REALLY.Originally Posted by Pint
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.
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.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
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.
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.
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.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
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.
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.
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.
Road Trips: July 7 2007 Chicago, July 22nd 2007 Columbus, August 11 2007 NY, October 13 2007 LA, March 29 2008 Columbus, May 24th 2008 DC, May 26 2008 Montreal, June 28th 2008 NE, March 7-11-14 2009 Charleston, March 28 2009 Columbus, April 10 2010 New England, May 12 2010 Montreal, April 7 2012 Montreal, March 16 2013 Montreal , June 3 2014 Montreal, March 14 2015 Columbus
Twitter: @RPBPhil
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.
Maybe DCU saw the groups unifying as something to be worried about.
Toronto 'til I die - but I think they're trying to kill me.
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.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to eustacchio again.
If you enjoy your capo stand don't ask for the current person in the league to make league wide rules.
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.
Excellent point.
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?
Last edited by Pint; 04-06-2016 at 10:50 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, 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
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.
Aren't the lines of jurisdiction at BMO the Ex grounds?
I honestly thought that was established after everything around "Justice for Matt".
Toronto 'til I die - but I think they're trying to kill me.
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.)
Toronto 'til I die - but I think they're trying to kill me.
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.
Toronto 'til I die - but I think they're trying to kill me.
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.
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.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
Yeah. Those different parties you spoke of? They were used as a tool to hot potato who to blame.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
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.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
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?
Toronto 'til I die - but I think they're trying to kill me.
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.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote