Leicesterlad96 Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 So is the lesson here don't accept a caution without legal advice? who needs legal advice when you have your mates at foxestalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitchandro Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 I'm still recovering from the horrors of Auschwich, not to mention Bacon-Belsen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bilo Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 Interesting to hear that Barclay is also the man who heads the appeal process. It is up to Barclay and Barclay alone whether or not bans he has handed out are upheld or thrown out, which nobody in their right mind would call fair. As a result the Foxes Trust have concerns about the independence, or lack thereof, of the appeal process. These concerns have been shared with the FSF and have now been made public via Radio Leicester. It's important that facts such as these are made public and challenged in a public forum as this structure is clearly very difficult to defend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugo Sanchez Posted 7 January 2013 Author Share Posted 7 January 2013 BARCLAY OUT! protest is back on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobsterboyuk Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 Interesting to hear the Foxes Trust on the moan in, I didn't think they had much input anymore but it sounds like the best bet for getting any real change. Think I'll join up off the back of that, show my support to their efforts. Much more realistic option than any Barclay Out! style campaign to get improvements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugo Sanchez Posted 7 January 2013 Author Share Posted 7 January 2013 I got a quote today on 5000 barclay signs. I'm tempted. Anyone up for handing them out with me ? Back of the kop i think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 Interesting to hear the Foxes Trust on the moan in, I didn't think they had much input anymore but it sounds like the best bet for getting any real change. Think I'll join up off the back of that, show my support to their efforts. Much more realistic option than any Barclay Out! style campaign to get improvements. I agree. Trying to get the club to sack this bloke wont work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbfox Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 Call me thick, but where did this Barclay stuff come from? I know that he's top of no-one's Christmas card list and is very much a jobsworth, but I don't see what's changed particularly following Weasel's caution? I mean, yes, we all agree that the caution was OTT, but based on the facts we have and the phone-in tonight, its hard to dispute that Weasel committed an offence. There also becomes a fine point where any official body decides to punish/not punish certain offences. Sure, we think the sandwich bags were minor (albeit, the bloke on the phone-in said they were a chunky roll...) but what exactly IS a missile in that case? A coin? Battery? Plastic bottle cap? Unfortunately, we can't really pick and choose what a 'missile' is and we HAVE to be arbitrary to avoid all kinds of long-winded disputes and ridiculousness. My 2p worth. I'm sorry, really, for the Weasel and I do think the punishment is harsh. However, IMO, it has to be done to avoid confusion in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 Call me thick, but where did this Barclay stuff come from? I know that he's top of no-one's Christmas card list and is very much a jobsworth, but I don't see what's changed particularly following Weasel's caution? I mean, yes, we all agree that the caution was OTT, but based on the facts we have and the phone-in tonight, its hard to dispute that Weasel committed an offence. There also becomes a fine point where any official body decides to punish/not punish certain offences. Sure, we think the sandwich bags were minor (albeit, the bloke on the phone-in said they were a chunky roll...) but what exactly IS a missile in that case? A coin? Battery? Plastic bottle cap? Unfortunately, we can't really pick and choose what a 'missile' is and we HAVE to be arbitrary to avoid all kinds of long-winded disputes and ridiculousness. My 2p worth. I'm sorry, really, for the Weasel and I do think the punishment is harsh. However, IMO, it has to be done to avoid confusion in the future. Good post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicesterlad96 Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 Barclay is head of the appeals process, it's ****ing a joke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col city fan Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 For me this one is simple. Don't throw 'missiles'.. Even sarny bags. Who knows who they will hit (kids, who may get upset, big blokes who may want revenge ). There should be a zero tolerance on this. Full stop IMO. One man's sarny bag could be another man's coin. On an aside, I'm listening to the football phone in this evening. One bloke got in touch to say that Stewards stopped his 9 yr old kid from using his camera phone to photograph his favourite players. And they were sitting in the family stand! THAT I find ridiculous if true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bilo Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 Pressure needs to be exerted on the club to initiate a fully independent appeals process now. It certainly explains a lot of what has happened in the past when others have appealed against their bans. This for me is the priority, it would hopefully go some way to ending what is beginning to sound more and more like one man's personal fiefdom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiritwalker Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 Interesting to hear that Barclay is also the man who heads the appeal process. It is up to Barclay and Barclay alone whether or not bans he has handed out are upheld or thrown out, which nobody in their right mind would call fair. As a result the Foxes Trust have concerns about the independence, or lack thereof, of the appeal process. These concerns have been shared with the FSF and have now been made public via Radio Leicester. It's important that facts such as these are made public and challenged in a public forum as this structure is clearly very difficult to defend. Whilst you are right that the appeal process is completely unfair if the person hearing the appeal is the same person who gave theoriginal decision,in reality it makes little difference. In order to get a decision overturned it requires someone of higher authority to say Barclay is wrong and therefor not doing his job correctly. As a union rep for many years I can count on about 2 fingers the amount of successful appeals I can remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
promised land Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 Barclay is head of the appeals process, it's ****ing a joke! I didn't hear his name mention on the football forum but I gathered it was him from what they said. You don't stand a chance as it won't be an unbiased opinion when you appeal as the person who brought you to an appeal in the first place is sat there deciding to keep it or over rule it. As if he will over rule his original decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smudger63 Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 He bans fans, He bans fans, He bans fans and that`s the way he likes it, he likes it, he likes it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy G Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 Sounds like no chance for weasel to get anything to change his ban and caution so probably best he just accepts it and everyone moves on. Worse thing that could happen now is a select few start protesting, with stupid banners and stuff it will just make a laughing stock of our fans, so please don't. Case closed. Has the chap even had the chance to speak and let everyone know what he wants to happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 Sounds like no chance for weasel to get anything to change his ban and caution so probably best he just accepts it and everyone moves on. Worse thing that could happen now is a select few start protesting, with stupid banners and stuff it will just make a laughing stock of our fans, so please don't. Case closed. Has the chap even had the chance to speak and let everyone know what he wants to happen? Is he banned? I thought he only got a police caution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy G Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 Is he banned? I thought he only got a police caution? Think so? For 3 games? Maybe I got confused with something else Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluetintedspecs Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 For me this one is simple. Don't throw 'missiles'.. Even sarny bags. Who knows who they will hit (kids, who may get upset, big blokes who may want revenge ). There should be a zero tolerance on this. Full stop IMO. One man's sarny bag could be another man's coin. On an aside, I'm listening to the football phone in this evening. One bloke got in touch to say that Stewards stopped his 9 yr old kid from using his camera phone to photograph his favourite players. And they were sitting in the family stand! THAT I find ridiculous if true. Agree Col, it appears that a misguided act has been harshly dealt with, however tame it's still a missile unfortunately! Reaction on here is a tad over zealous too. Sorry to say IMO much ado about nothing and a wild protest will not do any good. The airing on the phone in is the right approach when handled in the right manner and I hope a sensible re-assesment of the punishment would be a good thing to hear. I do not know Weasel like some on here but from what I've seen, read and heard he's a passionate fan who loves the club and wants to improve the atmosphere which is great. What's not great is the faux pas with the "offending item" because however you look at it it is a missile.So would strongly advise against any further protest action as frankly I feel it would be a fruitless exercise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storming Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 Agree Col, it appears that a misguided act has been harshly dealt with, however tame it's still a missile unfortunately! Reaction on here is a tad over zealous too. Sorry to say IMO much ado about nothing and a wild protest will not do any good. The airing on the phone in is the right approach when handled in the right manner and I hope a sensible re-assesment of the punishment would be a good thing to hear. I do not know Weasel like some on here but from what I've seen, read and heard he's a passionate fan who loves the club and wants to improve the atmosphere which is great. What's not great is the faux pas with the "offending item" because however you look at it it is a missile.So would strongly advise against any further protest action as frankly I feel it would be a fruitless exercise. Agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smudge Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 Sounds like no chance for weasel to get anything to change his ban and caution so probably best he just accepts it and everyone moves on. Worse thing that could happen now is a select few start protesting, with stupid banners and stuff it will just make a laughing stock of our fans, so please don't. Case closed. Has the chap even had the chance to speak and let everyone know what he wants to happen? In the "Standing" thread he says he wants put put it behind him; a wise choice I'd say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daggers Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 If I can stop myself from laughing at this utter tripe... What the shit has Barclay got to do with what took place? Sod all. The police arrested the someone for throwing something, they offered him a caution, he accepted, ends. A 5,000 person protest demanding the bloke is sacked? Fvck me backwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1994fox Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 If I can stop myself from laughing at this utter tripe... What the shit has Barclay got to do with what took place? Sod all. The police arrested the someone for throwing something, they offered him a caution, he accepted, ends. A 5,000 person protest demanding the bloke is sacked? Fvck me backwards. The stewards advise the police. The stewards handed him over to the police and told the police to arrest him. The stewards are controlled by Barclay. Fairly obvious link. Also I presume his 3 match ban was given him by the club/ Barclay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxes_Trust Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 On an aside, I'm listening to the football phone in this evening. One bloke got in touch to say that Stewards stopped his 9 yr old kid from using his camera phone to photograph his favourite players. And they were sitting in the family stand! THAT I find ridiculous if true. We will be contacting the family concerned & ask for all the correspondence on this one. A further caller/texter than picked up the clause in the Season Ticket that could cause the ST to be withdrawn (breaking image rights should not be applied to children) However with type of clauses in mind..... Hugo Sanchez - be aware there is another clause about handing out leaflets in the ground without the clubs permission. This has existed for many years, because when we wanted to hand out membership forms when trying to save the club we weren't allowed to, the reason given blocking the concourse, so we were given permission to do it on the approaches to the stadium instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bettsj2 Posted 7 January 2013 Share Posted 7 January 2013 We will be contacting the family concerned & ask for all the correspondence on this one. A further caller/texter than picked up the clause in the Season Ticket that could cause the ST to be withdrawn (breaking image rights should not be applied to children) However with type of clauses in mind..... Hugo Sanchez - be aware there is another clause about handing out leaflets in the ground without the clubs permission. This has existed for many years, because when we wanted to hand out membership forms when trying to save the club we weren't allowed to, the reason given blocking the concourse, so we were given permission to do it on the approaches to the stadium instead. Be really interested if the family come back with anything as I cannot believe that story is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.