PDA

View Full Version : D.C. United Faces Furious Fans After Supporter Is Slapped With One-Year Ban



Red4ever
04-05-2016, 04:18 PM
http://dcist.com/2016/04/dc_united_facing_fan_mutiny_as_supp.php

By Charles Boehm (https://twitter.com/cboehm?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctw gr%5Eauthor) and Pablo Maurer

The early-spring gloom around D.C. United deepened on Monday, as the winless club banned a leading member of the District Ultras supporters group from attending matches for one year. The punishment, for using a smoke bomb outside RFK Stadium before United's 3-0 loss to FC Dallas on March 26, has many supporters furious at what they say is uneven enforcement and unclear rules.

According to documents obtained by DCist (https://www.scribd.com/doc/307070833/Matt-Parsons-Notice-of-DCU-Ban), United fan Matthew Parsons has been officially banned from home games for one calendar year for a “violation of D.C. United and Major League Soccer Fan Code of Conduct (possession and ignition of illegal smoke device on RFK Stadium property).”

The sanction also extends to (https://www.scribd.com/doc/307050411/Matt-Parsons-Notice-of-MLS-Ban) “all MLS venues and events” for the remainder of the 2016 Major League Soccer season, while the entire District Ultras section “will not be permitted to have flags, flag poles, and drums” at this Saturday's game vs. the Vancouver Whitecaps at RFK—though a team official clarified to DCist yesterday that the Ultras will still be permitted to use drums at the match.

Last month's incident is being categorized as a “first offense” and will be taken into account if future “misconduct” leads to “escalating sanctions” for those involved.

The news has sparked fury among the team's devoted but dwindling corps of hard-core supporters, who have endured a winless start to the current season, deep cuts to the club's budget, and some of the highest ticket prices (at the oldest venue, no less) in the league. Fueling the fire: a perception of double standards and inconsistent enforcement, with fans quickly taking to social media to note an ongoing informal postgame fireworks tradition by the Barra Brava supporters group.

“They keep making up rules,” Parsons told DCist via email. “I have never seen anywhere that smoke is not allowed outside the stadium.”

Perhaps most frustrating of all, the alleged infraction of stadium policy took place in the midst of a “gathering of the tribes/unity march” intended to patch up long-simmering rifts between United's supporters groups and rally the wider fan base at a time of transition for their club.

“It was proposed that all four [supporters groups] would march into the stadium together as a show of strength, unity, and general noise to pump up the crowd,” District Ultras member Matthew Eide told DCist on Monday. “After tailgating separately, the four groups gathered under the bridge [at Independence Avenue SE] at Lot 8, sang songs, beat drums, danced—you know—celebrated their club.

“Then we all marched in, drums blazing, scarves up, singing etc and after partying in the [RFK] concourses (where there was NO smoke) we moved to our respective sections for the match. To my knowledge, none of the other [supporters groups] have been sanctioned. DU members are rightly pissed, and frankly sick of being scapegoated by [United],” Eide said.
Known for their elaborate prematch “tifo” banner displays, the District Ultras sit near RFK's northeast corner, a few sections over from the Barra Brava and Screaming Eagles groups on the stadium's “loud side.”

Speaking on background, a United source said that the severity of the punishments were shaped in part by Parsons' prominence among the District Ultras, noting that he and other leaders were briefed on the club's expectations for its supporters groups before the season began. A copy of United's code of conduct for supporters (https://www.scribd.com/doc/307050322/Supporter-Agreement-District-Ultras), obtained by DCist, does indeed ban the use of smoke by supporters, though the policy does not indicate whether it applies to the stadium itself or the surrounding grounds. Though fireworks that explode are considered illegal in the
District of Columbia, smoke bombs are not specifically mentioned as a prohibited item in D.C.'s fireworks ban (potassium cholrate, which is present in some, bot not all smoke bombs, is prohibited.)

The United source also added that some patrons complained about the smoke, some stating that they felt ill.

"It's annoying because they're trying to single out guy who drives three hours to games and [helps] to make tifo on off weeks," added Srdan Bastic, another senior member of the Ultras. "He has more away games at his own expense than [all of] DCU's staff since 1996, combined. This is why groups have such insane turnover—It's like people get paid to f**k with us while we pay to get f***ed with."

The incident fits into a recurring pattern (http://www.oregonlive.com/timbers/index.ssf/2015/03/supporters_groups_throughout_m.html) across MLS, which celebrates and advertises the unique passion of its most dedicated fans yet also draws their ire (http://thefirsteleven.com/the-montreal-ultras-and-the-mls-are-going-up-in-smoke/) when club and stadium security officialsreact negatively (http://independentsupporterscouncil.com/acb-sanctions/) to the noise and spectacle they tend to create.

ryan
04-05-2016, 05:14 PM
Just another example of how cunty MLS is. Love having a local club to watch, hate this fucking league tho.

prizby
04-05-2016, 05:35 PM
Seen a photo of Rachel holding a smoke bomb in Orlando...no one year ban?

BelfastBoy
04-05-2016, 05:44 PM
I think it sends the message - lets focus on the football. Cut out the shenanigans that will give the sport a bad name.

Ivy
04-05-2016, 06:19 PM
I think it sends the message - lets focus on the football. Cut out the shenanigans that will give the sport a bad name.
Today's MLS was built on the backs of passionate supporter groups from coast to coast. Don't make it out to be something that it's not. MLS definately wouldn't be where it is based on the level of football played.

OgtheDim
04-05-2016, 06:36 PM
To be fair, I'm not sure I would be happy if I was travelling in the GO transit underpass at the Ex and somebody let off smoke and flares.


This guy did the equivalent - in a closed corridor.

Ivy
04-05-2016, 06:43 PM
To be fair, I'm not sure I would be happy if I was travelling in the GO transit underpass at the Ex and somebody let off smoke and flares.


This guy did the equivalent - in a closed corridor.
I agree with this too, but is it up the the league to punish people for doing things outside the stadium?

molenshtain
04-05-2016, 06:53 PM
I agree with this too, but is it up the the league to punish people for doing things outside the stadium?

The club suspended him for doing something on their property. The core of the issue, from what i can tell, has to do with whether or not the club made the supporters aware of the fact that it was illegal prior to the incident. D.C. are saying they did make it clear, the fans are saying the didn't, or at least didn't make it clear enough.

Ivy
04-05-2016, 08:34 PM
The club suspended him for doing something on their property. The core of the issue, from what i can tell, has to do with whether or not the club made the supporters aware of the fact that it was illegal prior to the incident. D.C. are saying they did make it clear, the fans are saying the didn't, or at least didn't make it clear enough.
From what I understand, it happened in a tunnel outside the stadium. If its still up to DCU to police that particular area is something that I don't know..

greatwhitenorf
04-05-2016, 08:41 PM
To be fair, I'm not sure I would be happy if I was travelling in the GO transit underpass at the Ex and somebody let off smoke and flares.


This guy did the equivalent - in a closed corridor.


In a city like Washington with the constant worry of terror-related incidents.

A little common sense would go a long way here amongst hard core supporters. This isn't the Beograd derby.

molenshtain
04-05-2016, 08:51 PM
From what I understand, it happened in a tunnel outside the stadium. If its still up to DCU to police that particular area is something that I don't know..

It's still part of the club's property though. RFK is a massive piece of land with a big stadium in the middle. the tunnel that they mention in that piece runs perpendicular to a bridge that circles the stadium. You start on one side of the tunnel, not on RFK property, then come out on the other side of the tunnel, which is then presumably RFK property at that point. It's semantics but if the club is saying we told you you couldn't have flares on our property then there's nothing else the supporters can say really. It's too bad that the club cares so much - I like flares personally - but if they gave them prior knowledge of the rule then they can't really be mad about getting punished.

Pint
04-05-2016, 08:54 PM
It's still part of the club's property though. RFK is a massive piece of land with a big stadium in the middle. the tunnel that they mention in that piece runs perpendicular to a bridge that circles the stadium. You start on one side of the tunnel, not on RFK property, then come out on the other side of the tunnel, which is then presumably RFK property at that point. It's semantics but if the club is saying we told you you couldn't have flares on our property then there's nothing else the supporters can say really. It's too bad that the club cares so much - I like flares personally - but if they gave them prior knowledge of the rule then they can't really be mad about getting punished.

Smoke not flares... rather large difference.

Red4ever
04-05-2016, 08:55 PM
I'm more upset about the cringe-worthy alliteration in the articles title than I am about the ban.

Hopefully no Toronto supporters are forced to miss a game for similar silliness this year.

molenshtain
04-05-2016, 08:57 PM
Smoke not flares... rather large difference.

fair enough, My mistake.

BelfastBoy
04-05-2016, 11:16 PM
Today's MLS was built on the backs of passionate supporter groups from coast to coast. Don't make it out to be something that it's not. MLS definately wouldn't be where it is based on the level of football played.

Yeah. But there are leagues with much less resources than MLS. In relative terms, its still one of the better-off leagues in the world, even if it doesn't compare to the top leagues. Do flares really advance the progress of MLS?

jloome
04-05-2016, 11:18 PM
D'ya think beer might have been involved?

Dude is one of their hardest of hardcore supporters, a road warrior. Give him a warning and one-match suspension, you marketing morons. Jesus tap dancing Christ MLS is bad at PR.

jloome
04-05-2016, 11:20 PM
Yeah. But there are leagues with much less resources than MLS. In relative terms, its still one of the better-off leagues in the world, even if it doesn't compare to the top leagues. Do flares really advance the progress of MLS?

It was just red smoke, not a flare. No one was at risk except maybe of an asthma attack.

Red4ever
04-05-2016, 11:44 PM
I think a year is perhaps excessive but 8-10 games wouldnt be. I think the MLS has to drive home the point that support will be done by the fans but dictated by the league.

And lets be honest, among all the fans that move gate reveneue, very few care about what happens before or after a game. A show that players cant see isnt really for the team, it's for the fans. Is it fair? Maybe not but why risk this.

A minority of people need smoke / flares and a minority will care about this. Casuals may enjoy the show, but for the casuals its always gonna be flags and chants that matter.

Ivy
04-06-2016, 01:57 AM
D'ya think beer might have been involved?

Dude is one of their hardest of hardcore supporters, a road warrior. Give him a warning and one-match suspension, you marketing morons. Jesus tap dancing Christ MLS is bad at PR.
Bingo.

OgtheDim
04-06-2016, 06:16 AM
D'ya think beer might have been involved?

Dude is one of their hardest of hardcore supporters, a road warrior. Give him a warning and one-match suspension, you marketing morons. Jesus tap dancing Christ MLS is bad at PR.

Smoke in an enclosed public space.

Maybe not a year but guy deserves longer then 1 game.

Pint
04-06-2016, 06:36 AM
Their isn't even any hard evidence that the guy acted alone, a banning is ridiculous in general for something that happens on a march. To think this march was to show a symbol of unity between the DC supporters groups as they don't really see eye to eye on things, its weapons grade stupid from DC and MLS.

Whats better for the sport in DC:
Unity and understanding among the 4 main groups that took part in the march? or banning 1 member for something you didn't like but caused little to no damage (physical or to the brand/reputation)?

Again we are not talking about flares where the risk of harm is much higher and we are not talking about damaging RFK property... we are talking about non toxic coloured air.

Phil
04-06-2016, 08:13 AM
This to me is something supported by the MLS but really its DC's front office making up rules and enforcing them as they see fit.

I love that indication that because he was a leader, it made punishing him more attractive. Big message there - it makes being involved that much more difficult when you hand out punishments like that, then market the hell out of it on the other side.

BuSaPuNk
04-06-2016, 08:58 AM
I think a year is perhaps excessive but 8-10 games wouldnt be. I think the MLS has to drive home the point that support will be done by the fans but dictated by the league

Support dictated by the leauge?
So were talking Fan Clubs?
Make noise graphics on a video board?

Doesn't sound like support at all. Sounds like FO driven sheep to me.

Red4ever
04-06-2016, 09:04 AM
Paramaters of support will be dictated by the league


I should have been more clear.

Fort York Redcoat
04-06-2016, 09:05 AM
Support dictated by the leauge?
So were talking Fan Clubs?
Make noise graphics on a video board?

Doesn't sound like support at all. Sounds like FO driven sheep to me.

Dictate is not orchestrate.

BuSaPuNk
04-06-2016, 09:07 AM
Paramaters of support will be dictated by the league


I should have been more clear.

Same thing.

Lets ban a supporter for using a smoke bomb outside a stadium, but we will send camera crews to film Rachael doing it as well and we will market the fuck out of it.

You really think they can be trusted to dictate anything?

OgtheDim
04-06-2016, 09:14 AM
Same thing.

Lets ban a supporter for using a smoke bomb outside a stadium, but we will send camera crews to film Rachael doing it as well and we will market the fuck out of it.

You really think they can be trusted to dictate anything?


Clarification - that Orlando smoke was in the stadium, right?

Look, we all know that MLS supporter bans are dependent upon which owner is screaming the loudest (looking at you Joey Saputo). And as Phil said, the deliberate and acknowledged attempt to make a statement about a supporter group leader is troubling.

But, Bonnetta handling smoke in an outside spot does not excuse a guy doing smoke in an enclosed area.

Fort York Redcoat
04-06-2016, 09:17 AM
Same thing.

Lets ban a supporter for using a smoke bomb outside a stadium, but we will send camera crews to film Rachael doing it as well and we will market the fuck out of it.

You really think they can be trusted to dictate anything?

Wouldn't you be FOR the league coming through with a Supporters Code on all premises? To have that transparency and consistency would quash this sideshow of moving the goalposts on issues.

BuSaPuNk
04-06-2016, 09:18 AM
Clarification - that Orlando smoke was in the stadium, right?

Look, we all know that MLS supporter bans are dependent upon which owner is screaming the loudest (looking at you Joey Saputo). And as Phil said, the deliberate and acknowledged attempt to make a statement about a supporter group leader is troubling.

But, Bonnetta handling smoke in an outside spot does not excuse a guy doing smoke in an enclosed area.

Nope outside the stadium. It was on one of those stupid videos they did.

No it doesn't excuse it. But it shows the stupidity in the system. Really think the leauge can look at anything without a bias?

This case is perfect. Guy suspended for doing exactly what the leauge market itself on.

Pint
04-06-2016, 09:20 AM
Wouldn't you be FOR the league coming through with a Supporters Code on all premises? To have that transparency and consistency would quash this sideshow of moving the goalposts on issues.

Not really because i don't trust where the "goal posts" would be placed. Also enforcement of "rules" is and would be dependent on the mood of those involved as we already experience.

Fort York Redcoat
04-06-2016, 09:21 AM
Not really because i don't trust where the "goal posts" would be placed. Also enforcement of "rules" is and would be dependent on the mood of those involved as we already experience.

REALLY.

So don't gives us the rules we'll complain about the lack of transparency and consistency.

That would be the reason this issue gets little respect.

BuSaPuNk
04-06-2016, 09:22 AM
Wouldn't you be FOR the league coming through with a Supporters Code on all premises? To have that transparency and consistency would quash this sideshow of moving the goalposts on issues.

No the leauge should be outsourcing it to a unattached unbiased council.

The teams and leauge and even supporters all have there own reasons for fighting for a outcome to help themselves.

Pint
04-06-2016, 09:26 AM
REALLY.

So don't gives us the rules we'll complain about the lack of transparency and consistency.

That would be the reason this issue gets little respect.

I don't trust the current person who would be in charge of making the rules if MLS were to lay down blanket rules across all teams. We would likely lose a variety of things we are currently allowed to have but i won't go into specifics as to what they are.

This was and is DCU over reacting to something and seeking the league as a guide to what the punishment should be, feel like DC wanted to make an example out of DU due to stuff going on behind the scenes.

Fort York Redcoat
04-06-2016, 09:27 AM
No the leauge should be outsourcing it to a unattached unbiased council.

The teams and leauge and even supporters all have there own reasons for fighting for a outcome to help themselves.

So an unbiased council. Made up of who? Does it exist already or is this just an idea?

So they rule on a Supporters Code and you'd be for it?

I don't see this happening but I also don't see a lot of actual dedication to a set of rules to follow yet.

BuSaPuNk
04-06-2016, 09:43 AM
No the leauge should be outsourcing it to a unattached unbiased council.

The teams and leauge and even supporters all have there own reasons for fighting for a outcome to help themselves.


So an unbiased council. Made up of who? Does it exist already or is this just an idea?

So they rule on a Supporters Code and you'd be for it?

I don't see this happening but I also don't see a lot of actual dedication to a set of rules to follow yet.

Made of ex players, executives, ex FO liaisons to supporters and even ex unattached supporters. So you have a spectrum of all view points without the bias of group allegiance.

This is just an idea, but considering the leauge uses a board of bias people to rule on suspension of players it sounds like a pipedream.

Yes the "Supporters Code" or whatever you want to call it should be writen and drafts made between these groups and then voted upon around the leauge. Almost like the competition committee in hockey.

And I agree I dont see it happening and I don't see a set of actual rules or anything coming from the people in charge at all. And the guy actually in charge is the same guy who neutered the Emirates in London so yeah nothing is ever going to change.

Red4ever
04-06-2016, 09:54 AM
But reading between the lines, and not to be a contrarian, but this does define pretty clear rules.

If you light a smoke bomb or flare or an prohibbited item on TFC property, youre gonna get dinged. This sets a precident and a shitty one at that if you like smoke, but to me it's clear.

They could use a clear wrotten set of rules for sure. Peter is spot on. And supporters shouldnt have to plan according to league wide speculation and whispers on punishment, but and independent outsourcing won't happen. Cause money and power.

The power will most assuredly stay with __________ at MLS.

Phil
04-06-2016, 10:01 AM
Overall, I want to see consistency and transparency from the league and front offices. After the farce that erupted after the Montreal stuff last year it needs to be addressed with every team. As well, the MLS needs to start opening a dialogue with the Independent Supporters Council.

Those things can be done easily and quickly, yet the league drags its feet and has done for years now. The only thing that is clear is the 'carrot or the stick' policy and to that point it seems the carrot is rotten and thrown away.

The inconsistency of it all is appalling. To even consider that now they will target and hand out extra punishment to leaders makes me wonder why anyone would bother trying to help grow a group.

Pint
04-06-2016, 10:16 AM
All this shows is that what was done was unacceptable on that particular day in DC.

It has no barring on what is acceptable here and I'm not even sure of the legality who has jurisdiction where around BMO.

You can see via a few members of myself Sr management that the post game celebrations last season were liked.

eustacchio
04-06-2016, 10:18 AM
Maybe DCU saw the groups unifying as something to be worried about.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-OYKd8SVrI

Fort York Redcoat
04-06-2016, 10:21 AM
Made of ex players, executives, ex FO liaisons to supporters and even ex unattached supporters. So you have a spectrum of all view points without the bias of group allegiance.

This is just an idea, but considering the leauge uses a board of bias people to rule on suspension of players it sounds like a pipedream.

Yes the "Supporters Code" or whatever you want to call it should be writen and drafts made between these groups and then voted upon around the leauge. Almost like the competition committee in hockey.

And I agree I dont see it happening and I don't see a set of actual rules or anything coming from the people in charge at all. And the guy actually in charge is the same guy who neutered the Emirates in London so yeah nothing is ever going to change.

Well it's easy to look at the above and get frustrated. A lot of key steps have been attempted already between support, ISC, and clubs that just haven't been solidified and agreed upon to be rolled out.

This is the main reason I don't understand why it's better to wait until we have the above before signing off on something we have little say in anyway.

I ask for the rules and I ask them to be league wide. That could be implemented in a weekend using league and team marketing and social media.

Everything else is a reason for this issue to continue.

Red4ever
04-06-2016, 10:22 AM
Maybe DCU saw the groups unifying as something to be worried about.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-OYKd8SVrI

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to eustacchio again.

Pint
04-06-2016, 10:24 AM
If you enjoy your capo stand don't ask for the current person in the league to make league wide rules.

Red4ever
04-06-2016, 10:27 AM
All this shows is that what was done was unacceptable on that particular day in DC.

It has no barring on what is acceptable here and I'm not even sure of the legality who has jurisdiction where around BMO.

You can see via a few members of myself Sr management that the post game celebrations last season were liked.

Liked by who?

I mean im not pissing in your conflakes but as was the case in DC, it may only take one person complaining when a smoke bomb or flare is used on BMO property for someone to get dinged.

All this whole thing tells me is that people are irrational and people are heavy handed. If im supporter who likes smoke I dont like my chances this season.

Red4ever
04-06-2016, 10:28 AM
If you enjoy your capo stand don't ask for the current person in the league to make league wide rules.

Excellent point.

Pint
04-06-2016, 10:47 AM
Liked by who?

I mean im not pissing in your conflakes but as was the case in DC, it may only take one person complaining when a smoke bomb or flare is used on BMO property for someone to get dinged.

All this whole thing tells me is that people are irrational and people are heavy handed. If im supporter who likes smoke I dont like my chances this season.

by no means are you "pissing in my cornflakes" i don't even like corn flakes, its just discussion.

It should have said "you can see via social media that a few members of mlse Sr management liked the post game celebrations last season" most of which involved pyro.

Also BMO is much different than RFK... we have liberty village, Go transit, Ex and then BMO. So where are the lines of jurisdiction... I can tell you nobody really knows as this question has been asked before.


When at the beach you know that sharks are a possibility but do you want to know exactly how many sharks are in the water with you?

Oblio2
04-06-2016, 11:00 AM
Speaking on background, a United source said that the severity of the punishments were shaped in part by Parsons' prominence among the District Ultras, noting that he and other leaders were briefed on the club's expectations for its supporters groups before the season began. A copy of United's code of conduct for supporters (https://www.scribd.com/doc/307050322/Supporter-Agreement-District-Ultras), obtained by DCist, does indeed ban the use of smoke by supporters, though the policy does not indicate whether it applies to the stadium itself or the surrounding grounds. Though fireworks that explode are considered illegal in the
District of Columbia, smoke bombs are not specifically mentioned as a prohibited item in D.C.'s fireworks ban (potassium cholrate, which is present in some, bot not all smoke bombs, is prohibited.)

He chose to ignore and got punished
Oh well

OgtheDim
04-06-2016, 11:19 AM
If you enjoy your capo stand don't ask for the current person in the league to make league wide rules.

OK, I'm not sure what "the current person in the league" means but the Capo stands are the most prominent part of the MLS fan sales pitch. They will never ban them.

eustacchio
04-06-2016, 11:20 AM
by no means are you "pissing in my cornflakes" i don't even like corn flakes, its just discussion.

It should have said "you can see via social media that a few members of mlse Sr management liked the post game celebrations last season" most of which involved pyro.

Also BMO is much different than RFK... we have liberty village, Go transit, Ex and then BMO. So where are the lines of jurisdiction... I can tell you nobody really knows as this question has been asked before.


When at the beach you know that sharks are a possibility but do you want to know exactly how many sharks are in the water with you?

Aren't the lines of jurisdiction at BMO the Ex grounds?

I honestly thought that was established after everything around "Justice for Matt".

Pint
04-06-2016, 11:25 AM
Aren't the lines of jurisdiction at BMO the Ex grounds?

I honestly thought that was established after everything around "Justice for Matt".

Wasn't he banned from ex grounds but not BMO? i don't recall?

eustacchio
04-06-2016, 11:29 AM
Wasn't he banned from ex grounds but not BMO? i don't recall?

You could be right. I don't know all the details, but I was under the impression it was a ban from MLSE property and the Ex grounds. (I could be making that up.)

Pint
04-06-2016, 11:38 AM
You could be right. I don't know all the details, but I was under the impression it was a ban from MLSE property and the Ex grounds. (I could be making that up.)

My memory is saying that he was banned from ex grounds by ex grounds committee and TL or Payne had to work with the city to get it removed but don't remember exactly.

eustacchio
04-06-2016, 11:41 AM
My memory is saying that he was banned from ex grounds by ex grounds committee and TL or Payne had to work with the city to get it removed but don't remember exactly.

I'm going to go ahead and say that you know more about it than I do.

Initial B
04-06-2016, 12:16 PM
Maybe DCU saw the groups unifying as something to be worried about.
That's what I was thinking. There are some enlightened ownership groups and some that are repressive. To single out one guy from one supporter group keeps the rift open between the groups. Imagine each club had one unified supporters group that could demand change, the possibility of a loss of control scares them.

Fort York Redcoat
04-06-2016, 12:22 PM
If you enjoy your capo stand don't ask for the current person in the league to make league wide rules.


Excellent point.

Not in my POV.

This pussyfooting around rules is bitching at both ends as far as I'm concerned.

We can't cry "tell us the rules but only if we like them." And then bitch about this inconsistency.

I want to prevent confusion. Solve the problem not complain about miscommunication but hope they don't in case I don't want to hear it.

Fort York Redcoat
04-06-2016, 12:23 PM
My memory is saying that he was banned from ex grounds by ex grounds committee and TL or Payne had to work with the city to get it removed but don't remember exactly.

Yeah. Those different parties you spoke of? They were used as a tool to hot potato who to blame.

Red4ever
04-06-2016, 12:28 PM
Not in my POV.

This pussyfooting around rules is bitching at both ends as far as I'm concerned.

We can't cry "tell us the rules but only if we like them." And then bitch about this inconsistency.

I want to prevent confusion. Solve the problem not complain about miscommunication but hope they don't in case I don't want to hear it.

I agree with that too. I just meant ( and I'll phrase this as a question) isn't there a danger of losing some stuff we already have and that our club has no problem with, if things become uniform across the league?

I said it was a good point as I seem to think that some places don't like/ want capo stands or limit how many there are. Though I agree there has to be a consistent set of rules, I think some things should be left to the club and their supporters to work out.

Fort York Redcoat
04-06-2016, 12:37 PM
I agree with that too. I just meant ( and I'll phrase this as a question) isn't there a danger of losing some stuff we already have and that our club has no problem with, if things become uniform across the league?

I said it was a good point as I seem to think that some places don't like/ want capo stands or limit how many there are. Though I agree there has to be a consistent set of rules, I think some things should be left to the club and their supporters to work out.

I think it's an opportunity to start and then KEEP a dialogue going.

To keep this eg going if we lost the stand for a year but just had clubs that allowed it revisited it to the league at the end of the year with proof its done safely then it may not just be a privilege returned but looked into by other clubs that have wanted it can see how its done safely.

If we don't start somewhere it can't get better.

eustacchio
04-06-2016, 12:46 PM
I'm sure the league could set rules/guidelines around something like capo stands. Then if a team wants to put them in they can do it in accordance/safely. If they don't want them, then they don't put them in.

Maybe I'm missing something?

Ivy
04-06-2016, 01:19 PM
Not in my POV.

This pussyfooting around rules is bitching at both ends as far as I'm concerned.

We can't cry "tell us the rules but only if we like them." And then bitch about this inconsistency.

I want to prevent confusion. Solve the problem not complain about miscommunication but hope they don't in case I don't want to hear it.
I think Pinto's post is a reference to Whitworth and how he views support, his actions in Arsenal, and the damage that he caused there.

Pint
04-06-2016, 01:38 PM
I think Pinto's post is a reference to Whitworth and how he views support, his actions in Arsenal, and the damage that he caused there.

As well as one of his 1st actions in MLS which was an 8 game ban to ACB for streamers. If I thought it was communication of rules then cool but what we would see is establishment of rules and in normal MLS Headoffice fashion I would be surprised to see any interaction with SG's.

OgtheDim
04-06-2016, 01:49 PM
That reminds me - TFC has supporter privileges back as of the NER game.

eustacchio
04-06-2016, 01:55 PM
http://www.mlssoccer.com/fans/code-of-conduct


*NOTE: The use of streamers and confetti as an expression of fan enthusiasm is not prohibited, but will be kept under review. Streamers are not to be used to impact the competition and/or thrown at or toward a player, referee or stadium staff member.

Red4ever
04-06-2016, 02:00 PM
Yeah I mean it's one thing to cite hypocrisy, but it's not like that is going to get you off the hook.

From a purely PR perspective, no one really cares enough about these bans. I think everyone is sympathetic to a point, but when rules are broken that's where the sympathy fades away and where the PR war is lost.

Ivy
04-06-2016, 02:01 PM
MLS venues also have a policy against swearing... I can't wait till bans are being handed out to people for swearing.
Or when 112 gets sanctioned for throwing streamers at the corner.

eustacchio
04-06-2016, 02:04 PM
MLS venues also has a policy against swearing... I can't wait till bans are being handed out to people for swearing.
Or when 112 gets sanctioned for throwing streamers at the corner.

People know that streamers are not supposed to land on the field though.

You're also not supposed to be drunk at the stadium either so...

http://bmofield.com/alcohol-policy/
* A person may not enter the stadium in an intoxicated state.
* Intoxication in a public place is a criminal offence. Any person found on the property in an intoxicated state may be removed from the premises.

Ivy
04-06-2016, 02:05 PM
People know that streamers are not supposed to land on the field though.

You're also not supposed to be drunk at the stadium either so...

http://bmofield.com/alcohol-policy/
* A person may not enter the stadium in an intoxicated state.
* Intoxication in a public place is a criminal offence. Any person found on the property in an intoxicated state may be removed from the premises.
Good thing none of us ever throw steamers at players, or get drunk at games.

eustacchio
04-06-2016, 02:08 PM
Good thing none of us ever throw steamers at players, or get drunk at games.

I know, right? Drinking is for losers.

Streamers used to be thrown on the field all the time, but not so much any more because people know that throwing them at the field can get you booted.

Fort York Redcoat
04-06-2016, 02:10 PM
As well as one of his 1st actions in MLS which was an 8 game ban to ACB for streamers. If I thought it was communication of rules then cool but what we would see is establishment of rules and in normal MLS Headoffice fashion I would be surprised to see any interaction with SG's.

BUT an establishment of rules. League/SG interaction is the big ask. I'm not even asking for that.

I think people are getting detoured by what COULD happen and leaving out that progress isn't that difficult if the first step is taken.

Fort York Redcoat
04-06-2016, 02:12 PM
That reminds me - TFC has supporter privileges back as of the NER game.


Hint, hint, TRAVELERS!!!

Red4ever
04-06-2016, 02:16 PM
MLS venues also have a policy against swearing... I can't wait till bans are being handed out to people for swearing.
Or when 112 gets sanctioned for throwing streamers at the corner.

I'm sure if swearing bothers people, it can be reported and dealt with.

Though it's not as clearly explained as smoke, flares and streamers .

bgnewf
04-06-2016, 02:23 PM
The issue here is not the specifics of this particular incident but the general concern that MLS (and to a lesser degree MLSE) move the goalposts around the implementation of security and of the rules willy-nilly.

Selective enforcement when it suits them is the reason why this kind of crap takes place.

OgtheDim
04-06-2016, 02:23 PM
MLS venues also have a policy against swearing...

"And cheer in a respectful manner." The 90's were another world.

Ivy
04-06-2016, 02:28 PM
I'm sure if swearing bothers people, it can be reported and dealt with.

Though it's not as clearly explained as smoke, flares and streamers .
So if somebody in 112 gets banned for throwing a streamer, you wouldn't care? Just be like "hey, it's in the rules, so.... Too bad so sad?"

Ivy
04-06-2016, 02:31 PM
The issue here is not the specifics of this particular incident but the general concern that MLS (and to a lesser degree MLSE) move the goalposts around the implementation of security and of the rules willy-nilly.

Selective enforcement when it suits them is the reason why this kind of crap takes place.
Exactly. And it's disheartening to see supporters that agree with these individual decisions and don't stand up wanting to create a unique soccer supporter atmosphere. But hey, maybe it's just my immigrant background talking..

Red4ever
04-06-2016, 02:36 PM
So if somebody in 112 gets banned for throwing a streamer, you wouldn't care? Just be like "hey, it's in the rules, so.... Too bad so sad?"

I mean, yeah.

Two / three years ago I would have been mad, but after paying attention to the rather heavy handed message being sent from above, I stopped bringing them to games. I would be upset, but I wouldn't have a leg to stand on really.

I think this is the heart of the matter. I like streamers. I think they add to a fun atmosphere and that it's silly they would be banned, but I can't really justify doing it cause the risk isn't worth the reward. At least you get smoke supplied by the club that you can use whenever you want (or many times). There is no club mechanism for me to fire streamers in front of the feet of players on corners.

Pint
04-06-2016, 02:44 PM
The real dumb part about the streamers/confetti rule is that many clubs fire the stuff off at the start of the game and it litters the pitch anyway. It's almost like "hey that's our marketing tool, you're not allowed to have fun with it"

Ivy
04-06-2016, 02:44 PM
I mean, yeah.

Two / three years ago I would have been mad, but after paying attention to the rather heavy handed message being sent from above, I stopped bringing them to games. I would be upset, but I wouldn't have a leg to stand on really.

I think this is the heart of the matter. I like streamers. I think they add to a fun atmosphere and that it's silly they would be banned, but I can't really justify doing it cause the risk isn't worth the reward. At least you get smoke supplied by the club that you can use whenever you want (or many times). There is no club mechanism for me to fire streamers in front of the feet of players on corners.
This is one of the main reasons why I left RPB. Being in a supporter group means more to me than paying 25$ and having "Member" written under my board name.

Red4ever
04-06-2016, 02:45 PM
This is one of the main reasons why I left RPB. Being in a supporter group means more to me than paying 25$ and having "Member" written under my board name.

Care to elaborate? Not really sure what one has to do with the other.

Fort York Redcoat
04-06-2016, 02:50 PM
The issue here is not the specifics of this particular incident but the general concern that MLS (and to a lesser degree MLSE) move the goalposts around the implementation of security and of the rules willy-nilly.

Selective enforcement when it suits them is the reason why this kind of crap takes place.


Exactly. And it's disheartening to see supporters that agree with these individual decisions and don't stand up wanting to create a unique soccer supporter atmosphere. But hey, maybe it's just my immigrant background talking..

Not really what was being discussed but whatever you like, I guess.

What we're asking for is consistency. Having something to reference and then working from there.

If you want to pick and choose rules then you're not going to be the one they want to make agreements with anyway.

Red4ever
04-06-2016, 02:51 PM
The real dumb part about the streamers/confetti rule is that many clubs fire the stuff off at the start of the game and it litters the pitch anyway. It's almost like "hey that's our marketing tool, you're not allowed to have fun with it"

It's more about allowing people to throw things that could injure players. Not the pitch condition.

Fort York Redcoat
04-06-2016, 02:53 PM
This is one of the main reasons why I left RPB. Being in a supporter group means more to me than paying 25$ and having "Member" written under my board name.

Plenty of members not on the board, Ivy. But, hey, you know all that...

Fort York Redcoat
04-06-2016, 02:55 PM
Red4 and Ivy, both of you can take it to PMs to get personal.


Leave any personal jabs out, thanks.

Pint
04-06-2016, 02:59 PM
It's more about allowing people to throw things that could injure players. Not the pitch condition.

Not sure if a streamer on a corner could hurt someone, maybe if somebody tied a coin or rock to one end to make it go further.

Red4ever
04-06-2016, 03:01 PM
Not sure if a streamer on a corner could hurt someone, maybe if somebody tied a coin or rock to one end to make it go further.

And I agree with that, but I would say the spirit prohibiting streamers is that it's easier to ban everything thrown than it is to identify what is being thrown.

That's really the only sense in which I agree with a streamer ban.

Ivy
04-06-2016, 03:02 PM
Red4 and Ivy, both of you can take it to PMs to get personal.


Leave any personal jabs out, thanks.
I don't think there are any personal jabs, is there Red? We just have a disagree of opinion.. (Again :P)
To answer your question Cal - I feel that there is no longer any comradery in the group. It claims to be independent from the club and doesn't take any finances from the club to fund game day experience for members, mean while it works very much on the "you say jump, I say how high" mentality. The club smoke is another thing we'll disagree on. The group will claim that it fought the FO hard to get the smoke approved, but to me, it was the FO that played the SG, by letting us have smoke, but the club says who, when, where, and how it's deployed.

You probably dont don't know this story, and I'll gladly share it with you off the boards, but the club toon away RPBs smoke during the Red Bulls game last year. The one we clinched playoffs on... But like I said, long story.

eustacchio
04-06-2016, 03:04 PM
Not sure if a streamer on a corner could hurt someone, maybe if somebody tied a coin or rock to one end to make it go further.

What if someone gets tangled up and trips?

In all seriousness though I hope we all agree that spectators should not throw anything on the field.

Fort York Redcoat
04-06-2016, 03:05 PM
I don't think there are any personal jabs, is there Red? We just have a disagree of opinion.. (Again :P)

Yeah I was being pre-emptive. As you say, it's not the first time.

Ivy
04-06-2016, 03:06 PM
What if someone gets tangled up and trips?

In all seriousness though I hope we all agree that spectators should not throw anything on the field.
I think Beckham enjoyed it.

Pint
04-06-2016, 03:07 PM
What if someone gets tangled up and trips?

In all seriousness though I hope we all agree that spectators should not throw anything on the field.

Yes that is agreed upon... although how funny would it be to see a mtl player trip on streamers during a corner?

eustacchio
04-06-2016, 03:12 PM
Yes that is agreed upon... although how funny would it be to see a mtl player trip on streamers during a corner?

I'm laughing right now.

OgtheDim
04-06-2016, 03:57 PM
I think Beckham enjoyed it.

Not sure he enjoyed the beer cans at the Dome.

Ivy
04-06-2016, 04:08 PM
Not sure he enjoyed the beer cans at the Dome.
That wasn't cool...

BuSaPuNk
04-06-2016, 10:48 PM
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=827550897350777&substory_index=0&id=742995635806304

As we said its a slippery slope. Bannings in a leauge that isn't even MLS. Its an attack on support, this should be fought back from all supporters period.

Ivy
04-06-2016, 11:08 PM
I agree with Busa. This is absolutely a point proving incident that has nothing to do with MLS. Whitworth is the grinch to organized support. He will do anything and everything to discourage people from assembling and planning together.
Hearing through grape vines that these punishments are being handed down to leaders of groups, because they can't find the real culprits.
Itll be interesting to see what the reaction would be if Phil or Fizik got banned for a year because a person in a red patch scarf set off a flare.

OgtheDim
04-07-2016, 06:10 AM
I'd like to see the rationale and know what rules are expected at Orlando's B team before I make a comment beyond, "You know it is possible that pyro should not be always allowed where ever somebody can let off a flare." There's a lot of noise when ever a ban occurs.

Pint
04-07-2016, 06:21 AM
I agree with Busa. This is absolutely a point proving incident that has nothing to do with MLS. Whitworth is the grinch to organized support. He will do anything and everything to discourage people from assembling and planning together.
Hearing through grape vines that these punishments are being handed down to leaders of groups, because they can't find the real culprits.
Itll be interesting to see what the reaction would be if Phil or Fizik got banned for a year because a person in a red patch scarf set off a flare.

Mind PM'ing me what you heard? I like to stay in the loop on these things for obvious reasons

Fort York Redcoat
04-07-2016, 08:38 AM
I'd like to see the rationale and know what rules are expected at Orlando's B team before I make a comment beyond, "You know it is possible that pyro should not be always allowed where ever somebody can let off a flare." There's a lot of noise when ever a ban occurs.

What? You mean you parrot "Blanket Protest Across all Leagues" as soon as you hear the word BAN?g:D

This could be about clarification of rules if so many people didn't thrive in the lack of transparency and accountability.

OgtheDim
04-07-2016, 08:45 AM
...This could be about clarification of rules if so many people didn't thrive in the lack of transparency and accountability.


That line is genius cause it can be applied it to every single discussion about soccer structures in North America. Soccer here is sooooooooo cowboy wild west, from the top down. Such a young sport.

Fort York Redcoat
04-07-2016, 08:54 AM
That line is genius cause it can be applied it to every single discussion about soccer structures in North America. Soccer here is sooooooooo cowboy wild west, from the top down. Such a young sport.

Are you saying these SGs were first to the ball? And were the studs showing?g:D

james
04-09-2016, 12:07 AM
I'm sure if swearing bothers people, it can be reported and dealt with.

Though it's not as clearly explained as smoke, flares and streamers .

you really think swearing in a section like 112 would just be reported and the issue would be solved? I could see if a person was swearing directly to an individual, more like a "threatening manner" I could see security taking the issue serious, but if a person was to complain to security that people were swearing do you really think security could actually deal with the problem? you do realize we sometimes chant (sometimes thousands of people chant in the south end) that include swear words in the chant (Example vs Montreal Tic Tac Taber nac who the ...well you should know the rest) This is a soccer game with a more European atmosphere "flare"(:flare: ) to it that is more rude then your average Blue Jay, Raptors, Leafs or Argos game. Swearing is more part of the atmosphere, at least in the supporters section.

james
04-09-2016, 12:14 AM
Overall MLS is all over the place with there rules, some teams are aloud to have smoke and flares in some form including us at TFC. Some pretend to be against it, but turn a blind eye to it. While others are against it strongly and have strict rules against it that are enforced, while it seems MLS overall says the league are against smoke and flares, but then they advertise it like its part of the daily atmosphere and advertise it to attract people to buy tickets and support the team.


I think a lot of fans like smoke and/or flares, and advertising it and seeing it on TV is good for viewership and the "atmosphere" look for clubs. However allow it to only certain designated supporter members who are chosen by the club, do not have random people bringing such items, and have it organized. Then if you don't want anyone else with smoke or flares outside of the specific designated locations then make it aware. Announce that any grounds of there's outside of the few designated supporter fan section that is on the stadium property can be punished by the club....and any grounds outside of the stadium property maybe dealt with by city police exc. Follow this across the league, then at least people know where we all stand.

Fort York Redcoat
04-09-2016, 05:51 AM
I think a lot of fans like smoke and/or flares, and advertising it and seeing it on TV is good for viewership and the "atmosphere" look for clubs. However allow it to only certain designated supporter members who are chosen by the club, do not have random people bringing such items, and have it organized. Then if you don't want anyone else with smoke or flares outside of the specific designated locations then make it aware. Announce that any grounds of there's outside of the few designated supporter fan section that is on the stadium property can be punished by the club....and any grounds outside of the stadium property maybe dealt with by city police exc. Follow this across the league, then at least people know where we all stand.

The only difference I see with this from what's in place here now is where the smoke is set off. We already have members that have to be wearing a wristband and go through a safety process at the start of the year to handle smoke.

This really is about agreeing to do it league wide and proving its safe before we expand what we can do with it.

Cashcleaner
04-09-2016, 07:44 AM
I'll be honest, I find an awful lot of time and effort is spent on these discussions about rules and regulations, league or club policies, and whatnot. That's fine and all, and I'm not knocking people for bringing it up at all, but I think we have to sorta stand back at times and look at our current situation at BMO Field and what we can or cannot do. What is happening elsewhere in the league is obviously worth paying attention to because it could effect us in the future, but I'd like to ask the question about the us the supporters of TFC specifically, and that is:

Are we happy with the current set-up at BMO Field regarding smoke and even confetti or tifos?

Because while I won't speak for anyone else, I think we have things pretty damned good as it is. I'm very cool with how smoke is handled especially. To me it's a completely logical compromise to have the groups in control but still a margin of oversight by the club. The same can be said for other elements of support like banners or flags, though admittedly, similar policies will be found across the league. I'm just thinking really of how the RPB execs at the time were able to negotiate and work out the plan for smoke and how we were able to walk away from the table with a system that benefited everyone - supporters and club.

And even going back quite a few years now how we petitioned the club to make certain exemptions for the rules specifically for the south end. I'm writing this on my phone so I don't know who mentioned it, but someone posted about whether or not swearing in 112 would ever be reported, but luckily enough that's a question that will likely never arise because we came to an agreement with the club that exempts punishment in the south end for any of that. In fact, any visitor to the Supporters Section can see for themselves on any of the printed signs that standing, swearing, and general harmless shenanigans ARE allowed in that entire side of the stadium.

The point to all this is that while we can talk about what-ifs and how things are going with other clubs, I at least feel TFC is managing to get things more right than wrong when it comes to what is allowed in the Supporters Section at BMO Field. In fact, now that I think of it, I'm not even sure what could be done, reasonably, to make things better.

So again, the question to everyone here remains. Are we happy or unhappy with how things currently stand or do we want or demand any significant changes?

Ivy
04-09-2016, 08:59 AM
There is so much wrong with your post, Cashcleaner.

Cashcleaner
04-09-2016, 09:10 AM
^ By all means, please elaborate, Ivy. I think there's so much wrong with your views, but I'll usually take the effort to explain why.

Ivy
04-09-2016, 09:47 AM
^ By all means, please elaborate, Ivy. I think there's so much wrong with your views, but I'll usually take the effort to explain why.
Not view wise, I mean factually.
1. The smoke we have now is only deployed by the group, everything else around it is dictated by the club (what, when, how, why, and who). Don't get me wrong, I appreciate it for what it is, though.
2. You have a misconception about RPBs involvement in obtaining the smoke
3.The signs in the south end do not permit swearing. They read: "SECTION 112 IS A DESIGNATED SUPPORTER SECTION. Fans in this section will be permitted to stand persistently throughout matches, as well as use pre-approved flags, banners, and drums." The word smoke maaaayyyyy have been added, I'm not sure, but I doubt it.
4. This thread is about DC's, and MLS's recent bannings and sanctions, not about fan experience at BMO field.

But to answer your question about can it get better, I think there is no definitive answer. Every person has their own idea of support and how it should be done. Remember that some people here are against flags, and some don't like the drumming (too much salsa).

Fort York Redcoat
04-09-2016, 12:27 PM
But to answer your question about can it get better, I think there is no definitive answer. Every person has their own idea of support and how it should be done. Remember that some people here are against flags, and some don't like the drumming (too much salsa).

League wide consistency should be an agreed upon improvement. It would make this part of the discussion, on what's allowed at least, to be redundant.

Changing what is allowed would be so much clearer.

eustacchio
04-09-2016, 12:54 PM
In regards to smoke - isn't there already a consistent rule across the league: Controlled/club-sanctioned smoke is allowed - individuals using smoke is not?

If a club doesn't want to deal with the hazard, insurance costs (there must be something - I assume) and general hassle, well, that's their purgative.

When MLS advertisements include smoke I see it as an "only at participating locations" situation. As long as they're not using images of smoke being used somewhere where it shouldn't be, what's the problem?

Ivy
04-09-2016, 02:29 PM
In regards to smoke - isn't there already a consistent rule across the league: Controlled/club-sanctioned smoke is allowed - individuals using smoke is not?

If a club doesn't want to deal with the hazard, insurance costs (there must be something - I assume) and general hassle, well, that's their purgative.

When MLS advertisements include smoke I see it as an "only at participating locations" situation. As long as they're not using images of smoke being used somewhere where it shouldn't be, what's the problem?
MLS advertisements show pre game marches a lot. And those are smoke hot zones. Every single city does them.

eustacchio
04-09-2016, 03:34 PM
MLS advertisements show pre game marches a lot. And those are smoke hot zones. Every single city does them.

Fair enough (I knew my comment didn't really apply to this thread before I posted).

BuSaPuNk
04-09-2016, 06:16 PM
MLS advertisements show pre game marches a lot. And those are smoke hot zones. Every single city does them.

And in some cases MLS employees are the ones using the smoke. Just shows a huge double standard.

Good to see DC Ultras not show up in solidarity today. No matter what people say if its right or wrong wrong them to do so there in it as a group.

Ivy
04-09-2016, 06:25 PM
Glad to see other groups from around the league supporting them too.

nascarguy
04-10-2016, 05:57 AM
Glad to see other groups from around the league supporting them too.so Ivy where are your tickets at bmo field

Fort York Redcoat
04-10-2016, 07:16 AM
And in some cases MLS employees are the ones using the smoke. Just shows a huge double standard.

Good to see DC Ultras not show up in solidarity today. No matter what people say if its right or wrong wrong them to do so there in it as a group.

Were those MLS employees in DC? Are there different rules from ground to ground and state to province? If so THAT should be the first concern of MLS transparency and clarification.

BuSaPuNk
04-10-2016, 10:23 AM
Were those MLS employees in DC? Are there different rules from ground to ground and state to province? If so THAT should be the first concern of MLS transparency and clarification.

Im speaking of the Rachel in Orlando photo thats making the rounds. Her opening using a smoke bomb in her hands during a march outside the stadium.

Its amazing the rules only apply when its not for the betterment of there social media and marketing agenda.

Im with Ivy it's also nice that other groups have shown there support and solidarity openly about being with DC after this stupidity. Everyone should be this is an attack on all support.

eustacchio
04-10-2016, 11:37 AM
So the answer is no.

OgtheDim
04-10-2016, 12:53 PM
Not a fan of the length of the penalty but, again, setting off smoke in an enclosed public walkway space is what happened here.

Its a hot mess all around.

Ivy
04-10-2016, 05:01 PM
so Ivy where are your tickets at bmo field
112. Why?

Cashcleaner
04-10-2016, 11:47 PM
Not view wise, I mean factually.
1. The smoke we have now is only deployed by the group, everything else around it is dictated by the club (what, when, how, why, and who). Don't get me wrong, I appreciate it for what it is, though.

2. You have a misconception about RPBs involvement in obtaining the smoke

3.The signs in the south end do not permit swearing. They read: "SECTION 112 IS A DESIGNATED SUPPORTER SECTION. Fans in this section will be permitted to stand persistently throughout matches, as well as use pre-approved flags, banners, and drums." The word smoke maaaayyyyy have been added, I'm not sure, but I doubt it.

4. This thread is about DC's, and MLS's recent bannings and sanctions, not about fan experience at BMO field.

But to answer your question about can it get better, I think there is no definitive answer. Every person has their own idea of support and how it should be done. Remember that some people here are against flags, and some don't like the drumming (too much salsa).

1) Great! We're all cool with how smoke is handled. That was something many people wanted and as I mentioned above, things were worked out and we ended up getting it.

2) Did you ever think you might have a misconception about the group's involvement in obtaining the smoke? The mod/exec forum has a multitude of threads going back several years now over the subject of smoke at BMO Field and I know first-hand how in-depth working it all out was, because I was the guy constantly badgering the execs at the time for an update on how talks were going. You want to know something else that most people here or outside of the group have no idea about? The idea of smoke given to the groups and supplied by TFC came up first between myself and a few others after one of our very first RPB meetings in 2006/2007 with a number of TFC ticket and marketing reps who were eliciting those sorts of ideas to create an atmosphere at BMO Field. I'm certainly not going to say that's when and how the subject originated, but I will say it's a topic that has been kicked about before the majority of individuals believe.

3) Fair enough. But do you think security would ever enforce a no-swearing policy in the south end? I don't, because after all these seasons, I've yet to see or hear of it happening myself. I can't speak for any other section, but I just cannot imagine the stewards in 112 taking somebody out because another complained about their language.

4) Yes, but as I mentioned in my post, we often look at what's going on elsewhere and applying hypothetical situations to BMO Field and discuss their possible results. That's not a bad thing, but I think at times we get a bit carried away and can sometimes jump to conclusions (ie: these guys in DC get banned for X, so you just wait until it happens here!). Fuck, we're a soccer forum but at times it can be the most fucking depressing place to be.

You're absolutely right, though. There is no definitive answer, at least not if you ask a wider audience. Some are very happy with how things are. Some want more or less, and frankly, some will never be happy. Myself, I look at certain complaints and shake my head, Actually, strike that - I look at the positions some people take (like, ABSOLUTELY NO FLAG-WAVING AT ANYTIME EVER!!! VERSUS, FLAGS ALWAYS AND FOREVER!!!) and shake my head. Because what the heck happened to reason and taking the middle ground? I personally love flags and want to see them up as much as makes sense. But if a person behind me says he can't see what's going on during an important segment of the match (let's say during a PK), I'm not gonna get my back up - I'm gonna put my flag down. But once that's all over, it's going back up.

As for drums, I fucking love them. In fact, I stand beside them, so I don't even have a choice in the matter. And honestly, I cannot wrap my head around a lot of the criticism that the drums get. "What's that? The timing is off? Good thing we're at a football stadium and not the fucking opera!". Ugh, it tries my patience.

Honestly, hate using this card, but I've been involved with this group and a support since Day 1. I've seen people come and go, other groups come together than fall apart, and new policies and rules by the club too numerous to post that have been drawn up, discusses in committee, given to us to gauge reactions, re-written, thrown out, and drawn up again. New heads of marketing, sales, and even the odd Club President come in and leave. Trust me when I say that I've seen it all, either as a person having some sort of direct input as I did in the early years or now as an active observer of our current executive. I can honestly say that more often than not, the club is more than willing to meet the SGs halfway on a number of issues. We're never going to get everything we want - I guarantee that. But there is more give-and-take at play than I think most people are aware. There's also league-mandated issues that the club has it's handed tied over, but in all my dealings so far, for the most part - and there have been exceptions - I've seldom left a meeting or hung up the phone talking to someone at the club still feeling they've been unreasonable about an issue. Sometimes I have, and would usually vent at the execs or other mods about it, but yeah.

Ivy
04-11-2016, 12:03 AM
I appreciate your opinion, but I don't understand why I can't help but sense some hostility? Your opinions will be yours, mine will be mine. You obviously have an attachment to this group that I don't, since I haven't been here from day 1, unlike you - that, I can also appreciate.
I don't want to get into what and who you know, or what or who I know, but I think that your personal long relationship with the group might be causing you to be over defensive of the things I say sometimes, which I get. But please don't get upset at me on a personal level.
Even though I left the group, I made and hopefully kept a lot of friends over the years. I respect opinions whether or not I agree with them or not.

Cashcleaner
04-11-2016, 01:13 AM
I'll show you the root of my hostility:


This is one of the main reasons why I left RPB. Being in a supporter group means more to me than paying 25$ and having "Member" written under my board name.

You make remarks about how we charge a membership fee while very conveniently neglecting to mention that such a fee is require to organize and promote road trips because of legal action that was threatened against us years ago. By the way, that same legal action that could possibly force every other TFC supporter group in the future to do the same if an unscrupulous bus operator or travel agent wanted to report them to TICO (Travel Industry Council of Ontario).


It claims to be independent from the club and doesn't take any finances from the club to fund game day experience for members, mean while it works very much on the "you say jump, I say how high" mentality.

We don't just claim to be independent. We ARE independent. And I strongly resent any implication otherwise on behalf of myself and the executives. It's a slap to the face of the guys who are working hard behind the scenes to keep the forums running or ordering the merchandise (and putting their money up-front for it, by the way). Its an insult to the guys who get off work at 5pm downtown then have to run over to BMO Field for a 6 o'clock meeting that runs well into the evening. Or the ones who have to answer to Joe and defuse the situation when some ignoramus bails on paying their tab during a gameday viewing. I'm not even the guy who has to do any of it, but I see it with my own eyes and I'm glad they have the patience and energy to do all that, because I sure don't.

Ivy
04-11-2016, 01:19 AM
Again, I can factually debate you on the topics you've mentioned, but I choose not to do it on a public forum. If you'd like to talk more, you can PM me and I'll send you my number.

ill say this for everybody to see though - my comments about the 25$ are not about the guys that run the group. They're about the 95% or so of "members" that do absolutely nothing to contribute to THE GROUP, other than buy a scarf and post on this forum, saying that they're RPB supporters (some don't even do that). I'll reiterate what I said, for me, being in a group is more than paying 25$ and posting on a forum.

Pint
04-11-2016, 06:43 AM
After all the support from around the league and the support that will continue to pour in this week, i wonder if the league is feeling any pressure to change it's stance?

As far as us in Toronto? from the few conversations i was able to have this weekend i wouldn't expect this to come up as an issue here BUT DO NOT TAKE THIS STATEMENT AS FREE REIGN TO DO WHATEVER YOU WANT.

BuSaPuNk
04-11-2016, 07:16 AM
I'll show you the root of my hostility:



You make remarks about how we charge a membership fee while very conveniently neglecting to mention that such a fee is require to organize and promote road trips because of legal action that was threatened against us years ago. By the way, that same legal action that could possibly force every other TFC supporter group in the future to do the same if an unscrupulous bus operator or travel agent wanted to report them to TICO (Travel Industry Council of Ontario).



We don't just claim to be independent. We ARE independent. And I strongly resent any implication otherwise on behalf of myself and the executives. It's a slap to the face of the guys who are working hard behind the scenes to keep the forums running or ordering the merchandise (and putting their money up-front for it, by the way). Its an insult to the guys who get off work at 5pm downtown then have to run over to BMO Field for a 6 o'clock meeting that runs well into the evening. Or the ones who have to answer to Joe and defuse the situation when some ignoramus bails on paying their tab during a gameday viewing. I'm not even the guy who has to do any of it, but I see it with my own eyes and I'm glad they have the patience and energy to do all that, because I sure don't.

Im sorry but Id like to know for the record what road trips have been planned by and executed by the group in the last 3 years?

And I also disagree its insult to anyone. This coming from someone who went to meetings and seen the results of them.

Pint
04-11-2016, 07:18 AM
Luckily some of those meetings have now been pushed back to 630 ;)

Fort York Redcoat
04-11-2016, 08:19 AM
Im speaking of the Rachel in Orlando photo thats making the rounds. Her opening using a smoke bomb in her hands during a march outside the stadium.

Its amazing the rules only apply when its not for the betterment of there social media and marketing agenda.

Im with Ivy it's also nice that other groups have shown there support and solidarity openly about being with DC after this stupidity. Everyone should be this is an attack on all support.

Orlando B was punished for using smoke (flares?) in their stadium. Were they punished for handling it outside the grounds where Rachel was?

I don't see what helps in ignoring the different rules for different places. It simplifies things, sure, but it doesn't help to omit information. We're seeing the result of that in this decision.

Fort York Redcoat
04-11-2016, 08:26 AM
There is so much wrong with your post, Cashcleaner.


I appreciate your opinion, but I don't understand why I can't help but sense some hostility?

Well this could help. If you can't see the condescension in your opener than you have some work to do. I'll assume it's an oversight and not straight up antagonism.

Pint
04-11-2016, 08:31 AM
Orlando B was punished for using smoke (flares?) in their stadium. Were they punished for handling it outside the grounds where Rachel was?

I don't see what helps in ignoring the different rules for different places. It simplifies things, sure, but it doesn't help to omit information. We're seeing the result of that in this decision.

I don't think it's being ignored, lots of non-forum discussion has taken place on it but whats likely to happen is the rules of the strictest will be blanketed across all not the rules of the average or lenient. Personally I like the way things are here right now, are they perfect? No but we have it much better than many others and I wouldn't really want to leave it up to someone who has never met any of us and doesn't appear to have any want to meet us to dictate rules to us.

Fort York Redcoat
04-11-2016, 08:43 AM
I don't think it's being ignored, lots of non-forum discussion has taken place on it but whats likely to happen is the rules of the strictest will be blanketed across all not the rules of the average or lenient. Personally I like the way things are here right now, are they perfect? No but we have it much better than many others and I wouldn't really want to leave it up to someone who has never met any of us and doesn't appear to have any want to meet us to dictate rules to us.

Statements that say "MLS officials can do it why can't we" over simplify the issue. Most people interested in growing that element of the culture are well aware of these differences but skirt the transparency to enable action and the absence of accountability. We've provided lists in the past for stadium rules as an SG to clubs. How difficult could it be to publish a list of local bylaws to show the inconsistency's? It puts accountability on Supporters and can help to repair the PR damage that's been done.

Fort York Redcoat
04-11-2016, 08:48 AM
Im sorry but Id like to know for the record what road trips have been planned by and executed by the group in the last 3 years?

And I also disagree its insult to anyone. This coming from someone who went to meetings and seen the results of them.

Way to miss the point. Trying to organize and promote the last 3 years has been a challenge you should be well aware of. You should also know about membership and incorporation.

BuSaPuNk
04-11-2016, 09:04 AM
Way to miss the point. Trying to organize and promote the last 3 years has been a challenge you should be well aware of. You should also know about membership and incorporation.

Oh Im well aware. Every time it was shot down bevause there was no way to get around TICO and its rules and regs. But someone praising road trips as being a huge reason can't be justified if we havnt had any.

And yeah Im well aware of it, I was a part of it.

Fort York Redcoat
04-11-2016, 09:08 AM
Oh Im well aware. Every time it was shot down bevause there was no way to get around TICO and its rules and regs. But someone praising road trips as being a huge reason can't be justified if we havnt had any.

And yeah Im well aware of it, I was a part of it.

You see praise. What's there is reason and explanation. That's it. And there's more to road trips than renting a bus. It seems you've forgotten or choose to ignore it.

Either way, let's get back to the issue that DC support has brought to the spotlight.

Pint
04-11-2016, 09:13 AM
You see praise. What's there is reason and explanation. That's it. And there's more to road trips than renting a bus. It seems you've forgotten or choose to ignore it.

Either way, let's get back to the issue that DC support has brought to the spotlight.

Yes that DU leadership was blindly punished for something likely relating more to a backroom rift than any action that actually took place. He was targeted because he was leadership

Fort York Redcoat
04-11-2016, 09:22 AM
Yes that DU leadership was blindly punished for something likely relating more to a backroom rift than any action that actually took place. He was targeted because he was leadership

From the article it sounds as if he lead the march. I assume from your targeting comment he wasn't the only one with smoke?

Pint
04-11-2016, 09:27 AM
From the article it sounds as if he lead the march. I assume from your targeting comment he wasn't the only one with smoke?

From the pictures I've seen, its not clear who was holding the smoke. I would also be very surprised if only 1 smoke device was used on a march, would be abnormal (i think we can agree on that)?

The letter that was written and passed around the interwebs seams to indicate the same issues the Barra Bravas told me about 2 years ago (both ended up a the sheaf post game)still exist and have potentially gotten worse. This appears to me that DCU FO saw an opportunity to send a message and took it.

Fort York Redcoat
04-11-2016, 09:42 AM
From the pictures I've seen, its not clear who was holding the smoke. I would also be very surprised if only 1 smoke device was used on a march, would be abnormal (i think we can agree on that)?

The letter that was written and passed around the interwebs seams to indicate the same issues the Barra Bravas told me about 2 years ago (both ended up a the sheaf post game)still exist and have potentially gotten worse. This appears to me that DCU FO saw an opportunity to send a message and took it.

To be clear, I'm not disagreeing but trying to get as many facts surrounding the issue.

So is it safe to say the message was "no smoke on RFK grounds"?

I can admit I'm over simplifying the issue because the message could've been delivered BEFORE the incident since there was a precedent of smoke on the way to the stadium WITHOUT any punishment.

I also agree that this gets personal with the league-wide year-long ban I read. If this is the leagues way of communicating policy it lacks professionalism. The league has the means to communicate this policy throughout the teams, and its supporters BEFORE punishments come into play.

Pint
04-11-2016, 10:04 AM
To be clear, I'm not disagreeing but trying to get as many facts surrounding the issue.

So is it safe to say the message was "no smoke on RFK grounds"?

I can admit I'm over simplifying the issue because the message could've been delivered BEFORE the incident since there was a precedent of smoke on the way to the stadium WITHOUT any punishment.

I also agree that this gets personal with the league-wide year-long ban I read. If this is the leagues way of communicating policy it lacks professionalism. The league has the means to communicate this policy throughout the teams, and its supporters BEFORE punishments come into play.

That's what i'm not sure about from that open letter it seamed it was a tradition to pop smoke in that location.

Also if it was said was it said like our "no standing on the railing of the capo stands" is said to us?

Also is it a DCU issue if it happens on RFK grounds or did they make it a DCU issue? Everything on ex grounds is Toronto police territory until you are basically inside BMO field, then it becomes BMO field security.

Fort York Redcoat
04-11-2016, 10:23 AM
That's what i'm not sure about from that open letter it seamed it was a tradition to pop smoke in that location.

Also if it was said was it said like our "no standing on the railing of the capo stands" is said to us?

Also is it a DCU issue if it happens on RFK grounds or did they make it a DCU issue? Everything on ex grounds is Toronto police territory until you are basically inside BMO field, then it becomes BMO field security.

What I read was that smoke "was done in the past" and Matt wanted to recapture those days. That doesn't sound like it was still "tradition". This does NOT excuse the fact that if RFK security most likely knew this was happening (as we know FO's aren't completely unaware of SG plans) with an onus was on RFK/DCU to remind SGs of any policy change.

As for the capo stand comment you're aware my personal take on that. Just because it's not enforced doesn't mean I'm going to do something I agreed not to.

My message in all this is make the message clear and the action taken is defendable.

Bringing it back to CNE grounds the point I'm trying nail down is that CNE grounds have taken action in the past. The fact that Toronto Police have jurisdiction doesn't change that CNE grounds have taken more steps than police outside of CNE grounds on this issue as far as Toronto support is concerned, no?

Ivy
04-11-2016, 02:05 PM
Well this could help. If you can't see the condescension in your opener than you have some work to do. I'll assume it's an oversight and not straight up antagonism.
I was writing a long post, but I'll just summarize it instead.
Dont be a hypocrite about the condescension. You've been one side moderating and throwing off smerky smart ass comments at anything that you don't agree with.

Fort York Redcoat
04-11-2016, 02:15 PM
I was writing a long post, but I'll just summarize it instead.
Dont be a hypocrite about the condescension. You've been one side moderating and throwing off smerky smart ass comments at anything that you don't agree with.

Hey you asked why the hostility. I guess you didn't want to know.

If you have a problem with moderating there are others you can report it to.

Ivy
04-11-2016, 02:39 PM
Hey you asked why the hostility. I guess you didn't want to know.

If you have a problem with moderating there are others you can report it to.
Report it to who? To you? Lol I wasn't born yesterday.

And I've asked you before, as well as in that PM that you chose to ignore - tell me where I'm wrong, based on facts and current status, and I'll retract my statement; because so much of the stuff that cashcleaner said is wrong. I'm sorry if that hurts your personal ego for some reason.

Fort York Redcoat
04-11-2016, 03:02 PM
Report it to who? To you? Lol I wasn't born yesterday.

And I've asked you before, as well as in that PM that you chose to ignore - tell me where I'm wrong, based on facts and current status, and I'll retract my statement; because so much of the stuff that cashcleaner said is wrong. I'm sorry if that hurts your personal ego for some reason.

When you report something all mods see it. I'm surprised you didn't know the process. You seem interested enough in it.

Bringing up a PM in thread is Poor form, though. I'll gladly answer you're PM now if you felt it needed answering.

Ivy
04-11-2016, 03:06 PM
When you report something all mods see it. I'm surprised you didn't know the process. You seem interested enough in it.

Bringing up a PM in thread is Poor form, though. I'll gladly answer you're PM now if you felt it needed answering.
All mods see it here too, Pete. I'm sure reporting a mod to his buddy will go over real well.

whats the poor form? That I PMed you and you ignored it, or that I brought it up?

GATE7ULTRAS
04-11-2016, 03:08 PM
Dont punish what you advertise.....witworth has to go...wake up!!!!! Hes a cancer to supporters

eustacchio
04-11-2016, 03:13 PM
Surely it must get tiring being angry all the time.

Ivy
04-11-2016, 03:15 PM
Surely it must get tiring being angry all the time.
You have no idea buddy... You have noooo idea lol

eustacchio
04-11-2016, 03:17 PM
You have no idea buddy... You have noooo idea lol

Oh, but I do.

Ivy
04-11-2016, 03:19 PM
I feel like I'm angry all the time, and it stresses me out, which in turns make me angry because the anger is stressing me out. I'm caught in this matrix of angry.

Pint
04-11-2016, 03:20 PM
I feel like I'm angry all the time, and it stresses me out, which in turns make me angry because the anger is stressing me out. I'm caught in this matrix of angry.

Beer solves that... unless you get angry about talking about beer.

eustacchio
04-11-2016, 03:32 PM
I feel like I'm angry all the time, and it stresses me out, which in turns make me angry because the anger is stressing me out. I'm caught in this matrix of angry.

I tried to PM you, but you're out of space.

Fort York Redcoat
04-11-2016, 03:41 PM
All mods see it here too, Pete. I'm sure reporting a mod to his buddy will go over real well.

whats the poor form? That I PMed you and you ignored it, or that I brought it up?

If you're having issues you should report them instead of waiting for another mod to happen by.

Bringing up PMs in thread is poor form. As I've said above, there was nothing in it that even indicated you wanted a response but I only mention it since you want to make like I'm ignoring you.

We need to continue this outside of the thread.

james
04-11-2016, 09:56 PM
I'll be honest, I find an awful lot of time and effort is spent on these discussions about rules and regulations, league or club policies, and whatnot. That's fine and all, and I'm not knocking people for bringing it up at all, but I think we have to sorta stand back at times and look at our current situation at BMO Field and what we can or cannot do. What is happening elsewhere in the league is obviously worth paying attention to because it could effect us in the future, but I'd like to ask the question about the us the supporters of TFC specifically, and that is:

Are we happy with the current set-up at BMO Field regarding smoke and even confetti or tifos?

Because while I won't speak for anyone else, I think we have things pretty damned good as it is. I'm very cool with how smoke is handled especially. To me it's a completely logical compromise to have the groups in control but still a margin of oversight by the club. The same can be said for other elements of support like banners or flags, though admittedly, similar policies will be found across the league. I'm just thinking really of how the RPB execs at the time were able to negotiate and work out the plan for smoke and how we were able to walk away from the table with a system that benefited everyone - supporters and club.

And even going back quite a few years now how we petitioned the club to make certain exemptions for the rules specifically for the south end. I'm writing this on my phone so I don't know who mentioned it, but someone posted about whether or not swearing in 112 would ever be reported, but luckily enough that's a question that will likely never arise because we came to an agreement with the club that exempts punishment in the south end for any of that. In fact, any visitor to the Supporters Section can see for themselves on any of the printed signs that standing, swearing, and general harmless shenanigans ARE allowed in that entire side of the stadium.

The point to all this is that while we can talk about what-ifs and how things are going with other clubs, I at least feel TFC is managing to get things more right than wrong when it comes to what is allowed in the Supporters Section at BMO Field. In fact, now that I think of it, I'm not even sure what could be done, reasonably, to make things better.

So again, the question to everyone here remains. Are we happy or unhappy with how things currently stand or do we want or demand any significant changes?

I agree with what you say...I am very happy in recent years with how MLSE has dealt with flags, flares, swearing exc. They have been pretty calm about the whole thing, there was a few issues I disagreed with some years back, but things have changed. So if they remain like this, I can MLSE at BMO deal with these issues very well, something that I usually don't get to say much about MLSE but I can compliment MLSE on doing something right!!

mook-life
04-12-2016, 09:08 AM
I was writing a long post, but I'll just summarize it instead.
Dont be a hypocrite about the condescension. You've been one side moderating and throwing off smerky smart ass comments at anything that you don't agree with.


150% on your side with this one

Carter
04-12-2016, 10:46 AM
http://www.fourfourtwo.com/us/features/dc-united-fans-club-tension-fan-banned-year-smoke-bomb#:uZdrbRxzN5Hd4A

D.C. United's hardcore fans are simmering after one of their own received a year-long ban, a sudden spike in longstanding supporter-club tension.
WASHINGTON – There has always been two sides to D.C. United (http://www.fourfourtwo.com/us/dc-united)'s crowds at RFK Stadium, the aging concrete coliseum that stands tall as the only venue to witness all 20 of Major League Soccer (http://www.fourfourtwo.com/us/mls)'s seasons.
RFK has a “quiet side,” the lower western stand that rises above the team benches, where families, youth teams and more casual spectators generally sit. And on the east lies the “loud side,” the home of United's main organized supporters groups, where the “harDCores” stand, sing, drink, curse and jump until the half-century-old bleacher seats beneath them bounce and sway like an old diving board.
D.C. United was the first true home for supporter culture in MLS, thanks mainly to the capital city's multinational diversity and the club's uncommonly visionary approach to fan relations in the league's early years. Where other teams zoned in on the suburban “soccer mom” demographic and gazed upon rowdier supporters with fear and loathing, D.C. welcomed and nurtured supporters groups like the Screaming Eagles and Barra Brava, and were rewarded with the league's best ambiance in its first decade of existence.

This new regime in the FO [front office] refuses to see us fans as a part of the club – which, before they wiped out a lot of the FO and rehired, they used to."

- Matt Parsons, D.C. fan banned for one year

But the year-long, league-wide stadium ban handed down on Monday (http://dcist.com/2016/04/dc_united_facing_fan_mutiny_as_supp.php) to Matt Parsons, a prominent member of the District Ultras supporters group, has stunned and angered many of the Black-and-Red faithful and threatens to open up ugly new rifts between casual fans, the most devoted enthusiasts and the club's front office just as United's long-sought new stadium finally approaches reality.
“I just think they thought this would scare enough people and we would move on, like your average consumer,” Parsons told FourFourTwo on Thursday. “But this new regime in the FO [front office] refuses to see us fans as a part of the club – which, before they wiped out a lot of the FO and rehired, they used to.
“Now, we are just consumers like anyone else, the sense of community is gone, and all focus is on the new stadium, which is starting to seem like it might end up being more of a curse than a blessing if the current state of affairs are just signs of what's to come.”
http://images.cdn.fourfourtwo.com/sites/fourfourtwo.com/files/styles/inline-image/public/160408_dcu_fans_tommy_gilligan-usa_today_sports_0.jpg?itok=3uP3BnHW
Tommy Gilligan-USA TODAY Sports
United officials allege that Parsons was spotted by club employees, and recorded on video, setting off a “smoke grenade” in a tunnel under Independence Avenue SE that connects RFK's Lot 8 – home of D.C.'s famous pregame tailgating scene – to the area directly adjacent to the stadium before United's match vs. FC Dallas on March 26. Multiple sources have confirmed to FourFourTwo that the device in question was made by UK-based manufacturer Enola Gaye (http://www.enolagaye.com/), a style commonly used by MLS supporters and others abroad.
While the supporters groups have for years respected a ban on smoke devices inside the venue itself, they allege that United has suddenly expanded the technical definition of that banned space to “stadium property,” encompassing the enormous parking lots that flank the arena.
“We are very focused on the safety of our fans – all of our fans,” said Lindsay Simpson, United's director of media & communications. “We have an obligation to each and every single person that enters this facility, whether it's the parking lots or the building itself, to give them the best possible experience. And we have an obligation to comply with the law.”

In light of Parsons' leadership position in the group – he was one of a few supports group representatives given stadium credentials for the purpose of setting up installing banners and the like – the Ultras have also been slapped on the wrist, with the club revoking their clearance to use flags, flag poles and drums during Saturday's home match against the Vancouver Whitecaps. (United subsequently backtracked on drums, which will apparently be allowed after all.)“Public safety is our primary concern and firework restrictions are in place to reduce the likelihood of personal injury or property damage. Setting off firecrackers or any device with an inserted fuse is prohibited in the District of Columbia. Any firework found to be dangerous by the Fire Chief or the Office of the Fire Marshal to the safety of any person or property is also prohibited. Such devices are not allowed to be used in public assemblies without a valid permit issued by the Office of the Fire Marshal. Any prohibited devices found on site will be confiscated and destroyed.”
“The idea that flags, drums, tifo and such are some sort of supporter privilege is ridiculous,” District Ultras leader Srdan Bastaic told FourFourTwo, lamenting what he sees as “suits” attempting to “turn MLS back to a '90s soccer mom league.”
RECOMMENDEDhttp://images.cdn.fourfourtwo.com/sites/fourfourtwo.com/files/styles/puff-image/public/160316_olsen_espindola_geoff_burke-usa_today_sports_2.jpg?itok=7CDhqc8Y
Pragmatic in approach, Olsen trying to evolve D.C. United's playing style (http://www.fourfourtwo.com/us/features/dc-united-ben-olsen-evolution-pragmatic-approach)


If United officials envisioned their action as a deterrent to the fan base at large, as Parsons and others allege, the severity and summary nature of Parsons' punishment has thus far prompted exactly the opposite reaction. Condemnation has rained down on United and MLS from supporters across the league; the District Ultras are planning a protest for Saturday's game by leaving their section empty for the first half, and they say they have received pledges from other MLS supporters groups to take similar action in other stadiums.
“For whatever reason, it feels like they have chosen to make a statement with this particular punishment,” said Paul Sotoudeh, a longtime member of the Screaming Eagles board of directors who serves as that group's game day operations coordinator.
“It's a very severe – an extremely severe, frankly – penalty. And it's a penalty for something that, you look at the fan code of contact and you're really getting down into the weeds as to whether it's a violation or not.
He continued: “It's never been enforced in this way before and they chose to enforce it in such a draconian kind of way up front, that really strikes me the wrong way and I think that's a lot of what people are reacting to.”
Perhaps most frustratingly for many fans, Parsons and his fellow Ultras were in the midst of a “unity march” arranged to bring together all of the club's supporters groups, who have feuded intermittently in years past, in a combined show of support at a rough time for their team. That is also why club staff was filming the occasion, with plans to celebrate the drumming, chanting and various other displays of passion.
http://images.cdn.fourfourtwo.com/sites/fourfourtwo.com/files/styles/inline-image/public/160408_red_bulls_fan_noah_k._murray-usa_today_sports.jpg?itok=SZ_JXWix
Red Bulls fans with flares ahead of last year's playoff game vs. D.C. (fan Noah K. Murray-USA TODAY Sports)
D.C. United is off to a bumpy start in 2016, with no wins and just three points from their first five league games as well as a brief and winless cameo in the CONCACAF Champions League's knockout stages. The quality of play has been uneven as a rejiggered roster comes to terms with itself and Argentine playmaker Luciano Acosta, the team's featured offseason acquisition, has spent most of the time on the substitute's bench despite big expectations on his arrival from Boca Juniors.
United fans pay high ticket prices relative to the rest of MLS for a no-frills game-day environment at grungy, decaying RFK. Their team has been pragmatically constructed on a tight budget even relative to the league's salary-cap structure. The club has parted ways with many of its long-serving staffers in several waves of layoffs and firings, part of a sustained period of spending cuts as it seeks to stem the tide of annual losses under the terms of their lease with the city, which owns and operates the stadium.
Longtime fans say the relationship between supporters groups and club officials has slipped from a family-style bond in the early years to something more akin to a strict consumer transaction under the current ownership group, led by Indonesian media magnate Erick Thohir and managing general partner Jason Levien. Add it all up, and you have a recipe for disgruntled supporters. This week's events seem to have pushed many to the breaking point.
“Parsons will be first to tell you this is not about him, it's about this constant sanctions thing. It just hit the bottom now because it was in the parking lot, because D.C. went out of their way to do it,” said Bastaic.
Over the years, MLS has struggled to find the middle ground between strict law and order at matches and celebrating their colorful supporter culture. Last month's incident in D.C. is the latest in a string of conflicts between supporters and clubs around MLS, including comparable situations in Los Angeles (http://independentsupporterscouncil.com/acb-sanctions/) and Montreal (http://thefirsteleven.com/the-montreal-ultras-and-the-mls-are-going-up-in-smoke/).
http://images.cdn.fourfourtwo.com/sites/fourfourtwo.com/files/styles/inline-image/public/160408_dc_united.jpg?itok=Jc5ngW4S
USA TODAY Sports
Those rankled by United's actions readily point out how much of the league's promotional materials prominently feature exactly the kind of smoke device that brought on his ban.
“We would have NEVER imagined the club would act like this,” Parsons said. “There are actual fireworks set off in the same parking lot after nearly every game. Smoke used to be [a] regular [occurrence] inside and outside of RFK for years.
“Then add on top, the league's current-year commercial prominently featuring fans with smoke and flares … But obviously they pick and choose what rules they want to enforce and on whom they want to enforce them.”
MLS officials say their clubs take the lead on establishing and enforcing local regulations. League vice president of communications Dan Courtemanche said “it is standard protocol for MLS to administer the league-wide ban for violations such as this.”
“We've always been pretty clear that passionate fans and organized supporters groups are part of what makes attending a Major League Soccer match – or a soccer game throughout the world – so special,” Courtemanche told FourFourTwo this week. “They provide a festive environment that is unique to the sport. But we must have rules that strike the balance that provides our fans with this vibrant in-stadium experience while also ensuring that they have a safe environment.”


...unfortunately for MLS and D.C. United, this won't just get swept under the rug."

- Matt Parsons

Parsons said he plans to remain an active member of the District Ultras despite the ban, though he may relocate from the D.C. area for professional reasons later this year. He has received voluminous support from fellow fans and expects the issues his case has exposed will continue simmering around MLS.
“There are groups from around the league currently in communication, planning coordinated league wide actions throughout the season,” he said. “So, unfortunately for MLS and D.C. United, this won't just get swept under the rug. They must have thought this would be a one-fan issue, but I am not the issue at all, the issue is the unfair treatment of the group and groups around the league.
“I mean, I am glad it happened to me and not someone else who might be more upset by the ban. And I am glad it's bringing attention to the hypocrisy of the league and the issues facing supporters around the league.”

Oldtimer
04-12-2016, 10:56 AM
“We would have NEVER imagined the club would act like this,” Parsons said.

I think that is key. What matters is that whatever rules in place are clear. Otherwise people have every right to be upset.

eustacchio
04-12-2016, 11:01 AM
I haven't finished reading this yet, but I'm curious if suddenly means suddenly that day or suddenly this season new management wants to manage differently:


While the supporters groups have for years respected a ban on smoke devices inside the venue itself, they allege that United has suddenly expanded the technical definition of that banned space to “stadium property,” encompassing the enormous parking lots that flank the arena.

OgtheDim
04-12-2016, 05:37 PM
http://independentsupporterscouncil.com/independent-supporters-council-calls-for-hypocritical-unfair-and-arbitrary-sanctions-in-mls-to-end/

Red4ever
04-12-2016, 08:32 PM
"In this case, Mr. Parsons has been banned from every MLS venue for an action that would not even violate the rules of over 2/3 of the venues he is banned from."

Is Orlando one? Cause that kinda renders the hypocrisy smoke in promotion angle toothless.

Ivy
04-12-2016, 09:07 PM
You're just referencing the Rachel picture... But MLS advertised supporters and use of smoke in many forms, and they use footage from a lot of teams coast to coast. Individual teams have stopped doing it where it's not allowed, but MLS hasn't, thus the hypocrisy claims.

Red4ever
04-12-2016, 09:11 PM
You're just referencing the Rachel picture... But MLS advertised supporters and use of smoke in many forms, and they use footage from a lot of teams coast to coast. Individual teams have stopped doing it where it's not allowed, but MLS hasn't, thus the hypocrisy claims.

I am. I hope we can stop using the Rachel picture as a basis then. I've heard this, but I haven't seen any examples given other than Rachel. I certainly haven't seen any this season.

How many teams have a set up similar to us where using it through the club is okay but not illegally brought in? How do expect video editors to know the difference?

Shakes McQueen
04-12-2016, 09:37 PM
Assuming for the sake or argument that MLS are hypocrites on the promotional materials front - what is the end game? To then claim ignorance of what their policies are regarding smoke and/or pyro, because of that?

MLS are the one stakeholder here who can afford to be hypocrites, because they technically have all the power over their own policies. We should demand clarity on what those policies (and the related punishments) are, but special pleading because of hypocritical promotional materials is going to have a net effect of zero, unless all you're aiming for is a moral victory.

CBTFC
04-12-2016, 09:39 PM
http://independentsupporterscouncil.com/independent-supporters-council-calls-for-hypocritical-unfair-and-arbitrary-sanctions-in-mls-to-end/

Red4ever
04-12-2016, 09:41 PM
http://independentsupporterscouncil.com/independent-supporters-council-calls-for-hypocritical-unfair-and-arbitrary-sanctions-in-mls-to-end/
^^^^

http://independentsupporterscouncil.com/independent-supporters-council-calls-for-hypocritical-unfair-and-arbitrary-sanctions-in-mls-to-end/

Ivy
04-12-2016, 11:52 PM
I am. I hope we can stop using the Rachel picture as a basis then. I've heard this, but I haven't seen any examples given other than Rachel. I certainly haven't seen any this season.

How many teams have a set up similar to us where using it through the club is okay but not illegally brought in? How do expect video editors to know the difference?
You're right I guess, there's no real way of telling if it's allowed or not allowed other than asking the club. But we all know that smoke happens in marches for every club in every city. I think the anger is more based on the fact that they picked one guy, out of no where, and gave him a very hefty spanking.

Pint
04-13-2016, 06:26 AM
Assuming for the sake or argument that MLS are hypocrites on the promotional materials front - what is the end game? To then claim ignorance of what their policies are regarding smoke and/or pyro, because of that?

MLS are the one stakeholder here who can afford to be hypocrites, because they technically have all the power over their own policies. We should demand clarity on what those policies (and the related punishments) are, but special pleading because of hypocritical promotional materials is going to have a net effect of zero, unless all you're aiming for is a moral victory.

Big difference between what the club can say to a few behind the scenes and what the club can come out and say publicly. TFC can't come out and say smoke on ex grounds is okay because that's not their decision, TFC security are involved from x feet away from the stadium and inside the rest are Toronto cops who have generally been very good the past year or two. At the end of the day the Toronto cops are more for crowd control than actual enforcement of everything, as long as we are not endangering others they let things slide.

CBTFC
04-13-2016, 07:52 AM
^^^^

*shrug*, oh well. A repost. Oh no. lol.

Fort York Redcoat
04-13-2016, 08:09 AM
You're right I guess, there's no real way of telling if it's allowed or not allowed other than asking the club. But we all know that smoke happens in marches for every club in every city. I think the anger is more based on the fact that they picked one guy, out of no where, and gave him a very hefty spanking.

My anger is at the fact they had several ways to advise against his action and then state they had done so to media afterwards. From experience we both know marches like this that involve all groups don't happen out of the blue. If the new management wanted to enact the rules that were always there in the first place its their right but to ignore the avenues of communication available to them means they deserve all the backlash they are getting.

I mean, didn't they(MLS or DC?) have cameras on site? Or did the cameras meet them as they got to the stadium? Either way, completely preventable.

I can't even comment on the weight of the punishment. It shouldn't have come to it.

Fort York Redcoat
04-13-2016, 08:18 AM
Big difference between what the club can say to a few behind the scenes and what the club can come out and say publicly. TFC can't come out and say smoke on ex grounds is okay because that's not their decision, TFC security are involved from x feet away from the stadium and inside the rest are Toronto cops who have generally been very good the past year or two. At the end of the day the Toronto cops are more for crowd control than actual enforcement of everything, as long as we are not endangering others they let things slide.

I don't know. I think this situation sets the perfect time to press for an official statement from TFC no different than the one that came too late from DC. That's the issue for me.

They don't have to condone, they CAN'T enforce outside the grounds and have no responsibility but to think how many people don't even know outside of these circles what authority stands where....

The means to inform BEFORE an incident is available.

Phil
04-13-2016, 08:32 AM
Assuming for the sake or argument that MLS are hypocrites on the promotional materials front - what is the end game? To then claim ignorance of what their policies are regarding smoke and/or pyro, because of that?

MLS are the one stakeholder here who can afford to be hypocrites, because they technically have all the power over their own policies. We should demand clarity on what those policies (and the related punishments) are, but special pleading because of hypocritical promotional materials is going to have a net effect of zero, unless all you're aiming for is a moral victory.


This resonates well and reflects my own gripe with the MLS and various front offices. We need to now know the rules because we don't want to be subjected to some arbitrary ban without any process for a fair appeal or review of the event.

Right now things are coming down hard and fast on all supporters and there isn't much clarification about what the actual rules and punishments are. We all know what is illegal in the stadium and there is this real grey zone outside the grounds, but if rules start magically being created and applied to actions outside the stadium then we need to know and have it defined clearly. By 'we' I mean all supporters for all teams.

Greatest Ripoff
04-13-2016, 09:12 AM
I think I know Matt Parsons. Anyone know if this the same guy who has played in numerous DC and Richmond punk bands?

I feel really bad for him. I don't' know what I would do if I was banned from football a year.

jazzy
04-13-2016, 05:03 PM
I don't think there are any personal jabs, is there Red? We just have a disagree of opinion.. (Again :P)
To answer your question Cal - I feel that there is no longer any comradery in the group. It claims to be independent from the club and doesn't take any finances from the club to fund game day experience for members, mean while it works very much on the "you say jump, I say how high" mentality. The club smoke is another thing we'll disagree on. The group will claim that it fought the FO hard to get the smoke approved, but to me, it was the FO that played the SG, by letting us have smoke, but the club says who, when, where, and how it's deployed.

You probably dont don't know this story, and I'll gladly share it with you off the boards, but the club toon away RPBs smoke during the Red Bulls game last year. The one we clinched playoffs on... But like I said, long story.

just reading thru all of it....I fear MLS in the early days when it needed any support they were all nice and friendly but now
our commissioner reminds me of 'I'm the boss Gary Bettman' (lawyers not fans), and they want to put us in our place as they are very owner delegated and feel they can get by without the traditional supporter fandom . PS it is sad to see a few friends leave as you Ivy , you are dedicated supporter , that defines a positive attitude game day without the BS . Always one that could agree to disagree and not take it personal . Tip of the hat .

jazzy
04-13-2016, 10:37 PM
Beer solves that... unless you get angry about talking about beer.


can't ever see that happening ....🙊