You are not connected. Please login or register

Bolton Nuts » BWFC » Bolton Wanderers Banter » The PROTEST - verdict.

The PROTEST - verdict.

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Go down  Message [Page 2 of 2]

31 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Tue Jan 22 2019, 22:37

karlypants

karlypants
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Dirty protest Hipster?

32 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Tue Jan 22 2019, 23:00

wanderlust


Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:He's deleted his tweet. Reliability of his claims disputed by his own employer.
Who made the claim that a steward was attacked? Was it Anderson or one of his lackeys in order to discredit the character of concerned fans? Was it an employee of Anderson's who made the claim? Is there any evidence that it actually happened? Just asking.

33 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Tue Jan 22 2019, 23:21

King Bill

King Bill
David Lee
David Lee
Whoever took it upon themselves to ask the two stewards to go into that section to remove the banner wants sacking. 
It also seems that Parky had been briefed by Anderson today with his post match comments about the protest. The players weren't affected by the protest and to be fair put in another shift, albeit fruitless again. 
There's still a chance of staying up and hopefully more protests too.

34 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Wed Jan 23 2019, 08:43

Norpig

Norpig
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
I saw a video taken from the away end of knobhead corner on facebook last night and there was a lot going on by the looks. Lots of punches thrown and pushing and shoving between fans and stewards.

35 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Wed Jan 23 2019, 09:19

Hipster_Nebula

Hipster_Nebula
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Got to remove the banners.

Free speech is banned by the club.

36 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Wed Jan 23 2019, 09:49

Growler


Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:He's deleted his tweet. Reliability of his claims disputed by his own employer.
Deleting a tweet is a sure sign he regrets posting it. Telling a lie would be one explanation for that

37 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Wed Jan 23 2019, 10:41

Norpig

Norpig
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
I sit in the section next to knobhead corner and was watching when the tennis balls came on and i never saw any coins or any of the ground staff reacting as if they had been hit by one.

38 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Wed Jan 23 2019, 11:41

Kane57

Kane57
Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:He's deleted his tweet. Reliability of his claims disputed by his own employer.
Deleting a tweet is a sure sign he regrets posting it. Telling a lie would be one explanation for that

Was my first thought too

39 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Wed Jan 23 2019, 13:01

Growler


Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I sit in the section next to knobhead corner and was watching when the tennis balls came on and i never saw any coins or any of the ground staff reacting as if they had been hit by one.
Same here and it is maybe worth saying that it wasn't only that section of the ground protesting.There was loud singing in praise of John McGinlay from the North Stand/other end of the ESL.
From my seat in the ESU I could also see someone with an Anderson out banner in the WSL.

40 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Wed Jan 23 2019, 13:04

Kane57

Kane57
Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
Few in the north stand too

41 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Wed Jan 23 2019, 14:23

rammywhite

rammywhite
Frank Worthington
Frank Worthington
The stewards are not employed by BWFC- they're bought in from a security outfit. I wonder about the legality of removing banners altogether unless they are offensive in the sense of being racist,homophobic, sexist and the like. Who's to say that someone can't have a banner saying 'Anderson Out'
If it said 'Anderson In' would that have been acceptable .
Anderson wasn't there (as usual) to be offended. I think the stewards (on a miserly pay rate- I know because I know one of them from non football affairs) have been put in a lousy position by the club doing Andersons dirty work for him.
Is it something to do with being on private property or perhaps the police saying that it might give rise to a breach of the peace?
Anybody know the legalities of all of this?

42 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Wed Jan 23 2019, 14:37

Kane57

Kane57
Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
Sluffy will be along soon with a  few paragraphs

43 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Wed Jan 23 2019, 15:05

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:The stewards are not employed by BWFC- they're bought in from a security outfit. I wonder about the legality of removing banners altogether unless they are offensive in the sense of being racist,homophobic, sexist and the like. Who's to say that someone can't have a banner saying 'Anderson Out'
If it said 'Anderson In' would that have been acceptable .
Anderson wasn't there (as usual) to be offended. I think the stewards (on a miserly pay rate- I know because I know one of them from non football affairs) have been put in a lousy position by the club doing Andersons dirty work for him.
Is it something to do with being on private property or perhaps the police saying that it might give rise to a breach of the peace?
Anybody know the legalities of all of this?

Greater Manchester Police are investigating the incident in which a steward was assaulted. Two members of the public were spoken to at the match regarding the altercation and will be interviewed further.

It is claimed the event took place after stewards tried to prevent fans displaying their banners which protested chairman Ken Anderson's running of the club.
Bolton, however, dismissed these assertions in a statement: "The club would like to make it clear that at no time was there any attempt to seize the banner involved.

"The stewards were acting purely to a safety concern for the spectators in the upper tier.

"However, as the matter is being investigated by Greater Manchester Police it would be inappropriate for us to make any further comments at this time."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

44 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Wed Jan 23 2019, 20:47

King Bill

King Bill
David Lee
David Lee
The stewards were acting purely to a safety concern for the spectators in the upper tier.

So why didn't the stewards from the upper tier address the situation?

45 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Wed Jan 23 2019, 21:17

Kane57

Kane57
Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:The stewards were acting purely to a safety concern for the spectators in the upper tier.

So why didn't the stewards from the upper tier address the situation?

because, like the groundsman's tweet, it's fucking bullshit

46 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Wed Jan 23 2019, 23:37

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:The stewards were acting purely to a safety concern for the spectators in the upper tier.

So why didn't the stewards from the upper tier address the situation?

because, like the groundsman's tweet, it's fucking bullshit

For what it is worth, the following is a quote from MickyD at WandersWays who was at the match and saw the incident -

Oh, the stewards that were reacting to the child stood on the wall thinking his arms and the arms of further child reaching down from ESU were somehow 5 feet long each and could easily and safely pass the banner from ESL to ESU? It was the kid putting himself in danger and causing the stewards to react to that that caused it. OK, the reaction was over-zealous but I think they were doing their job.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

47 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Thu Jan 24 2019, 09:20

Dunkels King

Dunkels King
Nicolas Anelka
Nicolas Anelka
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Some protest organised last night.

According to the organisers there were about 4000 fans outside waiting to get in before the match.

Also some signs were erected in the ground and some balls were thrown on the pitch.

What was everyone's verdict? Do you think this will have the desired effect and Ken will simply walk out?

Regards.

HN.
From what I saw it just makes Bolton Fans look like idiots. I noticed that some of the Fans at the front were at the FGR v Bury game aswell. They just looked like a bunch of pissheads and 15 year olds to me. I hope Ken gets a buyer soon, but there is no way he is going to walk just because of that bunch of loons.

48 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Thu Jan 24 2019, 12:15

BoltonTillIDie

BoltonTillIDie
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
I thought the number of protesters who walked around the stadium was impressive, certainly much more than the 100 or so I thought might have taken part...

49 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Thu Jan 24 2019, 12:42

King Bill

King Bill
David Lee
David Lee
Anderson left the fans with no choice but to protest. For me the Doidge affair was the last straw. It was good see forums, bloggers, trust members, etc. coming together to show the strength of fan support. Anderson can't help but listen to it, whatever his reaction to it is. 
I dont think that will be the only protest and I think more fans will add their voice to it in the coming weeks.

50 Re: The PROTEST - verdict. on Thu Jan 24 2019, 20:07

Kane57

Kane57
Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
Nobody can force him out except himself. The whole thing was about bringing attention to what has become a toxic situation because of the way he does his business.

Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 2]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum