Union Bears Statement

[ally62 393]

If you make the Broomloan stand the safe standing area, means the scum take of that area when they visit !

would it not be better the Copland stand being the perminant home to the UB and the safe standing area, or the Govan / Copland corner ? 

 

[PRW. 5,631]

Just now, ally62 said:

If you make the Broomloan stand the safe standing area, means the scum take of that area when they visit !

would it not be better the Copland stand being the perminant home to the UB and the safe standing area, or the Govan / Copland corner ? 

 

Got to be Copland Front IMO.

[Bigsasasfloppyhair 13,310]

The UB have a high opinion of themselves. This the same group who landed the club with a ridiculous fine for throwing paper. Why do they merit a standing area  on this behaviour?

The idea of standing is a no brainer. Both enclosures, creating a great atmosphere that would reverberate around the dressing room scaring the shite out away teams. Sounds great to me.

I think this idea should be a consultation between all supporters clubs, season ticket holders etc to gain a true representation of the fan base and who would want to be part of it.

For example, in in the enclosure but would give me seat to somebody who wanted to stand. Spinal surgery means 90 minutes of the bouncy isn't advised but at the same time if I was told I'm being moved and not given the option to go then I'd be raging.

[bombaybadboy08 15,660]

1 hour ago, JC10 said:

Just takes a key to unlock it and turn it into a normal seat, so could do it against them and in European games when it's mandatory.

Cheers, mate.

Sounds like there's no more excuses for it not to happen then.

[With Heart and Hand 8,949]

Don't see why folk feel they have to be asked to move if a section is being changed

Yes you may have sat there for years but you don't own the seat and if they were knocking the stand down to rebuild or putting different styles of seats in they wouldn't have to ask to don't see what the big difference is

[ForeverAndEver 71,366]

13 minutes ago, bigsasasfloopyhair said:

The UB have a high opinion of themselves. This the same group who landed the club with a ridiculous fine for throwing paper. Why do they merit a standing area  on this behaviour?

The idea of standing is a no brainer. Both enclosures, creating a great atmosphere that would reverberate around the dressing room scaring the shite out away teams. Sounds great to me.

I think this idea should be a consultation between all supporters clubs, season ticket holders etc to gain a true representation of the fan base and who would want to be part of it.

For example, in in the enclosure but would give me seat to somebody who wanted to stand. Spinal surgery means 90 minutes of the bouncy isn't advised but at the same time if I was told I'm being moved and not given the option to go then I'd be raging.

They literally have 2 or 3 rows, it came from each section of BF.

[Bigsasasfloppyhair 13,310]

2 minutes ago, ForeverAndEver said:

They literally have 2 or 3 rows, it came from each section of BF.

Maybe so mate and I know that it wasn't an isolated incident but they were involved in it.

[PRW. 5,631]

19 minutes ago, bigsasasfloopyhair said:

The UB have a high opinion of themselves. This the same group who landed the club with a ridiculous fine for throwing paper. Why do they merit a standing area  on this behaviour?

The idea of standing is a no brainer. Both enclosures, creating a great atmosphere that would reverberate around the dressing room scaring the shite out away teams. Sounds great to me.

I think this idea should be a consultation between all supporters clubs, season ticket holders etc to gain a true representation of the fan base and who would want to be part of it.

For example, in in the enclosure but would give me seat to somebody who wanted to stand. Spinal surgery means 90 minutes of the bouncy isn't advised but at the same time if I was told I'm being moved and not given the option to go then I'd be raging.

They got the club a fine for throwing paper? Was that not because the paper was hitting the Progres keeper? Must have some shot on them from BF1 to the goal with a bit of A4 paper fs.

[Bigsasasfloppyhair 13,310]

10 minutes ago, With Heart and Hand said:

Don't see why folk feel they have to be asked to move if a section is being changed

Yes you may have sat there for years but you don't own the seat and if they were knocking the stand down to rebuild or putting different styles of seats in they wouldn't have to ask to don't see what the big difference is

Sure the club would have an obligation to the supporters to consult with anyone who would potentially be moved.

Yes you don't own the seat but they want to keep fans as a customer, so forcing people to move could be detrimental to business.

For example, I've sat in same seat since 98. If I was just told I was being moved it be quite pissed off and depending where they offered the moved too, price would determine if they kept me as a season ticket holder.

[Bigsasasfloppyhair 13,310]

2 minutes ago, PRW. said:

They got the club a fine for throwing paper? Was that not because the paper was hitting the Progres keeper? Must have some shot on them from BF1 to the goal with a bit of A4 paper fs.

The whole stand were throwing it. Maybe not the only ones responsible but def part of it.

[MasterD 7,435]

Good luck to them, definitely something that should be getting looked at seriously.

The petition I seen about it is a bit of a riddy though. Petitions for everything and anything these days.

[PRW. 5,631]

3 minutes ago, bigsasasfloopyhair said:

The whole stand were throwing it. Maybe not the only ones responsible but def part of it.

Part of it from BF1? Like I said, must have some shot on them to hit the keeper

[Bigsasasfloppyhair 13,310]

4 minutes ago, PRW. said:

Part of it from BF1? Like I said, must have some shot on them to hit the keeper

Do you think it was only the few that got the keeper that got the fine? 

I get your point but it was the collection of fans throwing that got the fine.

[BLUEDIGNITY 33,638]

Better get a winning team on the park or there will be plenty safe standing and sitting areas!

[RFC Eagle 4,888]

56 minutes ago, ally62 said:

If you make the Broomloan stand the safe standing area, means the scum take of that area when they visit !

would it not be better the Copland stand being the perminant home to the UB and the safe standing area, or the Govan / Copland corner ? 

 

If its rail seating it can be locked down so they have to sit. The seats tend to be metal so less chance of them wrecking them. Could also hook them up to the mains to 'discourage' their antics.

[ps95v7 387]

More concerning issues at the moment

[Band of Brothers 10,303]

Enclosures is where I grew up standing but with displays the lads want to do surely CF is the best option as GF yer going to be whistling dixie if they want to stand.

[DennyBlueNose 652]

Sorry but I feel they should have sought more dialect with the club before running off greetin. We've enough enemies without our own having a go at us, watch how the media spin this as a fans revolt against the club. 

I completely back their goal, I'm all for it. I just don't think going public is the way forward. 

[ricksen_da_best 2,034]

It's no a group issue as a whole, isn't about whether you support the group. Every fan should have the option of being able to stand at Ibrox with their mates if they want to. Supporting the groups pursuit of this can only help the whole ibrox experience for everyone.

[ricksen_da_best 2,034]

2 minutes ago, DennyBlueNose said:

Sorry but I feel they should have sought more dialect with the club before running off greetin. We've enough enemies without our own having a go at us, watch how the media spin this as a fans revolt against the club. 

I completely back their goal, I'm all for it. I just don't think going public is the way forward. 

This has been ongoing for too long now, endless promises of feedback and nothing. Group didn't want it to come to this to have to go public but obviously we now feel it was the only option to gain more support in pursuing this.

[ally62 393]

18 minutes ago, RFC Eagle said:

If its rail seating it can be locked down so they have to sit. The seats tend to be metal so less chance of them wrecking them. Could also hook them up to the mains to 'discourage' their antics.

Like yer thinking there. 

[DennyBlueNose 652]

Just now, ricksen_da_best said:

This has been ongoing for too long now, endless promises of feedback and nothing. Group didn't want it to come to this to have to public but obviously we now feel it was the only option to gain more support in pursuing this.

I don't know the ins and outs mate, just don't like to see this sort of thing unless it's absolutely necessary. 

[Billythebear77 10,386]

2 hours ago, bombaybadboy08 said:

Is the stumbling block that the toddler fondlers take up that part of the ground when they visit?

Or is it easily removed again?

I'm no clued up on it tbh.

I'd say that's a big part off it mate,  at least twice a year the nappy ripper would wreck them 

[ricksen_da_best 2,034]

4 minutes ago, DennyBlueNose said:

I don't know the ins and outs mate, just don't like to see this sort of thing unless it's absolutely necessary. 

Opinion of members also mate, which is why a statement was released.

[ricksen_da_best 2,034]

1 minute ago, Billythebear77 said:

I'd say that's a big part off it mate,  at least twice a year the nappy ripper would wreck them 

BF is the family section and can't see safe standing being erected their. Plenty options around the stadium which are possible without using BF.