Shamrock Rovers Ultras

[his holiness nb]

Theres me hoping this thread would end after 30 pages of the same old arguments going back and forth, and who joins in?
Sammy G and Evil Genius.

Roll on page 60  

[GalwayBayBoy]

On a different note Shamrock Rovers have issued an apology to Drogheda's Simon Webb. Apparently at a match last weekend a section of the Rovers support hurled abuse at him about his late wife who died of cancer last year. Some fans left the stadium in disgust. Absolutely sickening. Rovers have a big support but also a substantial sc**bag element following them.

Apology to Simon Webb (Drogheda United FC)
21 Apr 2007.On behalf of the club's membership and the entire Shamrock Rovers community, we wish to issue a public apology to Simon Webb for the heartless and highly personal verbal abuse he was subjected to from a tiny minority of the attendance at the Shamrock Rovers-Drogheda United game at Tolka Park on April 20. Those responsible should be ashamed of themselves and are certainly not welcome at Shamrock Rovers. An investigation into the incident has begun and those responsible will be dealt with in an appropriate manner.
Shamrock Rovers FC Board of Directors

[SammyG]

Theres me hoping this thread would end after 30 pages of the same old arguments going back and forth, and who joins in?
Sammy G and Evil Genius.

Roll on page 60  

I'm not involved in the discussion (as I've no idea of the ins and outs). I'm just dropping in the odd useful nugget of information, I'm not taking sides.

[hoop]

Rovers have a big support but also a substantial sc**bag element following them.

Correction - VERY SMALL sc**bag element.

It would appear that two or three morons gave the abuse and very few in the ground actually heard it.

[tayto]

Well no one has said it on here till now.

It doesn't take much working out. If you have a fixed piece of land and you're building a stadium, if you then increase the pitch size by 60 metres but can't increase the piece of land, you have to reduce and/or remove some of the stands, which in turn will reduce capacity. It's hardly rocket science.

On a slightly different tack, apparently the Maze stadium is going to have moveable stands that allow for the bigger pitch without affecting capacity but none of the Maze supporters have been able to explain how this will actually work. 

I know it seems obvious but why the attempted argument about this that and the other, some of it truely bizare, when something this clear cut is the only real issue.

Hoop actually said the distance seats would be from the pitch was the real issue a few pages back not capacity.

When it's actually quite obvious the capacity issue is the only real deal breaker. I believe Thomas Davis when they say it can be done without reducing capacity. you guys don't. That's what it boils down to.

[hoop]

I believe Thomas Davis when they say it can be done without reducing capacity. you guys don't. That's what it boils down to.

Show us the plans Thomas Davis!!!

[tayto]

Why in the meantime didnt the minister get an independent architectual review or demand to see Thomas Davis's review? Why isnt he saying this is the issue every time he's asked about Tallaght? Everyone can understand something like capacity being reduced making a project unviable. Instead he has just dug his heels in and said something about promises, this that and the other

He knows that it's an issue.

Go here:
http://www.shamrockrovers.ie/newsarchive.php

and then scroll down to:
Minister ODonoghue on RTE "This Week" radio programme 08-04-07

He has mentioned various reasons for his decision, only once that i've heard did he mention the capacity. If that's the reason he made the SDCC change their mind why isnt it his standard answer? Why mention "promises" to Rovers and why say he dosent want "any re-development work", if the capacity is definately going to have to be reduced and that makes the project unviable, why not just say that everytime, if true then it's logical and everyone can be brought on side.

[tayto]

I believe Thomas Davis when they say it can be done without reducing capacity. you guys don't. That's what it boils down to.

Show us the plans Thomas Davis!!!

Indeed. or couldnt the minister hire someone to do an independent review? he isnt consistent with this as the stumbling block so he's hardly convincing on this matter.

[his holiness nb]

It would appear that two or three morons gave the abuse and very few in the ground actually heard it.

Where did you get the info saying it was only 2 or 3?

I'm not saying you are lying, I've no idea as I wasnt there (thank f**k) but I have heard it was a lot more than 2 or 3, more so 20-30.

All hearsay of course, as is the report that it was only 2-3.

I would be worried if I was a Rovers fan though about their image.
Tallaght aside, its the "tiny minorities" fighting outside the hill 16 pub, added to the "tiny minorities" holding the f**k off and die banner, added to the "tiny minorities" chanting at Webb, and the Cork fella.

Add those tiny minorities up and they start to appear less "tiny".

[dublinfella]

I believe Thomas Davis when they say it can be done without reducing capacity. you guys don't. That's what it boils down to.

Show us the plans Thomas Davis!!!

Indeed. or couldnt the minister hire someone to do an independent review? he isnt consistent with this as the stumbling block so he's hardly convincing on this matter.

He is the independent review.

Why should they spend money on a report to counter a report that the people claiming to have refuse to share, even in court?

What are they reviewing? A super secret plan?

[tayto]

Well surely it'd be better then what is happening?
Why hasnt he publically said TD won't share their report.
If they're being that unreasonable why not go public with it.
I would certainly not support them if they're making this report up or refused to show it to the minister when asked for it.
Why isnt the minister banging this drum non-stop instead of banging on about promises he made to rovers etc. I don;t care what hes promised but I do think it's unreasonable for TD to expect entry if the capcity would have to be badly reduced.

[hoop]

Where did you get the info saying it was only 2 or 3?

From the few fans that actually heard anything.

And incidentally - as I said before - there is nothing wrong with the banner.

People who object to it simply have no idea about the level of rage and frustration currently being felt by Rovers fans. Twenty years is long enough without a home ground. What Thomas Davis want could hold up Tallaght Stadium for SEVEN MORE YEARS.

[Evil Genius]

Theres me hoping this thread would end after 30 pages of the same old arguments going back and forth, and who joins in?
Sammy G and Evil Genius.

Roll on page 60  

Do you ever attempt to "play the ball", or do you only ever "go for the man"?

I am generally interested in this topic, but confined myself to merely reading through it, since I have no particular knowledge of the circumstances, nor do matters in the Republic involve me.

However, after 29 pages, I concluded that the thread had veered off topic to what seemed to me to be the extraneous issue of pitch size, rather than stadium size (i.e. spectator capacity).

Therefore, in order to prevent another 29 pages, I raised a point of information which, if it is not immodest to point out, seems to have been accepted by all sides to the debate as having been useful in getting us back on track.

So unless you have something useful to contribute to the debate, why don't you just f**k off!  

[tayto]

From the few fans that actually heard anything.

And incidentally - as I said before - there is nothing wrong with the banner.

People who object to it simply have no idea about the level of rage and frustration currently being felt by Rovers fans. Twenty years is long enough without a home ground. What Thomas Davis want could hold up Tallaght Stadium for SEVEN MORE YEARS.

You may think there's nothing wrong with the banner but that doesn't mean there isn't. To be honest failure to condemn it undermines your opinion. I'm sure it's a frustrating situation to wind up in but you seem to be taking 20 years of hurt out on Thomas Davis, which is totally unfair, they're not the ones who shafted you in the first place. 

You, and Dublin fella, have made just about every possible argument saying that ThomasDavis have no use for the site, no right to use the site, that gaa clubs get grants all the time, just about every illogical argument as to why TD are in the wrong.

It seems clear as day to me that they have every right to raise a complaint about access to a municipal stadium if it can be achieved without making the project unviable.

Someone needs to prove it one way or the other and get on with it. Whether you like it or not Thomas Davis are fighting for their rights, through the only channels available to them.

[Hardy]

And incidentally - as I said before - there is nothing wrong with the banner.

There you go. That's where you lose everyone here.  Since you see nothing wrong with the banner, that puts you on the same level as the scum who raised it and beyond being worthy of the normal courtesies extended to contributors here.

Likewise, the failure of Shamrock Rovers officials to have the banner removed or to condemn it or to discipline those responsible puts them likewise on the same level.

My respects, by the way, to those who had the decency and courage to leave the match in protest at the unbelievable carry-on last Friday.