The ballot...

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
The Omega Man said:
"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.
Click to expand...
the club aren't saying that they demand that you show them your passport

they're saying that you will have to prove your ID. How you do that would be up to you

they can demand what they like if you have signed a contract specifically giving them permission to do so, which would be the case with the proposals they are consulting on

to say that it can't happen because the people carrying the flags weren't identified (from your earlier post) is ridiculous. The arrangement wasn't in place then. if it was then they would have been within their rights to stop them and ask their ID before they left the ground

what I do think people are missing though is that you can simply tell them no and refuse, and they cant do anything about it, apart from, as you acknowledge, eject you from the ground
 
It doesn't matter anyway, last time less than 20% of those eligible to vote did so. Whatever happens with this vote Ehab will claim not enough supporters care about concessions and things need to be put in place for next seasons membership scheme. There are only two more home games this season and one of those is in the voting time window so no more protests. Things will remain as they are.

Don't worry though as further fans consultations will take place in the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stockholm Tiger
dennisboothstash said:
the club aren't saying that they demand that you show them your passport

they're saying that you will have to prove your ID. How you do that would be up to you

they can demand what they like if you have signed a contract specifically giving them permission to do so, which would be the case with the proposals they are consulting on

to say that it can't happen because the people carrying the flags weren't identified (from your earlier post) is ridiculous. The arrangement wasn't in place then. if it was then they would have been within their rights to stop them and ask their ID before they left the ground

what I do think people are missing though is that you can simply tell them no and refuse, and they cant do anything about it, apart from, as you acknowledge, eject you from the ground
Click to expand...

I do not think that they can actually eject you from the ground either. I do think that you have missed the point, if you have a ticket for the game, you have a ticket. To ask for additional identification, has implications in law and in the way that all matches are stewarded.

They would have to identify you first, not the other way round. And this is the issue. If they cannot identify who is sitting in a seat during a game, they can come to you and say, "Are you Mr Dennisboothstash?" if you say "Yes I am, why are you asking?" and they reply "I do not believe that you are Mr Dennisboothstash and unless you can prove to me that you are, I will have to ask you to leave". But that is just about it, they cannot eject you by using force, or even take your photograph, they cannot involve the Police, if you do not produce your ticket, they cannot demand that you do so. They can only stop that ticket being used on another occasion by barring entry.
 
The Omega Man said:
I do not think that they can actually eject you from the ground either. I do think that you have missed the point, if you have a ticket for the game, you have a ticket. To ask for additional identification, has implications in law and in the way that all matches are stewarded.

They would have to identify you first, not the other way round. And this is the issue. If they cannot identify who is sitting in a seat during a game, they can come to you and say, "Are you Mr Dennisboothstash?" if you say "Yes I am, why are you asking?" and they reply "I do not believe that you are Mr Dennisboothstash and unless you can prove to me that you are, I will have to ask you to leave". But that is just about it, they cannot eject you by using force, or even take your photograph, they cannot involve the Police, if you do not produce your ticket, they cannot demand that you do so. They can only stop that ticket being used on another occasion by barring entry.
Click to expand...
To ask for additional ID only has implications in civil law, and to have a pass you would have had to have signed to agree what they can do

I must admit I'm less sure about whether they can eject anyone by force, but they do now don't they so what would be the difference?
 
dennisboothstash said:
To ask for additional ID only has implications in civil law, and to have a pass you would have had to have signed to agree what they can do
Click to expand...

But they have to identify you first, not the other way round. Essentially thy have to demonstrate that the person using the ticket is not entitled to it. You do no thave to prove anything, although common sense would be that in order not to cause a problem, most people will just show their card. But what if you bought a ticket on line? Where would the photo be?

dennisboothstash said:
I must admit I'm less sure about whether they can eject anyone by force, but they do now don't they so what would be the difference?
Click to expand...

http://www.spiritofshankly.com/representation/legal-briefing-for-supporters

What Stewards Are Allowed To Do
Under English law (which will include Wales for these purposes) Stewards have no special powers but are able like anyone to have a power of arrest where:
  • a breach of the peace is committed in their presence;
  • the person effecting the arrest reasonably believes that such a breach will be committed in the immediate future by the person arrested, or;
  • a breach of the peace has been committed or the person effecting the arrest reasonably believes that breach of the peace has occurred and that a further breach is threatened.
A breach of the peace occurs whenever harm is actually done or is likely to be done to a person or, in their presence, to their property, or where a person is in fear of being harmed through an assault, affray, riot, unlawful assembly or other disturbance.

Stewards have no legal power over and above anyone else to do more than is detailed above.
 
dennisboothstash said:
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
Click to expand...

Why so indignant: it's a conversational turn-of -phrase, not a personal instruction, ffs.

Where the hell did I mention anything about my opinion being any sort of a bench mark for 'reasonable'? Society in general will end up leveling what is reasonable behaviour by how it responds.

I think I have made it clear that detail is important (common ticket transfer policy), but only in-so-much as preventing an egg on the chin moment later. The style of publicising the draconian policing policy is laughable and is open to being held in contempt and publicly laughed at - even better, force them to carry it out and see where that leads. How the hell you and Balkan seem to have come to the strange conclusion that I advocate looking the other way is beyond me.
 
The Omega Man said:
But they have to identify you first, not the other way round. Essentially thy have to demonstrate that the person using the ticket is not entitled to it. You do no thave to prove anything, although common sense would be that in order not to cause a problem, most people will just show their card. But what if you bought a ticket on line? Where would the photo be?
Click to expand...

If you buy a ticket online without having already got a pay as you go pass (with ID) then you would pay higher prices with no concessions nullifying the need for an ID check.
 
balkan tiger said:
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.
Click to expand...

So you believe the Allams will spend money where they don't need to and that their wonderful ticketing history, club shop prowess and membership clusterfuck generally exhibits an aptitude for getting these logistical matters right? Okay, if you say so, Balkan. I personally believe they have a pedigree of doing simple things wrong - the real farcical.

Of course the vote is being steered, it started life being steered, it's a nonsense vote, always has been and still is. It never mattered who voted what in the last vote because it was destined to be a farce and no matter what anyone votes next will culminate in a farce. That's why I advocated a no-vote policy from the off.

If they want to make changes, they will...
 
Chilton's Hundreds said:
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.
Click to expand...

This will mean that they have to spend money and safeguard the data they accrue. It's a minefield that they will trip up in.
 
originallambrettaman said:
They're not going to implement anything, as they've absolutely no intention of changing the existing system.
Click to expand...

Well if they're happy to see crowds dwindle to 10k next season and young kids supporting other teams then so be it.

I'm giving notice and ending my Premier Club membership after this season. I may renew if the club shows signs of investment in the summer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImperialTiger, Howden Tigress, Newland Tiger and 1 other person
originallambrettaman said:
They're not going to implement anything, as they've absolutely no intention of changing the existing system.
Click to expand...

Exactly. They've put a laughable hotchpotch of pricing and concessions together, couple that with an amazingly stupid intention of policing and it is that hotchpotch folk should be focused on and making a laughing stock of their incredible business acumen - hit them where it hurts, make them look fools in every possible resource . There's elements of everyday policy within their thinking, but there is also total stupidity, simply be sure which is which - which was always my only point.
 
We're over complicating this. It's a **** deal. That can't even be argued.

Just don't enter the game. Don't vote. Cancel membership. It's all there is.
 
The Omega Man said:
But they have to identify you first, not the other way round. Essentially thy have to demonstrate that the person using the ticket is not entitled to it. You do no thave to prove anything, although common sense would be that in order not to cause a problem, most people will just show their card. But what if you bought a ticket on line? Where would the photo be?



http://www.spiritofshankly.com/representation/legal-briefing-for-supporters

What Stewards Are Allowed To Do
Under English law (which will include Wales for these purposes) Stewards have no special powers but are able like anyone to have a power of arrest where:
  • a breach of the peace is committed in their presence;
  • the person effecting the arrest reasonably believes that such a breach will be committed in the immediate future by the person arrested, or;
  • a breach of the peace has been committed or the person effecting the arrest reasonably believes that breach of the peace has occurred and that a further breach is threatened.
A breach of the peace occurs whenever harm is actually done or is likely to be done to a person or, in their presence, to their property, or where a person is in fear of being harmed through an assault, affray, riot, unlawful assembly or other disturbance.

Stewards have no legal power over and above anyone else to do more than is detailed above.
Click to expand...

No TOM that isn't the case with their proposals. However I should have been more clear that they are only talking about a membership pass

They are saying that if you sign up for a membership you must also sign up to allow stewards to be able to ask you, not the other way around, to prove your identity at all times whilst in the ground

And I quote ...."You will need to be able to prove who you are, and if you can’t the membership card will be confiscated" Clearly that is unenforceable as you could simply refuse to tell them, or tell them that you used a paper ticket which you threw away, so I suspect the only place it would work is as you go in when they could ask you to prove who you are before entry and not let you in if you couldn't

Regardless of how practical it is if you sign up for a pass you would sign up to allow them to do that so any previous "rules" regarding stewards would be superseded by your new agreement

https://www.hullcitytigers.com/news/articles/2018/201718-concessionary-pricing-vote-update/
 
Fez said:
Why so indignant: it's a conversational turn-of -phrase, not a personal instruction, ffs.

Where the hell did I mention anything about my opinion being any sort of a bench mark for 'reasonable'? Society in general will end up leveling what is reasonable behaviour by how it responds.

I think I have made it clear that detail is important (common ticket transfer policy), but only in-so-much as preventing an egg on the chin moment later. The style of publicising the draconian policing policy is laughable and is open to being held in contempt and publicly laughed at - even better, force them to carry it out and see where that leads. How the hell you and Balkan seem to have come to the strange conclusion that I advocate looking the other way is beyond me.
Click to expand...
looking what other way?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back