Operational policy changes - views sought

[standman]

Originally Posted by FieldtownRed

It’s a bloody stupid argument when you consider how few capacity crowds we’ve had in the last 10-15 years.

Community club my arse.

These people will be shown up as once they are removed anyone with a brain that comes in will remove it and they will be remembered for another tragic waste of money and it will replaced into a sensible area. They won’t be able to look anyone in the eye after all this.

[CRUMBS]

I wouldn't go in that area if it was free , just a normal game with little away support could be uncomfortable , madness at it's best .

[3pmsaturday]

Originally Posted by FieldtownRed

It’s a bloody stupid argument when you consider how few capacity crowds we’ve had in the last 10-15 years.

Community club my arse.

The revenue thing was a guess on my part, however, if that is true then the decision (again I surmise) would have been taken with the best intentions for the club as a whole.

You could argue on balance that it’s a win win in their eyes and that they get the platform and look after those fans who would use it and keep capacity in the most saleable areas of the ground.

Not saying this is the right or wrong decision and the empty chair analogy is a good one but just pointing out the challenges that making decisions with good good intentions can throw up when directly responsible for the clubs financial well being.

[FieldtownRed]

Originally Posted by 3pmsaturday

The revenue thing was a guess on my part, however, if that is true then the decision (again I surmise) would have been taken with the best intentions for the club as a whole.

You could argue on balance that it’s a win win in their eyes and that they get the platform and look after those fans who would use it and keep capacity in the most saleable areas of the ground.

Not saying this is the right or wrong decision and the empty chair analogy is a good one but just pointing out the challenges that making decisions with good good intentions can throw up when directly responsible for the clubs financial well being.

Just to clarify, my comment wasn't towards your post, but towards those making the decision.

[3pmsaturday]

Originally Posted by FieldtownRed

Just to clarify, my comment wasn't towards your post, but towards those making the decision.

Thank you for that but I read it as you’d meant it (those making the decisions) but my answer was based on my guess (again) as to how they had come to that decision?

Cheers

[Quay Red]

Originally Posted by 3pmsaturday

Thank you for that but I read it as you’d meant it (those making the decisions) but my answer was based on my guess (again) as to how they had come to that decision?

Cheers

1. The second platform was supposed to be for away supporters initially with the option for our own disabled fans to use it if there were empty spaces.

2. The platform currently proposed is, as most agree, poorly situated and does not meet the 'advisory' standards required by level playing fields for inclusion. Access is also below standards.

3. There is also the cost element. The current platform is being constructed at minimal cost by Phil Salmon, for which he should be applauded.
To construct a platform in either the B Concepts stand for away fans or behind the goal in a reasonable position would likely require a lift which would see the overall construction costs soar to £30 - £40 k.

4. The cost in good will, due to delays in actioning the members wishes, is immeasurable.

[FieldtownRed]

Originally Posted by Quay Red

1. The second platform was supposed to be for away supporters initially with the option for our own disabled fans to use it if there were empty spaces.

2. The platform currently proposed is, as most agree, poorly situated and does not meet the 'advisory' standards required by level playing fields for inclusion. Access is also below standards.

3. There is also the cost element. The current platform is being constructed at minimal cost by Phil Salmon, for which he should be applauded.
To construct a platform in either the B Concepts stand for away fans or behind the goal in a reasonable position would likely require a lift which would see the overall construction costs soar to £30 - £40 k.

4. The cost in good will, due to delays in actioning the members wishes, is immeasurable.

Adapting part of the lower tier behind the goal wouldn't require a lift would it - ideally the corner adjacent to the MRS? I'm guessing this has been looked at when the relevant parties were discussing potential options.

In addition, there must be grants available, sponsorship opportunities for local companies etc? Apologies in that I haven't followed this second platform issue in great detail so all these points have no doubt been discussed in great detail already.

[bowler]

As much as the platform is needed don't you think all the finances we have should be going into saving the club from extinction.

[FieldtownRed]

Originally Posted by bowler

As much as the platform is needed don't you think all the finances we have should be going into saving the club from extinction.

Extinction due to Coronavirus or the WST/club boards?