The Holmesdale Fanatics thread
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 spartakev2  Anerley 03 Sep 18 6.36am |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Jimenez
Is the correct answer
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Midlands Eagle 03 Sep 18 7.09am |
|
|---|---|
|
Reading the statement that the club put out yesterday the part that I have difficulty understanding is "They also said they felt the group would find it hard to continue if we could not facilitate this move" Why would they have difficulty continuing?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 03 Sep 18 7.20am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
Reading the statement that the club put out yesterday the part that I have difficulty understanding is "They also said they felt the group would find it hard to continue if we could not facilitate this move" Why would they have difficulty continuing? My thoughts exactly. I cannot get my head around this, if they are true fans and it is not "all about us" why not continue whilst negotiating.If it is not throwing a hissy fit perhaps the HF can explain why they couldn't.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| akiisalegend Croydon 03 Sep 18 8.05am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Spiderman
My thoughts exactly. I cannot get my head around this, if they are true fans and it is not "all about us" why not continue whilst negotiating.If it is not throwing a hissy fit perhaps the HF can explain why they couldn't. Agree with this 100%
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| bexleydave Barnehurst 03 Sep 18 8.05am |
 |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
Reading the statement that the club put out yesterday the part that I have difficulty understanding is "They also said they felt the group would find it hard to continue if we could not facilitate this move" Why would they have difficulty continuing? I also agree that it doesn't really make sense, but presumably it was an attempt to put pressure on the club to acquiesce to what they wanted. Harder to understand was "the club, and particularly the chairman, saw merit in this idea". If they did, then they hadn't given it a lot of thought. I know that this has already been mentioned before, but a standing section at the FRONT of Block E would mean that the whole of the lower Holmesdale would have to stand, because of the domino effect of not being able to see whilst seated. Apart from there being supporters there who cannot or do not wish to stand for 90 minutes, the club would be risking action with respect to ground safety. We're getting away with it at the moment because the 'standing areas' (albeit there's actually no such thing) are off to one side in the Holmesdale and at the back of the Arthur Waite (and the away supporters are in a coral of their own), so it's possible to argue that there's little risk to others in the rest of the ground. I think that the authorities may take a different view (and rightly so) of the whole of the lower Holmesdale standing. Anyone with an ounce of common sense could see that that would be a safety risk on a terrace currently designed as seating. Even if "safe standing" is eventually introduced, it will almost certainly be at the rear of stands (for the reasons stated above). It's unlikely that an area the size of the Holmesdale lower would be completely turned over to standing.
Bexley Dave Can you hear the Brighton sing? I can't hear a ******* thing! "The most arrogant, obnoxious bunch of deluded little sun tanned, loafer wearing mummy's boys I've ever had the misfortune of having to listen to" (Burnley forum) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
palace_in_frogland  In a broken dream 03 Sep 18 8.19am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wilbraham413
The most ironic example is this: The club's plan to destroy inhabited houses to upgrade the main stand was no problem at all, but moving some ticket holders is apparently impossible. That proves the club is capable of making difficult negotiations and accommodations when it is in the club's best interests. Substitute "season ticket holders" for "tenants/residents" in this article... "Under the proposals submitted to Croydon Council, six houses in Wooderson Close would be lost, five of which are owned by the local authority. Crystal Palace has promised to work with the council to ensure all tenants affected are re-housed in equivalent properties in one of the surrounding wards. The club will pay the bill to re-house residents and associated costs, including the cost of moving. It is offering to meet affected residents individually to discuss any concerns." This is a poor analogy and the reasons why have already been discussed earlier in the thread. I presume you haven’t followed this discussion from the beginning; you’ll find the stuff about Wooderson Close somewhere in the first 1000 pages.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Nobbybm Dartford 03 Sep 18 8.31am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by bexleydave
I also agree that it doesn't really make sense, but presumably it was an attempt to put pressure on the club to acquiesce to what they wanted. Harder to understand was "the club, and particularly the chairman, saw merit in this idea". If they did, then they hadn't given it a lot of thought. I know that this has already been mentioned before, but a standing section at the FRONT of Block E would mean that the whole of the lower Holmesdale would have to stand, because of the domino effect of not being able to see whilst seated. Apart from there being supporters there who cannot or do not wish to stand for 90 minutes, the club would be risking action with respect to ground safety. We're getting away with it at the moment because the 'standing areas' (albeit there's actually no such thing) are off to one side in the Holmesdale and at the back of the Arthur Waite (and the away supporters are in a coral of their own), so it's possible to argue that there's little risk to others in the rest of the ground. I think that the authorities may take a different view (and rightly so) of the whole of the lower Holmesdale standing. Anyone with an ounce of common sense could see that that would be a safety risk on a terrace currently designed as seating. Even if "safe standing" is eventually introduced, it will almost certainly be at the rear of stands (for the reasons stated above). It's unlikely that an area the size of the Holmesdale lower would be completely turned over to standing. Absolutely - saved me a lot of typing.
Will this be five? It's gonna be five! It IS five! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
jeeagles  03 Sep 18 8.32am |
|
|---|---|
|
My seat is in a pretty crappy location and I'm a fairly vocal supporter. Would any supporters who are quiet and have seats in a good location want to swap seat with me? If no one is willing to do this voluntarily. I'll ask Mr P and some bigger boys to sort you out. If I still don't get what I want me and all my mates are going to boycott the club. I'd like to graciously mention I won't blame anyone else for not getting exactly what I want, all the time.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| bexleydave Barnehurst 03 Sep 18 8.41am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Nobbybm
Absolutely - saved me a lot of typing.
Bexley Dave Can you hear the Brighton sing? I can't hear a ******* thing! "The most arrogant, obnoxious bunch of deluded little sun tanned, loafer wearing mummy's boys I've ever had the misfortune of having to listen to" (Burnley forum) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Painter Croydon 03 Sep 18 8.43am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Jimenez
This apparently is too hard for HF, as stated in statement. Why, not sure.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| bexleydave Barnehurst 03 Sep 18 9.09am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Painter
This apparently is too hard for HF, as stated in statement. Why, not sure. I'd expect that quite a lot of season ticket holders will want to move when the new stand is completed. That should have been the club's response to the request, not to go through a 'thinking about it' exercise, when it clearly couldn't happen for multiple reasons.
Bexley Dave Can you hear the Brighton sing? I can't hear a ******* thing! "The most arrogant, obnoxious bunch of deluded little sun tanned, loafer wearing mummy's boys I've ever had the misfortune of having to listen to" (Burnley forum) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| AdventureEagle Guildford 03 Sep 18 9.14am |
|
|---|---|
|
Everyone can see that the HF moving could be beneficial, but in order to make it happen, a lot of things need to work perfectly (people moving of their own volition, etc). It is a complex negotiation and those take time. The club have recognised that but the HF have not, and appear to have watched too much Suits for their own good. Harvey Spector may have given them more leverage before they walked away from the table. They need to come back and work with the club on a long term solution. This is what everyone wants, and the sooner they come back, the better for all.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.