by Forbury Lion » 18 Apr 2010 00:08
by bigshaka'away' » 18 Apr 2010 00:33
by Dirk Gently » 18 Apr 2010 00:55
by North Somerset Royal » 18 Apr 2010 10:48
by Rex » 18 Apr 2010 11:01
by North Somerset Royal » 18 Apr 2010 12:28
Dirk Gently For the n x thousandth time - there is strength in numbers.
If enough people stand together, nothing can be done to stop them. If a few people stand then they're easy pickings.
No-one can support standing in seated areas whilst the law remains the way it is
by Rex » 18 Apr 2010 12:42
by RoyalBlue » 18 Apr 2010 13:22
North Somerset Royal Whilst I personally have no problems with people standing and would welcome a return to terracing it was pointed out in yesterdays programme that standing in an all seater stadium is in fact illegal.
by Arnie_Pie » 18 Apr 2010 16:43
by Dirk Gently » 18 Apr 2010 18:10
North Somerset Royal Well in that case he speaks with forked tongue!Dirk Gently For the n x thousandth time - there is strength in numbers.
If enough people stand together, nothing can be done to stop them. If a few people stand then they're easy pickings.
ProgrammeNo-one can support standing in seated areas whilst the law remains the way it is
by North Somerset Royal » 18 Apr 2010 20:40
by North Somerset Royal » 18 Apr 2010 20:44
RoyalBlueNorth Somerset Royal Whilst I personally have no problems with people standing and would welcome a return to terracing it was pointed out in yesterdays programme that standing in an all seater stadium is in fact illegal.
Illegal?
Just when has anyone been arrested, charged, prosecuted and convicted for standing in an all seater stadium?
Against regulations maybe but that's very different from being a criminal offence!
it is illegal for a supporter to stand persistently whilst watching a football match at the MadStad
by Rex » 18 Apr 2010 21:01
by Dirk Gently » 18 Apr 2010 21:50
North Somerset Royal It certainly implies that if enough people are involved it is OK to break the law.
North Somerset Royal An incredible statement if it is true that you hold what should be a responsible position in STAR.
North Somerset Royal Also it is not a statement of fact. Something can be done. The Police can arrest them as breaching the Football Grounds Safety Regulations and the club can ban them for life. The practicalities involved may lead the stewards not to act when faced with large numbers but that does not make it right or preclude retrospective action based on video recordings which some clubs have taken.
by North Eaat royal » 18 Apr 2010 22:46
Dirk GentlyNorth Somerset Royal It certainly implies that if enough people are involved it is OK to break the law.
Nonsense. It implies nothing of the sort. It states that if enough people are involved then ground authorities will be powerless to prevent then standing. Which is precisely why when the vast majority of a large away crowd (e.g. Cardiff, Newcastle, West Ham, etc) stand they are unmolested but when a small number in Y25/Y26 stand they are targeted for this. (Which is where this statement first came up - as a response to the old argument "They're all standing, why can't we?)North Somerset Royal An incredible statement if it is true that you hold what should be a responsible position in STAR.
I think that is an incredible and also an iresponsible statement, actually. When I post on an anonymous internet message board using a screenname which does not mention STAR, how could anyone possibly deem that as having anything to do with STAR or to be representing STAR in any way?
Even if I accepted there was some validity in your first point (which I categorically do not!) I would still not accept this second point as being valid, because the implication of this is that anyone involved in supporter representation anywhere automatically loses the right to an opinion of their own!North Somerset Royal Also it is not a statement of fact. Something can be done. The Police can arrest them as breaching the Football Grounds Safety Regulations and the club can ban them for life. The practicalities involved may lead the stewards not to act when faced with large numbers but that does not make it right or preclude retrospective action based on video recordings which some clubs have taken.
The first half of this is also nonsense, I'm afraid. The police have no jurisdiction against supporters who stand (or who "persistantly stand," to be more accurate). The police can't get involved with anyone who does not obey ground regulations - they can only get involved if a supporter refuses to obey the orders of the approriate ground authority (e.g. a steward/Tango), who refuses to be evicted or who acts violently or offensively as a result - i.e. causes a breach of the peace.
The fact that you recognise that bans come from the clubs themselves rather than via the legal process suggests that you do know this - but enforcing standing regulations is absolutely not a police matter and they simply will not do this.
The same practicalities you refer to about retrospective action further reinforces the point about home fans being targeted more than away fans - there's no point in a club trying to take retrospective action against a visiting supporter, they can only use such measures against home supporters, because they're the ones who want to come back to the next game. But while PL & FL clubs refuse to have any data-sharing agreements there'll be no such retrospective action possible for away supporters who don't do any more than break ground regulations.
FWIW, the only way to break the logjam and allow clubs who want to to introduce safe-standing areas is via the political process. This is very much happening, and the election may make this happen quicker. In the meantime, we all really ought to understand the realities of life with such unenforcable regulations as we have now.
by Dirk Gently » 18 Apr 2010 22:57
by North Somerset Royal » 18 Apr 2010 23:00
Nonsense. It implies nothing of the sort.
When I post on an anonymous internet message board using a screenname which does not mention STAR, how could anyone possibly deem that as having anything to do with STAR or to be representing STAR in any way?
The police have no jurisdiction against supporters who stand (or who "persistantly stand," to be more accurate). The police can't get involved with anyone who does not obey ground regulations - they can only get involved if a supporter refuses to obey the orders of the approriate ground authority (e.g. a steward/Tango), who refuses to be evicted or who acts violently or offensively as a result - i.e. causes a breach of the peace.
The fact that you recognise that bans come from the clubs themselves rather than via the legal process suggests that you do know this - but enforcing standing regulations is absolutely not a police matter and they simply will not do this.
by Dirk Gently » 18 Apr 2010 23:16
North Somerset RoyalNorth Somerset RoyalNonsense. It implies nothing of the sort.
Of course it does. Its tantamount to saying that its OK to shoplift as long as you have a large enough gang to make it impractical for the storekeeper to prevent it.
North Somerset RoyalWhen I post on an anonymous internet message board using a screenname which does not mention STAR, how could anyone possibly deem that as having anything to do with STAR or to be representing STAR in any way?
When you become an officer of a representative body you cannot switch that responsibility off and on when it suits you. Using an alias to post comments on the Internet which were not in line with his party's policy recently led to the demise of a parliamentary candidate. Somehow I dont think the club would be too happy to discover that a STAR official was posting information likely to encourage supporters to break club rules.
North Somerset RoyalThe police have no jurisdiction against supporters who stand (or who "persistantly stand," to be more accurate). The police can't get involved with anyone who does not obey ground regulations - they can only get involved if a supporter refuses to obey the orders of the approriate ground authority (e.g. a steward/Tango), who refuses to be evicted or who acts violently or offensively as a result - i.e. causes a breach of the peace.
The fact that you recognise that bans come from the clubs themselves rather than via the legal process suggests that you do know this - but enforcing standing regulations is absolutely not a police matter and they simply will not do this.
Of course I am aware that in the normal course of events the Police would only act if asked to intervene when for example people refused to comply with the directions of club officials. However it is not true that the Police could not act unilaterally. If police officers saw someone acting in such a way as to be likely to cause a breach of the peace (which might arise for example when standing supporters were annoying others by blocking their view) they would be able to arrest them.
by North Somerset Royal » 18 Apr 2010 23:33
And this is really ironic since this actually came from a meeting I attended where it was a senior member of the FLA who acknowledged that ground authorities were unable to prevent persistent standing when sufficient numbers did this.
Presumably if you apply the same leap of logic this means that the FLA are encouraging people to stand ...
The sacked candidate, Stuart MacLennan, tweeted using his own account, in his own name - not under an alias at all. That, of course, is unacceptable but also a completely different scenario.
I ddn't say the police wouldn't act unilaterally - I said they wouldn't act to enforce standing regulations. They would only act to prevent the law being broken or when called to assist the ground authorities in such circumtances. In your example it's the breach of the peace they react to, not the standing.
by RoyalBlue » 19 Apr 2010 08:30
North Somerset RoyalRoyalBlueNorth Somerset Royal Whilst I personally have no problems with people standing and would welcome a return to terracing it was pointed out in yesterdays programme that standing in an all seater stadium is in fact illegal.
Illegal?
Just when has anyone been arrested, charged, prosecuted and convicted for standing in an all seater stadium?
Against regulations maybe but that's very different from being a criminal offence!
I can only quote from Page 75 of yesterdays programmeit is illegal for a supporter to stand persistently whilst watching a football match at the MadStad
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 142 guests