OT The Lightning Are Banning Some Penguins Fans From Wearing Pittsburgh Gear In Tampa

[SlyPokerDog]

If you’re a Pittsburgh Penguins fan with great seats to one of the Eastern Conference Final games in Tampa Bay this year, you may want to leave your Pens gear at home. The Lightning are not fond of your enemy colors, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

The Tampa Bay Lightning has barred fans from wearing visiting team gear in select areas of Amalie Arena during the 2015-16 playoffs, including seats in the first two rows and other high-priced sections.

It’s an effort to increase the team’s home-ice advantage and fend off transplants who moved to Florida in search of sunny weather but never left their home team behind. The policies, according to the team’s website, bar any attire, apparel, clothing, accessories, flags, noisemakers and other gear “branded with the name, logo, or registered mark(s) of the then-current 2015-2016 playoff opponent of the Lightning” — in this case, the Penguins.
​

http://uproxx.com/sports/tampa-bay-lightning-banning-penguins-gear-from-amalie-arena/

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Sure, I don't like seeing Kobe fan boys wearing Laker jerseys at Blazer games but oh well, you paid your money, you should be able to support your team and wear what you want.

 

[Harry's Raincoat]

Will be interesting to see if this ruling stands after complaints and knashing of teeth. If allowed, all teams will follow.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Will be interesting to see if this ruling stands after complaints and knashing of teeth. If allowed, all teams will follow.

Same team did it last year in the playoffs.

 

[Orion Bailey]

BS. Lame.

 

[crandc]

Seems to me if a team is good enough to win, a few fans wearing jerseys would not have an impact.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Seems to me if a team is good enough to win, a few fans wearing jerseys would not have an impact.

Yeah but let's be honest: people from Pennsylvsnia are the worst people. Anything you can do to remind them of that is good in my book.

 

[Natebishop3]

Sure, I don't like seeing Kobe fan boys wearing Laker jerseys at Blazer games but oh well, you paid your money, you should be able to support your team and wear what you want.

I've always thought I'd give out refunds at the door for opposing fans and tell them to pound sand. Why let opposing fans into your house during the playoffs?

 

[kjironman1]

Yeah but let's be honest: people from Pennsylvsnia are the worst people.

I just love the "People from Pennsylvania are the worst people" comment. Too funny!

 

[Natebishop3]

Yeah but let's be honest: people from Pennsylvsnia are the worst people. Anything you can do to remind them of that is good in my book.

I had to man a customer service phone line for people from Philly...... awful, awful human beings.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Further proof that hockey in Florida is unnatural and doesn't belong. It's a winter sport played on ice. WFT is it doing in Florida? Ice in Florida is best used in fruit flavored drinks with miniature umbrellas, not as a playing surface.

No wonder you don't have any local fans. In a market where the average annual snowfall is 0" and the average low temp, in the coldest month of the year, is 52 degrees, the local kids just don't grow up playing ice hockey.

If you start banning transplanted fans of Northern teams, your arenas will be empty. You want a home ice advantage for your ice hockey team? Move the team someplace where ice occurs naturally.

BNM

 

[ripcityboy]

I woud love to see them do this in Dallas during the NFL season . No more Black and Gold at Cowboy's Stadium. All the Penn tramsplants who still support the Steelers down there? Uncle Jerry says you gotta support America's team now! They'd shit a brick.

And I wasn't much a Crosby fan to begin with....

 

[Strenuus]

Yeah but let's be honest: people from Pennsylvsnia are the worst people. Anything you can do to remind them of that is good in my book.

Don't knock them, some of them just aren't electric enough.

If anyone gets where I'm going with that.... I love you.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Don't knock them, some of them just aren't electric enough.

If anyone gets where I'm going with that.... I love you.

HAHAHAHAH! Well played, brother Stren!

 

[dviss1]

I've always thought I'd give out refunds at the door for opposing fans and tell them to pound sand. Why let opposing fans into your house during the playoffs?

Here's what I can say:

When my son and I were so graciously given tickets to the Lillard Time Thunder game, some OKC fans KingSped to the game. They were right next to us. My preconceived notion was that they'd have nothing to say to us LOUD (I root pretty hard) Blazers fans. My son is super cute and just as outgoing as his talkative father. They dispelled that notion immediately by truly being some of the kindest people I've ever met. The wife knew ALL kinds of random KD facts that she shared with my son. The husband and I talked about the Enes deal. And then I got the last laugh and got to experience "Lillard Time".

Fans who pay their money should wear whatever the FUCK they want.

Another thing:

Why the HELL do corporations not have to abide by the constitution? Wearing a jersey is freedom of speech IMHO.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Another thing:

Why the HELL do corporations not have to abide by the constitution? Wearing a jersey is freedom of speech IMHO.

Technically, the arena is private property. So, they can enforce whatever dress code they see fit. Like McDonald's requiring employees wear pants and customers wear shoes and shirts to get service. Walmart, on the other hand, does not appear to enforce any dress code at all, but that's also their choice.

BNM

 

[Strenuus]

Here's what I can say:

When my son and I were so graciously given tickets to the Lillard Time Thunder game, some OKC fans KingSped to the game. They were right next to us. My preconceived notion was that they'd have nothing to say to us LOUD (I root pretty hard) Blazers fans. My son is super cute and just as outgoing as his talkative father. They dispelled that notion immediately by truly being some of the kindest people I've ever met. The wife knew ALL kinds of random KD facts that she shared with my son. The husband and I talked about the Enes deal. And then I got the last laugh and got to experience "Lillard Time".

Fans who pay their money should wear whatever the FUCK they want.

Another thing:

Why the HELL do corporations not have to abide by the constitution? Wearing a jersey is freedom of speech IMHO.

The year before GSW won it all, I went to a late season game at the Rose Garden against them (It was the one that went to overtime, Curry had 48, and IIRC Draymond hit a game tying 3... but we still won.) And I sat next to some GSW fans. Couldn't have been nicer. Had really good conversations about the bay, about Portland, etc. They were really kind. Even in defeat, they stayed classy. But man, it was going back and forth between Lillard and Curry and I would get pumped, they would get pumped... it was a great game to be at, and they enhanced it.

If someone wants to wear the others' team jerseys and shit, do it. I'll scoff and probably say "fan since this morning" or some snide remark under my breath, but they are wearing it... they paid for it.

 

[crandc]

I've worn Blazers gear up and down the coast from Seattle to LA. I've gotten some flack, some good natured trash talking, both of which I expect, and some downright nasty sexist filth. I've had things thrown at me by "fans". I had someone in Sacramento tell security to throw me out; I'd been going there for years and security said yeah, we know this woman and laughed.

But I've never had an arena tell me I can't wear Blazers gear. Blazers nail colors. Hell, even Blazers underwear.

 

[Natebishop3]

Why the HELL do corporations not have to abide by the constitution? Wearing a jersey is freedom of speech IMHO.

Because corporations can't throw you in jail for saying something bad about their CEO. Governments in the past have jailed and/or murdered people for saying something negative about their king.

The whole point of freedom of speech was to protect the people from the government. It's not some blanket principle that allows you to say whatever you want, or wear whatever you want, wherever you want to go, whenever you feel like it. A private business can ask you to leave. Ever seen the sign "no shirt, no shoes, no service?"

You CAN stand out on the street and say whatever you feel like saying though. That's your freedom of speech.

 

[dviss1]

Technically, the arena is private property. So, they can enforce whatever dress code they see fit. Like McDonald's requiring employees wear pants and customers wear shoes and shirts to get service. Walmart, on the other hand, does not appear to enforce any dress code at all, but that's also their choice.

BNM

I get that whole private property thing. My question is why private organizations can simply ignore our constitution.

 

[dviss1]

Because corporations can't throw you in jail for saying something bad about their CEO. Governments in the past have jailed and/or murdered people for saying something negative about their king.

The whole point of freedom of speech was to protect the people from the government. It's not some blanket principle that allows you to say whatever you want, or wear whatever you want, wherever you want to go, whenever you feel like it. A private business can ask you to leave. Ever seen the sign "no shirt, no shoes, no service?"

You CAN stand out on the street and say whatever you feel like saying though. That's your freedom of speech.

If you think protection from government is the only reason why we have freedom of speech, I think you would be wrong. It wasn't only the government that the founding fathers were trying to get away from. It was the East India Company too.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I get that whole private property thing. My question is why private organizations can simply ignore our constitution.

The Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, are the frame work for our government. Our government can't tell me I can't wear my Blazers gear, but if you're a Clippers fan, you can tell me I can't wear my Blazers gear in your house - your private residence. You own that property, so you get to set the rules.

Same is true for the freedom of speech. The government cannot censor my opinions, but if I go online a start bad mouthing the company I work for, or say other things they they feel damage their brand and negatively impact their profits, they have every right to fire me from their employment. This was the root whole Duck Dynasty "controversy" a couple years ago. The First Amendment guarantees that the US Government cannot censor Phil Robertson's homophobic opinions, but it does not guarantee him the right to host a crappy cable TV show in perpetuity. He's entitled to express those opinions, but he is not entitled to be paid to express them if his employer feels they negatively impact their business.

BNM

 

[Natebishop3]

If you think protection from government is the only reason why we have freedom of speech, I think you would be wrong. It wasn't only the government that the founding fathers were trying to get away from. It was the East India Company too.

I get what you're saying, but you're wrong. A company can refuse service to just about anyone, except for things like race, sexual orientation, etc. If someone comes walking into a nice restaurant wearing sweats and smelling like they haven't showered in a week, they can ask them to leave. A business has rights too.

 

[Natebishop3]

The Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, are the frame work for our government. Our government can't tell me I can't wear my Blazers gear, but if you're a Clippers fan, you can tell me I can't wear my Blazers gear in your house - your private residence. You own that property, so you get to set the rules.

Same is true for the freedom of speech. The government cannot censor my opinions, but if I go online a start bad mouthing the company I work for, or say other things they they feel damage their brand and negatively impact their profits, they have every right to fire me from their employment. This was the root whole Duck Dynasty "controversy" a couple years ago. The First Amendment guarantees that the US Government cannot censor Phil Robertson's homophobic opinions, but it does not guarantee him the right to host a crappy cable TV show in perpetuity. He's entitled to express those opinions, but he is not entitled to be paid to express them if his employer feels they negatively impact their business.

BNM

You said it better. Well put.

People think that freedom of speech entitles them to do or say whatever they want, whenever they want, wherever they want, to whomever they want.

It simply does not. It was put into place because the founding fathers got tired of being persecuted for disagreeing with the King of England. Freedom of speech allows us to say that we think Obama is horrible, or that Bush was awful, without having to worry about repercussions from the government. That's the whole point of freedom of speech.

 

[Boob-No-More]

I get what you're saying, but you're wrong. A company can refuse service to just about anyone, except for things like race, sexual orientation, etc. If someone comes walking into a nice restaurant wearing sweats and smelling like they haven't showered in a week, they can ask them to leave. A business has rights too.

There is however, a fine line here. If that business is issued a business license by the local government, they must abide by the terms of that license, which usually includes specific language stating that they cannot discriminate based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc. Local zoning laws usually also dictate that they must comply with the American's with Disabilities to allow access to their business for people in wheelchairs and with other physical limitations.

This is a good thing as it does help protect peoples basic civil rights. But, it also doesn't give people the right to be complete assholes. I can make you leave my place of business if you are being disruptive and disrespectful to my employees and other customers, but I can't refuse to serve you my crappy fast food chicken, because you're white, gay and/or Presbyterian.

BNM

 

[Natebishop3]

There is however, a fine line here. If that business is issued a business license by the local government, they must abide by the terms of that license, which usually includes specific language stating that they cannot discriminate based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc. Local zoning laws usually also dictate that they must comply with the American's with Disabilities to allow access to their business for people in wheelchairs and with other physical limitations.

This is a good thing as it does help protect peoples basic civil rights. But, it also doesn't give people the right to be complete assholes. I can make you leave my place of business if you are being disruptive and disrespectful to my employees and other customers, but I can't refuse to serve you my crappy fast food chicken, because you're white, gay and/or Presbyterian.

BNM

Totally, that's where I was going with that. There is a limit to what a company can do, as there should be.

 

[dviss1]

You said it better. Well put.

People think that freedom of speech entitles them to do or say whatever they want, whenever they want, wherever they want, to whomever they want.

It simply does not. It was put into place because the founding fathers got tired of being persecuted for disagreeing with the King of England. Freedom of speech allows us to say that we think Obama is horrible, or that Bush was awful, without having to worry about repercussions from the government. That's the whole point of freedom of speech.

I hope you don't think that that's been my personal stance, because it never has been. I'm one of the people who says that the Second Amendment can be regulated because the first amendment has.

 

[crandc]

BNM nailed it.

It is laughable that those who say homophobic, sexist, misogynist crap and get publicly criticized cry that their "free speech" has been denied. No it hasn't. You have the freedom to say crap and I have the freedom to say it is crap.

There is no right to a platform and no right to be free of criticism or consequences.

Back to the subject - arenas, unless publicly owned, can presumably legally ban people from wearing gear of another team. But I have the freedom to say it is stupid and petty. It's not like carrying profane or abusive signs, or screaming obscenities and threats, which arenas should regulate (ironically often do a poor job).

 

[Natebishop3]

I hope you don't think that that's been my personal stance, because it never has been. I'm one of the people who says that the Second Amendment can be regulated because the first amendment has.

No, definitely not directed at you specifically. I have just seen a lot of people bring up freedom of speech whenever someone does or says something stupid. And most of the time it has no relevancy. The other one that gets brought up a lot is separation of church and state. People seem to have a hard time understanding those two principles.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I love this.