|
Post by dorothy on Sept 12, 2008 19:26:52 GMT
Me, most Sundays reporting some gobby, beer smelling pillock for dissent.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2008 19:30:56 GMT
Exactly!!! I think Sunday morning football should be banned, you've got to give the wannabeneverbes a chance to sleep off Saturday nights payload!!
|
|
|
Post by jupu on Sept 12, 2008 20:02:18 GMT
A word of caution to those of you who seem to have knowledge of the SDA 1975. I understand the SDA includes a small number of exceptions that allow facilities or services to be provided on a single-sex basis. Different treatment of women and men is permissible where there is a legitimate aim and the different treatment is a proportionate means of achieving that aim. See www.equalities.gov.uk/publications/080408_Fact%20sheet_GD_final.docIt would also appear that the content of media and advertisements is excluded from the legislation. I think it could reasonably be claimed that there is a legitimate aim here, i.e. fewer women than men watch matches at SGL and the club is trying to encourage more women to attend; and the treatment is a proportionate means of achieving that aim, i.e. it’s free admission for one match only. And as for the club’s policy on equalities, if women were let in free every match, then yes, WCFC would be acting against its own aims and objectives. But you could equally argue that Worcester City Football Club is taking positive action where inequalities exist - which the policy states the club will try to do. It’s easy to knock this event and I too think the take-up will be minimal. I’m all in favour of attracting new supporters, but I’d rather to see more done to encourage children to attend. And for that matter more to show that the club is thinking about its existing fans. I notice that one of the stall holders is selling chocolates. When the first Fans’ Forum was held this time last year it was queried why chocolates, crisps, sweets etc. couldn’t be sold in a more visible place. Paul Curtis said this was something that could be addressed but as far as I’m aware nothing ever happened. This was potentially an easy gain and a lost opportunity.
|
|
BDS
Squad Member
Posts: 201
|
Post by BDS on Sept 12, 2008 20:02:50 GMT
I have my voucher at the ready. Might even go in drag, or is that taking the piss? Not in those ladies toilets you wont be..
|
|
|
Post by birdfeeder on Sept 12, 2008 22:35:15 GMT
A word of caution to those of you who seem to have knowledge of the SDA 1975. I understand the SDA includes a small number of exceptions that allow facilities or services to be provided on a single-sex basis. Different treatment of women and men is permissible where there is a legitimate aim and the different treatment is a proportionate means of achieving that aim. See www.equalities.gov.uk/publications/080408_Fact%20sheet_GD_final.docIt would also appear that the content of media and advertisements is excluded from the legislation. I think it could reasonably be claimed that there is a legitimate aim here, i.e. fewer women than men watch matches at SGL and the club is trying to encourage more women to attend; and the treatment is a proportionate means of achieving that aim, i.e. it’s free admission for one match only. And as for the club’s policy on equalities, if women were let in free every match, then yes, WCFC would be acting against its own aims and objectives. But you could equally argue that Worcester City Football Club is taking positive action where inequalities exist - which the policy states the club will try to do. It’s easy to knock this event and I too think the take-up will be minimal. I’m all in favour of attracting new supporters, but I’d rather to see more done to encourage children to attend. And for that matter more to show that the club is thinking about its existing fans. I notice that one of the stall holders is selling chocolates. When the first Fans’ Forum was held this time last year it was queried why chocolates, crisps, sweets etc. couldn’t be sold in a more visible place. Paul Curtis said this was something that could be addressed but as far as I’m aware nothing ever happened. This was potentially an easy gain and a lost opportunity. It is one of the aims of the trust to involve more children down the lane including a match day experience, maybe filling stand D with them, that is one of the reasons Sue Bentley as been co-oped on to the board to go out into the community to spread the word and get more young people interested in sport, on the chocolate front there is a story to tell and I might confide in you next time we meet down the Lane, that's if we get a extra square on the team page of the program.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2008 9:00:52 GMT
A word of caution to those of you who seem to have knowledge of the SDA 1975. I understand the SDA includes a small number of exceptions that allow facilities or services to be provided on a single-sex basis. Different treatment of women and men is permissible where there is a legitimate aim and the different treatment is a proportionate means of achieving that aim. See www.equalities.gov.uk/publications/080408_Fact%20sheet_GD_final.docIt would also appear that the content of media and advertisements is excluded from the legislation. I think it could reasonably be claimed that there is a legitimate aim here, i.e. fewer women than men watch matches at SGL and the club is trying to encourage more women to attend; and the treatment is a proportionate means of achieving that aim, i.e. it’s free admission for one match only. And as for the club’s policy on equalities, if women were let in free every match, then yes, WCFC would be acting against its own aims and objectives. But you could equally argue that Worcester City Football Club is taking positive action where inequalities exist - which the policy states the club will try to do. It’s easy to knock this event and I too think the take-up will be minimal. I’m all in favour of attracting new supporters, but I’d rather to see more done to encourage children to attend. And for that matter more to show that the club is thinking about its existing fans. I notice that one of the stall holders is selling chocolates. When the first Fans’ Forum was held this time last year it was queried why chocolates, crisps, sweets etc. couldn’t be sold in a more visible place. Paul Curtis said this was something that could be addressed but as far as I’m aware nothing ever happened. This was potentially an easy gain and a lost opportunity. Julian makes a good point, although a legal discussion taken thinks its a goer, paying to watch a sport is not provided on a single-sex basis, particularly as the sprot in question is not a dingle sex sport in itself. However, even if this was the case, a contra argument could run "Why are males being charged £11 to attend the same exhibition of goods in the Skittle Alley, whilst females are provided access for free?" And in this case the exhibitors are servicing one particular gender - females!! On the subject of chocolate, my understanding is that it cannot be addressed whilst one particualr director has an arrangement in place, even though this is ridiculous, it is at least a little more plausible than the reason I was given by the chairman once "The chocolate might melt in the refreshment kiosks!!!" I also agree that it is Children and FAMILIES that should be attracted to the ground with offers, and that is the way to attract more women to the ground. D Stand is FAMILY STAND - it is so bleeding obvious, and I've only been going on about it for the last 10 years!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2008 9:15:50 GMT
".... a dingle sex sport.." Now that might attract bigger crowds!
|
|
|
Post by tim on Sept 13, 2008 10:32:28 GMT
You know what? I'm not sure I can be arsed to go down today after all. I will walk past the ground and keep walking.
|
|
|
Post by birdfeeder on Sept 13, 2008 10:45:39 GMT
A word of caution to those of you who seem to have knowledge of the SDA 1975. I understand the SDA includes a small number of exceptions that allow facilities or services to be provided on a single-sex basis. Different treatment of women and men is permissible where there is a legitimate aim and the different treatment is a proportionate means of achieving that aim. See www.equalities.gov.uk/publications/080408_Fact%20sheet_GD_final.docIt would also appear that the content of media and advertisements is excluded from the legislation. I think it could reasonably be claimed that there is a legitimate aim here, i.e. fewer women than men watch matches at SGL and the club is trying to encourage more women to attend; and the treatment is a proportionate means of achieving that aim, i.e. it’s free admission for one match only. And as for the club’s policy on equalities, if women were let in free every match, then yes, WCFC would be acting against its own aims and objectives. But you could equally argue that Worcester City Football Club is taking positive action where inequalities exist - which the policy states the club will try to do. It’s easy to knock this event and I too think the take-up will be minimal. I’m all in favour of attracting new supporters, but I’d rather to see more done to encourage children to attend. And for that matter more to show that the club is thinking about its existing fans. I notice that one of the stall holders is selling chocolates. When the first Fans’ Forum was held this time last year it was queried why chocolates, crisps, sweets etc. couldn’t be sold in a more visible place. Paul Curtis said this was something that could be addressed but as far as I’m aware nothing ever happened. This was potentially an easy gain and a lost opportunity. Julian makes a good point, although a legal discussion taken thinks its a goer, paying to watch a sport is not provided on a single-sex basis, particularly as the sprot in question is not a dingle sex sport in itself. However, even if this was the case, a contra argument could run "Why are males being charged £11 to attend the same exhibition of goods in the Skittle Alley, whilst females are provided access for free?" And in this case the exhibitors are servicing one particular gender - females!! On the subject of chocolate, my understanding is that it cannot be addressed whilst one particualr director has an arrangement in place, even though this is ridiculous, it is at least a little more plausible than the reason I was given by the chairman once "The chocolate might melt in the refreshment kiosks!!!" I also agree that it is Children and FAMILIES that should be attracted to the ground with offers, and that is the way to attract more women to the ground. D Stand is FAMILY STAND - it is so bleeding obvious, and I've only been going on about it for the last 10 years!!! Spoil sport I wanted to tell him about the chocolate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2008 11:12:50 GMT
"...one particualr director has an arrangement in place.."
Who and what arrangement? Or are we, mere shareholders, not privy to the board's "arrangements"? In fact what are the catering contracts at SGL? And who are the directors of the company that runs the tea bars etc?
|
|
|
Post by birdfeeder on Sept 13, 2008 11:30:26 GMT
"...one particualr director has an arrangement in place.." Who and what arrangement? Or are we, mere shareholders, not privy to the board's "arrangements"? In fact what are the catering contracts at SGL? And who are the directors of the company that runs the tea bars etc? You seem to be a bit of a trouble maker asking all those questions
|
|
BDS
Squad Member
Posts: 201
|
Post by BDS on Sept 14, 2008 0:45:09 GMT
who are the directors of the company? That is a very good question m'boy
|
|
|
Post by almasno9 on Sept 14, 2008 14:03:31 GMT
as someone who was unable to attend the game yesterday is there any feedback on the success or otherwise of ladies day and the success or otherwise of a procession of beer bellied behemoths in drag and high pitched voices gaining access to St Georges Lane free of charge?
|
|
wh
Youth Teamer
Posts: 44
|
Post by wh on Sept 14, 2008 14:17:29 GMT
35 vouchers were handed over at the gate one of which came from a dodgy looking girl called Davina. The overall attendance was 703
|
|
BDS
Squad Member
Posts: 201
|
Post by BDS on Sept 14, 2008 14:21:51 GMT
Its an interesting one.
Under old Football League rules the gate receipts were shared. Complementaries were valued and if they exceeded a certain allowance, a value had to be included in the pooled funds for sharing with the visiting club even though the hosts received no cash.
I think The Club keep all the gate receipts (presumably in the bank to be safe!) but perhaps they have to pay a league levy? Does anyone know how it works?
Anyway if the Ladies Day had been a complete sell out then surely it would have been mentioned on BBC H&W last evening? I wonder how many new customers this fantastic initiative "dragged" in who had never been to the club before or were not friends, relatives and business associates of existing officials or exhibitors? I imagine the Board will have the detailed marketing analysis to back up any claimed success and enable accurate targeting for future fund-raising events. It could become a winner earning impoverished clubs like Manyoo and Chelsea enough money to compete with the big boy ((it used to be plural but not any more until DIC or KIC (poor choice of initials) get the little shaver and the redneck out of Anfield.))
|
|
|
Post by birdfeeder on Sept 14, 2008 16:23:20 GMT
35 vouchers were handed over at the gate one of which came from a dodgy looking girl called Davina. The overall attendance was 703 Thats what they said, my money would have gone on over 800.
|
|
|
Post by Croc on Sept 14, 2008 16:28:58 GMT
couldn't SHAG get in contact with DIC to seek advice?
|
|
BDS
Squad Member
Posts: 201
|
Post by BDS on Sept 14, 2008 16:49:41 GMT
35 vouchers were handed over at the gate one of which came from a dodgy looking girl called Davina. The overall attendance was 703 Thats what they said, my money would have gone on over 800. You are not suggesting that the official attendance was deliberately underdeclared are you? That would be serious wouldn't it? Remember what happened in the Nobby Clarke era?
|
|
|
Post by tim on Sept 14, 2008 17:48:19 GMT
Remember when the gate was just over 1000 every week? 1001 one game, 1004 the next, 1005 the next...... when even Stevie Wonder could have told you there was 1300 in the ground. They've been doing this for years...
|
|
|
Post by dave on Sept 15, 2008 7:44:33 GMT
I am pleased to report that on Saturday I was not discriminated against on the grounds of my gender, and the Supporters Trust received an £11 donation as a result.
|
|
kward
Youth Teamer
Posts: 3
|
Post by kward on Sept 15, 2008 8:01:14 GMT
Hello, Kevin Ward here the editor of the Worcester News. Further to suv's message can I point out (and it would have been nice if he had!) that I did return his call on Friday, once my meetings were over and once his phone stopped going to answer machine. I've also responded to other queries we have had on this subject - as I always do.
|
|
|
Post by dave on Sept 15, 2008 8:09:36 GMT
At last conclusive proof that the Worcester News does read what is posted on this forum, glad to hear it Kevin.
So when will the Worcester News start pushing for answers on the lack of a planning application for the new stadium, the late accounts, the postponed AGM, the non-existant website the failure to properly appoint Simon Williams and Celia Adams as Directors of the Club, the gap between the revenue from the sale of SGL and the funding required for a new stadium at Nunnery Way etc, etc, etc?
Don't tell me...
"Dave Boddy declined to comment"
Well that is ok then, we can all sleep easy at night, as long as you asked the question and Dave Boddy chose not to answer, everything will be all right.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2008 8:13:49 GMT
Excellent work Davina - what did you think of the exhibition in the anti-Social club?? Make sure your experience is documented on here - i.e. what you did, what the response from the stewards was etc. Then we've set an important precedence. It might well be worth while letting the Worcester News know that at least the football club recognised potential issue here! Next time an unfair promotion is staged EVERYONE will be able to benefit!! I wonder, out of the other 34 vouchers handed in, how many of them were existing females who go down the Lane week in, week out. It is such an outmoded misconception that ladies don't watch football, sure they are the minority (in a choice of two possible genders, one will be a minority be definition, it doesn't mean a great deal) but what was really unbelievable with this promotion was the way it was promoted on the (now defunct) website "Gents, treat your ladies to a day at the football!" or words to that effect. Well actually, it may surprise those in office at SGL, but ladies are well capable of making their own minds up as to whether they want to go to a non-league football ground or not! Looking at the crowd figure for Saturday, it looks like the club needs more fans of both genders going through the gates, such a pity that the Board is making every effort possible to alienate those supporters who raised their hands when IDIFF asked "who's been supporting this club for 30 years?"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2008 8:15:24 GMT
Hello, Kevin Ward here the editor of the Worcester News. Further to suv's message can I point out (and it would have been nice if he had!) that I did return his call on Friday, once my meetings were over and once his phone stopped going to answer machine. I've also responded to other queries we have had on this subject - as I always do. Totally agree - Kevin Ward responded directly to my complaint, we might not have agreed with each other, however his response was first class, and you can't ask for any more than that
|
|
|
Post by birdfeeder on Sept 15, 2008 8:23:42 GMT
I am pleased to report that on Saturday I was not discriminated against on the grounds of my gender, and the Supporters Trust received an £11 donation as a result. Just to confirm the £11 was received by the trust for which we that you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2008 8:32:05 GMT
It is interesting to note how much more representative of the gender split at football the Supporters Trust is, with Sue Bentley and Jane Clarke on the Board. They're not on there because they are ladies, they're there because they're bloody good supporters who work hard for the benefit of their fellow supporters. Rob Crean adds interplanetary interest too
|
|
|
Post by dave on Sept 15, 2008 8:40:16 GMT
Nothing to report really Brooksider.
I presented my voucher at the turnstiles and was admitted to the ground without further payment. I then walked round to find the Chairman of the Supporters Trust and gave my £11 to him as a donation to Trust funds.
There was no argument, no fuss, just the Club acknowledging that it was not able to discriminate against me.
As for the exhibition in the anti-social club, on a lovely sunny day I did not fancy being depressed, so I steered clear of the place.
|
|
|
Post by gobby cow on Sept 15, 2008 10:56:07 GMT
I only saw two ladies with bags from the ladies day display - one was the mayor (who would have been duty bound to buy something) and an away supporter.
The ladies loos looked like they had a fresh coat of whitewash but the doors were still mouldy!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2008 11:39:51 GMT
GC, did you use your voucher?
|
|
|
Post by gobby cow on Sept 15, 2008 13:19:21 GMT
Nope, I didnt have one.
|
|