Well we could go find clips of nay quiet, and noisy fan support and label them what we want to feed our argument.  Easier to organize noise in a small section of a small stadium, then a large section of a 75,000 seat stadium. 

Also the lack of noise may be due to shock as the notes on the MUFC clip stated that Berbatov had just scored.

I wished that southside had more bleachers, moving fans off the fence line up onto the bleachers givign better viewing angle and traditional southside coordination.  The front bottom row (grass) should be for th capos no matter what.  And for those that need to do a beer run.

Isn't that beating a dead horse with a stick?

We know that there are different styles of support, some are blatantly obvious, while some are cheeky and subversive.  While we are mostly the latter, we dip into the former on occasion. You want the former all the time, it ain't happening.  You made the same arguments last season.

You look at the way we support the club.  I see us moving left or right of that very little.  I have come to terms with that, mostly because I'm OK with that type of support.  I'm not interested in "hoohaaing" for 90 minutes a game.  45 minutes when the opposing goalkeeper is at our end, and the rest is up to the Caps to earn, while I may throw out a few more beyond that.  That in itself has made me a bigger participant then anyone in the grandstand and quite a few in the south side.  I'm happy with that.

I hereby command an appearance of Streaky the Wonder Moose.

You know who you are.

Southside Nation,

A lot has been said in this thread...here are a few things I have been thinking about as I have been reading it all this week:

I know it is semantics, but the "devices" that have been used, other than than the machine, at Swangard (and by us at PGE) over the past several years to create smoke...are not actually "smoke bombs".  I think the word bomb gives a bit of the wrong impression.  Having attended a couple of Seattle/Portland derbies with the TA at PGE, they use actual smoke bombs.  What we have used are more like smoke candles...and they actually look like candles.  Candles that create a lot of smoke.

I personally really appreciate both smoke and flares at matches.  I think they add great atmosphere and ambiance to football matches.  Having witnessed them at the 2003 German Cup Finale and again at the 2006 World Cup (the Poles and those guys with kit that double as table cloth were both great at it!).  Those have been the most impressive displays I have personally experienced.  My first two years in the south end I brought the cheapest (and as a result, lowest quality) road flares that one can buy at Canadian Tire.  I waited for the 'Caps to get a PK and then ignited the flare as soon as I could following the goal.  I remember the first year it was after an Oliver Heald PK.  On that occasion security approached me, took the flare and politely asked me not to do it again.  They also seemed to know how to handle the flair.  At the beginning of my second year, I thought it would be worth trying again.  I did and a similar thing happened, except later on in the match one of the more senior security guards approached me and told me that if I were to do it again I would been asked to leave the ground (and he might have mentioned being banned from the ground).  So I decided that I'd rather be in the ground and enjoy the other elements of the atmosphere than be a martyr for something I thought (and think) is cool.

I really enjoyed watching the V's Cup match at the Cheese U this year between Montreal and Toronto.  The flares that were used by both the North End Elite and the Ultras were quite wonderful!  I know that there were issues with security there and how they handle these type of banned actions.  I think all Canadian...and Cascadian supporters long for clubs and security to come to understand how to appropriately work a football match that has segregated supporters from both clubs...but that is for a discussion for some other time.  Another interesting note is that NEE only use flares at away matches because they know they can't at BMO.

As much as I enjoy the smoke candles and flares, I do recognize the massive risk and liability issues.  I do understand that the smoke, if not hypoallergenic, can be a horrific experience for those with and without respiratory problems.  I understand that people don't want to see it hinder play (in last year's Cup, the Portland Manager was trying to get the match called because of the excessive smoke).  With flares I do get that they could cause serious injury to people.  The incident where a security guard charged into the middle of the southside last year and took an active flare and then carried it above his head, which caused Tophdawg to be burned a bit on the top of his head, was another example of that (and of how security probably wasn't/isn't appropriately trained).  Tractor Boy, you were right when you said that Tophdawg was lucky...as were the rest of the people there that night.  The thing is that both smoke and flares can be done relatively safely and with lesser risks, however, the club, the city of Burnaby (and our future venues...unless we ever are actually allowed to build our own...with our own money...sorry I can't believe the way our owner has been "politiked" and held over a barrel over this opportunity) will not want to take any risks at all...and understandably so.

One of the perspectives that hasn't come up yet (and maybe that is because it is a non-issue and I am just not aware of it) is the fact that we (and other supporters) are asked not to do a number of these things, but when they are done they are used by the club (and previously by the USL) to promote the sport.  Not only that, but for parts of 2008 and the beginning of 2009 it seemed to me that there were actually games that the club knew smoke was going to be used and they were understanding of that fact (perhaps without actually condoning it).  So it was like it was accepted by the club for matches they deemed as big (2009 opening night at Swangard), but then for matches that they didn't deem to be a big match, but we did, there were problems - the second home match versus Portland as a prime example (when Masster was removed from the ground for igniting a smoke candle).  Perhaps it has been a long time since those photos from the 2008 Finale have been used.  Perhaps I have misunderstood something and there are no longer any "special" matches where either smoke and/or flares are momentarily acceptable.  Perhaps this was never the case and the use of such images was just the club capitalizing on these banned actions.  I can't remember what my involvement was on that night in October 2008 (perhaps as a result of my severe case of "Blue Lung"), but I will respect the club's stance on this issue going forward.  My apologies to Ya Beauty, Hilary, Nate, Simon, and Iain for any problems this may have caused you in the Front Office.  I hope this group can continue to have a positive relationship with you, even on these issues that we might have differing perspectives on.

Speaking of differing opinions, there seems to be a number that have been expressed here (and some of the discussion has spilled over into facebookland).  I guess one of the great things about forums like this is that everyone has the chance to really share where they are at.  One of the difficult things can be when people that all want to be on one boat think that that boat should go in more than one direction.  This is where where I'm sensing things are at.  It is not a bad place to be, but it can be very uncomfortable.  It can be a time where there are conflicts or frustrations, even amongst those that would otherwise be the closest of friends.  It can lead to people feeling left out or hurt.  The question that really is being discussed in this thread is a variant of the one we often sing to visiting clubs/players, "who are we?"  Or perhaps, who are we going to be in MLS?

On our own website under the history section, there is a nice concise story of what has lead us to this point.  It describes a good general idea of what the supporter culture has been to this point, but then finishes with the line, "What happens next is entirely up to you."  Now of course I understand that to mean that the group longs for more people join and take an active role in moving things forward.  The problem is that I think that the mentality that has been adopted is that the Southsiders should be exactly what "I" want them to be.  So each of us has kind of our own ideal southside in mind, but they are not all the exact same.  I know that last Fall we worked through a number of things about what we value, but they were all quite general and not very specific (Yaletownshane, correct me if I'm wrong on that, as you walked us through that process).

One of the things that I thought was going to help us in this respect, was the development of our own charter.  It would hopefully more clearly articulate who we are and "where we are going."  However, that hasn't been completed according to our site.  Now this might sound like a negative criticism of our elected Board, but I think that one of the main reasons that it hasn't been done is that each of these volunteers has been working so hard in their area and I personally feel that they have been doing quite a remarkable job.  I think that the development of our charter is something that will really define who we are and should probably be taken care of as soon as possible.

It sounds like one of the things that the Board is looking to move forward with is having various subsections within the larger organization of the Southsiders.  There are lots of things that I like about this idea, but there are a lot of things that would need to be worked out to make it happen.  It is one way to grow the Southsiders, but will bring with it issues over unity.  Also, we are "on the clock" for this, as according to my "evil" ticket rep the seating allocation for season ticket holders is supposed to commence in August or September (but that is not in stone).  The place, or places, that the club sets aside for this group and any potential subsections thereof will be a major factor in determining if this route is even possible.

In the end I guess this thread reinforces the mandate of our Board.  They need to help define the future in more specific tangible terms.  They are our elected leaders and this is a time we really need their continued leadership.  Perhaps it is a good thing that there are no games for several weeks in a row, as that may provide the right amount of time to see the charter completed/posted and more clarity given on the future.  I personally would rather that be focused on more than anything else (even though I'm looking forward to things like the Family BBQ!).

All apologies for going on at length...I guess some people will at least be appreciative that I'm not sharing these thoughts during a match.

Much Love,

Forever A Team

  I don't think  there is anything wrong with a bit of socializing during the match. It's part of the game and there are many matches that are a little slower then the rest and allow for some chatting, as long as its not a conversation that is better saved for a coffee shop or a pub. Too much chanting and cheering lasting a full 90 minutes can also be a little much. Take a look at Duke College sports.
(speed freaks)
   I think we all can agree that a good balance of chanting, singing, yelling, cussing, and some moments of chat and silence to take in the game.
  There have been games where there has been so much SS support that I had to watch the game again on-line because I couldn't focus on the match. I guess i'm a shitty multi-tasker!
  But when it comes to  big games like home-openers, TFC, and Portland. I think we are doing an awesome job. In other words, we should use those games as examples on how to support our team every match at Swangard.

 Great post Forever a team, BTW.
 
  

Just so everyone is clear...whenever you hear a buzz in the crowd...that's people talking.

I don't want to come away from this conversation to our game on the 29th concerned that someone will be monitoring my conversations for content and length.

Talk is talk, and there is no one in the south side that goes 90 minutes cheering.  What you fill those gaps with is up to you.  Trip to concessions, bathroom, conversation on topic that interests you. I would be shocked if every conversation is game related. 

Before I joined and even now, there have always been days where the south side has been a little empty, or quiet or whatever.  It happens.  It's not the norm.  A lot of whining over spilled milk here.

Our next opponent is Austin.  Other then it being a game between conference leaders, there's not much history between the two clubs. By that time some of the Euro leagues will have started as well. Enjoy yourselves.

 Zach, great post my friend. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I love the smoke. If the Caps and the City didnt have a problem with it I feel that allot of the issues being raised wouldnt even be discussed.

 Let it not be mistaken I agree there needs organization. What I was trying to say is that when I was asked to by a membership ( I always considered myself a SS even if I wasnt carrying a card) I didnt want to get involved in any of the "issues" that were bound to happen. I hate all the politics involved.  

Edited by Bayern Munich - 31-July-2010 at 13:04

Bayern, I understand what you are saying, and if we were staying in the USL or whatever the league is called, then I would not have so readily agreed to help form a "supporters club"

The sheer guts of the issue is that, I/we did not want to have the chance not to emulate what has happened in Toronto and Seattle.

Plus, there is the issue now that we will not be able to travel to away games unless the person attending is a member of a recognised supporters club.

Personally the away trips will be something that I cannot wait to go to, and will be some of first fixtures I will be watching for when they come out in a little over 6 months time.