Jump to content
Melbourne Football

A solution to active support problems


TheStig
 Share

Recommended Posts

So much has been talked about the ramifications of the derby violence but the worst thing for me personally was the fact that I didn't get to see the derby played out. Every year I look forward to the christmas derby as it has traditionally been a great contest at a time when everyone is starting to wind down after a hard year.

What is concerning is the discussion about Victory having to play all it's games behind closed doors which is not a solution in my books. It just punishes the innocent fans who want to see a competitive game. As a City supporter I want to be able to attend the next derby and as a member why shouldn't I be allowed to? I'm clearly not a Victory supporter therefore I represent no risk.

However here's my comprehensive solution.

1. State Government to pass legislation providing for an automatic six month jail term (minimum) for any banned supporter who attends at an a-league match. If you are where you are not supposed to me then you should get a jail term. Same for smuggling flares. This must be rigourously policed by Victoria Police.

2. Victory games and crowds to proceed as normal.

3. For the next 3 years the active area of Victory to be made dry.

4. Derbies to proceeds as normal at AAMI but the only people allowed to attend to be full Melbourne City members.
 

I think these measures would be effective at changing the culture.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by TheStig
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TheStig said:

So much has been talked about the ramifications of the derby violence but the worst thing for me personally was the fact that I didn't get to see the derby played out. Every year I look forward to the christmas derby as it has traditionally been a great contest at a time when everyone is starting to wind down after a hard year.

What is concerning is the discussion about Victory having to play all it's games behind closed doors which is not a solution in my books. It just punishes the innocent fans who want to see a competitive game. As a City supporter I want to be able to attend the next derby and as a member why shouldn't I be allowed to? I'm clearly not a Victory supporter therefore I represent no risk.

However here's my comprehensive solution.

1. State Government to pass legislation providing for an automatic six month jail term (minimum) for any banned supporter who attends at an a-league match. If you are where you are not supposed to me then you should get a jail term. Same for smuggling flares. This must be rigourously policed by Victoria Police.

Jailing people is harsh and should be a last resort. For me a ban to an a-league match is a ban to all professional sports grounds including AFL, cricket, tennis, etc. So the penalties should be: report to Mildura police station (or suitably far away police station) every Friday at 7pm, Saturday and Sunday at 5pm. A conviction recorded as this will impact their ability to travel overseas and limit their job prospects as some require a clean record.

The APL and Park management are meant to be checking for flares and that is not working. The state government to introduce legislation requiring flares to have a smell or sound passive detection so that a physical check is more effective. Those caught trying to smuggle flares are to be subjected to the punishment above.

Violation of parole conditions to be treated as any other violation. Jail should only be if people are injured and the injury to be treated as common assault.

2. Victory games and crowds to proceed as normal.

Victory games in Melbourne are to allow only women, children and men over 50. Opposition clubs are allowed normal crowds. This is to remain effective for three years. Normalisation would begin after that. First only family ticket holders allowed with the men accompanied by minors. Then proceed from there.

3. For the next 3 years the active area of Victory to be made dry.

Did alcohol play a part? 20 minutes into the game?

4. Derbies to proceeds as normal at AAMI but the only people allowed to attend to be full Melbourne City members.

See point 2 above.
 

I think these measures would be effective at changing the culture.

 

All clubs should be on notice that what is happening to MVC will automatically happen to them if the active area behaviour does not change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, TheStig said:

So much has been talked about the ramifications of the derby violence but the worst thing for me personally was the fact that I didn't get to see the derby played out. Every year I look forward to the christmas derby as it has traditionally been a great contest at a time when everyone is starting to wind down after a hard year.

What is concerning is the discussion about Victory having to play all it's games behind closed doors which is not a solution in my books. It just punishes the innocent fans who want to see a competitive game. As a City supporter I want to be able to attend the next derby and as a member why shouldn't I be allowed to? I'm clearly not a Victory supporter therefore I represent no risk.

However here's my comprehensive solution.

1. State Government to pass legislation providing for an automatic six month jail term (minimum) for any banned supporter who attends at an a-league match. If you are where you are not supposed to me then you should get a jail term. Same for smuggling flares. This must be rigourously policed by Victoria Police.

2. Victory games and crowds to proceed as normal.

3. For the next 3 years the active area of Victory to be made dry.

4. Derbies to proceeds as normal at AAMI but the only people allowed to attend to be full Melbourne City members.
 

I think these measures would be effective at changing the culture.

No. Do you honestly think that every time some dickhead does something wrong at a football match the government should step in with legislation? APL should make a new rule? FA should make a new rule?

The responsibility lies with each individual club to control its members and other supporters. For too long the clubs have failed to act and passed the buck saying "this is not really who we are." What Melbourne City does may be quite different from what Central Coast does, because of socio-economics and other factors.

I got so tired of this sort of shit in industry where individual companies failed to act until there was an industry-wide agreement that in the end I retired.

All APL should really have to do is set the criteria that each all clubs must meet to enter and stay in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

No. Do you honestly think that every time some dickhead does something wrong at a football match the government should step in with legislation? APL should make a new rule? FA should make a new rule?

The responsibility lies with each individual club to control its members and other supporters. For too long the clubs have failed to act and passed the buck saying "this is not really who we are." What Melbourne City does may be quite different from what Central Coast does, because of socio-economics and other factors.

I got so tired of this sort of shit in industry where individual companies failed to act until there was an industry-wide agreement that in the end I retired.

All APL should really have to do is set the criteria that each all clubs must meet to enter and stay in the league.

There are already laws in place that can account for piss poor behaviour - affray, etc. The issue is that the existing sanctions may not take into account sporting events. An example a random fight where someone is concussed and needs stitches (like Glover), the perpetrator may not necessarily have a conviction recorded against them, also freedom of movement is unclear. Hence my suggestion to ensure that there is a conviction recorded even if there is no jail time. And that would require legislative changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jw1739 said:

Maybe. But I'm pretty sure the various States will tell the clubs to put their own houses in order before coming to us to change legislation. Waiting for legislative change is passing the buck yet again.

To a certain extent, what does that mean? How much authority do clubs (and the venues) have over citizens? Part of the contract is that people will adhere to the social contract but what if they don't? A court imposed penalty which is violated will mean that person can be further sanctioned (unless you are the monkey bike murderer) but a civil contract?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


If someone who is banned from the footbll turns up and gets into the ground, what punishment is there that can be handed down currently? The FFA is not a court.

To be effective such sanctions as life bans need judicial backing and jail sentences as a deterrent. That can only be put in place by Government. Essentially at the end of the day this is a law and order matter.  
 

Edited by TheStig
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jw1739 said:

I'm not debating that legislation may be needed. But it is simple for the game to get its own house in order first. City can't even get a statement out condemning our own supporters for throwing flares, and IMO that's pissweak.

I am not sure whether the club would want to directly condemn the behaviour because that may detract other people from joining and the focus is on MVC so let them deal with the press. Having said that, the club can still issue a statement that obliquely criticises the Active group and acknowledge that the club will improve the governance of the membership.

What I don't know is the contractual obligations between the club, the APL, ground management and security. Ultimately, it becomes a matter of self policing by the Active groups, and policing by security. And on this every one is very silent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, NewConvert said:

I am not sure whether the club would want to directly condemn the behaviour because that may detract other people from joining and the focus is on MVC so let them deal with the press. Having said that, the club can still issue a statement that obliquely criticises the Active group and acknowledge that the club will improve the governance of the membership.

What I don't know is the contractual obligations between the club, the APL, ground management and security. Ultimately, it becomes a matter of self policing by the Active groups, and policing by security. And on this every one is very silent.

I'm of the opinion that the flares issue must be addressed by both clubs, which means cleaning up and cleaning out "active" or dispensing with it altogether. 

Further that City should address what Tom Glover did, not because it might have triggered the invasion, because it could have caused serious injury to spectators. All that the club needs to do in this respect is state that it is reinforcing the protocol for players when such incidents occur - it doesn't need to  name anyone.

My understanding is that for A-League matches "we" hire the venue, and IIRC back in the Scott Munn era this was costing us some $3m per season. However, what the terms are only the Olympic Parks Trust, the club, APL and FA will know. However, I would guess that security will be a contract between the Trust and a security agency, much like landlord insurance for a landlord, but that's just a guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

I'm of the opinion that the flares issue must be addressed by both clubs, which means cleaning up and cleaning out "active" or dispensing with it altogether. 

Further that City should address what Tom Glover did, not because it might have triggered the invasion, because it could have caused serious injury to spectators. All that the club needs to do in this respect is state that it is reinforcing the protocol for players when such incidents occur - it doesn't need to  name anyone.

My understanding is that for A-League matches "we" hire the venue, and IIRC back in the Scott Munn era this was costing us some $3m per season. However, what the terms are only the Olympic Parks Trust, the club, APL and FA will know. However, I would guess that security will be a contract between the Trust and a security agency, much like landlord insurance for a landlord, but that's just a guess.

I think that Glover should be sanctioned by the A-League and if not then by the club. I also believe that the A-League should publish a protocol for removing objects from the field of play.

I like Active so I would not dispense with it but certainly the way that members are allowed to sit there should be improved. Entrance to the area should be cordoned, clear shots of what people look like and what they are wearing. At the entrance, better screening for flares, etc.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As stated by many the main problem is the fact that their are too many males in active and not enough women. So here's what I propose:

- Every male in active must bring there partner to games in order to acess it. Guys won't do stupid shit with their girlfriends around if they know it may cost them getting laid.

-If a male does not have a girlfriend they will be required to bring their mum OR they will be assigned a woman at a later date.

With more women in the active groups league wide we'll have a lot less violence in them. Instead, we'll just have a lot of angry groups, not talking to each other.

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...