The ballot...

Godwin's law.
You've just blown it.

 

Ok !! Check point Charlie then.

 

Seeing as most EU countries have mandatory ID cards which are needed to book in at hotels, access health services etc I very much doubt it.

 

Maybe they will bring in the GDR system. Build walls and barbed wire fences to stop people getting out and going elsewhere.

 

Yes that was what I was alluding to.

 

Unfortunately, they have the power to do whatever turns them on. Parallels have been made with various dictatorships. I don't think people are too far wide of the mark.

 

There is no real need to get worked up by the issue of ID.

If the ****ing turnstile technology is any gauge to how it would be successfully introduced then there is nothing to worry about.

This sort of thing really does get me going. The Police have no right to ask me for id, I have no right at work to ask people for it and I know that no steward at any football match has a right to ask for it.

You do not need to put your own name on the current scheme, in fact if like me you pay for two memberships only one name goes on both cards.

 

Not in the new plan TOM, whether you like it or not

In the new world each pass must be an individual named person, who has turned up with photo ID. No photo ID = No membership.

And if introduced you will, if you’ve decided to be a member, have signed up to a contract that gives your express permission for stewards to ask you to provide proof of your identity at any time in the ground

So I’m afraid on this one I disagree with you. There is every need to get worked up about it...they are currently consulting on introducing it!

 

If it’s a contract of entry they can.

The ground is a place where you pay to enter and they can add terms to make you do what they want.

It’s not like a public place and police!

 

Precisely

 

Of course you can always rely on a football thread for facts.

Full of people who know stuff.

There are laws that apply in a ground, and they don’t extend to identifying yourself if you haven’t commented any offence. The penalty for breaking the law can amount to arrest.

There are also terms of admission, which can enforce providing ID to an club official. The penalties for breach of contact are civil and stewards may bottle taking action but if it’s on the ticket or in the membership pack it does allow them to demand.

 

There's a word in use in everyday life, and it is significant in legal speak, it's 'reasonable', folk will look at what is 'reasonable'. We should take the piss and show them up for what they are - don't attack the detail, attack the sense - it's what folk look at.

 

I’ll attack both thanks

Be aware of assuming that most people’s view of what is reasonable for football supporters is the same as yours. There’s plenty of examples of us being treated in ways that would be deemed unreasonable for any other group

In this occasion my view is that both the detail and the intention need attacking. It certainly doesn’t make sense to look the other way and refuse to believe that the Allams would introduce it given the chance

 

Me and you are on the same page with this, to suggest that the Allams are not prepared to pay the costs, don't have the technical nous and just wouldn't do those things is farcical.

It looks to me like the vote is being steered by the Allams, either this new proposal will be rejected or even less people will vote, the Allams will then claim that they have asked twice with two different concession offers and the majority of supporters are happy with the current system.

If nothing else it draws out the process, soon it will be too late to make changes for next season.

 

I stick to my view.

Two supporters took a flag onto the pitch at the end of a televised game.
Neither were identified in the ground, one was identified because of social media and got a banning order, the other has not been identified and until he is he escapes a ban.
If a steward has a right to ask for ID that right would have been used and both supporters would have been banned.

No one has a right to demand that you identify yourself by any means other than has been provided by the service provider.

Identification plays a major part in my work. I have to identify individuals and provide descriptions virtually everyday. I have had to be trained in the questioning of individuals in order to establish fact. It is impossible to prove a negative. If I am shown a credit card with a name on it, I have to accept that is the person as I cannot prove that it isn’t.

You may agree to being asked for identification in the ground, but if someone else uses your ticket or pass they have not.
Once in you are in there is no reason for anyone to ask you to identify yourself unless it is to prevent or stop a breach of the peace.
You may have agreed that the club can use and store your details but everyone has after May to opt into the system.
Safeguarding issues arise when it is difficult to determine the age of a young person.
Stewards at football grounds may eject anyone who they want, but they do not have the right to ask for ID.
There is no standard ID card in the UK. Not everyone has a passport and or photo driving license.
No one has a right to take your photograph for means of identification.

I never carry anything other than cash at a game. No wallet, no cards, nothing. My membership card is kept by my Brother in Law and I only have it at the turnstile.
If the club want me to produce an identification document, they can provide it. This will mean an end to print at home, an end to postal group purchases and an end to not having a ticket office.

And just to clarify, these views will be put to the club at the next supporters committee meeting.

I am sorry but you are wrong, they cannot demand that you identify yourself at any point, no matter what the contract states. Its a mute point anyway, because even if they introduce it, the club will never apply it. As it is impossible to justify and they can take as much civil action as they want.

 

The Deep also take your photo for the year long tickets

 

"No one has a right to demand that you identify yourself by any means other than has been provided by the service provider."

The difference is OLM, that if a part of the provision of a service, requires your to provide photo id, then in order to access the service you have to comply. Once in the gym, they can only use the ID they have and cannot demand that you show them your passport etc.

The club could stop anyone entering the ground, but once in, thats it.

 

Applying for a membership will be like a passport application. 2 copies of photos, name and DOB on the back.

And who exactly are going to process these thousands (?) of applications because they'll all need checking and making
sure the correct photo goes on the right card. Some will send them in without the name on, some will get mixed up. It'll be a another complete
Hull City Tigers **** up.

 

Funny how there is a banning order for going on a pitch with a banner at City whereas people with less peaceful intentions elsewhere aren't handed one.
How many banning orders have been handed out for fighting on the pitch at Craven Park for example?