|
Post by oxvox on Sept 4, 2017 15:08:33 GMT
Hi all
We have an OxVox committee this Friday evening. it's a pretty busy agenda, but if you do have any ideas/issues/questions, that you'd like us to include, then please drop us a line or pop them onto this thread!
Cheers
Jem
|
|
|
Post by headingtonutd on Sept 4, 2017 19:19:05 GMT
Hi Jem
I'm sure it's there already but with the dust settling after the transfer window and change of management i'm sure most of us would like to know more about the plans to move the stadium situation forward. Are OxVox intending to try and move things forward or is it not more of a case of helping where they can? It seems like the relationship with DE is stronger now and he seems to be wanting to build bridges with FK. Are OxVox able to help and is there a plan?
Cheers
|
|
|
Post by foley on Sept 4, 2017 19:43:19 GMT
Hi Jem I'm sure it's there already but with the dust settling after the transfer window and change of management i'm sure most of us would like to know more about the plans to move the stadium situation forward. Are OxVox intending to try and move things forward or is it not more of a case of helping where they can? It seems like the relationship with DE is stronger now and he seems to be wanting to build bridges with FK. Are OxVox able to help and is there a plan? Cheers I agree that this is the key question. I know that DE suggested that he was not against looking elsewhere from the Kassam. After the years of trying to get some deal re the Stadium, if FK refuses to play ball then maybe this work needs to begin. IF FK will play ball then hopefully progress will start.
|
|
|
Post by manorlounger on Sept 4, 2017 20:56:59 GMT
This has been raised once before, I believe, but I would appreciate if the position on allocated seating where there is no choice of seat position at the time of purchase could be discussed. This has been highlighted again at MK Dons and the problems that have arisen with those who wish to sit versus those who wish to stand. And, perhaps linked to that same game, the issue of smoke bombs etc. I believe it requires supporters to be made fully aware of the consequences for OUFC should the use of smoke bombs etc continue. I am convinced that certain supporter groups are very aware of who set off such a device on Saturday.
|
|
|
Post by Junior on Sept 4, 2017 21:20:55 GMT
I take it you're referring to the Ultras?
If so, are you calling them liars? As they've come out and said they weren't aware who let it off and the group are against the use of them.
|
|
|
Post by manorlounger on Sept 4, 2017 21:47:25 GMT
I take it you're referring to the Ultras? If so, are you calling them liars? As they've come out and said they weren't aware who let it off and the group are against the use of them. I purposely did not refer to the Ultras. So, I am not calling them liars. I am saying that a group of supporters are very well aware of who set off the smoke bomb at the MK Dons game. Being stood not very many rows back from where the smoke came from it was clear that the grouping of singers was the source. I have no idea if they are the Ultras or not. Nor do I care. I do care that some irresponsible individual has brought the club I support into disrepute and possible sanctions. If the Ultras are such fervent supporters of the club then surely it would be in their best interests to assist in identifying whoever brings these devices into grounds so that those individuals can be dealt with.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 5, 2017 5:49:46 GMT
I take it you're referring to the Ultras? If so, are you calling them liars? As they've come out and said they weren't aware who let it off and the group are against the use of them. Against the use of them ? Might wanna check out their twitter photos 😉 totally possible it was nothing to do with them , and they have in the past called for them to stop but I wouldnt say they are against them.
|
|
|
Post by rickyotto on Sept 5, 2017 5:54:11 GMT
I take it you're referring to the Ultras? If so, are you calling them liars? As they've come out and said they weren't aware who let it off and the group are against the use of them. I purposely did not refer to the Ultras. So, I am not calling them liars. I am saying that a group of supporters are very well aware of who set off the smoke bomb at the MK Dons game. Being stood not very many rows back from where the smoke came from it was clear that the grouping of singers was the source. I have no idea if they are the Ultras or not. Nor do I care. I do care that some irresponsible individual has brought the club I support into disrepute and possible sanctions. If the Ultras are such fervent supporters of the club then surely it would be in their best interests to assist in identifying whoever brings these devices into grounds so that those individuals can be dealt with. [ Hang on a minute. Don't in one voice claim you're not accusing the Ultras and then in the next sentence Insinuate that they have an obligation to shop in the cultprits as if they have knowledge. Utterly unfair unless you have clear knowledge and evidence that they are connected. Otherwise you're tarnishing their good character when their only crime was to be in proximity. Which appears to be a crime youd be guilty of too and you've not yet shopped the culprits in? Not a surprise to see our resident police officer agrees with this guilty by proximity method of law enforcement having liked your post. So very TVP
|
|
|
Post by arthurturner on Sept 5, 2017 6:14:27 GMT
I take it you're referring to the Ultras? If so, are you calling them liars? As they've come out and said they weren't aware who let it off and the group are against the use of them. Well if not the Ultras, who then? Someone must know.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Burrett on Sept 5, 2017 7:25:17 GMT
Seems to me it's the definition of 'Ultras' that is causing confusion.
A certain group of (I believe younger) fans formed a group called the Ultras to add organised colour and noise to proceedings. Nothing wrong with that.
Whether it was an (official) Ultra who recently threw a smoke bomb is a moot point, as is whether the Ultras are truly opposed to pyrotechnics. The problem is numbers of Ultras vary match to match as do individuals within the group, so I'm told. Nothing to stop a rogue individual attaching themselves to the group at a particular match, letting off a smoke bomb then disappearing, leaving the REAL Ultras with a tarnished reputation.
The Ultras have been under pressure for some time: overly officious stewards, restrictions on flags, criticism from this forum and lukewarm support from the club. Some previous stalwarts can no longer be bothered getting involved.
I suggest we give them a break. Their intentions are definitely to help OUFC. Let's leave finding irresponsible smoke bombers to Mr Mixter and not imply guilt by association.
|
|
|
Post by foley on Sept 5, 2017 9:16:43 GMT
Seems to me it's the definition of 'Ultras' that is causing confusion. A certain group of (I believe younger) fans formed a group called the Ultras to add organised colour and noise to proceedings. Nothing wrong with that. Whether it was an (official) Ultra who recently threw a smoke bomb is a moot point, as is whether the Ultras are truly opposed to pyrotechnics. The problem is numbers of Ultras vary match to match as do individuals within the group, so I'm told. Nothing to stop a rogue individual attaching themselves to the group at a particular match, letting off a smoke bomb then disappearing, leaving the REAL Ultras with a tarnished reputation. The Ultras have been under pressure for some time: overly officious stewards, restrictions on flags, criticism from this forum and lukewarm support from the club. Some previous stalwarts can no longer be bothered getting involved. I suggest we give them a break. Their intentions are definitely to help OUFC. Let's leave finding irresponsible smoke bombers to Mr Mixter and not imply guilt by association. All of that is wrong in my view. The ground makes it hard enough to create an atmosphere without putting off those who do try and live things up. I am surprised a little that the club are 'lukewarm in their support.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Baldi on Sept 5, 2017 12:16:18 GMT
Seems to me it's the definition of 'Ultras' that is causing confusion. A certain group of (I believe younger) fans formed a group called the Ultras to add organised colour and noise to proceedings. Nothing wrong with that. Whether it was an (official) Ultra who recently threw a smoke bomb is a moot point, as is whether the Ultras are truly opposed to pyrotechnics. The problem is numbers of Ultras vary match to match as do individuals within the group, so I'm told. Nothing to stop a rogue individual attaching themselves to the group at a particular match, letting off a smoke bomb then disappearing, leaving the REAL Ultras with a tarnished reputation. The Ultras have been under pressure for some time: overly officious stewards, restrictions on flags, criticism from this forum and lukewarm support from the club. Some previous stalwarts can no longer be bothered getting involved. I suggest we give them a break. Their intentions are definitely to help OUFC. Let's leave finding irresponsible smoke bombers to Mr Mixter and not imply guilt by association. I do feel sorry for the core of the Ultras, but equally it's a mess of all our making as fans. Perhaps they, as a group, need to redefine what they are to help clarify what their message is and what they will or won't do at games. It would help damp down some of the criticism and remove some of the tensions that are there. Something so loose that anyone can join can also be abused by hangers on and a larger group is often guilty by association as a consequence. I don't think giving anyone a break works, because it will only incentivise the idiots to keep on doing what they are doing. I found it a shame that the forum was Ian Mixter was so poorly attended when the club get criticism (right and wrong) about how they treat fans, and the opportunity to clear the decks was missed.
|
|
|
Post by rickyotto on Sept 5, 2017 12:27:53 GMT
Why should they have to define themselves? How can they ever be held accountable for the behavior of the entire fan base? Thats no different to you or I bring hekd accountable for fans stood near us. You're asking them to do something unachievable to mitigate against people unfairly accusing them of doing stuff they haven't done.
They very specifically came our last year and stated they would no longer use pyro and that they would communicate that message to others near them but there is little else they can do. Seems fair enough to me unless they've assumed legal or parental responsibility for all fans within a twenty meter radius of their flags.
As stated above the crap they've received from fellow fans and from the club has edged many into early retirement. They're a fantastic resource for the club and great marketing tool. They'll make mistakes from time to time as they're young. Not everyone will like what they do. So be it.
The alternative is adead stadium with Peter Rhoades Brown serving up hos cringeworthy b*llshit pre match and music after goals
|
|
|
Post by rickyotto on Sept 5, 2017 12:30:00 GMT
I take it you're referring to the Ultras? If so, are you calling them liars? As they've come out and said they weren't aware who let it off and the group are against the use of them. Against the use of them ? Might wanna check out their twitter photos 😉 totally possible it was nothing to do with them , and they have in the past called for them to stop but I wouldnt say they are against them. Currently against their use in the UK in order to protect the club. Not against wanting to use them. There's a marked difference. Two of those photos are clearly at a location where it is legalized and the third looks a little league two and perhaps pre their statement?
|
|
|
Post by Gary Baldi on Sept 5, 2017 12:58:21 GMT
Why should they have to define themselves? How can they ever be held accountable for the behavior of the entire fan base? Thats no different to you or I bring hekd accountable for fans stood near us. You're asking them to do something unachievable to mitigate against people unfairly accusing them of doing stuff they haven't done. They very specifically came our last year and stated they would no longer use pyro and that they would communicate that message to others near them but there is little else they can do. Seems fair enough to me unless they've assumed legal or parental responsibility for all fans within a twenty meter radius of their flags. As stated above the crap they've received from fellow fans and from the club has edged many into early retirement. They're a fantastic resource for the club and great marketing tool. They'll make mistakes from time to time as they're young. Not everyone will like what they do. So be it. The alternative is adead stadium with Peter Rhoades Brown serving up hos cringeworthy b*llshit pre match and music after goals Because there are people that will take the p*ss and ruin what they are trying to do, based on their own personal perception. Perhaps something as simple as a reminder at the beginning of each season to say this is what we are about and this what we want to achieve for this season. Or work with the club to have something on the web site/social media about the movement so it comes across as something more than an informal bunch of lads. There are such simple ways to clear up the misconceptions, but they aren't being done. People forget Ricky, so unless there is a nudge and a reminder of these are our core values, liberties with their name and ethos will be taken. And for that I feel sorry for the Ultras. Maybe it just grew too big, too quickly and got out of control. Not for me to say.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 5, 2017 13:07:51 GMT
Against the use of them ? Might wanna check out their twitter photos 😉 totally possible it was nothing to do with them , and they have in the past called for them to stop but I wouldnt say they are against them. Currently against their use in the UK in order to protect the club. Not against wanting to use them. There's a marked difference. Two of those photos are clearly at a location where it is legalized and the third looks a little league two and perhaps pre their statement? That's not what I was getting at, junior said they were against them, they are clearly not and have said what they feel they add and that they are not dangerous. However Like I've said , they also put the message out when asked last season for those out side of the group using them to stop. As u say I think a lot of things get grouped under the banner of ultra when it's not them. I'm not saying I agree with everything they say and do, but not all people getting into arguments over sitting nor everyone letting off smoke are ultras as has been implied on here at times.
|
|
|
Post by rickyotto on Sept 5, 2017 13:12:53 GMT
I understand your angle Gary. I just figure they're damned if they do and damned if they don't in some people's eyes. Lookhow wuivkly people jump on them regardless of evidence. Any statement will be treated as guilt by association and ripped to bits anyway. Take your point though
|
|
|
Post by manorlounger on Sept 5, 2017 13:23:46 GMT
This whole Ultras thing has gone way over board. I am not and never have been against them. I have in the past, and possibly will in the future, support them financially.
The point I was initially making was that when grounds insist on allocated seating it will cause disruption for some if they do not have the opportunity to choose where they sit at the time of purchase. Coupled with the fact that there are very few grounds with standing areas it stands to reason that any group that comes together and stands will cause inconvenience to others less able to stand. This is the case at MK Dons. That a number of people then ignored the stewards and chose to sit where they felt happy is not to say that everyone had that option. We were actually very pleased with the view from our seats, until everyone in front of us stood up. By that time it was no longer possible to move without moving to an area much further away. (and risking the wrath of the stewards)
Because of where we sat/stood we had a view which included the area occupied by the singers and it was from here that the smoke bomb emerged. So, take that anyway you damn well please.
|
|
|
Post by scotters on Sept 5, 2017 13:33:36 GMT
Seems daft that the problem of where people sit has come up twice now in the least crowded place we ever visit.
|
|
|
Post by manorlounger on Sept 5, 2017 15:06:57 GMT
Seems daft that the problem of where people sit has come up twice now in the least crowded place we ever visit. For exactly the same reason. Lose the allocated seating and no more problem - simples.
|
|
|
Post by plonker on Sept 5, 2017 16:15:51 GMT
Seems daft that the problem of where people sit has come up twice now in the least crowded place we ever visit. For exactly the same reason. Lose the allocated seating and no more problem - simples. I assume one of the main reasons for assigning seats is so that groups who book their tickets together are seated next to each other. If you didn't have allocated seating and a group of 6 people turned up and there were only 3 seats left in one row, 2 in another and a lone seat elsewhere, that group would be entirely split. Hypothetical, of course, but while you might be solving one problem, you could be creating another. The easiest solution would be to be able to select your seat(s) on an interactive map for each game. You know where certain people are likely to want to sit (or stand) - choose your seat(s) accordingly.
|
|
|
Post by manorlounger on Sept 5, 2017 16:34:59 GMT
For exactly the same reason. Lose the allocated seating and no more problem - simples. I assume one of the main reasons for assigning seats is so that groups who book their tickets together are seated next to each other. If you didn't have allocated seating and a group of 6 people turned up and there were only 3 seats left in one row, 2 in another and a lone seat elsewhere, that group would be entirely split. Hypothetical, of course, but while you might be solving one problem, you could be creating another. The easiest solution would be to be able to select your seat(s) on an interactive map for each game. You know where certain people are likely to want to sit (or stand) - choose your seat(s) accordingly. And that should be the case if there is any argument in favour of allocated seating. MK Dons are just being bloody minded and making an issue for their stewards to cock up. As they did this season and last. Just allow people to sit/stand where they wish and all are reasonably happy.
|
|
|
Post by pc956 on Sept 5, 2017 17:30:19 GMT
I purposely did not refer to the Ultras. So, I am not calling them liars. I am saying that a group of supporters are very well aware of who set off the smoke bomb at the MK Dons game. Being stood not very many rows back from where the smoke came from it was clear that the grouping of singers was the source. I have no idea if they are the Ultras or not. Nor do I care. I do care that some irresponsible individual has brought the club I support into disrepute and possible sanctions. If the Ultras are such fervent supporters of the club then surely it would be in their best interests to assist in identifying whoever brings these devices into grounds so that those individuals can be dealt with. [ Hang on a minute. Don't in one voice claim you're not accusing the Ultras and then in the next sentence Insinuate that they have an obligation to shop in the cultprits as if they have knowledge. Utterly unfair unless you have clear knowledge and evidence that they are connected. Otherwise you're tarnishing their good character when their only crime was to be in proximity. Which appears to be a crime youd be guilty of too and you've not yet shopped the culprits in? Not a surprise to see our resident police officer agrees with this guilty by proximity method of law enforcement having liked your post. So very TVP [ Uh no. I liked the fact that someone identified that people were in the area that it was set off and could easily identify the persons responsible. Investigation is ongoing. I now have a responsibility to inform forces/clubs that Oxford visit that some Oxford fans like to take/use flares/pyros into away grounds. Fans may have more stringent searches and it may take longer to enter grounds. Is that what people want? Probably not. Until legislation changes they're illegal. Please don't use them. It's been mentioned before. The EFL could fine clubs/deduct points for persistent usages of smoke/Pyros.
|
|
|
Post by upthecowboys on Sept 5, 2017 17:48:32 GMT
Jem - It would be good to hear an update on the ground situation. Pre the possible takeover it seemed that progress was being made with different options (i.e. community bid for the stadium, more favourable lease etc) and then understandably a back seat was taken when the bid came about. Now it appears that there are no bids on the table are Oxvox still looking at being involved in coordinating a community bid / or negotiating a more favourable lease? As ever, thanks to those Oxvox folk who give up their free time to try and make things better.
|
|
|
Post by sarge on Sept 5, 2017 18:45:09 GMT
Id like there to be sometime spent on discussing the legality of mr mixters oxtales database of risk supporters, and its use amongst stewards
|
|
|
Post by sarge on Sept 6, 2017 12:52:49 GMT
Another relatively uncontentious issue to solve would be regarding online ticket bookings from handheld devices/smartphones.....the club/ticket office ,imo,really should do thier utmost to ensure fans,and for that matter occasional supporters are fully aware of all the quirky foibles,as well as hoops tht have to be jumped through when attempting to prchase matchday tickets usibg a hand held device....a bit of communication on the subject would go a long way. Current situation is akin to an old fasioned lucky dip. Can oxvox ask the club to circulate information on what is the proceedure for booking tickets on line via a hand held device?cheers
|
|
|
Post by Si Bradbury on Sept 6, 2017 13:05:50 GMT
I like and appreciate alot of what the ULTRAS do at home games. The only thing I don't like or agree with is Smokebombs - and frankly, until one of the 'ULTRAS' gets caught red-handed, they have no case to answer and the suggestion they are to blame is unfair.
If the club want to deal with the issue, then deal with it by searching people, help away stewards by doing the same and provide support to their counterparts. If the police want to deal with it, same as, catch the culprit and ban them indefinitely or implement the respective banning orders.
Until such time, that the small group of Ultras, get caught or captured then I think it best to stop the resentment and accusations. I could set off a smoke bomb and pretend to hide behind the Ultra banner. Asking for 'young kids' to snitch could be seen as "a way out" of authorities from doing their job. The reality of asking for fans to grass, is simply unrealistic.
OxVox are trying to help the diminishing group of 'Ultras' (the flag and atmosphere based ones seen at home games - not the smoke flare ones) by working with the club to set up an Ultra section, Block 21 of the East Stand.
It looks to me that they want that, our fans who have complaints about them for standing in their way in the centre of the east stand want it and low and behold, why wouldn't the stewards want it. Let's make something happen like we see at Crystal Palace.
As for the 'away' following, I won't disagree, the cuplrit of the smokebomb needs to be caught and dealt with. I won't change my view on that.
We're all fans, we all want to support in different ways, let's find a way of doing so.
|
|
|
Post by Junior on Sept 11, 2017 17:22:34 GMT
Has anyone received a reply to any email that the've sent? I sent one Wednesday and haven't received yet.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 11, 2017 17:26:15 GMT
No way have u actually decided to part with £10 after all these years
|
|
|
Post by Jem on Sept 11, 2017 18:47:06 GMT
Has anyone received a reply to any email that the've sent? I sent one Wednesday and haven't received yet. Are you talking about an email to the club/Ian Mixter rather than one to OxVox mate? Cheers Jem
|
|