Fan Advisory Board

[Bluedell 6,150]

11 hours ago, ranger_syntax said:

The club cited the police and the S.P.F.L. as part of their justification in those minutes.

 

Doubling down on the board not having any opinion on it.

I' don't agree with that but if the board don't see anything wrong with the banner then they shouldn't be condemning it. If their first instinct is to run away from potential trouble, even if that trouble might not exist, rather than taking a rational view on it, or looking to support the fans as their first instinct, then they shouldn't be in their positions.

[Frankie 8,938]

I find the situation really strange.  

 

When the TIFO was unfurled, I thought it was quite strong - the wording especially - but also very funny given the date, the Star Wars association and the banners at the Celtic Park fixture recently.

 

For the club to react like they did is nothing short of farcical. Yes, we need not and should not be defined by other clubs but there was no reason to release any statement with the sort of urgency they showed.

 

Hopefully it's a lesson learned for a few people.

[compo 7,984]

Simple solution no more TIFO displays, problem solved.

[stewarty 2,128]

My take is that the club was simply waiting for the next banner that was even a little bit edgy in order to ensure they have approval over future tifos and banners.  The minutes seem to back this up.

 

 

 

 

Edited 23 hours ago by stewarty

[ranger_syntax 4,837]

1 hour ago, Bluedell said:

Whilst I agree with his in principle, the biggest complaint is the way that we're treated compared to Celtic. Their banners didn't make front page news. Their board don't allow their club to be attacked. It seems like an excuse for inaction because they don't have the stones to deal with this issue and take the easy way out by attacking a banner that most don't have an issue with.

It's nothing to do with stones.

 

It's easy to do stuff when you have power.

 

It's often a waste of time doing stuff when you don't have power.

[ranger_syntax 4,837]

1 hour ago, Bluedell said:

I' don't agree with that but if the board don't see anything wrong with the banner then they shouldn't be condemning it. If their first instinct is to run away from potential trouble, even if that trouble might not exist, rather than taking a rational view on it, or looking to support the fans as their first instinct, then they shouldn't be in their positions.

The board are not a collection of moral philosophers agonising over banners.

 

Neither are they there to support the fans.

 

There is no rational argument for squabbling with the S.P.F.L. and the police about banners. It's all cost and no benefit. The bean counters on the board, and maybe even elsewhere, should understand this.

[Fa1833 433]

Some of there Tifo  displays have certainly crossed the line in which is genuinely offensive to deliberately provoke and mean to antagonise rivals, us especially! Yet they seem to be brushed under the carpet and when we have a questionable display it’s National News or jumped on swiftly or condemned by our own board. We need to call it out via a display that the National news will see and the Sharks at SPL etc will need to act. Sure at times our displays are questionable but it’s only a reaction to what other teams have displayed. As for the board they need to have a direct link with the UB Tifo team to establish a drief description of the displays they will be having, if they cross the line then UB will have to be accountable for it, The fact they have openly said they discussed it at half time  shows there lack of interest in reaching out to the UB’s which doesn’t make sense to me personally. 

[L72 268]

54 minutes ago, Frankie said:

I find the situation really strange.  

 

When the TIFO was unfurled, I thought it was quite strong - the wording especially - but also very funny given the date, the Star Wars association and the banners at the Celtic Park fixture recently.

 

For the club to react like they did is nothing short of farcical. Yes, we need not and should not be defined by other clubs but there was no reason to release any statement with the sort of urgency they showed.

 

Hopefully it's a lesson learned for a few people.

This.

 

Who needs enemies when the board are prepared to come out and slaughter the supporters and push us to national news? 

 

It is farcical that they've doubled down on it, even going as far as lying to say the banner was seized at half time etc, when we know that not to be the case. 

 

FTB.

[buster. 5,661]

29 minutes ago, stewarty said:

My take was is that club was simply waiting for the next banner that was even a little bit edgy in order to ensure they have approval over future tifos and banners.  The minutes seem to back this up.

Ultras groups in football are fighting against general societal trends regards freedom of expression.

 

Within the stadium, the UB are onto a loser given that our support in general won't think twice if there are eventually measures taken against them.

 

This is just the direction of travel and although large, I think that our support are relatively easy to 'manage' in this type of dispute.

 

Worse is the "why don't you take more action against them over there" type of comment (from both sides) that only enables authorities to make up and enforce more and more rules and regulations. 

 

 

 

 

[Bluedell 6,150]

1 hour ago, ranger_syntax said:

Neither are they there to support the fans

So they shouldn't support the lifeblood of the club? Hmmm.

 

1 hour ago, ranger_syntax said:

There is no rational argument for squabbling with the S.P.F.L. and the police about banners. It's all cost and no benefit. The bean counters on the board, and maybe even elsewhere, should understand this.

There is no squabble with the police or the SPFL. The benefit would have been not alienating their customer base...the basis of any business.