Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

M1 South
Posts: 641
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2021 6:21 pm

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by M1 South »

I never stand behind the goal so not really sure what all the fuss is about? From where I sit (home & away) they just seem to be a group of lads out to have a bit of a laugh together. I’ve never seen any bottles thrown (I assume plastic with no top on so not exactly a missile?)
And as I stated earlier a bit of ‘friendly abuse to the opposing goalie is all part & parcel of non league football, & why we love it!! Some Goalies can take it & respond with a bit of banter whilst some obviously can’t!!
Let’s all just get on with it for christs sake!!
User avatar
Sleightly Deceptive
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:53 pm

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by Sleightly Deceptive »

Ring of fire wrote: Wed Nov 30, 2022 10:58 pm The vocal yoof is most welcome and is the future!
However, without their own Adult supervision, behaviour had seemed to be deteriorating. Bottles started to be used as missiles at the opposition keeper, smoking / vaping amongst kids and annoying other spectators (who reported these), foul language used, entering pitch perimeter, as short cut to toilets (Drug Smell there). 1-2 older teenagers seemed to be stoking it up, with more unacceptable language and misdemeanours!
Dunno what's meant by 'DFCSA Elders' keeping them in check... As far as we know, DFCSA committee members are merely volunteers who mostly have match day duties and often miss some of the action already. In any case, they're untrained at crowd management!
Just wishing that the club's invitation to apply for the Youth Membership is swiftly successful, so that a more organised / supervised DFC Youth voice is heard in harmony. Hoping all means are also used to clearly communicate the reasoning behind this action!
The ‘DFC Elders’ bit I alluded to was a kinda prompt to the more, ahem, ‘Senior’ DFC supporter nearby - (not necessarily DFCSA - my bad,) to have a nice, smiley, friendly word in their shell-likes - along the lines of, “well done, very funny, now stop being a James Hunt!” It kinda nearly worked when that tit went onto the pitch and was booed and stopped from getting back to the terrace. The best form of admonishment for the ‘yoof’ is from their peers or a ‘respected’ wider group of ‘common ground’ elders. They’ll only rebel against any kind of authority. Just like ‘we’ did? And, tbh, they’re probably laughing (like most of us adults) at the ineffectiveness of any stewarding who are either a) untrained in dealing with conflict resolution or b) too f’kin scared to. But we absolutely MUST do what we can to keep em coming to DFC and not ‘sending’ them east or west to our rivals. Sadly, I think they’ve already made up their mind and told DFC to ‘do one.’ And, I kinda don’t blame em. Needed thinking through before a knee jerk reaction. Which is only what it appears to be. I reiterate what Tall Dart alluded to, maybe there’s more than meets the eye?
User avatar
ozymandias
Posts: 875
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:35 pm

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by ozymandias »

I'd personally would like to hear BAWArmy's view on this. :D
BAWArmy
Posts: 250
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2021 1:58 pm

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by BAWArmy »

ozymandias wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 10:01 am I'd personally would like to hear BAWArmy's view on this. :D
I think its ridiculous we are making it difficult for an entire age to attend, which will no doubt push them towards other local clubs all because of a few trouble makers that could be dealt with on an individual basis.
BRASSNECK
Posts: 714
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2021 10:52 am

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by BRASSNECK »

BAWArmy wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 10:48 am
ozymandias wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 10:01 am I'd personally would like to hear BAWArmy's view on this. :D
I think its ridiculous we are making it difficult for an entire age to attend, which will no doubt push them towards other local clubs all because of a few trouble makers that could be dealt with on an individual basis.
Not really.

UPTHEDARTS
Dart Mark
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2021 7:59 pm

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by Dart Mark »

Some of the worst behaviour and language behind the goal doesn't come from teenagers. Ridiculous from the club
BAWArmy
Posts: 250
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2021 1:58 pm

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by BAWArmy »

BRASSNECK wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:03 pm
BAWArmy wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 10:48 am
ozymandias wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 10:01 am I'd personally would like to hear BAWArmy's view on this. :D
I think its ridiculous we are making it difficult for an entire age to attend, which will no doubt push them towards other local clubs all because of a few trouble makers that could be dealt with on an individual basis.
Not really.

UPTHEDARTS

Did you see the atmosphere, or lack of at the Concord game?? Clearly not.
BRASSNECK
Posts: 714
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2021 10:52 am

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by BRASSNECK »

BAWArmy wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 5:32 pm
BRASSNECK wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:03 pm
BAWArmy wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 10:48 am

I think its ridiculous we are making it difficult for an entire age to attend, which will no doubt push them towards other local clubs all because of a few trouble makers that could be dealt with on an individual basis.
Not really.

UPTHEDARTS

Did you see the atmosphere, or lack of at the Concord game?? Clearly not.
As I was at the game unlike you I thought the atmosphere was fine no annoying banging drum.

UpTheDarts
User avatar
Sleightly Deceptive
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:53 pm

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by Sleightly Deceptive »

Why respond to the 🛎️ end? Just ignore IT. IT only mentioned the lack of atmosphere at the Concord game because one or two mentioned it in these pages. I’m very surprised IT is still allowed to comment in here. It’s time IT was kicked out! IT does not watch DFC. IT has made that clear. Nowt but a piece of trolling 💩 on the bottom of ya shoe! No constructive contribution to the forum whatsoever. Why not make it a rule to just ignore IT? And again when IT pops up with another identity. IT’s style of writing is sooo easy to identify. I know I’ve mentioned IT again here - but only in the hope that IT dies in this forum. #IT OUT! 😃
BRASSNECK
Posts: 714
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2021 10:52 am

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by BRASSNECK »

Sleightly Deceptive wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 8:18 pm Why respond to the 🛎️ end? Just ignore IT. IT only mentioned the lack of atmosphere at the Concord game because one or two mentioned it in these pages. I’m very surprised IT is still allowed to comment in here. It’s time IT was kicked out! IT does not watch DFC. IT has made that clear. Nowt but a piece of trolling 💩 on the bottom of ya shoe! No constructive contribution to the forum whatsoever. Why not make it a rule to just ignore IT? And again when IT pops up with another identity. IT’s style of writing is sooo easy to identify. I know I’ve mentioned IT again here - but only in the hope that IT dies in this forum. #IT OUT! 😃
I was bored.😂


UpTheDarts
User avatar
Sleightly Deceptive
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:53 pm

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by Sleightly Deceptive »

BRASSNECK wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 8:20 pm
Sleightly Deceptive wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 8:18 pm Why respond to the 🛎️ end? Just ignore IT. IT only mentioned the lack of atmosphere at the Concord game because one or two mentioned it in these pages. I’m very surprised IT is still allowed to comment in here. It’s time IT was kicked out! IT does not watch DFC. IT has made that clear. Nowt but a piece of trolling 💩 on the bottom of ya shoe! No constructive contribution to the forum whatsoever. Why not make it a rule to just ignore IT? And again when IT pops up with another identity. IT’s style of writing is sooo easy to identify. I know I’ve mentioned IT again here - but only in the hope that IT dies in this forum. #IT OUT! 😃
I was bored.😂


UpTheDarts
And me! Bra 💤 il 😆
User avatar
DA Mikey
Posts: 485
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2021 3:55 pm

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by DA Mikey »

BRASSNECK wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 6:52 pm
BAWArmy wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 5:32 pm
BRASSNECK wrote: Fri Dec 02, 2022 1:03 pm
Not really.

UPTHEDARTS

Did you see the atmosphere, or lack of at the Concord game?? Clearly not.
As I was at the game unlike you I thought the atmosphere was fine no annoying banging drum.

UpTheDarts
Did you see Hudson?
User avatar
The 5th Searcher
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2021 9:08 am

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by The 5th Searcher »

I’ve just seen a posting on Twitter from Tom Bonner asking for any fans aged 13-17yrs that have been affected by this new policy to attend a meeting at the club tonight at 7:30pm to discuss the situation.
The meeting will be with Tom Bonner, Dowse & some club officials as they would like to get the issue’s sorting and to get the younger fans back on the terraces.

Hopefully a few will attend and the situation can get sorted.

M1 South
Posts: 641
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2021 6:21 pm

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by M1 South »

Their numbers & enthusiasm were sorely missed Saturday that’s for sure!!
Never seen so few Darts fans (whatever their age, shape. or gender) at Chelmo away????
Mark Sweet
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:44 am

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by Mark Sweet »

User avatar
JCJ
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2021 1:08 pm

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by JCJ »

Strange it is after our next home game
rambo
Posts: 219
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2021 8:29 pm

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by rambo »

Mark Sweet wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 2:32 pm
Very good move by Tom and dowse , I hope the young fans respond to this and turn up with their 🥁
Mark Sweet
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:44 am

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by Mark Sweet »

JCJ wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 4:39 pm Strange it is after our next home game
Can only assume its due to Charlton being away and Arsenal not playing as that's where I've heard the youngsters go, so the club want to wait and see the true impact the restrictions are having when both of those clubs aren't at home.

I just hope it's not too late by then, but I agree this is a good move by Dowse and Tom along with whoever else is involved, I just feel this open conversation should've been done before enforcing such restrictions. Let's hope some of the youth actually turn up as we need them and the atmosphere they generate!
Ring of fire
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2022 4:09 pm

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by Ring of fire »

PRIVACY

TAKE NOTE

KentOnline
NEWS TRAVEL SPORT BUSINESS WHATS ON

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE
SPORT
Maidstone United chief executive disgusted by supporter behaviour against Dorking Wanderers which lands National League side with an FA fine
By: KentOnline reporter multimediadesk@thekmgroup.co.uk
Published: 05:00, 07 December 2022

A section of Maidstone United supporters who took part in 'vile chanting' has led to the club being fined by the Football Association.

The FA's regulatory commission ordered the club to pay £2,500 plus costs after fans 'participated in misogynistic abuse' with chants of 'who brought the dog out? Who's the slapper in grey? She's got chlamydia' which were aimed at a female visiting supporter.

Maidstone United have been hit with a £2,500 fine from the FA following supporter chanting
Maidstone United have been hit with a £2,500 fine from the FA following supporter chanting
Maidstone were playing Dorking Wanderers in a midweek National League game at the Gallagher Stadium on August 16, a match watched by close to 2,500 spectators. The chant was filmed and subsequently posted on Twitter.

According to documents released by the FA, Maidstone were charged with failing to ensure that its spectators, and all persons purporting to be its supporters or followers, conducted themselves in an orderly fashion and failed to ensure those persons did not use words or otherwise behave in an improper and/or offensive and/or abusive or insult in manner with either express or implied reference to gender.

The charge alleged that "a not insignificant group of Maidstone United's supporters participated in misogynistic abuse." The Stones accepted liability at the first opportunity and the club's chief executive Bill Williams wrote to the FA expressing his disgust at the actions of a few.

The FA had written to Maidstone and requested further information, such as details of the club's preparations for the match, including measures to present misconduct from spectators.

Mr Williams replied that he had been "shocked and appalled" after seeing the video clip posted on Twitter and was "disgusted by the language that was used."

In his letter to the FA, he said: "As a father and grandfather, it sickens me that this generation has such a flippant attitude towards right and wrong."


Talking about the day of the game, he said there was "generally good-natured rivalry" between the opposition fans, adding: "Some verbal warnings were given by SIA [Security Industry Authority] stewards to those who overstepped the mark when a goal went in or who tried to encroach on the segregation line."

He said further warnings were given when "that vile chanting began." As it involved 'several individuals', stewards spoke to the group as a whole.

Maidstone later took action, using CCTV and photographic evidence to identify those responsible and warning them about their future conduct. They would have to join the youth membership scheme. All under-16s should have an adult supervisor or be a youth season ticket holder to attend games.

Mr Williams added: "A tiny minority are spoiling it for the vast majority and we will do everything we can to root out that tiny minority and continue to be a place where everyone is welcome."

Mr Williams added that the chant on the evening was "disgusting and totally out of order." He added: "I take no comfort from the assertion that it's a national problem, it's a problem that happened at my stadium and I will continue to do all I can, with the support of my matchday team, to promote high standards of behaviour and respect, and will take appropriate action against anyone prepared to go against that."

Following the incident, several young supporters were visited by a Police Community Liaison Officer.

The FA commission stated that: "There was no direct evidence of the precise numbers involved, or of the duration of the chanting."

They said: "We accept Mr Williams' assertion that Maidstone United reacted speedily and appropriately by ensuring that stewards addressed the offenders in order to quell the chanting. We also accept Mr Williams' outrage to be genuine, and note the positive steps that have been taken by Maidstone United to try to identify those responsible, and to prevent repetition.

"We also believe that Maidstone United is not a club that would encourage or tolerate such behaviour, and that it has reacted properly and appropriately."

The FA did, however, say that: "Perhaps the most potentially significant document that we have not seen is any specific pre-match risk assessment carried out by Maidstone United's safety officer.

"Such an assessment is required by the Green Guide which states that a detailed risk assessment should be undertaken for each event before determining the final number, location and duties of all safety staff, including stewards."

In conclusion, the commission accepted that Maidstone United had no advance notice of the abusive language and took steps to stop the chanting, reacted promptly and responsibly and have taken steps to ensure it didn't happen again.

Read more

All Kent Sport Football Maidstone Sport Maidstone United Non League Sport Sport Football
More by this author

KentOnline Reporter
Post or View Comments
View on KentOnline

HELPFUL LINKS
Contact Us and KM offices
Send us your story
Terms and conditions

© KM Group - 2022
User avatar
Sleightly Deceptive
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2021 1:53 pm

Re: Change of admission policy for supporters 13 -17yrs old

Post by Sleightly Deceptive »

Ring of fire wrote: Wed Dec 07, 2022 12:09 pm PRIVACY

TAKE NOTE

KentOnline
NEWS TRAVEL SPORT BUSINESS WHATS ON

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE
SPORT
Maidstone United chief executive disgusted by supporter behaviour against Dorking Wanderers which lands National League side with an FA fine
By: KentOnline reporter multimediadesk@thekmgroup.co.uk
Published: 05:00, 07 December 2022

A section of Maidstone United supporters who took part in 'vile chanting' has led to the club being fined by the Football Association.

The FA's regulatory commission ordered the club to pay £2,500 plus costs after fans 'participated in misogynistic abuse' with chants of 'who brought the dog out? Who's the slapper in grey? She's got chlamydia' which were aimed at a female visiting supporter.

Maidstone United have been hit with a £2,500 fine from the FA following supporter chanting
Maidstone United have been hit with a £2,500 fine from the FA following supporter chanting
Maidstone were playing Dorking Wanderers in a midweek National League game at the Gallagher Stadium on August 16, a match watched by close to 2,500 spectators. The chant was filmed and subsequently posted on Twitter.

According to documents released by the FA, Maidstone were charged with failing to ensure that its spectators, and all persons purporting to be its supporters or followers, conducted themselves in an orderly fashion and failed to ensure those persons did not use words or otherwise behave in an improper and/or offensive and/or abusive or insult in manner with either express or implied reference to gender.

The charge alleged that "a not insignificant group of Maidstone United's supporters participated in misogynistic abuse." The Stones accepted liability at the first opportunity and the club's chief executive Bill Williams wrote to the FA expressing his disgust at the actions of a few.

The FA had written to Maidstone and requested further information, such as details of the club's preparations for the match, including measures to present misconduct from spectators.

Mr Williams replied that he had been "shocked and appalled" after seeing the video clip posted on Twitter and was "disgusted by the language that was used."

In his letter to the FA, he said: "As a father and grandfather, it sickens me that this generation has such a flippant attitude towards right and wrong."


Talking about the day of the game, he said there was "generally good-natured rivalry" between the opposition fans, adding: "Some verbal warnings were given by SIA [Security Industry Authority] stewards to those who overstepped the mark when a goal went in or who tried to encroach on the segregation line."

He said further warnings were given when "that vile chanting began." As it involved 'several individuals', stewards spoke to the group as a whole.

Maidstone later took action, using CCTV and photographic evidence to identify those responsible and warning them about their future conduct. They would have to join the youth membership scheme. All under-16s should have an adult supervisor or be a youth season ticket holder to attend games.

Mr Williams added: "A tiny minority are spoiling it for the vast majority and we will do everything we can to root out that tiny minority and continue to be a place where everyone is welcome."

Mr Williams added that the chant on the evening was "disgusting and totally out of order." He added: "I take no comfort from the assertion that it's a national problem, it's a problem that happened at my stadium and I will continue to do all I can, with the support of my matchday team, to promote high standards of behaviour and respect, and will take appropriate action against anyone prepared to go against that."

Following the incident, several young supporters were visited by a Police Community Liaison Officer.

The FA commission stated that: "There was no direct evidence of the precise numbers involved, or of the duration of the chanting."

They said: "We accept Mr Williams' assertion that Maidstone United reacted speedily and appropriately by ensuring that stewards addressed the offenders in order to quell the chanting. We also accept Mr Williams' outrage to be genuine, and note the positive steps that have been taken by Maidstone United to try to identify those responsible, and to prevent repetition.

"We also believe that Maidstone United is not a club that would encourage or tolerate such behaviour, and that it has reacted properly and appropriately."

The FA did, however, say that: "Perhaps the most potentially significant document that we have not seen is any specific pre-match risk assessment carried out by Maidstone United's safety officer.

"Such an assessment is required by the Green Guide which states that a detailed risk assessment should be undertaken for each event before determining the final number, location and duties of all safety staff, including stewards."

In conclusion, the commission accepted that Maidstone United had no advance notice of the abusive language and took steps to stop the chanting, reacted promptly and responsibly and have taken steps to ensure it didn't happen again.

Read more

All Kent Sport Football Maidstone Sport Maidstone United Non League Sport Sport Football
More by this author

KentOnline Reporter
Post or View Comments
View on KentOnline

HELPFUL LINKS
Contact Us and KM offices
Send us your story
Terms and conditions

© KM Group - 2022
Jeez! It’s getting very close to outlawing shouting that the referee is a blind, mincing, attention seeking handbag!
Post Reply