Bois Boycott

[Big Stall]

1 hour ago, MJC said:

The Green Brigade are way, way out in front of the Union Bears in every level, just like their club is way out in front of Rangers in that regard too. 
 

The GB are far bigger, far more dangerous and have a lot more clout than the UB could ever hope to have. They have powerful people with big voices and a lot of influence at various levels of sport and politics on their side and in their ranks. So even though the Union Bears might display similar behaviours, they don’t have the same leverage with police and authorities. Even Celtic as a club can’t control the Green Brigade.

Which is why the blockE lads are more comparable to the UB. But yet you havent bothered making that link? Its a mystery why not...... almost as if it doesnt fit your agenda.

Most Rangers fans i know think of the UB as a bunch of daft wee fannies. We can certainly see some similarities there.

Thats not meant as an insult, plenty of us were daft wee fannies once upon a time. It doesnt mean we got to speak on behalf of the club.

[MJC]

1 hour ago, Stuwell2 said:

MJC, can you explain the political beliefs part

No.

1 hour ago, Big Stall said:

Which is why the blockE lads are more comparable to the UB. But yet you havent bothered making that link? Its a mystery why not...... almost as if it doesnt fit your agenda.

Most Rangers fans i know think of the UB as a bunch of daft wee fannies. We can certainly see some similarities there.

Thats not meant as an insult, plenty of us were daft wee fannies once upon a time. It doesnt mean we got to speak on behalf of the club.

But as far as I can see, and maybe I am wrong, the Union Bears aren’t political in the same way the Green Brigade are. I heard about the drum incident with St.Johnstone fans and Rangers as a club acted swiftly and banned the individuals identified as being involved, and good on them for doing so. Would Celtic have done the same had it been a GB member? I highly doubt it and there would be protests, walk-outs and a lot of noise made by the GB if they had. See some similarities there too?

This topic has run its course now as far as I’m concerned so the final thing for me to say is that I hate the Green Brigade and I’m not a fan of the Well Bois.

MJC - over and out. 

[0Neils40yarder]

33 minutes ago, MJC said:

No.

But as far as I can see, and maybe I am wrong, the Union Bears aren’t political in the same way the Green Brigade are. I heard about the drum incident with St.Johnstone fans and Rangers as a club acted swiftly and banned the individuals identified as being involved, and good on them for doing so. Would Celtic have done the same had it been a GB member? I highly doubt it and there would be protests, walk-outs and a lot of noise made by the GB if they had. See some similarities there too?

This topic has run its course now as far as I’m concerned so the final thing for me to say is that I hate the Green Brigade and I’m not a fan of the Well Bois.

MJC - over and out. 

The 'Union' Bears aren't political? Gie me peace

[wunderwell]

44 minutes ago, MJC said:

No.

But as far as I can see, and maybe I am wrong, the Union Bears aren’t political in the same way the Green Brigade are. I heard about the drum incident with St.Johnstone fans and Rangers as a club acted swiftly and banned the individuals identified as being involved, and good on them for doing so. Would Celtic have done the same had it been a GB member? I highly doubt it and there would be protests, walk-outs and a lot of noise made by the GB if they had. See some similarities there too?

This topic has run its course now as far as I’m concerned so the final thing for me to say is that I hate the Green Brigade and I’m not a fan of the Well Bois.

MJC - over and out. 

Celtic banned the entire Green Brigade previously
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-67277186

[wunderwell]

Listen MJC we are not talking about Rangers and Celtic here.
You work for the daily record?

Can we concentrate on the Well Bois and Motherwell FC on a Motherwell forum?

[Yabba's Turd]

2 hours ago, MJC said:

MJC - over and out. 

When reason and argument are lost, the debater checks out.

[Stuwell2]

2 hours ago, MJC said:

No.

If your not willing to back up your point, why bring it up to start with?

 

[Mccus28]

Folks

As with all walks of life, there will be arses in the Bois as well as decent folk, it is what it is.

Motherwell are also entitled to ban anyone they want, there isn't the same burden of proof that there is in a Scottish court so people need to realise you cant intertwine the 2 as closely as you would like, rightly or wrongly.......................

Ultimately, I don't agree with all that the Bois do as a whole but it is only a small minority, the same minority who abused and threatened myself and my wife in Dundee 2 seasons ago as they didn't know I was a Motherwell fan as I didn't have colours on when walking back to my car, it was kinda pathetic if im honest from across a road but wasn't pleasant for my wife who doesnt normally go to the footy.

Should some be banned.........probably

[0Neils40yarder]

1 hour ago, Mccus28 said:

 

Motherwell are also entitled to ban anyone they want, there isn't the same burden of proof that there is in a Scottish court so people need to realise you cant intertwine the 2 as closely as you would like, rightly or wrongly.......................

 

That's all correct...any business has the right to ban whoever they wish, from entering their premises but as I said elsewhere if they and their mates feel its unjust then the club shouldn't be surprised when they aren't happy about it 

[Stuwell2]

Most folk seem to have a broadly similar view regarding the banning of fans, it’s not desirable but if the evidence backs it up then we have to accept that it will happen. 
On this point I believe that whoever is being banned should have the right to appeal the ban and the club should then invite them to a review of the ban giving the person a chance to have it overturned or at least reduce it to a certain time rather than indefinite. 
Regarding the current issue, can anyone say the age of those who were banned without giving any other information that might identify them?

The reason I’m asking is that if they’re under the age of 16, then surly their parents would have been informed of the decision and taken it up with the club if they felt it was wrong?

[Kmcalpin]

15 minutes ago, Stuwell2 said:

On this point I believe that whoever is being banned should have the right to appeal the ban and the club should then invite them to a review of the ban giving the person a chance to have it overturned or at least reduce it to a certain time rather than indefinite. 
Regarding the current issue, can anyone say the age of those who were banned without giving any other information that might identify them?

The reason I’m asking is that if they’re under the age of 16, then surly their parents would have been informed of the decision and taken it up with the club if they felt it was wrong?

Good post. Whatever the rights and wrongs of individual cases, its important that protocols are followed. Earlier some poster(s) said that the club contacted the youngsters before the Police had contacted them. That shouldn't happen. Any process should be fair and transparent and parents involved, if appropriate. 

[Busta Nut]

I've sat down towards that end section for 20 odd years until recently. 
I've heard far more "f****n Bastards" type shouts than "Orange bastards" type shouts.

I'm not really getting the friendly with celtic stuff.

I mean I remember the throwing of tennis balls(I think) at the same time as them a good few years ago.

[Stuwell2]

FFS, Bob and Brian’s influence seems to spread everywhere!

Just been looking at Oasis tickets on Ticketmaster and seen this

Standing: no 14 year olds or younger on the park, 14 year olds to be accompanied by an adult 18 or over  

Seating: No under 8’s allowed, 8-15 year olds to be accompanied by an adult 18 or over minimum 1 adult to 4 persons 8-15. 

How are Oasis ever going to get youngsters interested and grow their fan base with these oppressive rules.
 

  

[Cameron_Mcd]

Comparing apple's and oranges....

[Kmcalpin]

39 minutes ago, Stuwell2 said:

FFS, Bob and Brian’s influence seems to spread everywhere!

Just been looking at Oasis tickets on Ticketmaster and seen this

Standing: no 14 year olds or younger on the park, 14 year olds to be accompanied by an adult 18 or over  

Seating: No under 8’s allowed, 8-15 year olds to be accompanied by an adult 18 or over minimum 1 adult to 4 persons 8-15. 

How are Oasis ever going to get youngsters interested and grow their fan base with these oppressive rules.
 

  

I suspect there will be a few hundred more at the Oasis concerts than there will be at Fir Park. Different environment too with drink flowing and drugs available.

[David]

18 hours ago, Mccus28 said:

Motherwell are also entitled to ban anyone they want

Indeed they are. But if the majority ownership group wants those bans explained to them, and the rationale behind them backed up with facts, that's surely understandable?

The people discussing this, many of whom are Society members, aren't just punters who drink in a pub or customers of a business. 

[Spiderpig]

1 hour ago, David said:

 

The people discussing this, many of whom are Society members, aren't just punters who drink in a pub or customers of a business. 

Take away all of the hype and tradition around supporting football clubs and That's exactly what they are, paying customers of a business just like any other leisure activity, cinema, restaurants, health clubs etc etc.  So as I mentioned before certain polices, codes of conduct etc need to be followed as a condition of buy that particular service.

It's up to the club to ensure these conditions are not detrimental and actually make Fir park a better place to pay to go to.

[grizzlyg]

3 hours ago, Stuwell2 said:

FFS, Bob and Brian’s influence seems to spread everywhere!

Just been looking at Oasis tickets on Ticketmaster and seen this

Standing: no 14 year olds or younger on the park, 14 year olds to be accompanied by an adult 18 or over  

Seating: No under 8’s allowed, 8-15 year olds to be accompanied by an adult 18 or over minimum 1 adult to 4 persons 8-15. 

How are Oasis ever going to get youngsters interested and grow their fan base with these oppressive rules.
 

  

Liam Gallagher walks into a chippy and says "ayyyyyyyyyyy bag of chips please mate"

Guy behind counter says "you want a roll with it?"

Thank you.....good night 🤪🤪

[SteelmaninOZ]

51 minutes ago, grizzlyg said:

Liam Gallagher wants into a chippy and says "ayyyyyyyyyyy bag of chips please mate"

Guy behind counter says "you want a roll with it?"

Thank you.....good night 🤪🤪

He is back then and true to form that cruise ship must have been good 

[grizzlyg]

6 minutes ago, SteelmaninOZ said:

He is back then and true to form that cruise ship must have been good 

Loved it pal 

[wunderwell]

1 hour ago, wellgirl said:

But does he live in a house.. A very big house in the country? 

(Oasis were robbed in my view of the number one). 

Blur for me are 10 x the band Oasis are 

Albeit Country House was a load of guff

[grizzlyg]

3 hours ago, grizzlyg said:

Liam Gallagher walks into a chippy and says "ayyyyyyyyyyy bag of chips please mate"

Guy behind counter says "you want a roll with it?"

Thank you.....good night 🤪🤪

And Lady Gaga was behind him.   She wanted a Poke Of Chips. 🤣🤣

[David]

On 8/30/2024 at 1:29 PM, Spiderpig said:

Take away all of the hype and tradition around supporting football clubs and That's exactly what they are, paying customers of a business just like any other leisure activity, cinema, restaurants, health clubs etc etc.  So as I mentioned before certain polices, codes of conduct etc need to be followed as a condition of buy that particular service.

It's up to the club to ensure these conditions are not detrimental and actually make Fir park a better place to pay to go to.

Yes, but you can't dismiss all the excitement and tradition associated with supporting a football club. You're essentially saying, "If our football club weren't actually a football club..." but it is. And it's fan-owned to boot.

There aren't any fan-owned cinemas, gyms, or restaurants with such a devoted following of individuals who are there week in and week out, scrutinising the ins and outs behind the scenes.

If Motherwell were just another business, we’d likely be sitting here now looking forward to the era of Barmack. In a traditional business, decisions are made by the executive board, while "customers" don’t tend to care all that much.

We can’t ask the fans to be vocal and express their views, making those in charge uncomfortable when it suits—such as with a dubious bid—and then complain when those same fans voice their opinions on other issues.

[Kmcalpin]

Had a close encounter with 2 of the Bois today and I have to say they were polite and helpful. You treat folk as you find them. 

[Pepper]

I thought football fans didn't want to be treated differently to everyone else? Is that not the main reason The Offensive Behaviour at Football Act was repealed?

I love the idea that they are now claiming they weren't boycotting the Hearts game only their usual section. Hilarious. 

Noone is going to take anything they say seriously until they at least acknowledge the have as a group made mistakes and behaved poorly. You can do all the food drive an bucket collection you want but people aren't daft, more than enough have seen first hand their behaviour to judge them accordingly.

Well Bhois - they did that one to themselves!