Are you a Fosse Boy that was turned away on Saturday?

[lildave3]

I'm not a Fosse Boy but because I was standing in SK1 near the back (obstructing nobody I might add as I made an effort not to be in anyones way) I was told I had been filmed by the police, they had my face on record and if I didn't sit down I'd be kicked out and maybe even banned. They told several people scattered around near me to sit too - it's a joke what football has become, it really is. The Fosse Boys were a few rows away from us so I don't know if they though we were maybe part of them or something but still, it's not right. They're happy to tell small groups to sit down or they'll be banned but when it comes to massive groups they'd quite happily be hypocritical bastards and let them stand because they'd quite clearly have a riot on their hands.

I hate football sometimes I really do.

When and whereabouts in SK1 was this?? I stood freely on the back of SK1 (and have done for ages) all game

[Ozwin]

When and whereabouts in SK1 was this?? I stood freely on the back of SK1 (and have done for ages) all game

Right at the end, near the blue bar thing that seperates the two sections.

[Ultra]

Get yourself quoted in there Ultra. With great power comes great responsibility

Also genuinely would add some gravitas to the whole thing.

I got onto it straight away. Twitter is such a wonderful (and mobile-friendly) site.

I'm always concerned when people with passions just like mine are harassed and vilified for seeking to express those passions.

[TheLeicesterMercury]

Thanks for all your help guys

Keep an eye on tomorrows paper

Oh, and do keep note of my email/number and let me know of any developments!

[Aeropars]

Never said they were but all seems a bit of a storm in a teacup to me. I just prefer to watch football.

[unreachable]

If standing is an integral part of the Fosse Boys movement then the club are legally entitled to turn away supporters who intend to breach the Ground Regulations.

[Ultra]

If standing is an integral part of the Fosse Boys movement then the club are legally entitled to turn away supporters who intend to breach the Ground Regulations.

And how can the club prove that fans intend to break ground regulations?

Doesn't the legitimate purchase of a ticket for a specified seat in the stadium constitute some form of contract, morally if not legally?

[unreachable]

And how can the club prove that fans intend to break ground regulations?

If fans are carrying banners etc supporting the Fosse Boys then they are in difficulty IF standing is an integral part of the movement.

Don't follow your point about ticket purchase. Tickets are sold subject to the ground regulations which do not allow standing.

[davieG]

If standing is an integral part of the Fosse Boys movement then the club are legally entitled to turn away supporters who intend to breach the Ground Regulations.

So why don't they stop the rest of the Kop, L1 and the away fans from standing, indeed why have they let these other fans breach the Ground Regulations?

If they were just intent on stopping them standing why did they tell them to go to other part of the ground where people were standing and where they had no control over whether they did stand?

Surely if it was just a case of standing they would have let them in and then insisted they sat, but they didn't because that was not their aim which was to destroy the Fosse Boys.

There is simply no other explanation or justification for their underhand, cowardly response to a group of people that just wanted to enjoy themselves by singing as a group.

[Flynny]

I got onto it straight away. Twitter is such a wonderful (and mobile-friendly) site.

I'm always concerned when people with passions just like mine are harassed and vilified for seeking to express those passions.

Plus points for the Smiths quote.

[unreachable]

If they were just intent on stopping them standing why did they tell them to go to other part of the ground where people were standing and where they had no control over whether they did stand?

I didn't know that the Club had officially stated that the Fosse Boys could stand. Very pertinent.

[davieG]

I didn't know that the Club had officially stated that the Fosse Boys could stand. Very pertinent.

Sorry don't understand you point.

[unreachable]

Sorry don't understand you point.

My point was that if standing is an integral part of the Fosse Boys movement then by telling to go to another part of the ground then the Club would seem to be making an official exemption to the Ground regulations which I thought was rather surprising.

[lcfcadam]

If standing is an integral part of the Fosse Boys movement then the club are legally entitled to turn away supporters who intend to breach the Ground Regulations.

Okay fine I'll formulate a proper response instead of summing it up with a smiley.

We seem to have been over this so many times and yet the same stupid comments keep getting made. For a start, it's an outrage that the club could ban certain supporters from certain parts of the stadium because they believe that those individuals 'intend' to breach ground regulations. It's like arresting someone because he 'might' commit a crime one day.

Let's face it, there's no way the club are taking this negative action because they're bothered about a few extra people "breaching regulations" by standing, it's because the whole concept of the fans enjoying themselves, making a point and being highly visible and active is a threat to the club's determination to keep an entirely non-conflict, sterile and easy-to-manage atmosphere lacking in all the hallmarks that previously made football support what it was.

Going to a football match should not be like going to the theatre; everyone involved (including most prominently players and managers) knows the importance of a good atmosphere during a match and quiet stadiums get universally berated. We have already established that, due to a change in the demographic of the support, heavy stewarding and regulation, new stadiums etc, that the crowd as a whole is not going to often join in unison to create that atmosphere, so hence... a group like the Fosse Boys becomes necessary if a fan wants to retrieve something of what it was like before. But because they're still relatively small in number, and serious about what they want to do, the club just immediately sees them as a potential source of problems and a threat to the completely non-volatile atmosphere they've managed to create.

And if anyone thinks that trying to stop them using backdoor tactics with no communication or justification, you're just supporting the unquestioned submission of people to their "superiors", something I can't understand acceptance of.

[davieG]

My point was that if standing is an integral part of the Fosse Boys movement then by telling to go to another part of the ground then the Club would seem to be making an official exemption to the Ground regulations which I thought was rather surprising.

No it shows that if they went where others already stand they'd turn their blind eye to them like they already do that is not the same as Official consent but is in my mind a cowardly approach and shows that they just do not like the thought of the Fosse Boys existing, standing in this instance is obviously not their highest criteria otherwise they would have let them in to their legally purchased seats but insisted they sat.

[unreachable]

No it shows that if they went where others already stand they'd turn their blind eye to them like they already do that is not the same as Official consent but is in my mind a cowardly approach and shows that they just do not like the thought of the Fosse Boys existing, standing in this instance is obviously not their highest criteria otherwise they would have let them in to their legally purchased seats but insisted they sat.

I don't agree. Turning a blind eye and consenting to standing is very similar. The club need to be consistent and treat all fans equally as lou posted.

[unreachable]

Okay fine I'll formulate a proper response instead of summing it up with a smiley.

We seem to have been over this so many times and yet the same stupid comments keep getting made. For a start, it's an outrage that the club could ban certain supporters from certain parts of the stadium because they believe that those individuals 'intend' to breach ground regulations. It's like arresting someone because he 'might' commit a crime one day.

Let's face it, there's no way the club are taking this negative action because they're bothered about a few extra people "breaching regulations" by standing, it's because the whole concept of the fans enjoying themselves, making a point and being highly visible and active is a threat to the club's determination to keep an entirely non-conflict, sterile and easy-to-manage atmosphere lacking in all the hallmarks that previously made football support what it was.

Going to a football match should not be like going to the theatre; everyone involved (including most prominently players and managers) knows the importance of a good atmosphere during a match and quiet stadiums get universally berated. We have already established that, due to a change in the demographic of the support, heavy stewarding and regulation, new stadiums etc, that the crowd as a whole is not going to often join in unison to create that atmosphere, so hence... a group like the Fosse Boys becomes necessary if a fan wants to retrieve something of what it was like before. But because they're still relatively small in number, and serious about what they want to do, the club just immediately sees them as a potential source of problems and a threat to the completely non-volatile atmosphere they've managed to create.

And if anyone thinks that trying to stop them using backdoor tactics with no communication or justification, you're just supporting the unquestioned submission of people to their "superiors", something I can't understand acceptance of.

I support standing only areas in grounds but don't understand how you can expect the club to officially endorse standing until any legal obstacles are overcome.

I note from the Football Licensing Authority's website that a consultation is underway to consider changing safety requirements.

[Ultra]

I support standing only areas in grounds but don't understand how you can expect the club to officially endorse standing until any legal obstacles are overcome.

I note from the Football Licensing Authority's website that a consultation is underway to consider changing safety requirements.

That's not what's being asked for. If the the club treated the Fosse Boys in the same way they do the folk in L1, this issue would not have arisen. Simple as.

[unreachable]

That's not what's being asked for. If the the club treated the Fosse Boys in the same way they do the folk in L1, this issue would not have arisen. Simple as.

I understand your point. The club have placed itself in an impossible position by its inconsistent policy. So if the club insist on everyone sitting down throughout the stadium you're saying that the Fosse Boys wouldn't exist or that the Fosse Boys would continue but agree to sit down?

[Fossegirl]

I understand your point. The club have placed itself in an impossible position by its inconsistent policy. So if the club insist on everyone sitting down throughout the stadium you're saying that the Fosse Boys wouldn't exist or that the Fosse Boys would continue but agree to sit down?

Officially the club do insist everybody sits down and as you say have placed themselves in a poor position regarding discrimination. If they did manage to get everybody sitting then of course that would make it more difficult to argue the point, and by the way several Fosse Boys did sit and sing for the whole first half against Reading whilst numerous other fans stood close by unchallenged. That's the whole point as DavieG pointed out. Discrimination it is, but unfortunately not discrimination considered unlawful by statute, if it was then that would be another matter.

[unreachable]

Officially the club do insist everybody sits down and as you say have placed themselves in a poor position regarding discrimination. If they did manage to get everybody sitting then of course that would make it more difficult to argue the point, and by the way several Fosse Boys did sit and sing for the whole first half against Reading whilst numerous other fans stood close by unchallenged. That's the whole point as DavieG pointed out. Discrimination it is, but unfortunately not discrimination considered unlawful by statute, if it was then that would be another matter.

I'm confused. I thought it was against the rules of the Fosse Boys' constitution to sit!

[Fossegirl]

I'm confused. I thought it was against the rules of the Fosse Boys' constitution to sit!

So it would have been better for 10 of them to be ejected an risk being banned, some times you have to lose the battle to hopefully win the war. Please not reference to battles and war is purely as an example, Fosse Boys are non confrontational.

[leftsideoverhere]

I'm confused. I thought it was against the rules of the Fosse Boys' constitution to sit!

Are you being an arse on purpose? Or just accidentally?

The Fosse Boys have repeatedly described their preferred mode of supporting the team during games - loud, lively, on their feet and 'bouncing'. But they're also realistic enough to know that they don't get their own way just by stamping their feet. So when they have had to, they've sat down, because they're trying to build a movement for a different kind of atmosphere at the walkers, not get themselves banned in a moment of pointless self-sacrifice. It's not like a religious cult, where failing to stand up at the football gets your membership card ripped up.

[unreachable]

Are you being an arse on purpose? Or just accidentally?

The Fosse Boys have repeatedly described their preferred mode of supporting the team during games - loud, lively, on their feet and 'bouncing'. But they're also realistic enough to know that they don't get their own way just by stamping their feet. So when they have had to, they've sat down, because they're trying to build a movement for a different kind of atmosphere at the walkers, not get themselves banned in a moment of pointless self-sacrifice. It's not like a religious cult, where failing to stand up at the football gets your membership card ripped up.

Thank you for explaining the position. I was simply trying to establish how important standing was to the movement. Now I know. You are the first person today since I starting posting today to explain.

[leftsideoverhere]

Thank you for explaining the position. I was simply trying to establish how important standing was to the movement. Now I know. You are the first person today since I starting posting today to explain.

That's probably because there's over 100 pages in the main Fosse Boys thread where people repeatedly ask the kind of questions you've been asking, the Fosse Boys answer them again and again and again, and then someone asks the same question but makes it sound all hostile and snarky, and the whole thing begins again. Probably, other people (who may lack my saintly patience) expected you to read through some of that thread rather than expect your questions to be answered for the hundredth and something time.