No. But it will help define what being a pillock is. There have been references from others that the club operates a kangaroo court when it comes to sanctions. That’s not great for fans, or the club. The EFL operate a standard set of sanctions, so fans can have transparency.
[Albion] The Fan Advisory Board Thread
- Thread starter Super Steve Earle
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Colonel Mustard
Well-known member
- Jun 18, 2023
- 2,240
Yes, I find it deeply concerning that the PL and at least some clubs are fighting against the appointment of a regulator. The resistance to what looks like a fair and sensible policy, seems to be a very clear admission that there are major faults with football administration.
Completely agree. A regulator wont micro manage but having PB telling the BHAFC FAB that he doesn’t think they’re needed isn’t great to hear. It’s in the October minutes on the club
Website.
We know.
You seem to have a grudge and very detailed knowledge of club processes. How? What did they do to you?
I’d bet Tony Bloom doesn’t either. Having personally invested a small fortune and having instilled his own board of business associates and friends I’m not sure he’s enamoured with some of the regulator suggestions either
- May 8, 2018
- 11,713
A regulator typically (dependent on remit) will look how clubs have incorporated shared values / standards (agreed from the outset by governing body and regulator) they will have pillars if you like to ensure standards are met, such as consistency, fairness, transparency and communication.
If clubs set out clear and concise terms and you as a fan chose to not follow them, there’s not much the regulator will do. If for example the club hasn’t followed the process, the process isn’t proportionate or fair or there’s a conflict of interest the regulator may comment and act (again depending on remit)
Football clubs are private enterprises and it’s up to them in the main who they let buy their product / attend their premises, pretty much like every other business / residence
Reading between the lines I would say it’s probably isn’t a reach to suggest you have had some direct interaction on a grievance of some kind with the club. I’m guessing it’s been suggested that your actions have brought the club into disrepute somehow and you disagree, all be it , phrase is open ended and open to interpretation?
Last edited:
It won't. The remit of the regulator is actually very narrow. That doesn't stop the Premier League from trying to narrow it even further though, which IMO is counterproductive. The legislation is due to go to Parliament and could potentially be passed by June. However, we could have a new government by then, who are less willing to listen to the Premier League's pet lobbyists who are from the right of the politicial spectrum.
History suggests this is the point where the conversation becomes a lot less specific.
I’m going to make an educated guess, based on the evidence thus far, that whatever you or your friend got banned most, if not all, will consider twattish and deserved of a ban.
I completely understand it. As you say it’s a matter of opinion and I respect those of other fans. What I don’t respect is any double standards, not following protocols or decisions made based on the morals of individuals, that’s too loose in terms of interpretation. Reputation goes both ways - how we act, and the club too. Hearing about a 17 year old not being let in the ground because he was spotted having a beer (with his dad) is taking things to level of morality that I find baffling.
You couldn’t be more wrong, or rude.
Colonel Mustard
Well-known member
- Jun 18, 2023
- 2,240
Likely, yes but this is also a danger in that a new administration often clears the decks of half-chewed legislation. Labour won’t gain anything by abandoning it completely but it’s the sort of proposal that won’t be seen as high priority for a new government. So it might get kicked into the long grass.
Fair point!
They could call it Maupay’s Law
And quite rightly. Why on Earth would I expose myself to more scrutiny? I’ve got others on here suggesting I’ve behaved like a twat so probably deserve some punishment. on the other side, if I am not careful I could be accused of trying to undermine the reputation of the club.
Super Steve Earle
Well-known member
- Thread starter
- #296
If the lyrics aren't on screen I can't sing along. So I say keep the them. Why do people keep trying to make the positive of showing the lyrics in to a negative.
thedonkeycentrehalf
Moved back to wear the gloves (again)
- Jul 7, 2003
- 9,793
For a newby, it's quite impressive how one person can totally derail something that had previously been a useful thread. 
Good point well made.For a newby, it's quite impressive how one person can totally derail something that had previously been a useful thread.
Okay, now we know what the issue is. How long is/was the ban for?
On the contrary you’ve been here a week and done nothing but post about two issues, the Post Office IT thread and spamming this one with insinuation about the club.
It appears you have an agenda but not the balls to back it up with fact. Frankly it’s time to
or get off the pot.As for the “17 year old drinking” we’ll need a bit more information than ‘you’ve heard’. This isn’t Facebook, nor is it the place to post allegations about the club you can’t back up.
Nonetheless, my son is 17 and I don’t let him have beer at the Amex because it would risk the club’s alcohol licence and I’d expect a ban for both of us if he was caught. I’m not a prude, he drinks at home sometimes and was on the beer in the Dam. But I don’t want either of us losing our ticket or the club losing their licence. I expect anyone who works in the licensed selling of alcohol would understand the club’s position (if it was true).