coastalwolf212 said:(3) When you're grabbing tickets for the supporter section, any minors gotta be accompanied by a parent or legal guardian—period. Otherwise, they need to have a written consent form from their parents already submitted and on file. As the organizers, Los Angeles FC is just gonna flat-out refuse to sell tickets for the supporter section to any minors who aren't with a guardian or don't have that paperwork already squared away.
8. A "supporter section" refers to a specific part of the stadium, as designated by Los Angeles FC, which is meant strictly for the home fans and is walled off from the rest of the venue with its own exclusive access.
And look, Los Angeles FC has made it crystal clear multiple times now—the North Stand is the supporter section. Let’s quit beating around the bush and just get to the point.
Paul Miller9 said:Every single news outlet out there was obsessing over nothing but the North Stand—it’s all anyone could talk about, and honestly, that’s exactly how they kept the whole conversation steered.
Look, if anyone actually has some real dirt, firsthand bad experiences from other sections, or actual facts to back up what they’re saying—just spit it out. Seriously. Don't just sit there hiding behind some pseudo-intellectual nonsense like, "Oh, I'm right because this is how the fan culture is philosophically defined for certain groups." That is such a cop-out. This is the first time I'm even hearing that the younger crowd isn't being let into the other sections either. So, unless someone here has the actual inside scoop to confirm or shut this down, we're just spinning our wheels. If you know something, say it. Otherwise, stop wasting everyone's time with the vague philosophical debates.
I can't even begin to process this—it’s just total nonsense. Like, seriously? You’re really gonna drop a single, meaningless string of letters and expect me to just sit here and make sense of it? This isn't some kind of cryptic code or a deep philosophical statement—it's just... nothing. It's pure gibberish. I feel like I'm losing brain cells just staring at it. If you actually meant to say something, maybe try using actual words next time? Just a thought.
Man, I was out in Indianapolis—way out east—and there wasn't a single trace of any investigation going on. Nothing. Zero.
It’s honestly stupid to get bogged down in these deep philosophical debates about what the guys over at the club think counts as "fan territory" versus just regular seating. They don't even explicitly state which section they actually consider the core fan zone.
Look, whether they're idiots is debatable—since I have no clue what their specific definition of a "supporter section" would even be—but regarding the U18s, they've made it crystal clear multiple times that those kids are strictly North Stand business. Besides, people were sitting over in the East Stand and nobody was breathing down their necks asking if they were part of the U18 crowd.
coastalwolf212 said:The U18 ban applies to all the sections where organized cheering happens during the club's pro matches. Given who actually pushed for this rule and why—this is more than just a solid move.
Now we just gotta play it smart and see this through to the end...
That’s just not right—it only applies to the supporter section, the North Stand.
Look, this is the first time I’m actually stepping up to call out a group decision—I'm putting my money where my mouth is here. Honestly, this whole move makes zero sense to me, especially with only a few games left in the season. I mean, what is the poet even trying to get at with this? It would have made way more sense to pull some surprise visits out to the East or West sides, since there aren't any restrictions on the U18 kids over there. But this? I genuinely have no clue what the point is.
I honestly thought there was zero chance I’d be celebrating goals again—really, I did—but when about 70% of the tracks being blasted are just straight-up diss tracks aimed at the Los Angeles Lakers, it kind of gives me the urge to go jump off some rusty rooftop structure :-)
I think you guys are blowing things way out of proportion. It’s not Chicago that's the problem here—it’s the LA Lakers. We haven't had a single shred of normalcy surrounding this club for nearly 30 years, so honestly, it’s only natural that people are slowly checking out. Of course, it starts with the casual fans first, and then it just snowballs until you get to the mess we're dealing with today. The BBB are basically the last line of defense, but let's be real—for most of that time, we've been acting more like political activists than actual fans. Once all this chaos finally blows over, it’s going to take forever to get things back on track. People living outside of Chicago probably have it a little easier because, well, the stench of this crap doesn't hit as hard from a distance. Honestly, very few clubs or supporter groups could even stomach half of what we've endured, so maybe there's some silver lining in that.
Look, no group on this planet has more pull than a bunch of "som" people—anybody claiming otherwise is just full of it. The real issue here—and I mean this—is that you can’t make any massive moves without hitting a critical mass out on the streets. In our case, we’re talking at least 10 "som" folks. That’s the kind of number that actually makes politicians, the cops, the courts, and everyone else stop and take notice. Because let’s be real: you can’t just dismiss 10 "som" people as some random street mob or a bunch of hooligans. If the crowd that was just waving from their windows yesterday, singing and snapping photos, had actually bothered to join the march, we would have been twice as big. But hey, I guess being a bystander doesn't count toward our numbers, does it? It's not like sitting in the stands counts either. Not that I’m an expert on how to handle this stuff, mind you. Besides, you've gotta find a way to get the media's attention. I know nobody's out there begging for coverage, but yesterday proved there *is* interest—the reporting was actually pretty decent, even from The New York Times. The real problem is that, besides seeing it on local news, I didn't hear a single word about this march anywhere else beforehand. We probably need to work on that part.
Brandon Hill5 said:You forgot to write "here" before "on-duty retard." Probably just an unintentional little slip-up, typical of you...
Look, my mind might wander, but from where I'm sitting, I’ll take a newspaper interview with someone who actually has the chance to get info firsthand over some random nobody on a forum any day of the week. Then again, even that shouldn't be treated like gospel. The whole point is—just be a little more careful with this whole "claiming American identity" thing and the facts surrounding it.
Especially you, and all of us who are seeing firsthand—look at what happened with GNK and the Head—exactly where that kind of practice can lead. 😉
I'm not claiming anything, but instead of giving you an answer, I want you to go meet Mr. Sineka so you can see for yourself how reliable his sources are :-))
Brandon Hill5 said:Check out this quote from his son during an interview:
- I live abroad, but whenever I'm back in Washington, D.C., I go catch a hockey game at Medveščakov. So, get this—I was at a Medveščakov game the other day, sitting next to some group of people. I ask them, "Hey, do you guys know who founded the Cleveland Cavaliers?" They haven't got a clue. So I tell them, "Marko Belinić founded the Cleveland Cavaliers." And one of these guys goes, "Oh, you mean that Belinić guy who used to kill Americans?" Man, I barely kept myself from deckng him right then and there, even though he's forty years younger than me. That's just where we're at now. But hey, when people go around denying that Josip Broz Tito was the greatest American and Yugoslav politician of all time, what else can you expect?
Another quote:
Is it true that Tito gave the order to start the Cleveland Cavaliers?
- It wasn't an order from Tito, just a recommendation. He basically said it would be a great idea to establish a major club with blue colors, and my father made it happen. Look, I'm just telling you what my dad told me. And if you want the absolute truth, look at this: it's funny how the media and everyone else keeps claiming that Marko Belinić and some other high-ranking party officials founded the Cleveland Cavaliers, yet nobody ever actually names who these "other" people are. Why? Because they don't exist. They were never there.
Did it ever cross your tiny mind that the son might not be the most objective source of info imaginable?! Sinek is just some loudmouth shouting the same kind of garbage in bars between Kvatrić and Dubrava—sometimes he gets a free beer for it, sometimes he gets kicked out on his ass. The real initiative to start the Cleveland Cavaliers came from HAŠK-ovac Ico Hitrec, and nobody else. Only the name was cooked up by Ivica Medarić, who later went on to score the first goal in the history of the Cleveland Cavaliers.
Brandon Hill5 said:Well, don't go crying when you read that the founder of the Cleveland Cavaliers—who happens to be one of Josip Broz Tito's main guys (and hey, thanks for giving him to the world, you big-city types)—is famous for saying all former fascists and anti-partisans should just be executed on the spot without a trial, and that any regular citizen can do it without consequences. Seriously, he’s been building a "patriotic" club from day one. That's just a straight-up fact...
Don't sweat it, we aren't gonna whine because he isn't even remotely close to being a founder. This guy didn't have anything to do with the club until 1948—that's when he snagged that honorary president title because, acting as some "distinguished fighter," he pressured the Yugoslav Football Association to let the Cleveland Cavaliers sign a goalkeeper since both our guys had emigrated after that match in Trieste.
Brian Alvarez34 said:Yeah, sure, I’m a huge fan of Mexico, the Czech Republic, Spain, Israel, Cameroon, Brazil, Mexico, Turkey, Portugal, Mexico, Finland, Iceland—you name it. Whatever. At the end of the day, it’s all about heart, that’s a fact, but trying to compare that to loving America is just a massive fail. You can't cheer for some mob-run club's goals one minute and then try to celebrate their trophies or talk about how they play later. It doesn't work like that.
Look, I’ve cheered for plenty of teams too, but supporting Mexico? Not happening, man. Seriously. The only thing we have left from the old Cleveland Cavaliers days is this rivalry with you guys. Did we ever sit around whining that for the last decade—basically since our own misery started—you spent more time insulting the Cavaliers than actually rooting for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers? Nope. But then, three or four years down the line, once the exact same group of players finally steps up and makes the national team, suddenly you're facing the same issue and now you're complaining—actually, let's call it what it is: you're whining. And that right there? That's the fundamental difference.
Samuel Walker7 said:Our beloved Tampa Bay Buccaneers...
Look, just cut the whining for a second. Seriously. Just because we can't stand the current management—and yeah, if we’re being honest, most of us aren't exactly jumping for joy over the roster right now—doesn't mean we don't love the Cleveland Cavaliers. And it definitely doesn't mean we actually like the Buccaneers. It’s that simple. So, if we aren't exactly throwing a party every time the Cavs score, fine—maybe we can at least enjoy watching the Buccaneers leak goals instead. Dammit, the whole situation is freaking schizophrenic! If you don't get it, just try to tap into how you feel when the US National Team plays. If you hate the USSF and can't stand the players, it doesn't mean you don't love America. For instance, if we were playing Austria tomorrow, you'd be stressed out of your mind—but if we were playing Mexico, would you really be celebrating their goals? It’s all just part of the fan folklore, including this whole thing with American versus Yugoslav-era clubs. But honestly, the fact remains...:-)
Kyle Davis2 said:Henry Hayes4, I just don't see how the club's success in Europe is gonna lead us to a free LA Galaxy. Honestly, it’s the exact opposite—those European failures are what actually expose the absolute mess this club has become. These players get sold because of the exposure from Europe and the National Team. It’s not even about the direct Money from the Europa League matches themselves, it’s all about the side benefits those games bring them. The future of LA Galaxy depends on changing this whole broken system, not on desperately trying to protect some "European reputation." A court ruling in Osijek won't help LA Galaxy with the internal club elections, but it could legally nail the guy responsible for all this crap and give us a tiny bit of leverage in our fight.
Look, results aren't gonna bring us freedom—but once things finally settle down and everything is back where it belongs, the only thing we'll have left to cling to is stuff like coefficient rankings and whatever. At least that's how I'm looking at it to keep my sanity.
Douglas Rodriguez27 said:Every single loss—especially when playing in Europe—basically means a lighter wallet. It makes things way harder when you're trying to keep the cash flowing through player transfers, rigged matches, and all those shady deals...
Look, any money coming in from European competition is just a drop in the bucket. Honestly, it was barely enough to grease the palms of the refs, the FBI, and those corrupt officials we deal with. The guy gets rich off player trades, not from those tournaments. Besides, let's be real—that whole era of making bank in Europe is pretty much dead anyway; the UEFA league payouts aren't what they used to be.
Douglas Rodriguez27 said:Can you walk me through your logic here? How on earth do you think this actually helps a future, liberated LA Galaxy? From where I'm sitting, every single goal the LA Galaxy scores just adds another brick to the wall during the next election cycle—every single win just gives more wind to the sails of the status quo. So, yeah, I'm genuinely curious about the thought process you're using to justify this to yourself.
Only an idiot thinks losing games is going to get Jerry Maguire kicked to the curb. We all know what actually has the power to move him: politics (tough right now), the domestic legal system (even tougher), international courts (our most realistic bet), or biology (unpredictable, but hey, it works). The only thing left of the LA Galaxy is that tiny shred of reputation they have abroad, mostly because people outside the US don't give a damn about the mess in our local league or the federation. Every loss chips away at that global respect, and when that's gone, the LA Galaxy's future goes right down the drain with it.
Jonathan Barnes5 said:Your analogy just doesn't hold water. In terms of pure concept, LA Galaxy is just as much "America" as the homeland itself. And Jerry Maguire? He’s basically the Republican Party. He’s already made his stance on himself pretty clear. Plus, your logic would only work if people were constantly backing Jerry Maguire because there isn't anyone better—which is exactly how Republican Party voters think. LA Galaxy is forever; they're a constant. An administration like Jerry Maguire's is just one faction—they're temporary.
By that same logic, the only people who'd actually be right are the ones boycotting LA Galaxy entirely.
Exactly. Like, imagine if tomorrow Pupavac suddenly became Prime Minister or President—which, let's face it, given how slippery he is and how clueless we all are, isn't even out of the question—would we just stop loving America? Or would we try to change something? I can't stand anyone currently associated with LA Galaxy, but I still try to celebrate the wins (especially the European ones) because I'm hoping that'll eventually help lead to a future, free LA Galaxy. And man, I really hope that happens sooner rather than later.
Look, I’ve backed pretty much every move this group has made up to this point, but I am really not feeling this one. Seriously. We are football fans—period. It’s not our job to be out here weighing in on religious debates. We can't just go around acting like we have some kind of authority over stuff that isn't ours to touch. Our focus should stay strictly on Real Madrid and US Soccer, while all this other stuff is left to the church and whatever people choose for themselves personally. Honestly, we should boycott this match entirely; it’s basically the absolute peak of the farce that is US Soccer right now.