I dont think this has been bought up in a marinators forum but i think it speaks somewhat for the marinators two.
From melbourn victory supporters.
Letter sent to the FFA regarding HEM in July
30th August 2008, 07:08 pm
by Sebastian James
Following is a letter that was sent to the FFA just under 2 months ago. It was co-signed by representatives from the North End, the South End, OSS, SDC, Gold Member section, representatives of this forum, as well as two MPs that are sympathetic to our cause.
As yet, we have not received any reply from the FFA, who clearly have not deemed responding to the games stakeholders as an immediate priority. Massive kudos to CLM who got this process rolling and had a huge role in constructing this. Despite not receiving any sort of feedback yet, it was still a worthwhile process.
Dear FFA
We write on behalf of, and in support of, the active supporters of the terraces of Melbourne. As passionate supporters, we share with the FFA a commitment to growing the game of football in this country.
We wish to object to the imposition of allocated seating Home End Membership on all A-League clubs.
We believe it is unnecessary. We believe the process by which it was imposed was flawed. We suspect the analysis that underpins it is incorrect. We believe the system will stifle home end support for MVFC, and will dampen the atmosphere at Melbourne games.
Melbourne is clearly doing something right. Attendance at MVFC games is by far the highest in the League.
We are proud of the massive growth of support in Melbourne. We are proud of the growth of active support. We are proud of our rapid creation of distinctive support styles. We are proud of the creativity, passion and community we have built.
We believe active supporters bring something of great value to the game. Our contribution is atmosphere. It is our voices that raise the chants that fill the stadium. It is our flags that wave over the home end. We are more than customers.
If the FFA fails to foster the passion and creativity active support can generate, you do the game a great disservice.
It was a mistake to base the decision over Home End Memberships on the advice of consultants who did not consult us. Supporters and MVFC had only recently arrived at an agreement about how to manage access to the home end. This agreement had been negotiated between the stakeholders supporters, the club, the stadium. Your decision over-rode that agreement before it even had a chance to operate in season.
One-size-fits-all solutions are not always the best, and top-down decision-making is not a good way to win co-operation. A negotiated solution that has local support will be far more effective in the long run than a centrally imposed rule. Melbourne fans are angry that our local solutions have been discarded, and frustrated by the way that something that could be simple is made difficult.
However, if it is really essential to have only one rule for the whole league, clearly the reasons for the huge success of Melbourne should be taken into account in designing it.
In a practical sense, our chief objection to the system that has been imposed is the restrictions it places on access to the home end.
Prior to this, the home ends were both general admission. At the South End, where there has been no history of over-crowding, it was operating as straight general admission. At the North End, where there had been some over-crowding at times, a system had been devised to control access to the central bays, with special tickets distributed via the supporter groups.
As general admission areas, people were free to come and go from the active areas.
Our issues with restricted access are:
people do not want to be tied down to a particular seat they wish to move around within the bay, the home end and the stadium
active support is in an establishment phase, with many people still trying it out, or deciding which end they prefer it is too early in the life of our terraces to ask people to make a definitive decision about where they belong
general admission allows the size, density and character of the end to evolve
there is a possibility of tension between supporters over ownership of seats and whether people sit down allocated seating means it cannot be dealt with by just moving apart
as a new club, we have had several stages of evolution where groups of supporters have split, and there has been a need to move away from each other to pursue different aims
We also want you to try to understand the importance to us of freedom and independence.
The kind of passion we can bring is born out of creativity and spontaneity. Bureaucratic hurdles, illogical rules, disrespect - these things stifle our creativity and our enthusiasm.
When we create our own symbols of support songs we have written, flags we have made, imagery we have devised they carry with them a commitment and a passion that can never be replicated through a Samsung placard handed out at the turnstile. The relationships we build transform us from a crowd into a community, and deepen our commitment to the game.
We urge you to reconsider the home end membership system. We request an explanation of the reasons why this system was deemed necessary. We would like to know what the risks are that you believe need to be controlled.
