| Rochdale v Carlisle on 16:03 - Jan 21 with 1262 views | griff |
Down with this sort of thing. |  | |  |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 16:42 - Jan 21 with 1126 views | Plattyswrinklynuts |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 16:03 - Jan 21 by griff |
Down with this sort of thing. |
Agree entirely, I can only assume that GM police have stuck their oar in. There’s no reason why we can’t accommodate 2-2.5k away fans, our facilities are more than adequate. |  | | |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 16:51 - Jan 21 with 1099 views | D_Alien |
This is ridiculous, anti-football support and loss of income. Could well be intervention by GMP. The last police force that restricted attendance by away fans had their Chief Constable resign a few weeks later on the back of it
What does this mean, then, for future expected large away followings? What's the point of having a stand that can accommodate twice that number? |  |
| |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 16:54 - Jan 21 with 1090 views | Daley_Lama |
I suspect one or two may head into home stands if not all ticket with proof of address.
And I don’t blame them, unless done to look for trouble of course.
Sets a precedent for game 46 too. |  |
| |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 18:04 - Jan 21 with 922 views | EllDale |
Cost the club a fair bit of money if nothing else. |  | | |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 18:44 - Jan 21 with 786 views | D_Alien |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 18:04 - Jan 21 by EllDale |
Cost the club a fair bit of money if nothing else. |
My bet is on GMP requesting an exorbitant sum for policing an away following above the current number, which may well have more than wiped out income from additional fans
All of this needs to be clarified, so we know where we stand (half empty)
Something for CAB to take up? Otherwise we're looking at a permanent loss of income, atmosphere and capacity | |
| |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 18:58 - Jan 21 with 744 views | TalkingSutty |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 18:44 - Jan 21 by D_Alien |
My bet is on GMP requesting an exorbitant sum for policing an away following above the current number, which may well have more than wiped out income from additional fans
All of this needs to be clarified, so we know where we stand (half empty)
Something for CAB to take up? Otherwise we're looking at a permanent loss of income, atmosphere and capacity |
It wont be that, the police wont have limited the amount of tickets to half the capacity of the stand. There's been no reason to close half the away stand and deprive the club of money, the police don't have the powers to do that.. The police don't deal with the away fans inside the stadium anyway, thats the stewards job. The club don't pay for police outside the stadium and wont want to pay for them to police games inside the stadium.. Most games including Premiership games are run entirely by stewards and are police free...apart from a handful of football intelligence officers. Hopefully our new stewards will be able to cope better with situations than the laat lot. I think the decision could have been because a full away stand takes away the advantage of a home game and it's the first thing the players see when they run out of the tunnel. [Post edited 21 Jan 19:03]
|  | | |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 19:01 - Jan 21 with 711 views | D_Alien |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 18:58 - Jan 21 by TalkingSutty |
It wont be that, the police wont have limited the amount of tickets to half the capacity of the stand. There's been no reason to close half the away stand and deprive the club of money, the police don't have the powers to do that.. The police don't deal with the away fans inside the stadium anyway, thats the stewards job. The club don't pay for police outside the stadium and wont want to pay for them to police games inside the stadium.. Most games including Premiership games are run entirely by stewards and are police free...apart from a handful of football intelligence officers. Hopefully our new stewards will be able to cope better with situations than the laat lot. I think the decision could have been because a full away stand takes away the advantage of a home game and it's the first thing the players see when they run out of the tunnel. [Post edited 21 Jan 19:03]
|
Whatever the reason - and if it's what you think it might be, that'd be even worse... are we a football team or a bunch of bloody fairies? - it could do with being clarified | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 19:05 - Jan 21 with 687 views | TalkingSutty |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 19:01 - Jan 21 by D_Alien |
Whatever the reason - and if it's what you think it might be, that'd be even worse... are we a football team or a bunch of bloody fairies? - it could do with being clarified |
We're certainly missing out on ticket money with this decision. I think more tickets will go on sale nearer the time. GMP are used to dealing with crowds of 75,000 and 60,000 at United and City, they won’t be involved in restricting Carlisle’s ticket allocation. If the club can’t safely steward a 5000 crowd then they either need more stewards or better training. [Post edited 21 Jan 19:19]
| | | |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 19:12 - Jan 21 with 634 views | 442Dale |
The decision may be related to the trouble after the Spennymoor game with restrictions possibly put in place due to costs or safety matters once that event was reviewed. It does need communicating though and when we can look to maximise income again.
Having 1300 fans all in the centre of that stand will still create a wall of noise anyway so it may as well be 3000 if it’s allowed. [Post edited 21 Jan 19:17]
|  |
| |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 19:23 - Jan 21 with 559 views | TalkingSutty |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 19:12 - Jan 21 by 442Dale |
The decision may be related to the trouble after the Spennymoor game with restrictions possibly put in place due to costs or safety matters once that event was reviewed. It does need communicating though and when we can look to maximise income again.
Having 1300 fans all in the centre of that stand will still create a wall of noise anyway so it may as well be 3000 if it’s allowed. [Post edited 21 Jan 19:17]
|
There was no restrictions for the Southend play off game though and if i’m not mistaken Southend brought more fans than Spennymoor. As you say, the reason for the restrictions needs explaining, especially if project 5000 is still a serious target. Scunthorpe will bring a good following and obviously York will. Maybe this is the first step with a view to eventually moving away fans into the Sandy Lane. [Post edited 21 Jan 19:27]
| | | |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 19:45 - Jan 21 with 465 views | 442Dale |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 19:23 - Jan 21 by TalkingSutty |
There was no restrictions for the Southend play off game though and if i’m not mistaken Southend brought more fans than Spennymoor. As you say, the reason for the restrictions needs explaining, especially if project 5000 is still a serious target. Scunthorpe will bring a good following and obviously York will. Maybe this is the first step with a view to eventually moving away fans into the Sandy Lane. [Post edited 21 Jan 19:27]
|
Southend were allocated just over 1400. That was slightly more than what Carlisle are getting, dictated by the rules that say 15% of capacity had to be provided. Not sure if that’s just a playoff rule.
https://www.southendunited.co.
They brought 1113 on the night.
Edit: the away fans in the Sandy is an issue that’s been discussed before. It would annoy far too many home supporters and reduce income as they can’t be charged as much on the terrace. [Post edited 21 Jan 19:47]
| |
| |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 20:09 - Jan 21 with 382 views | Dalenet |
Something doesn't seem right here. Carlisle announced it was an 'initial' allocation setting fans expectations there would be more. I doubt that Carlisle made that up. So what has happened since? Have the police intervened?
Yes we lose the extra revenue and some might argue we don't need it. But in the same sentence we expect people to pay again for the Southend game. The Trust might know? Or the club could explain | | | |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 20:11 - Jan 21 with 370 views | D_Alien |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 20:09 - Jan 21 by Dalenet |
Something doesn't seem right here. Carlisle announced it was an 'initial' allocation setting fans expectations there would be more. I doubt that Carlisle made that up. So what has happened since? Have the police intervened?
Yes we lose the extra revenue and some might argue we don't need it. But in the same sentence we expect people to pay again for the Southend game. The Trust might know? Or the club could explain |
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the Trust
I'd take more credence from CAB being able to put the record straight | |
| |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 20:38 - Jan 21 with 272 views | D_Alien |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 20:11 - Jan 21 by D_Alien |
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the Trust
I'd take more credence from CAB being able to put the record straight |
Further to this, I believe CAB are indeed seeking clarification
That's what it's there for, and being effective is highly creditable | |
| |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 22:26 - Jan 21 with 65 views | dingdangblue |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 20:09 - Jan 21 by Dalenet |
Something doesn't seem right here. Carlisle announced it was an 'initial' allocation setting fans expectations there would be more. I doubt that Carlisle made that up. So what has happened since? Have the police intervened?
Yes we lose the extra revenue and some might argue we don't need it. But in the same sentence we expect people to pay again for the Southend game. The Trust might know? Or the club could explain |
Just seen your Southend comment! I cant believe they are charging fans for a re arranged abandoned game! Especially for the Southend fans! Shocking that. |  |
| |
| Rochdale v Carlisle on 22:29 - Jan 21 with 43 views | 442Dale |
Wouldn’t be surprised to see a sudden amount of spares being available in the away end if the current mood prevails up the M6. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
