TheZeppo wrote:It's funny how attitudes have changed when it comes to going on the field at the ends of games. I remember this being a common occurance when the Lions played at Empire Stadium. In fact, my first close-up look at artificial turf occured at the end of a game sometime during the 1970 season. As a kid back then, it was a great thrill to walk (and wrestle with your friends) on the same field where the pros had just finished playing. The ironic thing is that I can't for the life of me remember a fan ever going on to the Empire Stadium field DURING a game.
Attitudes have changed because fan behaviour has changed (for the worse, on average). As you say, mid-game fan invasions were nonexistant during the Empire Stadium era, but four or five years ago, they were practically
de rigueur at BC Place (thankfully those are now a rarity). After what happened to Monica Seles and, more recently, Tom Gamboa (the KC 1b coach who was attacked by a father and son team in Chicago) and Eric Carter in the 2002 playoffs, fans entering the field of play can't be taken lightly. If some such idiot committed a weapons offence there'd be hell to pay.
There was a stretch in Winnipeg fairly recently -- shortly after the Reinebold era, IIRC -- when it became commonplace for Bomber fans to storm the field after a win (presumably because they had forgotten what it felt like under the previous regime), but they eventually got it under control, although I was surprised it took them so long to do so.
Sports can be a peculiar thing. When partaking in fiction, like a book or movie, we adopt a "Willing Suspension of Disbelief" for enjoyment's sake. There's a similar force at work in sports: "Willing Suspension of Rationality". If you doubt this, listen to any conversation between rival team fans. You even see it among fans of the same team. Fans argue over who's the better QB or goalie, and selectively cite stats that support their views while ignoring those that don't.