Ha ha. That is the procedure security has said they will use. A "Yellow Card" is a warning that one more incident that game and you will be ejected from the stadium.
Submitted wthout comment: http://www.rslsoapbox.com/2012/7/5/3139411/so-what-is-all-this-talk-about-free-teddy
Yes it is a good question. I think the answer lies in what is at stake. Personally, I appreciate the support from teams around the league especially Salt Lake. It is nice to know that despite our rivalry we can recognize some common interests as supporters. It means a lot that they would publicly show their support and I am appreciative. Unlike away fans, Teddy's supporter group actually has actively been working with the FO to get him back in the stadium. The lack of displays in Colorado are not because of apathy but a decision made with Teddy's best interests in mind. SG response in Colorado has the burden of knowing that a public display, while feeling good and showing other support from others in the stadium could potentially have negative consequences for Teddy. If the main goal is to actually help Teddy the reaction of supporter groups needs to keep that in mind. That being said a quick resolution is needed.
A few thoughts based on the idea that it appears nobody on these forums or on the blogs knows what is really going on here. I'm generally in support of the single individual being beaten down by the big organization and this is no exception. My first inclination is to agree: Free Teddy! If there were no warnings before the ban letter, that is wrong, but not illegal. The ethical failing should result in him being allowed back to attend with a clear understanding of what behaviors are allowed and not so that he can avoid a future ban, or if he transgresses he knows what is at risk. Some are describing that this lacks due process, evidence presentation/challenge, comparison to judicial systems, etc. All of that is off base. This is not a government imposing sanctions and therefore under the legal constraints of the constitution. Private companies are under no such obligation. They only have to allow equal access to all regardless of race, religion, sex, etc. But, they are free to impose rules of behavior of all those that attend. My experience in running any kind of program that people have options to attend it or other events is that a single individual's misbehavior will drive away more interested people, and drive still more people away each succeeding event than they bring in terms of commitment. Therefore, it is nearly always in the best interest of the operator of an event to kick out offending people rather quickly because they cost you much more in the long run, no matter how dedicated their individual attendance. The entertainment value of supporter's groups creating 'authentic soccer culture' is, IMO, overstated. Most casual American fans know little about 'soccer culture' and many who do know about it do not think very well of all aspects of it. That is, they are not interested in being around continuous noise, regular vulgarity, flares, smoke, antics, etc. They think of it as 'alien' (not America) because it is rare to non-existent in other American sports and would rather it did not become part of American soccer. So, it is a very difficult decision for front offices to decide if supporters groups help or hurt, particularly when it comes to some kinds of behaviors. Why is it such an all or nothing proposition? Can't the FO institute multiple game, season long, and other shorter term bans rather than lifetime being the result? I'd expect a lifetime ban for a physical assault of another person in the stadium (beyond whatever the police and prosecutors want to do). Offensive words or disallowed substances (such as fireworks or signs) should be shorter term bans after warnings go unheeded. So, with all of that said, and knowing very little about the specifics of the situation (which from what I can tell is pretty much where everyone else is) I would hope the Rapids FO changes its mind, puts Freddy on warning that he risks a longer ban if he doesn't shape up his behavior. Here's to a great rivalry and the Rocky Mountain Cup! Here's to our fans being passionate! Here's to our front offices treating us with a bit more insight and care!
You are correct KSE can ban everyone if they want to. I also agree that some of the complaints from individuals about this matter are not valid. However, I would like to point out a couple of things. 1. When people say Due Process I think it is really Standardization of Procedures - I agree with you about due process but I don't think people are really comparing due process to the legal definition. The issue is really a standardization of procedures and for both Supporter Groups and the security following them. Rules need to be consistent and punishments shouldn't be arbitrary if security is going to improve in the stadium. The biggest issue with security in the terraces is consistency. Standard policies and procedures allow for a clarification of what is and is not acceptable behavior. I will say that at the beginning of the season leaders of the supporter groups met with the Rapids, KSE, and Argus to discuss the security procedures for this year. Everyone left that meeting in agreement as to how issues would be handled. Whether that agreed upon process has been followed this year (not just in the Teddy incident) is currently being discussed internally between the Rapids and SGs. I believe that all parties are committed to improving the process so I don't think there is much value in discussing what did or did not happen on Big Soccer. 2. You are also correct that legally KSE can probably do whatever they want. However, let me point out a couple of examples as to why this would be a very foolish path for them to chose. Honestly, the best way for the Rapids to improve security is to work with the SGs. SG leaders are committed to improving things and can be very effective in resolving issues. This is more than just a ridiculous demand by SGs it is a reality. The issues with security are not always black and white and if you think inappropriate behavior doesn't occur with contracted Argus security you are very mistaken. For example, last year a beer was thrown on the field after the game from the west side of the terrace. Members of the Pid Army immediately attempted to identify the individual. No one saw with certainty who it was but they believed they had identified the correct individual. Members of the supporter group asked an Argus security guard for help as he was standing right there. He was asked if he saw the incident and if he could help identify the responsible individual. The security guard responded that he saw the incident but "he wasn't a snitch". At the time no one else could make a positive id with 100% certainty so no immediate action was able to be taken. However, after the game through photos of the terraces members of the SG were able to get additional witnesses and send a picture of the individual to the Rapids FO. I don't believe that excluding SGs form the security process is best practice. 3. The Rapids FO is not the same as stadium security. KSE runs security and contracts out for many things with Argus. There are at minimum three different entities involved. Without getting into details let's just say it is possible that some of these entities may not always be on the exact same page. 4. It most certainly is not an all or nothing issue. I don't believe SGs have ever made that claim.
This should be moved to the other Supporters discussion thread. Keep this one focused on the incident.
i disagree.. this is a fair and logically evolution of the discussion... plus it would be buried there
I think if people want to discuss how the Terraces are like Thatcherite England it should get it's own thread. I also think COMtnGuy should be more specific in his comparisons as I do not follow his logic.
As far as supporting Teddy... I thought about writing an email or making a sign or something, then I thought... what is to keep KSE from banning me? Unless its a MASSIVE effort, I think I'm going to keep myself out of this fight. There is power in anonymity.
Right in the middle of the tailgate the porta-potty cleaners showed up to clean out the porta-potties adjacent to the tailgating lot. Needless to say the smell kind of ruined some appetites. (Putting our heads together the only reason we could figure out that a porta-potty company would be doing that on a Saturday evening was that there was a tournament on the fields during the day and of course the part of KSE running the tournament never bothered to check the schedule of the Rapids to see if immediately after the tournament was a logical time to roll into the tailgating lot to clean out the porta-potties.)
My goodness. I guess it shouldn't be a shock that the Rapids have a Clipper Darrell moment here. I just wonder if there was a line when the cleaners showed up.