Fan ejected at back of east stand ??

[DRFC]

I didn't witness the event in person but it's a well known phenomenon that of 10 people witnessing an incident there'll be 10 different versions of events. Perhaps this person genuinely thought Martin was at fault?

So, if this individual(s?) reported what they saw without bias then I don't see an issue however if they intentionally misrepresented this situation to get one over on Martin that's reprehensible.

What I would take issue with is if the club saw fit to release that individuals details to a third person, in this case Martin. If, for example, you made a complaint about someone making racist comments would you like the club to pass your details on to the person in question?

Perhaps Martin could clarify if the club have given him that persons details or not?

[Rovers Return]

No personal details were given. The comment was that they had received many emails from witnesses backing Martins version of events. They also pointed out that they had received a couple who claimed Martin was rightly ejected as he was very rude to that steward. As I was stood one person away from Martin at the time I can honestly say that they were shit stirring trolls. End of!

[Al4475]

I was the one person between RR and SM! He was never rude nor obnoxious nor anything else levelled his way, he was amicable with the ejection (tho puzzled I don't doubt) and the club have gone through the wringer to sort it one way or another!

The club have acted in the best possible way in all areas of this incident and a reciprocal, middle of the road amicable solution has been sorted!

Well played all round!

[wilts rover]

DRFC, I dont know if you have deliberately misread or misunderstood my question, but nowhere in any posts that have been made on the subject does it say that that the comments made by the individual(s) were about the incident in question. They quite clearly are personal comments about Martin himself. This is the direct quotation:

'But to those ‘trolls’ who thought it wise to contact the club and express their opinion of me in a negative way, shame on you!! Fortunately the club didn’t pay any attention to them!

For clarity's sake would you now wish to comment on the person(s) who did this?

Nothing I have read indicates that any details were given out btw.

[DRFC]

Wilts, it seems you're the one misunderstanding here, I'll quote from my last post:

"if they intentionally misrepresented this situation to get one over on Martin that's reprehensible."

Does that clear it up?

[wilts rover]

Not really DRFC, nowhere in Martin's comment does it relate to these people 'misrepresenting this situation', that appears to be something you have either plucked out of thin air or have other sources to that I am unaware of from this thread. My question is related to the comment that is in the public domain and included in my post above.

[DRFC]

I feel we're off on a tangent here.

If someone intentionally used this situation to stick the boot into Martin then that individual is a Kitson.

If someone viewed the incident and, in their opinion, Martin was in the wrong then they did right emailing the club. As I said earlier 10 witnesses will normally give 10 different versions of events.

If the club gave that persons details to Martin (rather than just telling him X number of emails pro, Y number anti Martin) then that's a fairly serious breach of trust by the club. Judging from Martins comments this was premeditated on their part, how would he know that without being privy to the contents of that email and, potentially, knowing who made the complaint in the first place.

Once again for those that seem to want to pigeon hole me into something I'm not:

I fully support Martin in this issue, in my opinion he was dealt with terribly by the club and I'm glad that, finally, lessons have been learnt.

I'm concerned that, potentially, the club could be releasing people's info to a third party. I'm awaiting Martin to confirm.

Bullet point for the terminally stupid:

* My issue is with the club, not Martin.

I await Colin C's apology for his unprovoked attack.

[Alickismyhero]

It would appear that all these later comments about the trolls were kicked off by me, sorry for that. I think if you stand back and judge DRFC's comments fairly  he is actively trying to provoking a situation out of nothing. Why he would want to do that? I don't really know perhaps he has a grievance against the club or the smooth running of the VSC forum or could it be he got the sack recently?

[DRFC]

It would appear that all these later comments about the trolls were kicked off by me, sorry for that. I think if you stand back and judge DRFC's comments fairly  he is actively trying to provoking a situation out of nothing. Why he would want to do that? I don't really know perhaps he has a grievance against the club or the smooth running of the VSC forum or could it be he got the sack recently?

Are you drinking tonight, Alick? I've no issue with the club other than it's completely unjustified removal of Martin (although I'm heartened to see it's resolved to the betterment of all fans)

I'm trying to provoke only debate, scroll back and see who's been abused here. You'll find I've been polite throughout.

I've no grievance with the club, why would I? Also, I've recently left a job and moved into another one but the relevance of that is lost on me. What did you have for breakfast?

[Alickismyhero]

DRFC,
I like your style, what size feet have you got?

[DRFC]

DRFC,
I like your style, what size feet have you got?

You're not the first to like my style and I'm sure you'll not be the last.

Size 9.

Have you ever danced naked in the rain?

[RedJ]

Yes but it didn't go down too well with the Spanish police...

[DRFC]

We better pack in, this is a serious thread... 

[neil grainger]

I feel we're off on a tangent here.

If someone intentionally used this situation to stick the boot into Martin then that individual is a Kitson.

If someone viewed the incident and, in their opinion, Martin was in the wrong then they did right emailing the club. As I said earlier 10 witnesses will normally give 10 different versions of events.

If the club gave that persons details to Martin (rather than just telling him X number of emails pro, Y number anti Martin) then that's a fairly serious breach of trust by the club. Judging from Martins comments this was premeditated on their part, how would he know that without being privy to the contents of that email and, potentially, knowing who made the complaint in the first place.

Once again for those that seem to want to pigeon hole me into something I'm not:

I fully support Martin in this issue, in my opinion he was dealt with terribly by the club and I'm glad that, finally, lessons have been learnt.

I'm concerned that, potentially, the club could be releasing people's info to a third party. I'm awaiting Martin to confirm.

Bullet point for the terminally stupid:

* My issue is with the club, not Martin.

I await Colin C's apology for his unprovoked attack.

Are you for real?

Find something else to occupy your time. And don't wait too long for Colin C's apology...life's too short.

[Yorkiered]

You will have a long wait if it's an apology from Colin C you are looking for. It's always somebody else in the wrong isn't it Colin?

[DRFC]

I feel we're off on a tangent here.

If someone intentionally used this situation to stick the boot into Martin then that individual is a Kitson.

If someone viewed the incident and, in their opinion, Martin was in the wrong then they did right emailing the club. As I said earlier 10 witnesses will normally give 10 different versions of events.

If the club gave that persons details to Martin (rather than just telling him X number of emails pro, Y number anti Martin) then that's a fairly serious breach of trust by the club. Judging from Martins comments this was premeditated on their part, how would he know that without being privy to the contents of that email and, potentially, knowing who made the complaint in the first place.

Once again for those that seem to want to pigeon hole me into something I'm not:

I fully support Martin in this issue, in my opinion he was dealt with terribly by the club and I'm glad that, finally, lessons have been learnt.

I'm concerned that, potentially, the club could be releasing people's info to a third party. I'm awaiting Martin to confirm.

Bullet point for the terminally stupid:

* My issue is with the club, not Martin.

I await Colin C's apology for his unprovoked attack.

Are you for real?

Find something else to occupy your time. And don't wait too long for Colin C's apology...life's too short.

You've lost me, son.

[neil grainger]

I feel we're off on a tangent here.

If someone intentionally used this situation to stick the boot into Martin then that individual is a Kitson.

If someone viewed the incident and, in their opinion, Martin was in the wrong then they did right emailing the club. As I said earlier 10 witnesses will normally give 10 different versions of events.

If the club gave that persons details to Martin (rather than just telling him X number of emails pro, Y number anti Martin) then that's a fairly serious breach of trust by the club. Judging from Martins comments this was premeditated on their part, how would he know that without being privy to the contents of that email and, potentially, knowing who made the complaint in the first place.

Once again for those that seem to want to pigeon hole me into something I'm not:

I fully support Martin in this issue, in my opinion he was dealt with terribly by the club and I'm glad that, finally, lessons have been learnt.

I'm concerned that, potentially, the club could be releasing people's info to a third party. I'm awaiting Martin to confirm.

Bullet point for the terminally stupid:

* My issue is with the club, not Martin.

I await Colin C's apology for his unprovoked attack.

Are you for real?

Find something else to occupy your time. And don't wait too long for Colin C's apology...life's too short.

You've lost me, son.

Sorry, Dad

[neil grainger]

You will have a long wait if it's an apology from Colin C you are looking for. It's always somebody else in the wrong isn't it Colin?

Don't worry too much about Colin C's criticism of you Yorkiered..... I think he was in a jokey way just challenging your opinion that the draw against Stoke was "shit" and wouldn't attract a very good crowd.

Some posters on here just want to be positive, you know, if possible.

[DRFC]

Certainly wasn't very positive when he said I was accusing  Martin of lying or that I didn't have the balls to ask him. Especially as that is categorically not what I was saying.

Perhaps he has a differing version of being positive to me.

[silent majority]

By the way, just for clarification. The club haven't disclosed anything of a personal nature.

Those people claiming to have witnessed the events quite clearly didn't, as was born out from CCTV evidence and others.

I hope that helps.

[DRFC]

Thanks for clearing that up, Martin.

There are some very low individuals about if they're prepared to lie to the club about a fellow fan just to settle a score over an internet forum.

I absolutely abhor liars.

[Rovers Return]

By the way, just for clarification. The club haven't disclosed anything of a personal nature.

Those people claiming to have witnessed the events quite clearly didn't, as was born out from CCTV evidence and others.

I hope that helps.

As I said about 10 posts back 😏

[neil grainger]

Actually, how does Martin know that people have contacted the club? Surely the club should treat any contact in confidence, regardless of it being positive or negative about the ejection?

I refer you to your earlier contribution.

Explain that one, hand on heart.

[BobG]

What a weird bunch of contributions old DRFC has come up with. I have a feeling he's turning into our latter day Mick. You're not Mick by any chance are you? You're clearly not for real so you I suppose you must have to be somebody, somewhere.

Tell you something else that's odd DRFC: you popping into existence when and how you did. Anyone would think you had an agenda. Funny that don't you think? You abhor liars apparently. Me? I respect integrity and intelligence. Martin has lots of both. In Spades. What have you got? I have a strong feeling you must abhor yourself. 

Cheers

BobG

[DRFC]

What a weird bunch of contributions old DRFC has come up with. I have a feeling he's turning into our latter day Mick. You're not Mick by any chance are you? You're clearly not for real so you I suppose you must have to be somebody, somewhere.

Tell you something else that's odd DRFC: you popping into existence when and how you did. Anyone would think you had an agenda. Funny that don't you think? You abhor liars apparently. Me? I respect integrity and intelligence. Martin has lots of both. In Spades. What have you got? I have a strong feeling you must abhor yourself. 

Cheers

BobG

How many people have you accused of being Mad Mick, Bob? Hand on heart?

If you're accusing me of lying based on what you know about me which, given you've accused me of being someone completely different, is obviously very little I strongly suggest you show me your proof. Otherwise you'll look a bit of a knob, won't you?

[neil grainger]

/quote]

 Otherwise you'll look a bit of a knob, won't you?

Oh, the irony!

[DRFC]

Someone obviously gets his understanding of Irony from Alanis Morissette. 

[Dagenham Rover]

Gi up the lot of yer

[DRFC]

Gi up the lot of yer

Agreed.

[BobG]

Look! Two pages now wasted by this wastrel.

And to answer your question, one.

BobG