using that strap line... :picard::picard::picard::picard::picard::picard:

Shep
07-20-2009, 02:52 PM
Semantics IMO. Regardless - you can't watch the game. I'm not hung up on the term, it's the force that bothers me. I'm forced to be touched by a stranger to enter a soccer game.

My take on this is that if a person refuses to be patted and is denied it is legit but they should receive a refund for their ticket. It is a private venue. They set the rules, watching the match is not a human right, it's en event being put on by someone.

If you go into a movie theatre with a backpack, they can search it as well, or deny you entry, same situation.

You can't use words like 'forced' in this instance. Statements like, "I'm forced to be touched by a stranger to enter a soccer game." just kill your argument.

Anyways, you didn't get patted did you?

Shep
07-20-2009, 03:03 PM
I'm glad someone else said this... It's the union culture slippery slope... Look, let me look around your home for drugs, I mean .... If you have nothing to hide, what's the issue... WOW!!! I can't believe people are still using that strap line... :picard::picard::picard::picard::picard::picard:

Except in this case it was US going into THEIR home.

Opposite ends of the spectrum.. logically you've just validated your opponents argument. Good work! (Unless what you are saying is that anyone should have the right to enter another's property unchallenged and free of limitations.. but you aren't are you? :) )

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 03:04 PM
My take on this is that if a person refuses to be patted and is denied it is legit but they should receive a refund for their ticket. It is a private venue. They set the rules, watching the match is not a human right, it's en event being put on by someone.

If you go into a movie theatre with a backpack, they can search it as well, or deny you entry, same situation.

You can't use words like 'forced' in this instance. Statements like, "I'm forced to be touched by a stranger to enter a soccer game." just kill your argument.

Anyways, you didn't get patted did you?

Nope. Because I live in the land of professional football clubs at the moment. I ask, if thye can go without patting down fans, why does TFC... Why? What is the overarching rationale? Spain.. no pat down.... Italy... none... England... never (in many, many stadiums)... so why in friendly little Canada????

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 03:06 PM
Except in this case it was US going into THEIR home.

Opposite ends of the spectrum.. logically you've just validated your opponents argument. Good work! (Unless what you are saying is that anyone should have the right to enter another's property unchallenged and free of limitations.. but you aren't are you? :) )

So you pat people down when they come into your home? You're certainly a great host!!

Shep
07-20-2009, 03:07 PM
We waited 3-4 minutes in line, I had a flask of single-malt, and walked in no problem after one really lame 'pat-down'....If people had shown up 20-30 minutes prior to kick-off they wouldn't have missed much of the match...

Exactly.

We had more than enough warning to get there early. I was in 40 minutes before kick-off, there wasn't even a line forming yet.

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 03:07 PM
Spain.. no pat down.... Italy... none... England... never (in many, many stadiums)... so why in friendly little Canada????


http://www.wannask8.com/template/wannaskin/images/map/map_North_America.gif






if they do in in every NFL game, then they will be doing it in the MLS too.
Toronto FC is never going to play in a league outside of MLS, or a continent outside of North America, so it seems like a pointless comparison, no?

Darlofletch
07-20-2009, 03:09 PM
Nope. Because I live in the land of professional football clubs at the moment. I ask, if thye can go without patting down fans, why does TFC... Why? What is the overarching rationale? Spain.. no pat down.... Italy... none... England... never (in many, many stadiums)... so why in friendly little Canada????

When I lived in England, going to Darlington games, I got patted down regularly, in a fairly half arsed way admittedly, the same as at most TFC games, so I'm not sure how you're holding up England as some grand carefree place to watch football where no-one ever gets patted down. the extra pat downs beyond the usual was clearly a special case to avoid future multiple game booze bans.

Get In There
07-20-2009, 03:10 PM
http://www.wannask8.com/template/wannaskin/images/map/map_North_America.gif






if they do in in every NFL game, then they will be doing it in the MLS too.
Toronto FC is never going to play in a league outside of MLS, or a continent outside of North America, so it seems like a pointless comparison, no?


Do you know if they searched when the Bills played here? Curious - if it was mandated by head office.

"Toronto FC is never going to play in a league outside of MLS, or a continent outside of North America, so it seems like a pointless comparison, no?"

No - I don't see your point - or is it, what US does we must do? He was talking about entry to other soccer stadiums....this is on point.no?

B

Roogsy
07-20-2009, 03:10 PM
Nope. Because I live in the land of professional football clubs at the moment. I ask, if thye can go without patting down fans, why does TFC... Why? What is the overarching rationale? Spain.. no pat down.... Italy... none... England... never (in many, many stadiums)... so why in friendly little Canada????

Holy crap, this isn't a TFC issue Pat, this is a Canada issue.

It's not like pat-downs don't happen anywhere else in Toronto or Canada for that matter.

I've been patted down in all sorts of venues around the city. Parkdale showed you it happens in the CFL. And yet you continue to make this a MLS/MLSE issue when it so obviously is not.

Gawd...even when you are obviously wrong, you can't admit it.

Let me make this simple for you. It happens in Canada and the US. It has for years. Deal with it. Or don't, since you are not here. But don't make it an issue when 99% of the people at the stadium didn't really care other than the fact that it took longer to get to the seats.

Boondaddy
07-20-2009, 03:12 PM
Semantics IMO. Regardless - you can't watch the game. I'm not hung up on the term, it's the force that bothers me. I'm forced to be touched by a stranger to enter a soccer game.


...I'll forcibly touch you inaminute ;)

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 03:14 PM
...I'll forcibly touch you inaminute ;)

Are you hitting on me!!?? <3

Shep
07-20-2009, 03:15 PM
So you pat people down when they come into your home? You're certainly a great host!!

Man, you don't know my friends... and strangers wouldn't just be walking into our parties. I wouldn't pat them, but if I had any questions about what they're doing there I'd ask.. issues with them being there, and they'd be ejected.

But nice way to divert the conversation.

I'm going out for Taco Bell now, this is kind of boring.
Danmit.. I have to wear a shirt and shoes to get in there... there goes my freedom!!!!! What did my Grandad fight for????

:banghead:

Smuttynose
07-20-2009, 03:16 PM
Nope. Because I live in the land of professional football clubs at the moment. I ask, if thye can go without patting down fans, why does TFC... Why? What is the overarching rationale? Spain.. no pat down.... Italy... none... England... never (in many, many stadiums)... so why in friendly little Canada????

sorry, did you forget why there was extra security? ummm... liquor violation... and i'm sure we would have to go more than one game without booze if someone snuck something in.

i, as a female, had no issue with the search. i went through the south entrance in about 30 seconds at 12:30, and it really wasn't much more of a hassle than on regular game days. i can't speak for anyone else, but i personally didn't feel like my basic human rights were violated in the least.

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 03:17 PM
Do you know if they searched when the Bills played here? Curious - if it was mandated by head office.

No - I don't see your point - or is it, what US does we must do? He was talking about entry to other soccer stadiums....this is on point.no?



Yes, they will search bills fans coming into the Skydome (http://www.billsintoronto.com/details_faq#24)


It doesn't matter what sport we're talking about here.
We have to play by the rules, and those rules are common across our continent.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 03:18 PM
Holy crap, this isn't a TFC issue Pat, this is a Canada issue.

It's not like pat-downs don't happen anywhere else in Toronto or Canada for that matter.

I've been patted down in all sorts of venues around the city. Parkdale showed you it happens in the CFL. And yet you continue to make this a MLS/MLSE issue when it so obviously is not.

Gawd...even when you are obviously wrong, you can't admit it.

Let me make this simple for you. It happens in Canada and the US. It has for years. Deal with it. Or don't, since you are not here. But don't make it an issue when 99% of the people at the stadium didn't really care other than the fact that it took longer to get to the seats.

I'm not wrong - you are wrong!! Simply, it comes down to training... And I don't get searched at Jays games... So why do some do it and some don't??? Why?? Is this because Garver is one of the former NFL cronies... ?? Lotsa you are wrong PK, with simple maps as the "reasoning"... :o

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 03:20 PM
Lotsa you are wrong PK, with simple maps as the "reasoning"... :o


Every major sports stadium in North America does some form of searches.
Deny it all you like, but that's the world we live in.

Toronto FC will never be playing outside of the North American sports world.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 03:20 PM
Yes, they will search bills fans coming into the Skydome (http://www.billsintoronto.com/details_faq#24)


It doesn't matter what sport we're talking about here.
We have to play by the rules, and those rules are common across our continent.

Sheer lie. It's easy to support your argument when you lie. Raptors, I've never been searched... Jays, (only nap-sacks) but never patted. Bills, never searched to be honest, now that I recall... And I've been 10-12 times... Quoting policy doesn't make it so!!!

Get In There
07-20-2009, 03:22 PM
Man, you don't know my friends... and strangers wouldn't just be walking into our parties. I wouldn't pat them, but if I had any questions about what they're doing there I'd ask.. issues with them being there, and they'd be ejected.

But nice way to divert the conversation.

I'm going out for Taco Bell now, this is kind of boring.
Danmit.. I have to wear a shirt and shoes to get in there... there goes my freedom!!!!! What did my Grandad fight for????

:banghead:

Have you ever watched The Big Lebowski?

"The courts have roundly rejected prior restraint Dude"

reminds me of the "Fuck, I can get you a toe in 5 minutes" scene

B

Boondaddy
07-20-2009, 03:22 PM
Are you hitting on me!!?? <3


:facepalm:

BuSaPuNk
07-20-2009, 03:23 PM
I can understand the frustration from Kingpin. It's one thing if it was across the board....just out of the blue and you get checked sometimes and some places and not in others.....it's a joke. Listen I didn't mind the check at all....I got there too early I think concidering we had time to chill outside the southend gate and walk all the way around to gate 2 by the GO and get in BMO like 2 mins after lining up.

It wouldn't bother me if they even did this everygame. It's inconsitancy that is the problem. Bills game in TO you will be checked (venue Rogers Centre).....Jays game they almost never check anyone unless you have a bag or something (venue Rogers Centre), Leafs game never be checked in the 6+ times I have gone in the last 5-6 yrs.

London
07-20-2009, 03:23 PM
they pat you down at the international bowl at rogers centre, also was heavily searched at rogers centre for serbia vs Italy going into the italian supporters section.

you are patted down at most concerts unless it is raffi

been patted down at least 50 times

Broadview
07-20-2009, 03:25 PM
Nope. Because I live in the land of professional football clubs at the moment. I ask, if thye can go without patting down fans, why does TFC... Why? What is the overarching rationale? Spain.. no pat down.... Italy... none... England... never (in many, many stadiums)... so why in friendly little Canada????


¥ou don't have to be searched in England because if you pull something, you're already on CCTV :)

T-Bird
07-20-2009, 03:26 PM
I was unfortunately absent from the game on Saturday but have only ever been patted down once in my life and that was because a security guard saw me smoking a joint at a club...was my own stupid fault.

Is this going to take place at every game from now on? Also, I noticed Holly's post about a security guard that was going to pat you down was referred to as "he" and if I'm not mistaken that is not legal. A male security guard or police officer can not "pat down" a female. They are supposed to call a female to do it. That is why often at clubs and other venues where this is common practice they have a separate line for girls to enter.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 03:27 PM
I can understand the frustration from Kingpin. It's one thing if it was across the board....just out of the blue and you get checked sometimes and some places and not in others.....it's a joke. Listen I didn't mind the check at all....I got there too early I think concidering we had time to chill outside the southend gate and walk all the way around to gate 2 by the GO and get in BMO like 2 mins after lining up.

It wouldn't bother me if they even did this everygame. It's inconsitancy that is the problem. Bills game in TO you will be checked (venue Rogers Centre).....Jays game they almost never check anyone unless you have a bag or something (venue Rogers Centre), Leafs game never be checked in the 6+ times I have gone in the last 5-6 yrs.

Bingo!!

Get In There
07-20-2009, 03:28 PM
Yes, they will search bills fans coming into the Skydome (http://www.billsintoronto.com/details_faq#24)


It doesn't matter what sport we're talking about here.
We have to play by the rules, and those rules are common across our continent.


So they do not pat down the customers like BMO did - tks.

What do you mean "We have to play by the rules, and those rules are common across our continent" What treaty did we sign? What am I missing here.

What are these common set of rules you speak of and where can I read them?

B

Boondaddy
07-20-2009, 03:28 PM
I'm not wrong - you are wrong!! Simply, it comes down to training... And I don't get searched at Jays games... So why do some do it and some don't??? Why?? Is this because Garver is one of the former NFL cronies... ?? Lotsa you are wrong PK, with simple maps as the "reasoning"... :o

because there was an alcohol ban for one match and they couldn't risk someone smuggling in their own booze.....it's really that simple.

Smuttynose
07-20-2009, 03:30 PM
I was unfortunately absent from the game on Saturday but have only ever been patted down once in my life and that was because a security guard saw me smoking a joint at a club...was my own stupid fault.

Is this going to take place at every game from now on? Also, I noticed Holly's post about a security guard that was going to pat you down was referred to as "he" and if I'm not mistaken that is not legal. A male security guard or police officer can not "pat down" a female. They are supposed to call a female to do it. That is why often at clubs and other venues where this is common practice they have a separate line for girls to enter.


they did have lots of female security guards there... i'm sure you could've asked for one of them if you didn't feel comfortable.

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 03:30 PM
because there was an alcohol ban for one match and they couldn't risk someone smuggling in their own booze.....it's really that simple.


yeah, it is pretty simple.


It sounds like some people would have preferred it if BMO got a 6 game alcohol suspension instead of searching people and causing a minor inconvenience for one match.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 03:30 PM
I was unfortunately absent from the game on Saturday but have only ever been patted down once in my life and that was because a security guard saw me smoking a joint at a club...was my own stupid fault.

Is this going to take place at every game from now on? Also, I noticed Holly's post about a security guard that was going to pat you down was referred to as "he" and if I'm not mistaken that is not legal. A male security guard or police officer can not "pat down" a female. They are supposed to call a female to do it. That is why often at clubs they have a separate line for girls to enter.

And as a woman, how would that whole process make you feel. Really, think about it. On a sunny Saturday afternoon, you have to ask some man who wants to pat you down o go and get a female to do it. Then you wait, and you get pated down by a woman in front of everyone... Honestly, how would that make you feel. I'd NEVER let me partner be subjected to that, and I would turn and walk away. No man would let his partner go through that... Just my thoughts... But I'm curious... How would you feel?

T-Bird
07-20-2009, 03:32 PM
And as a woman, how would that whole process make you feel. Really, think about it. On a sunny Saturday afternoon, you have to ask some man who wants to pat you down o go and get a female to do it. Then you wait, and you get pated down by a woman in front of everyone... Honestly, how would that make you feel. I'd NEVER let me partner be subjected to that, and I would turn and walk away. No man would let his partner go through that... Just my thoughts... But I'm curious... How would you feel?


It wouldn't bother me at all...if anything it would make me feel a lot safer. Really though it's not like she's going to feel me up or grab my naughty bits!

Hooligan69
07-20-2009, 03:33 PM
I was patted down twice on my way into BMO on Saturday. Didn't get to my seat until the 25th minute due to a few reasons. 20 minutes into the first half and the lineups outside were rather ridiculous.

Smuttynose
07-20-2009, 03:35 PM
It wouldn't bother me at all...if anything it would make me feel a lot safer. Really though it's not like she's going to feel me up or grab my naughty bits!

+ 1 totally agree

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 03:35 PM
Then you wait, and you get pated down by a woman in front of everyone...


oh gosh.... in front of everyone???? Oh the shame!!!

:rolleyes:

Darlofletch
07-20-2009, 03:37 PM
And as a woman, how would that whole process make you feel. Really, think about it. On a sunny Saturday afternoon, you have to ask some man who wants to pat you down o go and get a female to do it. Then you wait, and you get pated down by a woman in front of everyone... Honestly, how would that make you feel. I'd NEVER let me partner be subjected to that, and I would turn and walk away. No man would let his partner go through that... Just my thoughts... But I'm curious... How would you feel?

My wife was at the game with me, she got patted down initially by a guy, who asked her if she minded, then after we got inside she was patted down by a woman. She wasn't bothered either time and neither was I.

And why is it worse for a woman to be patted down than for a man? My wife would kill me if i tried to argue she needed special treatment.

T-Bird
07-20-2009, 03:37 PM
. On a sunny Saturday afternoon, you get pated down by a woman in front of everyone...

hahaha! Isn't that just a free show?

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 03:38 PM
It wouldn't bother me at all...if anything it would make me feel a lot safer. Really though it's not like she's going to feel me up or grab my naughty bits!

So it really wouldn't bother you that you'd have to refuse the male security individual and then wait for a female one while others are standing around... and watching? Maybe it is just me then, but I would never subject my partner to this. It's a personal space and respect thing. It's just not civilised...

T-Bird
07-20-2009, 03:39 PM
So it really wouldn't bother you that you'd have to refuse the male security individual and then wait for a female one while others are standing around... and watching? Maybe it is just me then, but I would never subject my partner to this. It's a personal space and respect thing. It's just not civilised...


I think it's just you

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 03:41 PM
oh gosh.... in front of everyone???? Oh the shame!!!

:rolleyes:

WHOA!! You forgot to continue your exceptionally lame argument that all NA sports teams perform searches!!! C'mon!!! GET ON IT!!! :facepalm:

You are allowed to take on new arguments when you are completed with the ones you are botching miserably!! :hump:

Smuttynose
07-20-2009, 03:41 PM
So it really wouldn't bother you that you'd have to refuse the male security individual and then wait for a female one while others are standing around... and watching? Maybe it is just me then, but I would never subject my partner to this. It's a personal space and respect thing. It's just not civilised...

if it's a male security guard they ask you if you mind them patting you down... if you say no, they didn't have to go to the other end of the stadium to get a female, she was right beside him working another line at the same gate... totally a non issue

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 03:42 PM
I think it's just you

It must be a generational thing...

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 03:43 PM
You are allowed to take on new arguments when you are completed with the ones you are botching miserably!! :hump:


no... you just ignore the ones you can't win.

like the whole "violating our basic human rights" angle you tried to take.

but now it's all better, because this is really all about respect for the ladies right?

T-Bird
07-20-2009, 03:44 PM
It must be a generational thing...

What are you 85?

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 03:47 PM
no... you just ignore the ones you can't win.

like the whole "violating our basic human rights" angle you tried to take.

but now it's all better, because this is really all about respect for the ladies right?

No No No No... You don't.... c'mon now. Tell me again how ALL NA stadiums perform searches... C'mon... one more time for prosperity!!

T-Bird
07-20-2009, 03:51 PM
No No No No... You don't.... c'mon now. Tell me again how ALL NA stadiums perform searches... C'mon... one more time for prosperity!!


Does it really matter if ALL of them do? The fact remains that it was and is done so for a reason at every venue that chooses to do so and that is for safety and to prevent people from bringing in illegal or banned substances.

Rudi
07-20-2009, 03:51 PM
no... you just ignore the ones you can't win.

like the whole "violating our basic human rights" angle you tried to take.

but now it's all better, because this is really all about respect for the ladies right?
Didn't someone also point out that they were subjected to pat downs/searches at an English venue, too?

It's funny how fast that angle was dropped after that post.


Does it really matter if ALL of them do? The fact remains that it was and is done so for a reason at every venue that chooses to do so and that is for safety and to prevent people from bringing in illegal or banned substances.
AND they warned people well before the fact.

It's not like this was just randomly sprung onto people as they arrived.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 03:53 PM
Didn't someone also point out that they were subjected to pat downs/searches at an English venue, too?

It's funny how fast that angle was dropped after that post.

When was that Mr. Post chaser? I've been to 15+ stadiums... with a ruck sack.. and camera equip... no searches yet... The whole thing is about consistency. But hey I say black - they say white, this is what makes it so much fun!!

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 03:55 PM
Does it really matter if ALL of them do? The fact remains that it was and is done so for a reason at every venue that chooses to do so and that is for safety and to prevent people from bringing in illegal or banned substances.

Originally, I think it was meant to make sure people didn't bring in their own water so they could sell more! We argued that water was ok... so they moved to booze!

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 03:58 PM
But hey I say black - they say white, this is what makes it so much fun!!

you said a pat-down search is...... one more time..... a violation of basic human rights.


Surely we're disagreeing with that, just because we like to be contrary.
It has nothing to do with the fact that it's absolutely incorrect.


but hey, you weren't even there, so anything you say about it is all second hand anyway.

T-Bird
07-20-2009, 03:59 PM
Why the hell would someone hide a water bottle in their pants?

Rudi
07-20-2009, 04:00 PM
When was that Mr. Post chaser? I've been to 15+ stadiums... with a ruck sack.. and camera equip... no searches yet... The whole thing is about consistency. But hey I say black - they say white, this is what makes it so much fun!!
LOL nice try. I'm a post chaser, yet I haven't posted a single thing until now, and how many pages into the conversation are we?

You've some ridiculous things today, not only in this thread, but also the Beckham thread, and I haven't said a word until now. Post Chaser, indeed.

BTW, here this post I was referring to, which you so conveniently failed to see, yet you've since completely dropped the "England stadiums never do searches" angle:


When I lived in England, going to Darlington games, I got patted down regularly, in a fairly half arsed way admittedly, the same as at most TFC games, so I'm not sure how you're holding up England as some grand carefree place to watch football where no-one ever gets patted down. the extra pat downs beyond the usual was clearly a special case to avoid future multiple game booze bans.

Darlofletch
07-20-2009, 04:01 PM
When I lived in England, going to Darlington games, I got patted down regularly, in a fairly half arsed way admittedly, the same as at most TFC games, so I'm not sure how you're holding up England as some grand carefree place to watch football where no-one ever gets patted down. the extra pat downs beyond the usual was clearly a special case to avoid future multiple game booze bans.


Didn't someone also point out that they were subjected to pat downs/searches at an English venue, too?

not like this was just randomly sprung onto people as they arrived.


When was that Mr. Post chaser? I've been to 15+ stadiums... with a ruck sack.. and camera equip... no searches yet... The whole thing is about consistency. But hey I say black - they say white, this is what makes it so much fun!!

That was me. I'm not calling you a liar, but to suggest your experience is the only one that exists in England is a bit much. I remember getting searched at cricket games, cricket for christs sake (though to be fair the western terrace at headingley on the saturday of a test match used to be an alarmingly drunken place).

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 04:04 PM
you said a pat-down search is...... one more time..... a violation of basic human rights.


Surely we're disagreeing with that, just because we like to be contrary.
It has nothing to do with the fact that it's absolutely incorrect.


but hey, you weren't even there, so anything you say about it is all second hand anyway.

Well it was the only thing I said. So you are right!! :rofl:

But that's what the ------ people do. Hinge on one point to make the heavily biased argument seem legitimate. Like me "attacking Naturegirl"... You are hinging on one element of what I said vs. the overarching intention. BMO security is grossly undertrained and thus do not perform proper consistent and accurate searches... But go and hinge on whatever it takes for you to defend Paul... Who knows!!???$$$ (See, we can all do that)

Brooker
07-20-2009, 04:04 PM
many of us have Kingpin on ignore and it's a breath of fresh air except when he's quoted over and over. try not to quote him if at all possible. :D

Troll
07-20-2009, 04:06 PM
I don't post here very often, but I've discovered a weird pattern.

I've discovered that I'm more inclined to throw my laptop off the balcony after reading a thread that Kingpin is involved in.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 04:06 PM
LOL nice try. I'm a post chaser, yet I haven't posted a single thing until now, and how many pages into the conversation are we?

You've some ridiculous things today, not only in this thread, but also the Beckham thread, and I haven't said a word until now. Post Chaser, indeed.

BTW, here this post I was referring to, which you so conveniently failed to see, yet you've since completely dropped the "England stadiums never do searches" angle:

Have you been to Darlington? I'd expect to be searched at the city (using that term lightly) border. I'm talking about placed where there are Football Clubs... Not bootloads of Chav's... :o

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 04:08 PM
BMO security is grossly undertrained and thus do not perform proper consistent and accurate searches...


well technically it's an entirely new security team (brought in from the ACC over the last off-season),
so you've never actually experienced them first hand - Just more hot air.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 04:08 PM
That was me. I'm not calling you a liar, but to suggest your experience is the only one that exists in England is a bit much. I remember getting searched at cricket games, cricket for christs sake (though to be fair the western terrace at headingley on the saturday of a test match used to be an alarmingly drunken place).

I go to TONS of cricket.... never been searched yet. But to your point, I'm generally in different areas. But I was in Scarborough on Saturday... Helping RUN THE EVENT... No searches...

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 04:10 PM
well technically it's an entirely new security team (brought in from the ACC over the last off-season),
so you've never actually experienced them first hand - Just more hot air.

So new. And not improved. Just ask Jack and FLUSH!!!??? Calling them full of hot air are you. Like to see that live!! Jack as I'm aware is collecting security stories to present to TFC... Is that not true... So... You're up! Are Flush, Jack... and other members attending games liars??

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 04:12 PM
I don't post here very often, but I've discovered a weird pattern.

I've discovered that I'm more inclined to throw my laptop off the balcony after reading a thread that Kingpin is involved in.

I don't blame you! I'm freakin' irritating! Don't worry, you guys can get back to the 'regularly scheduled program' really soon. Just having a laugh tonight!! I'm getting ready to usurp the current TFC leadership from the UK!! Buuhahaha!!

Parkdale
07-20-2009, 04:13 PM
http://static.open.salon.com/files/down_arrow_inv1245951673.png

hey you, down there in the post below me.
you can have the last word in here. I'm done work, and going to the pub.

The Kingpin
07-20-2009, 04:17 PM
you're so predictable.

I only said that YOU were not THERE. (which is something you can't debate, or can you?)


so you're collecting security stories to present to TFC? how nice. I'm sure they'll love to sit down with you to hear them.

No! I'm trying to "Parkdale" an argument. I'll keep responding with an opposite opinion until others fritter away... Then I claim victory!! I can stay on the internet longer than ANYONE!! :drinking:

I call:










LAST WORD!!!

Yohan
07-20-2009, 04:18 PM
Why the hell would someone hide a water bottle in their pants?
to avoid paying 4 bucks at concessions...

etro
07-20-2009, 04:28 PM
Showed up 5 mins late for the game, saw MASSIVE lineup to enter at Gate 3. Went to the other Gate 3 entrance that apparently no one knows about LOL, waited about a minute or two, got pat down, they scanned my ticket, then pat me down again.

Troll
07-20-2009, 04:31 PM
to avoid paying 4 bucks at concessions...

I do it to enhance the size of my junk.

TFC Via Buffalo
07-20-2009, 04:34 PM
Showed up 5 mins late for the game, saw MASSIVE lineup to enter at Gate 3. Went to the other Gate 3 entrance that apparently no one knows about LOL, waited about a minute or two, got pat down, they scanned my ticket, then pat me down again.

It's funny, because a few of us in the top of 110 started yelling at people to go around to that gate.

Blizzard
07-20-2009, 04:40 PM
It's funny, because a few of us in the top of 110 started yelling at people to go around to that gate.

Even BMO staffers at 3 were telling people to go to 3A!

Not many listened it seems.

TFC Via Buffalo
07-20-2009, 04:46 PM
Even BMO staffers at 3 were telling people to go to 3A!

Not many listened it seems.

Nobody could probably hear them. I looked out around then 10 min mark and the line was half way down the parking lot going towards the north gate.

I did my part. I just kept giving updates by yelling, "Nothing's happened."

Get In There
07-20-2009, 05:40 PM
Does it really matter if ALL of them do? The fact remains that it was and is done so for a reason at every venue that chooses to do so and that is for safety and to prevent people from bringing in illegal or banned substances.


Come on though - this was nothing to do with safety - it was about booze - it was also about making sure people didn't bring in water / juice.

Question - was the body search made mandatory by the gov or did TFC choose to do this?

B

Get In There
07-20-2009, 06:00 PM
because there was an alcohol ban for one match and they couldn't risk someone smuggling in their own booze.....it's really that simple.


...and people sneaking in their own water.

Do people believe that if (pardon the bullets)

- there is a booze ban at a major sporting event.
- the stadium chooses to enforce the governing laws to the letter that day (and prob should every game)
- no body search on the way in. Usual bag check.
- have extra security and people seen with smuggled booze are dealt to fullest extent.


How are they going to get a 6 game ban?

Because some people are found with booze inside as opposed to outside?

I think the government smack-down is a bit of a herring.

There was a positive economic impact from the search and publicity of it.



No, the fine asian woman should not have patted me down....:)

B

MUFC_Niagara
07-20-2009, 06:30 PM
Holy crap, this isn't a TFC issue Pat, this is a Canada issue.

It's not like pat-downs don't happen anywhere else in Toronto or Canada for that matter.

I've been patted down in all sorts of venues around the city. Parkdale showed you it happens in the CFL. And yet you continue to make this a MLS/MLSE issue when it so obviously is not.

Gawd...even when you are obviously wrong, you can't admit it.

Let me make this simple for you. It happens in Canada and the US. It has for years. Deal with it. Or don't, since you are not here. But don't make it an issue when 99% of the people at the stadium didn't really care other than the fact that it took longer to get to the seats.

:hump: Thank you Roogsy.....and as I said before, if you have nothing to hide then who cares......pat me down all you want! As was stated earlier, if you don't want to have a pat down, don't go to TFC, NFL, MLB, NBA, concerts, night clubs.....its that simple Patrick et. all who are calling this a "rights violation". Furthermore, take MLSE if you think you are correct. Also Pat, I've had a pat down before go to the football in the UK and Italy.

dag
07-20-2009, 08:08 PM
My pat-down was done by a Hot Asian Girl. 'Nuff said.

olegunnar
07-20-2009, 08:24 PM
You used "we" in such a way as to imply that we're all in this together and now you're saying "I". I personally did nothing to cause the situation either, but I also understand why it happened. This is not to say that the facility management does not need to step up their act big time, because they do. We all know that a lot of people use TFC games as an excuse to act like drunken asshats, which is a part of what caused this situation. The unfortunate thing here is that there is likely to be a tightening of the type of security we don't particularly like. At the same time a lot of people seem to think they can pretty much do whatever they like in the stands at a TFC game, so there's got to be some sort of middle ground where it works for all involved.

The whole pat-down thing was an inconvenience to me, but not much ore than that. If that's Stockholm Syndrome, then I've got it.

You're missing the point, and I hope that's not deliberate.

The ACGO, who's rules and regs BMO field broke...is concerned with the sale and service of alchohol in the province of Ontario.
That's got absolutely zero to do with us, the paying public.

You have a licence to sell alcohol...and the ACGO is on your ass watching.

You're a purchaser and the cops are watching.

You're a minor with alcohol, and the ACGO will go after the seller, should they chose....the cops can give you a ticket.

You, me, and the rest of the people that got pat downs on Saturday have absolutely no repsonsibility or accountability to the ACGO. The cops are our watch dogs. We drink, we don't apply for licences to sell.

This was and is a BMO field problem...not ours. No way should we have to be inconvienienced in any way.

Sure impose a ban on BMO field, so they learn their lesson...but what logical rationale is there for BMO to try and pawn of their fuck ups on the general public?

Roogsy
07-20-2009, 08:30 PM
This way of thinking defies logic.

It was well publicized that if BMO did not take steps to make sure nobody snuck in booze for the game, that there would be further actions taken by the ACGO.

So there IS rationale for BMO to take measures. Not only would we as fans see further dry games, but BMO Field, the City, and TFC would see their revenues affected by further disciplinary action by the regulators.

It really is as simple as that. And us complaining about it is foolish unless one of us is brilliant enough to figure out a way to make sure people don't sneak in alcohol in a manner different than physically searching patrons.

And if you figure that out...make sure to send that brilliant idea to bars and night clubs who pat us down for drugs and weapons when we visit their establishments as well...you'll be filthy rich.

olegunnar
07-20-2009, 08:38 PM
Oh and Jack...the ban had nothing to do with public intoxication.

here's the relevant blurb:



AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS

The Licensee who has been advised by counsel and Registrar’s counsel agree to the following facts in relation to the Notice of Proposal to Suspend a Licence dated October 7, 2008.

1. On May 17, 2008, liquor inspectors and police officers visited the licensed premises and found several minors consuming liquor in the premises. On May 21, 2008 liquor inspectors and a police officer found another minor consuming liquor on the Licensee’s premises.

2. Based on the above-mentioned facts, the Licensee admits to having breached section 30(4) of the Liquor Licence Act.

http://www.canlii.org/eliisa/highlight.do?text=bmo&language=en&searchTitle=Search+all+CanLII+Databases&path=/en/on/onagc/doc/2009/2009canlii29721/2009canlii29721.html

AL-MO
07-20-2009, 09:17 PM
OG....How is this any different than the Motley Crue concert last year? That concert was dry because of infractions at a previous concert. (at least that is what I understand)

Personally I think a fine should be handed out to the facility and not have paying customers punished later on at a future event, but that is the way it is.

MUFC_Niagara
07-20-2009, 09:38 PM
You're missing the point, and I hope that's not deliberate.

The ACGO, who's rules and regs BMO field broke...is concerned with the sale and service of alchohol in the province of Ontario.
That's got absolutely zero to do with us, the paying public.

You have a licence to sell alcohol...and the ACGO is on your ass watching.

You're a purchaser and the cops are watching.

You're a minor with alcohol, and the ACGO will go after the seller, should they chose....the cops can give you a ticket.

You, me, and the rest of the people that got pat downs on Saturday have absolutely no repsonsibility or accountability to the ACGO. The cops are our watch dogs. We drink, we don't apply for licences to sell.

This was and is a BMO field problem...not ours. No way should we have to be inconvienienced in any way.

Sure impose a ban on BMO field, so they learn their lesson...but what logical rationale is there for BMO to try and pawn of their fuck ups on the general public?

Has it occured to you that the pat down was unrelated to alcohol and that maybe the police received some intel that some sort of violence, possibly gang related, may have been happening at BMO that day? Again, if you don't like it.....don't go!

H Bomb
07-20-2009, 09:51 PM
^ sadly cant play that card...we were informed of a pat down in an email days before the event.

Wagner
07-20-2009, 09:55 PM
OG....How is this any different than the Motley Crue concert last year? That concert was dry because of infractions at a previous concert. (at least that is what I understand)

Personally I think a fine should be handed out to the facility and not have paying customers punished later on at a future event, but that is the way it is.

this is a good point.

as my buddy who only gets to one or 2 games per year was really disappointed that his tix were for a dry game.
also, the workers that got the day off...
a fine against the operators would have the same net result...a hit to the mlse bottom line...

Wagner
07-20-2009, 09:57 PM
I've been patted down at most sporting events...the only time i'm not is if i go straight from work to a Leafs/Raps game...

I find when i wear cargo shorts my side pockets get a bit of the turn and cough cupping.

I was frisked by a security guard last year at Ralph Wilson by a creepy guy the locals refer to as Uncle Diddles....a very creepy guy that really enjoyed putting on the security jacket and making sure ZERO contraband got into the stadium on his watch.

MUFC_Niagara
07-20-2009, 10:27 PM
^ sadly cant play that card...we were informed of a pat down in an email days before the event.

Right, but they could have received intel weeks or days before the email was sent.

AL-MO
07-20-2009, 10:28 PM
With respect Tim, I think the only reason for the pat downs was to ensure there was no booze in the stadium at all on saturday.

stretchthetruth
07-20-2009, 11:02 PM
Right, but they could have received intel weeks or days before the email was sent.


and maybe if my aunt had a dick she'd be my uncle...

Belfast_Boy
07-21-2009, 08:59 AM
that pat down was a joke. could have brought in just about anything. I've been searched by the British Army and the Belfast police and let me tell you that it's very different and they mean business. when they were done I felt like I need a shower and to be cuddled.... but that's a story for another time.

the ban targeted the vendors but effected us more. sure they didn't sell any beer but still sold overpriced water, pop and popcorn that's almost all profit. not to mention TFC gear. I think we should call for a total fan boycott of all vendors at a game.

Get In There
07-21-2009, 09:02 AM
This way of thinking defies logic.

It was well publicized that if BMO did not take steps to make sure nobody snuck in booze for the game, that there would be further actions taken by the ACGO.

So there IS rationale for BMO to take measures. Not only would we as fans see further dry games, but BMO Field, the City, and TFC would see their revenues affected by further disciplinary action by the regulators.

It really is as simple as that. And us complaining about it is foolish unless one of us is brilliant enough to figure out a way to make sure people don't sneak in alcohol in a manner different than physically searching patrons.

And if you figure that out...make sure to send that brilliant idea to bars and night clubs who pat us down for drugs and weapons when we visit their establishments as well...you'll be filthy rich.



100% supposition

0% fact

"It was well publicized that if BMO did not take steps to make sure nobody snuck in booze for the game, that there would be further actions taken by the ACGO." - by whome, TFC? I'm interested if you have any information regarding the 'necessity' for body searches.

Was BMO mandated by the gov to conduct body searches?

I don't believe that is the case.

Yes, it really is as simple as that.

B

Get In There
07-21-2009, 09:06 AM
Right, but they could have received intel weeks or days before the email was sent.


right.........................

Dick Cheney......................is that you?

Did you finally find that Uranium from Nigeria?

B

Roogsy
07-21-2009, 09:50 AM
100% supposition

0% fact

"It was well publicized that if BMO did not take steps to make sure nobody snuck in booze for the game, that there would be further actions taken by the ACGO." - by whome, TFC? I'm interested if you have any information regarding the 'necessity' for body searches.

Was BMO mandated by the gov to conduct body searches?

I don't believe that is the case.

Yes, it really is as simple as that.

B

Actually, it's fact.

There is no "supposition". BMO Field was threatened with more sanctions if the dry game was violated in any way. How about you find out the facts before throwing up a silly post?

BMO did likely have a choice of how stringent the measures were going to be, but are you going to tell me they were going to put their faith in 20,000 soccer fans? You've got to be kidding me.

Get In There
07-21-2009, 09:51 AM
Was TFC / BMO mandated by any government agency to conduct body searches at the last home game?


An answer would certainly satisfy the discussion.....especially if the decision was out of your hands.

B

Roogsy
07-21-2009, 09:52 AM
Was TFC / BMO mandated by any government agency to conduct body searches at the last home game?


An answer would certainly satisfy the discussion.....especially if the decision was out of your hands.

B

It was government mandated that no alcohol be on the premises. End of story. How BMO goes about ensuring that is up to them.

But in all your wisdom, I suppose you have a better way of ensuring nobody sneaks in a mickey? Please....do tell.

Get In There
07-21-2009, 10:02 AM
Actually, it's fact.

There is no "supposition". BMO Field was threatened with more sanctions if the dry game was violated in any way. How about you find out the facts before throwing up a silly post?

BMO did likely have a choice of how stringent the measures were going to be, but are you going to tell me they were going to put their faith in 20,000 soccer fans? You've got to be kidding me.


You saying so doesn't make it so.

I have never stated anything was fact - that has been your tact so far.

You stated this earlier "It was well publicized that if BMO did not take steps to make sure nobody snuck in booze for the game, that there would be further actions taken by the ACGO.

Now they had a choice on how stringent they needed to be....?

Who's being silly

B

Roogsy
07-21-2009, 10:12 AM
Ah deflection and avoidance. I asked a question and you drove around it like a pothole.

The fact that they would have lose the license to serve alcohol at a future game and/or games IS what determined how stringent they needed to be. You'd think that would be obvious to you. What corporation wants to lose tens of thousands of dollars (if not more)? There is no stronger reason for BMO Field and the team to ensure nobody brings in alcohol than the loss of future sales. Therefore, the only option to them is to put in place the strongest system possible to ensure nobody sneaks in booze.

Now...the question falls back on your shoulders. Is there a better system than a pat-down? Please present it here so that we could all learn, including the team and stadium operations. Because if you can't come up with a better system...it is you that's being silly.

Parkdale
07-21-2009, 10:26 AM
Was TFC / BMO mandated by any government agency to conduct body searches at the last home game?



body searches?

a pat down is about as mild as you can get in the 'body searching' department.

Derko
07-21-2009, 10:28 AM
Pat downs are useless ... if someone really wants to sneak something in they know where to put it

Pat downs are usually a deterrent, I am sure some knuckleheads that felt they needed to smuggle something in got caught, I wasn't offended at all.

Get In There
07-21-2009, 10:29 AM
It was government mandated that no alcohol be on the premises. End of story. How BMO goes about ensuring that is up to them.

But in all your wisdom, I suppose you have a better way of ensuring nobody sneaks in a mickey? Please....do tell.


Excellent - can you let me know where I can obtain this information? I was made aware that BMO was banned from selling Alcohol.

Again - if BMO does an excellent job and catches (some at the gate - usual bag searches) people in the building that had snuck in booze the ACGO is going to come down on them with a 6 game booze ban?

I don't believe this is the case

B

Get In There
07-21-2009, 10:54 AM
Ah deflection and avoidance. I asked a question and you drove around it like a pothole.

The fact that they would have lose the license to serve alcohol at a future game and/or games IS what determined how stringent they needed to be. You'd think that would be obvious to you. What corporation wants to lose tens of thousands of dollars (if not more)? There is no stronger reason for BMO Field and the team to ensure nobody brings in alcohol than the loss of future sales. Therefore, the only option to them is to put in place the strongest system possible to ensure nobody sneaks in booze.

Now...the question falls back on your shoulders. Is there a better system than a pat-down? Please present it here so that we could all learn, including the team and stadium operations. Because if you can't come up with a better system...it is you that's being silly.


Again with the 'facts' that you can't prove.....?

:facepalm:

Just show me where you get this information.

just give me the information from a reliable source.

I don't need to prove how to 100% comply with no alcohol being smuggled in (or on premisis) without a pat down - because I don't believe this was mandated by the ACGO. It may have been and would certainly shape my point of view if this was the case. I would like to know this information. But sorry, I'm not going to believe a guy that states supposition as fact, tells me a story is over because he wants it to be.

Now if BMO doesn;t check all ID's at future games when buying beer(which I believe will be the case).........they will have issues.


"What corporation wants to lose tens of thousands of dollars (if not more)?"

I guess that's why they were not checking ID's well enough in the past or ensuring no pass alongs....also why they wanted to ensure water / pop was not being sneaked in.......it's always about the benjamins.

B

Roogsy
07-21-2009, 11:02 AM
What you believe is irrelevant. You have obviously not taken the time to find out the facts in the case and have chosen to take the positiong that anything MLSE has done in this matter is wrong, despite your lack of knowledge and information.

Even if I presented you with the evidence that the AGCO applies harsher penalties when a venue violates a "dry" event, will you recognize your mistaken position? Unlikely.

I am not going to waste my time answering points you raise when you ignore the questions I pose to you. It's classic avoidance and demonstrates the weakness of your position. Anyone reading this can see the lack of logic presented in your position and your refusal to acknowledge the points that argue against your position.

I've wasted enough time on this and the points I raised are there for people to make judgements on. Anyone who knows anything about how thw AGCO works knows that the next step in the process is multi-game bans. Once you realize that, you realize that the losses would be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars and whatever "Get in there" feels about pat downs is irrelevant. They care more about the loss of money than they do about your fear of having your armpits touched.

Get In There
07-21-2009, 11:12 AM
What you believe is irrelevant. You have obviously not taken the time to find out the facts in the case and have chosen to take the positiong that anything MLSE has done in this matter is wrong, despite your lack of knowledge and information.

Even if I presented you with the evidence that the AGCO applies harsher penalties when a venue violates a "dry" event, will you recognize your mistaken position? Unlikely.

I am not going to waste my time answering points you raise when you ignore the questions I pose to you. It's classic avoidance and demonstrates the weakness of your position. Anyone reading this can see the lack of logic presented in your position and your refusal to acknowledge the points that argue against your position.

I've wasted enough time on this and the points I raised are there for people to make judgements on. Anyone who knows anything about how thw AGCO works knows that the next step in the process is multi-game bans. Once you realize that, you realize that the losses would be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars and whatever "Get in there" feels about pat downs is irrelevant. They care more about the loss of money than they do about your fear of having your armpits touched.



:facepalm:

In short

You've got nothing but hyperbole, straw men and riducule.

The breakfast of champions

B

Roogsy
07-21-2009, 11:26 AM
Hyperbole: Factually incorrect since what I have stated is in no way an exaggeration.

Strawmen: That's your area of expertise. You have presented no facts, only doubted the ones presented and then played armchair quarterback without addressing the original facts in question.

Ridicule: It's easy to feel that way when you have no substance to your posts.

You have obviously not investigated any facts, you speak of what you have been made "aware" of but don't look beyond what you got in the email and them make assumptions. Now you want me to provide you with....what....nothing specific. What do you want me to bring. Past AGCO cases? The actual letter sent to MLSE? Present to you an official from the AGCO that will confirm that further violations result in wider reaching bans? Really? You don't have enough experience and knowledge to know this without me needing to quote you AGCO regulations? I can't waste my time on that kind of ignorance.

And for someone that has spent pages criticizing the team and stadium...what facts have you presented that back up your claim that the team/stadium stepped over the line?

ExiledRed
07-21-2009, 12:13 PM
I'm confused about one thing.

If the ban was meant to put a stop to 'vending' of alcohol.

Why would BMO be held responsible if I smuggled some in? They didn't serve it or provide it, and if I was discovered with it during any regular match, it would be confiscated, or I would be ejected.

I'm not stating any facts or suppositions here, I'm just wondering what premise AGCO has to impose sanctions on BMO if an individual smuggles in alcohol that was obtained elsewhere, against stadium rules?

It has nothing to do with selling to minors, nothing to do with overselling, and nothing to do with drinking in public, so I'm having a hard time understanding AGCO's position.

The other thing is that, alcohol is NEVER allowed through the gates, so why do preventative measures have to be different on a dry game?

Parkdale
07-21-2009, 12:24 PM
I'm confused about one thing.

If the ban was meant to put a stop to 'vending' of alcohol.


The other thing is that, alcohol is NEVER allowed through the gates, so why do preventative measures have to be different on a dry game?


technically, it's to ensure a 'dry venue'.
If a bar gets an infraction, they have to shut the doors.
(well not legally, but it doesn't make sense to pay wages with no cash coming in)

The ban isn't to stop the vending, it's to keep the place dry, by halting the vending.

People will debate this, but if someone was caught by an AGCO officer with
a beer in his hands (even a bottle of Blue), BMO would be suffering the repercussions.

Kevvv
07-21-2009, 12:31 PM
As a licensee, BMO is responsible for the sale, possession, and consumption of alcohol on the premises by minors (section 30(4)). So not selling alcohol isn't enough - they need to make sure no-one has any. So the trade-off is a more thorough search at the entrance, versus the risk that more people try to smuggle in their own, and an inspector sees someone having a drink. In the case of the latter, another suspension would be likely.

stretchthetruth
07-21-2009, 12:33 PM
can we all agree that the LLA and the AGCO are lame? I think we can...

Shep
07-21-2009, 12:36 PM
This thread has turned into a joke.

I can't believe people are so butthurt over a simple patdown.

Cry me a river.

Kevvv
07-21-2009, 12:39 PM
can we all agree that the LLA and the AGCO are lame? I think we can...


That we can.

Get In There
07-21-2009, 12:43 PM
Hyperbole: Factually incorrect since what I have stated is in no way an exaggeration.

Strawmen: That's your area of expertise. You have presented no facts, only doubted the ones presented and then played armchair quarterback without addressing the original facts in question.

Ridicule: It's easy to feel that way when you have no substance to your posts.

You have obviously not investigated any facts, you speak of what you have been made "aware" of but don't look beyond what you got in the email and them make assumptions. Now you want me to provide you with....what....nothing specific. What do you want me to bring. Past AGCO cases? The actual letter sent to MLSE? Present to you an official from the AGCO that will confirm that further violations result in wider reaching bans? Really? You don't have enough experience and knowledge to know this without me needing to quote you AGCO regulations? I can't waste my time on that kind of ignorance.

And for someone that has spent pages criticizing the team and stadium...what facts have you presented that back up your claim that the team/stadium stepped over the line?


Tell me of these 'facts' you have investigated.

Your whole arguement is based upon supposed facts that are just so above you to explain. The more you riducule the more obvious this point becomes

Roogs - you have no idea what mandate was given to TFC and BMO do you?

B

Belfast_Boy
07-21-2009, 12:47 PM
shit! do you guys realize that you're argueing about something that you can't change and have no influence on?

Parkdale
07-21-2009, 12:57 PM
shit! do you guys realize that you're argueing about something that you can't change and have no influence on?


http://www.jonathangiles.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/2361866387_4bdb08a481.jpg

Steve
07-21-2009, 12:59 PM
Tell me of these 'facts' you have investigated.

Your whole arguement is based upon supposed facts that are just so above you to explain. The more you riducule the more obvious this point becomes

Roogs - you have no idea what mandate was given to TFC and BMO do you?

B

Oh FFS, you want the facts? Here:

http://www.agco.on.ca/pdf/Non-Forms/schedule_mon_pen_lla_en.pdf

Please refer to section 33(1). This is from the AGCO's website, from the schedule of charges sections, essentially showing us the specifics of the Liquor Licence Act (which is here if you want: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90l19_e.htm#BK3) and how an establishment with a licence can be in violation of it. I'll put it here for people who don't want to go to the link:

"The licence holder shall not permit liquor, other than liquor purchased by the licence holder under licence from a government store, to be brought onto the premises to which the licence applies or that are used in connection with the sale and service of liqur, including the liquor and food preparation area and storage areas."

So, essentially, they would be in violation of their licence if they allowed people to bring alcohol into BMO. Additionally, here: http://www.agco.on.ca/en/b.alcohol/b12.monetarypenalties.html
you will find this list of compliance tools available in an escalating fashion:

Education
Verbal warning
Written warning
Monetary penalty
Increased monetary penalty
Additional licence conditions/terms of registration, including through Risk-based Licensing
Suspension of licence or registration
Increased suspension of licence or registration
Revocation of licence or registration.

(bold mine). So, as you can see, if BMO was caught in violation of the Liquor Licence Act again (which includes people bringing in unlawful alcohol into the establishment) they would be subject to increased suspension and the possibility of revocation of their licence. Further, it is not a huge jump to assume there would be someone from the AGCO on hand at BMO to ensure their ban was enacted in a suitable manner, therefor, BMO and MLSE had to act to ensure further violation would not happen to protect their financial interests, as well as their fans enjoyment of future games.

Is that enough for you?

Get In There
07-21-2009, 01:00 PM
As a licensee, BMO is responsible for the sale, possession, and consumption of alcohol on the premises by minors (section 30(4)). So not selling alcohol isn't enough - they need to make sure no-one has any. So the trade-off is a more thorough search at the entrance, versus the risk that more people try to smuggle in their own, and an inspector sees someone having a drink. In the case of the latter, another suspension would be likely.


Tks for the info Kev (and Parky - above) EDIT - and Steve above

Ya, looks like it was a trade off.

BMO didn't have to do the pat downs but felt more secure with the ACGO by doing so.

I think it is debateable (as parkdale stated) what the ACGO would do if they found some people who have smuggled in booze (while noticing BMO be proactive and catching others). Note: smugglers don't have to be minors.

But I also believe the 'pat down' decision was made easier knowing it would increase the day's revenue.

If I was Paul I probably would have made the same decision - a conversation with the ACGO rep would really have shaped my thought process.

B

EDIT / Question - how are they going to ensure underagers (pass along) are not drinking at the next game?

Boondaddy
07-21-2009, 01:00 PM
is this discussion still going on????! Holy Mackinaw!! It's over...

Belfast_Boy
07-21-2009, 01:17 PM
http://www.jonathangiles.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/2361866387_4bdb08a481.jpg


ah! I see. a bit of verbal wanking off.... I get it. thanks Parkdale.
love the helmet!

Roogsy
07-21-2009, 01:27 PM
Tell me of these 'facts' you have investigated.

Your whole arguement is based upon supposed facts that are just so above you to explain. The more you riducule the more obvious this point becomes

Roogs - you have no idea what mandate was given to TFC and BMO do you?

B

Ok I will bite. Because you obviously are in dire need of being informed.

Let me start at the beginning, because at this point, I have no idea what you do know and what you don't, but I am going to assume you know very little since that is how it's coming across.

The AGCO or the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (and not the ACGO as you keep calling it) is responsible for the adminsitration of the Liquor Licence Act and the Gaming Control Act in Ontario. It is a regulatory agency that reports to the Ministry of Consumer Services and in this particular case, adminsitrates the licensing of the stadium for the purpose of serving alcohol.

BMO Field has a Liquor Delivery Service Licence and has a specific type of endorsement called the "Stadium Endorsement" by the AGCO. This endorsement is INVALID unless it is issued in combination with the actual sales licence.

Therefore, having the stadium endorsement will mean nothing if the liquor licence is suspended. According to AGCO, any failure to abide by the law is first met with a monetary penalty. This has already happened because according to the AGCO, monetary penalties are applied before sanctions and licence suspensions are applied.

From the AGCO:


Licensees and registrants who are not in compliance with the law could be assessed a monetary penalty. The primary purpose of monetary penalties is to act as a bridge between a simple warning and a suspension of a licence or registration, and to provide the AGCO with an added compliance tool for working with licensees and registrants before a significant suspension or revocation may be necessary.


Therefore, since the licence was suspended for the Houston game (which is what a "dry" game is unless you think it was TFC and BMO who decided, "hey, let's not serve beer") then according to the AGCO, the next step is a lengthier sanction (meaning more than one game for those of you who can't follow very well). Both the initial sanction and the subsequent lengthier sanction all happen before a AGCO disciplinary hearing.

The ultimate sanction is a revocation of the licence.

It is fairly straight forward. If you can't follow these fairly easy steps then there is nothing I can do to help you. But I have been involved in enough events and licencing issues to know how this deal works. You want mandates? It's right up there. Do you want to read it for yourself? Go to this website:

http://www.agco.on.ca/en/h.home.html

But all we want is that you become informed first before looking uninformed and deciding to call people out. There is no deviation from this process. This is how things work. It's how it's worked for years.

Oh...and if you need a direct quote of the statement from the team that it was indeed a suspension of the licence by the AGCO indicating it was a suspension, here it is:



BMO Field announced Monday that there will be a suspension in alcohol service at the venue on Saturday, July 18 during the Toronto FC versus Houston Dynamo match.

The suspension, issued by Ontario's Alcohol and Gaming Commission (AGCO), results from a violation of Section 30(4) of the Liquor Licence Act, which makes it an offence to permit a person appearing to be under 19 years of age to consume or possess alcohol on the premises. The incident occurred on May 21, 2008.







The fact that I have to do this kind of research for you is stupid. It's simple stuff that follows logically what most people already know...most people except you apparently.

Roogsy
07-21-2009, 01:30 PM
Oh FFS, you want the facts? Here:

So, essentially, they would be in violation of their licence if they allowed people to bring alcohol into BMO. Additionally, here: http://www.agco.on.ca/en/b.alcohol/b12.monetarypenalties.html
you will find this list of compliance tools available in an escalating fashion:

Education
Verbal warning
Written warning
Monetary penalty
Increased monetary penalty
Additional licence conditions/terms of registration, including through Risk-based Licensing
Suspension of licence or registration
Increased suspension of licence or registration
Revocation of licence or registration.

(bold mine). So, as you can see, if BMO was caught in violation of the Liquor Licence Act again (which includes people bringing in unlawful alcohol into the establishment) they would be subject to increased suspension and the possibility of revocation of their licence. Further, it is not a huge jump to assume there would be someone from the AGCO on hand at BMO to ensure their ban was enacted in a suitable manner, therefor, BMO and MLSE had to act to ensure further violation would not happen to protect their financial interests, as well as their fans enjoyment of future games.

Is that enough for you?

Thank you. It's obvious what step BMO Field currently finds itself in...was he really not able to figure out what the next step was that somebody else has to actually show him???

Gawd...so logical and yet this guy wants us to show it to him on a silver platter. Some people get others to do the work for them but in the process, never learn anything on their own.

Parkdale
07-21-2009, 01:30 PM
Further, it is not a huge jump to assume there would be someone from the AGCO on hand at BMO to ensure their ban was enacted in a suitable manner.....


I know (for a fact) that there have been liquor inspectors at the games for a long time now.
This is nothing new.

What the AGCO wants is total compliance.
You have to show that you are willing to fix your mistakes.
The same thing happened with Shoeless joe's after the first year.