georgefostersbeard wrote:part time pete wrote:georgefostersbeard wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:I don’t understand those who are saying they didn’t understand it would be a first come, first served basis. Can anyone explain what they mean by that?
With a limited capacity, surely it was understood that only a limited number of seats would be available?
I totally agree that it e-mailers should’ve had the same attention as other customers. And I’ve lost my seat/stand as a result of all this so I’m not trying to cause upset, just a genuine question as to what people were expecting?
Perhaps I have used the wrong term - I think there was a lack of clarity over how seats would be allocated. I am not sure I know of a better way of doing it but it wasn't made clear.
This is what it said on website
As you will appreciate, the club therefore cannot guarantee your normal seat due to the prospective implementation of social distancing measures, however, we will endeavour to seat you as near as possible to your preferred location within One Call Stadium.Surely this meant your seat might not be available when renewing. My seat wasn’t when I renewed on Monday.
Perhaps then it is my naivety that I thought I could get nearer than another Stand!
I would assume everyone thinks social distancing means at least one metre plus seating away from others.
Common sense also should mean that every row could not be sold, so leaving every other row blocked off was required. In addition a one seat gap would not be enough, so a two seat gap would be required. This means only selling a sixth of the seats.
So only less than 500 seats available in the normally 2700 seated capacity upper west stand.
When you think at least 150 to 200 people were reported to be queuing up at ticket office on Monday morning at 10am, it’s not unreasonable that Upper West Stand sold out quickly.
And I thought head teachers could add up and use common sense.
Those accustomed to privilege may feel that equality is oppression.