Nobody on this board or (from what I have read) in the local press know the difference in costs between policing an 'average' game and a 'high risk' game at Priestfield. Are Kent Police holding the match to ransom knowing there is an added incentive through gate receipts? Scally has always been a controversial figure at the club but he is a reasonable business man, he stepped down over the costs at the Stoke game and I'm sue the situation will be resolved before the match goes ahead. I'm traveling down from Lincolnshire to see the game so I want to see the match have a good atmosphere and attendance (as always with this fixture) as much as anybody but until there are further details on the dispute, you can't say who is in the right or wrong here.
I want it to be resolved but not at the expense that the police supposedly want. Scally is inadvertantly sticking up for all lower league clubs by refusing to pay what he see's as unreasonable costs. A compromise will surely be found but how can a club be responsible and have to pay for policing away from the stadium. Gills may be able to afford it, but teams like Barnet,Macclesfield etc with their small gates will find it a struggle if the police decide they should up their presence at matches.Something else,also, the more police there are at matches the more trivial arrests they will make to justify their being there . Maybe the away club should pay half the costs, because its because of them (whoever they may be )that the police want to increase their numbers.
gillslad69 You are right. The actual £ costs, as such are an unknown quantity - but - Gills have spent enough seasons in the Championship and hosted other high profile fixtures, that, one could safely assume that the numbers of police and stewards must have some precedence. These fixtures will have included matches against such teams as West Ham ( attendance11418) Man City, Millwall, Charlton etc etc. Am I dense in thinking that, at least, the level of policing numbers would be applied to the game v Swindon ? Mr.Scally can be commended in his futile attempt to minimise any policing costs - but based on previous high profile games, he doesn't have much choice but to pay up.AND - the above established police numbers will (regrettably, but quite rightly) be affected by the ' history' between the two clubs. The incidents that occurred at the last home meeting, in and around the vicinity of the ground - together with what new intelligence that the police will show to our chairman, means that he has no choice but to pay up. here's a thought If the match is that important to Swindon fans, and if the cost of extra policing is going to hurt Mr.Scally, why doesn't / didn't he put up the price of away tickets to about £ 30. I estimate that this would raise an extra £10000 - surely enough to pay the extra element of the police bill ? And before I get lambasted for being ridiculous - please do remember what happened when getting tickets for the game against Stoke - the online/telephone booking fee got trebled- and when last we went to Wembly the booking fee was an outrageous £5. so - if he can pull a few strokes on home fans - why should we, the home fans suffer by not being allowed into our ground ?
bilko, why are you creating a second thread, when there was already one covering the topic? Thread is going to be merged. ps. original thread is now a sticky.
BSG - yes, a slight crossing of threads - but there are only 2 threads on this subject on this forums - and only a couple of pages to read - my thoughts are well documented.
Yeah ,but brb quoted me before I could rectify my spelling mistake <muststopdraggingmyknucklesonthefloor>
Yes you thoughts were well documented, but please don't take this the wrong way, they were more reactions to the situation rather than solutions. Of course you have the right to vent anger (or whatever emotion it maybe) but it wasn't really constructive. That said your previous post to the one I am quoting (does that make sense), you have stated your solution so it did answer my question. Of course that makes this post pointless but to be honest I an trying to look busy at work by typing!!
BSG I make no apology for the ( initial ) ranting - or its' continuation. Thankyou for acknowledging that I have, in my penultimate post on this subject, made some suggestions for raising some ( if not all ) of the revenue to pay the extra part of the police bill. Please feel free to carry on with your pointless posts ( I've had a lot more practise than you !) Normal services will probably be resumed about 4.55pm tomorrow. I promise to revert to being depressed and suicidal - might actually kick the horse of brb's chariot if I see it.
REFUNDS - yeah, right ! Whilst I'm being so bloody cheerful --Just looking through my season ticket booklet- conditions- No.10 Each voucher ( ticket ) is valid for the advertised match date to which the match is re-scheduled. NO REFUNDS can be given under any circumstances. (can't understand why the term RE scheluled has been used.) From memory, I believe that matchday tickets can be refunded if returned to the club at least 24 hours before a fixture. This applies to re-arranged games - otherwise the sale of season tickets and matchday tickets are final. I cannot find anything to say that there is an obligation for the club to refund any 'pro rata' payment for a game from which the season ticket holder has been 'banned.' Does this mean that, in the case of season ticket holders, Gillingham FC can have their cake ( our money ) and eat it ?
I think that you are absolutely correct on this, and agree entirely. The problem is that we don't know what those policing levels were, and what policing levels are now being stipulated by the police for this match. But regardless of this I can't see how the club can argue against the levels NOW being required. Assuming that agreement is eventually reached (i.e. the club concede), if it all goes off satisfactorily there will be no evidence as to what lower levels of policing might have been satisfactory, and if it doesn't go off OK then the police will say that that the numbers (and more) were justified. In other words they've got the club by the cojones.
Thanks Tim. ( I think ! ) In my original post ( before I've jiggled it ) I mentioned about charging the Swindon fans an extra premium for this game - to cover the additional cost of extra police. If the roles were reversed - although I may not be happy to pay up - it wouldn't prevent me from doing so - to have the chance to see my team in a match where they might secure promotion ( what did we all pay for our Wembley play off tickets ?? - a lot more than for a normal game .) Perhaps this is an idea that Mr.Scally might consider in future. Charging away fans more to see the same game is not new - I have experienced it with Gills.
Listening to oxford commentary as they actualy comment on the game. Mentioned an interesting conspiracy theory. That scally wants to play swinedon behind clothes doors so that Swindon will field a weakens side. The theory being they would want to clinch promotion in front of a big crowd. Don't think even our esteemed chairman could be that cynical!
Latest news.....does'nt matter if this game is behind closed doors now... No one from Medway wants to go anymore. Whilst being fed up waiting for an anouncement of anykind I have now made arrangements to get into summer mode and do the garden instead. I may or may not be back next year without a season ticket But I am in discussion with the wife and there will be a pointless announcement soon
