Webbo Posted 8 December 2008 Posted 8 December 2008 Im guessing you dont have children by your incredible responses. I have 3 children of my own Not too bright are you?
Thracian Posted 8 December 2008 Posted 8 December 2008 I have 3 children of my own actually and I don't like listening to those screaming let alone a total stranger's.If your child was between 18months and 2 years you might have an argument but 2 months FFS what were you thinking?Didn't you realise how cold it was on Saturday?With the noise and the jostling do you really think your baby would have enjoyed the experience ? What if there had been trouble in the ground? What if the stadium had had to have been evacuated in a hurry? Did you think of that?It seems to me you were just putting your own selfish pleasure before the well being of your baby and the comfort of your fellow spectators. Come on Webbo. Unless you're going to palm kids off on babysitters all the time - hardly practical with a two-month-old baby - then whenever possible they go where you go. Cold? I took my newborn son to Newark showground when I was working there for three days, outdoors and in 14 degrees of frost one year and so cold one guy actually froze to death in his car. We slept in a truck. The kid was wrapped up warm and good as gold. He grew up with the place and with only one notable effect. He's never had a cold in his life that I can remember. Take kids with you and they soon adapt to the circumstances. Jostling wouldn't be a problem in a football ground like Leicester's anyway. You'd just picks seats where there was plenty of space. As for having to evacuate the ground, that's a pretty unlikely scenario and no more a risk than leaving nipper at home with a babysitter who might leave the cooker on and accidentally start a fire or something. And if if there was an evacuation I don't see that you'd move any slower with baby than without. Risks exist everywhere or babies just as they do for adults nd I'd say there was far more danger in having a kid in a car than a relatively empty part of a football ground. But while you might base your decisions on worrying about them I'm damned sure not everyone will want to. And when it comes to babies I've always had the theory that they're safest with mum and dad.
scully91 Posted 9 December 2008 Author Posted 9 December 2008 Out of all the hundreds of people that have heard this story Webbo has been the most nastiest i could believe anyone to be. People must understand we went as a family. No way would i have taken my 2 month old on my own, thats just silly, but there were 2 adults and 3 kids. And who in their right mind would leave a baby of that age with a baby sitter, thats just totally irresponsible, he needs his mummy. We go to the stock cars every other weekend and can take children in and they are 150mph monsters, not footballers!! If trouble were to flare it wouldnt be in the family stand would it? Or one of the 15,000 spare seats that i selectively chose from. We take the baby to the park in exactly the same manner so whats the difference? Did you hear it on Radio Leicester? Peter Jones said it was a cold day and they wouldnt take the risk incase the steps were icy. Who said we would need to climb steps with 15,000 spare seats avaialable? Dont get me wrong, on the outside it sounds a stupid thing to do to take a 2 month old but as you dissect it actually there is no difference to going elsewhere with the baby and he is no colder and in no extra danger.
Ultra Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 Peter Jones is being a complete jobsworth. If the steps had been icy, then the ground would have been unsafe for ALL fans and the game would have been postponed. And the club have bigged up their policy of free admission to those aged under 8, so shouldn't complain if fans take them at their word. I think we should ALL take a stand against this type of nannying. Who will be next to be banned - pregnant women? The elderly?
Ultra Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 I'm sure the City Council would have a view on this action by a so-called "family-friendly" club. Contact them at [email protected] .
Asha Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 Good on him. Definately worth fighting for. Rediculous 'rule' really...I think they should have been allowed in and if anything, god forbid, did happen to the baby then it would surely be his responsibility?
Corky Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 The club obviously don't want under 2's in the ground, but now this is in the public domain, they've got to review their policies. They are obsessed with being seen as this great family club, so they've shot themselves in the foot on this issue.
davieG Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 The club obviously don't want under 2's in the ground, but now this is in the public domain, they've got to review their policies.They are obsessed with being seen as this great family club, so they've shot themselves in the foot on this issue. We need a crèche!
breadandcheese Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 It's obviously a ridiculous rule, but if the club feel that they need it to comply with health and safety legislation, then any anger at the club is mis-placed. Anyone who's had to deal with health and safety knows that it is not clear-cut instructions, but a minefield of different rules and potential risks that are all open to interpretation.
Tilley Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 Can see both sides of the argument really. I wouldn't personally take a child of that age to a football match, ecspecially in that weather.
scully91 Posted 9 December 2008 Author Posted 9 December 2008 Of course there are 2 sides. When you first look at it you must think im some kind of irresponsible idiot, but you look again, and a bit closer and actually what they are saying is my 2 month old cant come in but my 2 year old could. If anybody can find any difference at all between those 2 children and how it affects one more than the other then i would like to know. My 2 year old would have a coat on (he is 5 but im using 2 as an example as that they say is the age they can come in at), yes my 2 year old would have a coat but my 2 month would also be in a car seat with a snow suit and with as many balnkets as he liked on him. Also my wife has just taken him into town, he will be out for about 2 hours so is she (and every other child you see today) going to come to harm in the weather. Of course not. Such is the interest Midlands Today (East midlands) are running this tonight, they contacted me i might add. And still alot are missing the point. It is my wifes first outing since having the baby. We went as a family, 5 of us. Are people saying that i am going to come to more harm at the football game with 15,000 spare seats available than if i went elsewhere I thought football was a family game but it seems that in some bigoted peoples eyes FOOTBALL = HOOLIGANISM and it isnt safe to take a child ANY CHILD i might add. LCFC are saying it is unsafe to take any children to their ground, that must be what they and everyone else is saying. The weather is not LCFCs concern and my child would have been lovely and warm so the only other reasons people have said is 1/ icy steps well doesnt that apply to all childredn? 2/ Crowd trouble well again that puts all children in danger at LCFC. 3/ People are saying if we had to be evacuated so are LCFC not looking after their patrons well enough?? Furthermore, Peter Jones was sympathetic but he did nothing to offer us back to the club, nowhere does it state under 2s cant go to the game and we had a wasted journey and cost us money but Peter didnt seem to care, he could easily have offered a goodwill gesture.
Jimmy2Drags Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 I'm very supprised to hear this, as @ the last home match, I was sitting about 4 rows behind a lady with a baby! I would consider the baby to have been no older than 6 months old. Whilst the Southend team were warming up, one of them took a shot that cleared the goal & the net behind, missed the lady holding the baby by about a foot, bounced off of the back of the chair in front of me (like playing 'kirby'), and bounced back over the lady's head. At the time, I thought to myself "Who would be to blame if the ball had hit her & she'd dropped the kid?" but now I'm wondering how she got the baby into the ground in the first place.
Babylon Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 Such is the interest Midlands Today (East midlands) are running this tonight, they contacted me i might add. They think a cat coughing up a fur ball is news worthy. I can understand the where the club is coming from, but if they are going to enforce like this then they should at least make it well known that under 2's can't come. Things like "under 8's free" should really make reference to it as it's misleading. Common sense should have been used and time taken to get you in some how. Even if it's in an unused box as a one off, with a warning that in future they won't let you in.
breadandcheese Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 They think a cat coughing up a fur ball is news worthy. I love local news. Once they had a report on a man who turned his shed into a vehicle. They then had him race the guy who put a motor and wheels on his armchair. You don't get Trevor McDonald reading quality like that.
maddog Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 Oh my dear life, thats a terrible comment to make. A baby making noise at a football match !!! Are you for real ? Babies are allowed even inrestaurants nowadays you know. I take it you either a guy without kids or one that doesnt give a stuff about them and leaves them at home. This poor woman of mine has spent months fat and horrible, no drink, then painful labour and sleepless nights. Imagine the hassle to get 3 kids ready and head for Leicester and all for nothing. Have you no compassion perhaps? For the record her parents have died and mine live in Skeggy and in a nuthouse respectively, we are a close family that always USED to enjoy going to watch the footy. Not sure what your problem is. Theres no need to go all X Factor sob story on us, what does that have to do with anything.
Babylon Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 Theres no need to go all X Factor sob story on us, what does that have to do with anything. It all adds to the drama... perhaps he could say someone stole all the kids presents from under the tree as well.
Webbo Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 Out of all the hundreds of people that have heard this story Webbo has been the most nastiest i could believe anyone to be. Are you for real?
Sparky Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 Of course there are 2 sides. When you first look at it you must think im some kind of irresponsible idiot, but you look again, and a bit closer and actually what they are saying is my 2 month old cant come in but my 2 year old could. If anybody can find any difference at all between those 2 children and how it affects one more than the other then i would like to know. My 2 year old would have a coat on (he is 5 but im using 2 as an example as that they say is the age they can come in at), yes my 2 year old would have a coat but my 2 month would also be in a car seat with a snow suit and with as many balnkets as he liked on him. Also my wife has just taken him into town, he will be out for about 2 hours so is she (and every other child you see today) going to come to harm in the weather. Of course not.Such is the interest Midlands Today (East midlands) are running this tonight, they contacted me i might add. And still alot are missing the point. It is my wifes first outing since having the baby. We went as a family, 5 of us. Are people saying that i am going to come to more harm at the football game with 15,000 spare seats available than if i went elsewhere I thought football was a family game but it seems that in some bigoted peoples eyes FOOTBALL = HOOLIGANISM and it isnt safe to take a child ANY CHILD i might add. LCFC are saying it is unsafe to take any children to their ground, that must be what they and everyone else is saying. The weather is not LCFCs concern and my child would have been lovely and warm so the only other reasons people have said is 1/ icy steps well doesnt that apply to all childredn? 2/ Crowd trouble well again that puts all children in danger at LCFC. 3/ People are saying if we had to be evacuated so are LCFC not looking after their patrons well enough?? Furthermore, Peter Jones was sympathetic but he did nothing to offer us back to the club, nowhere does it state under 2s cant go to the game and we had a wasted journey and cost us money but Peter didnt seem to care, he could easily have offered a goodwill gesture. It was on radio leicester all morning and most callers backed the clubs stance
Dr The Singh Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 It was on radio leicester all morning and most callers backed the clubs stance Not surprised!!!! My opinion is that we live in a 'controlled' society and whether we like it or not that's the fact, if health and safety say there's a risk and the insurers will not cover it etc, the club have no real option!! I feel for those who have under 2's, i have one myself........................and as a favour to you, your quite welcome to look after mine while the rest of my family go and watch the match, get pissed and return the next day!!
Corky Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 Not surprised!!!!My opinion is that we live in a 'controlled' society and whether we like it or not that's the fact, if health and safety say there's a risk and the insurers will not cover it etc, the club have no real option!! I feel for those who have under 2's, i have one myself........................and as a favour to you, your quite welcome to look after mine while the rest of my family go and watch the match, get pissed and return the next day!! How are the grandkids?
Jon the Hat Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 Interesting one. I am not sure you can really compare the stadium environment with anywhere else really. You certainly cannot have one set of rules for a day when there are 15k empty seats and another when the stadium is full (if..) so that point is moot. I would be inclined to say it is not appropriate in a stadium to be carrying a child. How horrible would everyone feel if a baby got dropped on the steps and crushed to death? It could happen. Not everyone would be as sensible as Scully91 and go as a family, or with a car seat, or happily sit in the front row etc. The sad fact of H&S if you have to account for idiots in the current environment of litigiousness.
Daggers Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 It was on radio leicester all morning and most callers backed the clubs stance Let me see, when was the last time I heard someone phoning a radio show who sounded as though they had an IQ of more than 70? Hmmm...
JoeyB Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 Out of all the hundreds of people that have heard this story Webbo has been the most nastiest i could believe anyone to be.People must understand we went as a family. No way would i have taken my 2 month old on my own, thats just silly, but there were 2 adults and 3 kids. And who in their right mind would leave a baby of that age with a baby sitter, thats just totally irresponsible, he needs his mummy. We go to the stock cars every other weekend and can take children in and they are 150mph monsters, not footballers!! If trouble were to flare it wouldnt be in the family stand would it? Or one of the 15,000 spare seats that i selectively chose from. We take the baby to the park in exactly the same manner so whats the difference? Did you hear it on Radio Leicester? Peter Jones said it was a cold day and they wouldnt take the risk incase the steps were icy. Who said we would need to climb steps with 15,000 spare seats avaialable? Dont get me wrong, on the outside it sounds a stupid thing to do to take a 2 month old but as you dissect it actually there is no difference to going elsewhere with the baby and he is no colder and in no extra danger. You need to climb/ or go down steps to get to pretty much any seats. It's just precaution for Leicester. I know this wouldn't happen. but say you fell and trapped your kid underneath you and he died. ( doubt it would happen but just follow on) so the kid dies, that could seriously harm Leicester alot of stories could start happening....... It's a case of what if. I think Leicester were just covering their own back really.
Sparky Posted 9 December 2008 Posted 9 December 2008 Let me see, when was the last time I heard someone phoning a radio show who sounded as though they had an IQ of more than 70?Hmmm... Wasnt leaning towards the callers being right , more the fact that scully lives in Warwick and may not have known that the story was being covered .
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.