Red meat ban at football ground

Remove all ads!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-12416671

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/world-of-sport/article/31926/

I particularly love this ban, its very entertaining to me, especially how the clubs vegan owner tries to push it forward as being "in the interests of everyone's health" red meat is part of a healthy diet, I make burgers with 100% minced beef and I grill them, the only unhealthy thing in my burgers is the cheese. If this ban were truly about health and not an attack on red meat from a vegan, other unhealthy products would dissappear too, but, I bet the club still serves sugary soft drinks, and lets also focus on the deep fried fish and chips.

The article is clearly bias to the owners opinion, If red meat were truly bad for the players, I'm sure big clubs with the top nutritionists would have banned red meat for players too.

I wonder how these discussions went... here's my take:

boss - "I want you to stop feeding red meat to my players, find something else"
Nutrition guy - "Ummmm....... o....k......"
boss - "really, its nothing to do with me being totally against red meat, nothing at all to do with me being vegan, red meat is very very bad for people, and they should stop eating it... all of the dietry advice from top nutritionists that it is an excellent source of iron, protein, creatine, minerals such as zinc and phosphorus, and vitamins such as niacin, vitamin B12, thiamin and riboflavin and being the richest source of Alpha Lipoic Acid, which is a powerful antioxidant, is total bollocks theyre all wrong, I'm right, so screw all those fools I want it banned"
Nutrition guy - "Ummmm....... o....k......"

another of my favourite quotes is this one:

so basically... "I can still eat my incredibly unhealthy food, so I dont give a crap that red meat lovers can't have theirs"

and this:

"I'm a steadfast vegetarian.... so my opinion is that people need to eat less meat"
[sarcasm]no really... you don't say.[/sarcasm]

 

Tin pot.

 

I understand the ban on feeding the players red meat, at least before a game or practice. I think red meat is harder to digest and stays in the stomach longer, thus could cause problems for people doing a lot of intense physical labor after eating. That being said, a burger after the game wouldn't cause any problems.

Banning it for the fans... unless they have a big problem with fans puking in the stands because they ate and then got too worked up, this is all a bad joke. And actually, it's probably still all a bad joke if they're still selling fried fish and the like.

 

Bizarre.

 

That's my problem with militant vegans and the like. They are welcome to eat or not eat whatever they wish. It's when they start trying to influence or control what I eat that I get POed. Very few vegetarians are militant douches like this, but they sure make it difficult for their non-militant co-vegans.

 

Um...I'm a little surprised with everyone's reactions here.

He hasn't told his team that they can't eat red meat -- he's merely elected not to feed it to them himself. He hasn't told attendees of the game that they can't eat red meat, either, he just isn't serving it. It's his effing team, it's his effing park, so he gets to decide what food he serves and what food he won't. Fans aren't obligated to attend his games or to buy his food, so he's not pushing his agenda onto anyone. Why he's elected to do this doesn't even matter matter, because it's his effing team and his effing park. When I invite friends over for dinner, I don't serve meat, eggs, dairy. Why would I? I'm a vegan, it's my house, and it's my kitchen. If my potential guests have a problem with that (they never do because my wife is an amazing cook), they don't have to come.

 

From a business perspective, he might invoke the ire of his patrons and lose customers. Fiscally unwise. That said, though . . .

If I owned a restaurant, I'd likely not bother with a liquor licence (being a Mormon, I don't touch the stuff) and I wouldn't see that as forcing people to not drink alcohol in that if they want to drink it, they can do so elsewhere. But I wouldn't be surprised if my restaurant didn't last too long.

I would also hazard that he's not only not feeding it to his players, but telling them not to eat it at all. Not being a Jock, I don't know for sure, but I believe that teams often lay down some pretty intrusive rules for their players in terms of foods eaten and schedules kept. Any Jocks here please let me know if I'm wrong.

 

actually, yes he has, football teams in this country eat only the diet given to them by the teams nutritionists, if they eat anything not in that diet, they can be held in breach of contract - its under the being fit to play clause in their contract.

businesses in the UK dont function the same way as your house Drew, a whole bunch of riots and strikes ended the whole "its my effing business, you do what I say" idea from pompous arrogant upper class arsewits. In another recent thread, freedom of choice was held up by several posters as being the most important thing around, now freedom of choice is being taken away by someone with a 'big brother' attitude and thats ok? alot of these fans will have been going to this ground for years and now this guy gets to force his will on them if they want to see their team play, just because he's got some money and decided to buy their team? thats ok to you?

if your potential guests were paying for your home and lifestyle, maybe your attitude would be different, personally I hope that this the nail in the coffin to the club, when a team is 19th in their league, generally you'd think they'd do anything to keep their fans, not push them away.

 

Sho, you should show up at his park with a big ol' burger custome on... secretly loaded up with a ton of wrapped up burgers and start handing them out to all of the fans. Please stream live as well...

 

A football club isn't really a business in the normal sense though. Forest Green was founded in 1889. This guy is supposed to be a steward of the focal point of the community, pushing his own agenda in this way shouldn't be part of it. Forcing people to go without red meat for two hours isn't going to make him feature on a 'worst chairman ever' list but it is incredibly petty.

 

Blades, I wouldnt be suprised if people did dress up like that as a protest

 

Please. Businesses work exactly like my kitchen. Do Indian restaurants serve beef? Do football stadiums serve gourmet fare? Of course not, and while the reasons for those choices are quite different, the end result is the same. Businesses serve the food they wish to serve, for the reasons they choose to serve (or not serve) it. Not serving something is far different than denying someone the right to eat it. This isn't big brother talking. The owner of an establishment gets to decide what he wants to serve -- and not serve -- in his establishment. If you don't like it, go somewhere else. Regarding the red meat ban for his players, I'm inclined to doubt the medical legitimacy of his claims, but it's his club, his "kitchen". If his players don't like it, they don't have to stay -- they can quit and play somewhere else. Whether the team serves red meat or not, they're already telling their players what to eat. Red meat is hardly the only thing they don't serve.

 

That is astounding - football players have to get every meal they eat OK'ed by the nutritionist? Pro teams in the US certainly have nutritionists on their staffs, but they certainly aren't preparing the meals and telling them what to eat. Nutritionists provide guidles involving what types of food to eat, caloric intake, carbs, protein, fats, etc. So yes, there are "fit to play" clauses in players contracts, but how you stay fit is largely up to you.

Nutritionists also provide advice as to what types of supplements you are allowed to take that won't violate the ban on PEDs. There was a big stink a couple of years back when a couple of players on the Minnesota Vikings bought some dietary supplements (that were intended to help them lose weight) and took them to the team nutritionist who told them they were OK to take. They started using them, and failed their next drug test because of the content of the pills. The players appealed their suspensions, citing that the team nutritionist had said they were OK to take. (The players weren't suspended last year, and I think the case is still pending - they may still get suspended for four game next season.)

I agree with this completely - What they serve at the stadium is completely up to the owner.

 

The problem with that is that we’re not talking about a restaurant here – the serving of food at the stadium is secondary. And I realize you said “establishment”, not “restaurant”, but the problem is that going somewhere else isn’t really an option for fans of the football club.

Having said that, I don’t really disagree with his right to serve what he wants – I just think it’s a bad business decision. On the other hand, the linked article seems to suggest that fans can bring in meat-based food of their own if they want, so they do have options (although I’m not sure that bringing in a hamburger to be eaten an hour late is really an option).

 

If you mess with tradition, you're likely to get a backlash. I'm going to hazard that hamburgers and other "red meat" dishes are traditional at football games, and they have been for decades. Whether the guy is within his legal rights to make this change is not debatable -- of course it's his team and his venue. But nonetheless, I can imagine that the fans (a whole lot of whom are not vegan or vegetarian) are not going to like the change. They don't like people telling them what to eat or influencing their food choices in such a strong arm, sanctimonious way. I'm not a sports fan, so I can't measure how devoted they are to their sport, but speaking personally, I would invest my money elsewhere -- some examples:

-- going to the next town over and watching games in that stadium, where I can get the foods I've always loved.

-- paying more money for a cable package that'll let me see games from the comfort of my own home.

-- going to a local pub and watching the games on the big screen

-- attending the stadium but not buying a single effing thing from the concession stands.

Any of these, or a combination thereof, is going to mean that the business is going to take a financial hit, with ticket and / or food sales dropping. Is it really worth it? Time will tell.

Of course, I could be wrong, and people will feel that despite their opposition to his position, they still want to see the games firsthand in the stadium, because their love of football overrides all other considerations. Again, time will tell.

 

many do - I'm partial to beef rogan josh

if it would sell, yes. plenty of stadiums in the UK have premier clubs/lounges which serve very high class meals

the attitude is total big brother:

yes, but generally the owner is a cleaver man who intends to make money, to do this you serve what the public want - it is simple demand and supply, you cant tell the public how to eat which is what he is trying to do :

bye bye business.

once again - contract.

yes, they are told what they can and cant eat and when they can eat it, theyre also required to adjust their hours of sleep to suit the club.

not in the premiership, if a club decides that you are unfit to play as a result of your personal choices... a big fine is coming your way.

I havent disagreed with this, Im saying he is an idiot but then this enforces the old "if youve got the money, you can do what you want"

there will be people who will stop watching home games, if they can travel and only watch away games, I for example cant stand the liberty stadium, so I dont watch the ospreys when they play at home.

I wonder, he says "ham sandwich" I wonder if the stewards would let you in with a burger.

LKD of course has hit the nail on the head, I would think that a low ranking team is going to suffer in its fan base as a result of the owner, with it sponsorship will slide, time will tell.

 

Wow - now THAT is big brother. Yes, athletes in pro leagues in the US are expected to be ready to perform on game day. Yes, there are curfews on the nights leading up to the game. Yes, every player who signs a contract is expected to keep their weight in a certain range, with fines coming your way if you don't. (One particularly draconian way was done a couple of years ago by the Patriots. Overweight players were fined $100 per pound per day they were overweight. That adds up in a hurry.) That said, as long as you maintain yourself in that weight range, you can pretty much eat what you want.

 

Want to know what the best thing to eat right after exercising for those who want to build muscles is? Red meat.

 

Actually Drew, most stadiums for professional teams serve gourmet fare now. You don't go to many profesional sports venues, do you?(That's ntot a smart-ass comment btw, I'm just asking ) It's not the good old days of just getting a Dog, a Pop and some Peanuts anymore. The prices are through the roof. To help justify this, most newer stadiums are adding in private clubs and restaurants, including Sushi bars, etc.. I personally hate it. I prefer the older days when you could actually take your kids to the game without having to work overtime on the weekends to pay for it. . Now it will run you at least a hundred bucks to take tyour kid to the game with parking, tickets and concessions. Am I'm only talking baseball. Going to a NFL game will cost you a vacation trip. Let alone you have to pay for the game flyer as well. I use to keep the box score of every MLB game I ever went to. Now you have to buy that as well. I hate the owners. I need a time machine...

 

Shoshino, thinking something and forcing other people to adhere to your idea of how things should be are not even remotely in the same league. Red meat is hardly the only food the team is not offered, so you really can't claim that banning red meat is any more "big brother" than banning any of the other foods the team doesn't allow their players to eat. I'm opposed to the policy as a whole, but I fail to see how telling a player he can't eat red meat is any different than telling him he can't eat Fugu. There are tons of things that the players aren't getting fed. Adding one more item to the list doesn't make the policy any more "big brother" than it already was.

Regarding the stadium? It's his club -- no one has to attend. Incidentally, Shosh, the vast Majority of Indian restaurants will not serve beef -- Hinduism...cows are sacred...that sort of thing. A lot of them don't even serve meat.