This is a spurious comparison as I'm sure you realise. Personally I think the club could afford to give free tickets to blind people. How many do you think go to matches on average? 1? It's not like the stadium is going to be overrun with blind freeloaders. Really surprised to see so many having the "I have to pay, so should they" attitude. Is it so hard to imagine doing something nice for someone less fortunate than yourself? Especially when it costs you nothing.
I am not one that advocates as you suggest however they do have a point............As I said in my post if you ask the disabled themselves, they would argue they would want to be treated the same as anyone else as far as reasonably possible. Now if the person in question has difficulty in funding such a thing now that may well be different but that I gather is not the issue. It is the timing of the hike without warning that seems to be the issue. One final thing why would you treat this person any different from any other disabled person. The disability he has should not be the deciding factor.
Apparently this is normal for PL. Giving them the same rights as other disabled people seems fair to me. The only difference appears to be that presumably a blind person and his enabler sit in normal seats rather than in wheelchair section. I wonder if they are afraid that with the increase in ST prices, we'll all go out and try and convince a blind person that they are a Saints fan.
Well, I would treat them differently because their experience is different due to the particular disability they have. A suitable comparison is the TV licence, which is heavily discounted for blind people, but not for sighted disabled people. I'm sure you're right that disabled people who can see would argue they don't want to be treated differently, but for someone who can't see well enough to be able to appreciate what is happening, they don't get the same value out of the ticket that anyone else would, so I'm not sure the blind people would make that argument. I'm sure they wouldn't mind contributing to your ticket if you asked
That is a reasonable argument...but surely a deaf person might be entitled to the same understanding in that case based on your argument?
Maybe but I think vision plays a more important role in watching a football match than sound does. Although your enjoyment would be diminished by not being able to hear the crowd, the ref's whistle, etc, you still have a comparable experience to those who can hear, which isn't the case for those who can't see.
If you are getting something from being at the game, you can't be surprised that you have to pay something. Harsh as it seems..most of our games next year will be sold out so each seat is valuable. Do the blind get free seats at any other event...asking, don't know.
To be honest it just goes to show how making decisions of this type is so hard. You have to run a business based on understanding and sentiment unfortunately has to take second place to survive. The line has to be drawn somewhere. I am sure you would agree that realistically an argument could be made for all persuasions of disability no matter how rare the person maybe to the game of football.
I suppose if you wait long enough someone will come along along who is not driven by the same mean spirited attitude of the majority of posters here. pass the football For someone who regularly spouts socialist virtues, your post is a bit hypocritical don't you think?
No it most definately is not. Groceries are essential to maintain life and health. Football is a pastime which you pay for with your disposable income. Many people who post on this website have very limited disposable income therefore they have limited opportunities to watch the Saints live. This thread has certainly pulled out the PC brigade so for them I thought the following would be of interest: There's an annual contest at *Griffith University* calling for the most appropriate definition of a contemporary term. This year's term was 'political correctness'. The winning student entry read: "Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a piece of **** by the clean end."
Not in the least. I am a realist. Do you think it is wrong for the club to charge retired people the top rate without concession for sitting in a premium seat? My answer to that would be NO. If you don't want to pay the rate then sit somewhere else. I am prepared to pay the rate so I am staying put. Southampton FC is not a charity.
Though certainly imperfect, political correctness is a massive improvement on what preceded it. Most people who bang on about it are completely missing the point, and the anti-PC brigade are even more annoying and delusional than the PC brigade (though I'm sure we can agree they are both annoying). I don't agree that this is a question of political correctness - it's merely a question of a private company trying to make a profit, and not giving blind people free stuff because, frankly, if they can enjoy it, then can pay for it. The only way that political correctness has anything to do with this, is that blind people should be treated like regular people, and this has both positive and negative implications.
How isit mean spirited wanting blind people to pay for coming to a game?. They still have other senses , meaning they can still enjoy the game. Aren't disabled people ment to be treated as equal anyways?. It's not like they are being asked to pay full price isit?, if they were then I'd agree it was harsh. It's how itis these days. If you want to go to anywhere were people entertain you, you have to be ready to pay the costs. To say people that have other disabilities then blind people should pay and them not is actually discrimination, all disabilities should be treated the same so all should pay the same.
I would suggest not! But we're not all gifted with your superior intellect, can you explain these reasons for the idiots among us?
