|
Post by stig-of-the-gas on Sept 14, 2014 19:40:40 GMT
Just typical of the attitude of the ruling class and their attitude towards working class British. They literally despise poor British people. They think football fans are aggressive, sun reading bigots. They treat them like animals, criticise football culture. It's macho, its about rivalry and competition, which the social happy clappers hate. It's frightfully rough. You see this with the way the media hark on about footballers setting bad examples, while disproportionately promoting other sports. Sports that THEY like, with well spoken athletes who went to schools rich enough to buy rowing, cycling or archery equipment. They contrast these athletes to footballers and make out that it's "football culture" they dislike, when it's just poorer, chavvier people they dislike. The people who run are country are no longer toffs or greedy industrialists, they are social engineers who are obsessed with self hate for the past and want to take it out on the poor. The same poor who fought and died in the wars that got them the empire thAt they now feel guilt for. This is a detour but this attitude is what causes all the ott anti footbAll stuff we hear about. They protect monsters in Rotherham, Rochdale etc at the expenses of the children of the British working class, and come down hard and heavy on any wrongdoing. Swearing, shouting, fighting. Instant heavy force. Plenty of funding, while they deny them basic freedoms like the right to police protection from criminals. Sorry to rant but there is more to the heavy handed actions of officials, it's an ingrained discriminatory culture which football fans are on the wrong end of. You are on top form tonight. Very balanced - a huge chip on both your shoulders. I mistakenly thought this was a football forum. I have to say I will struggle to take anything you say seriously after that nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Sept 14, 2014 20:09:11 GMT
Just typical of the attitude of the ruling class and their attitude towards working class British. They literally despise poor British people. They think football fans are aggressive, sun reading bigots. They treat them like animals, criticise football culture. It's macho, its about rivalry and competition, which the social happy clappers hate. It's frightfully rough. You see this with the way the media hark on about footballers setting bad examples, while disproportionately promoting other sports. Sports that THEY like, with well spoken athletes who went to schools rich enough to buy rowing, cycling or archery equipment. They contrast these athletes to footballers and make out that it's "football culture" they dislike, when it's just poorer, chavvier people they dislike. The people who run are country are no longer toffs or greedy industrialists, they are social engineers who are obsessed with self hate for the past and want to take it out on the poor. The same poor who fought and died in the wars that got them the empire thAt they now feel guilt for. This is a detour but this attitude is what causes all the ott anti footbAll stuff we hear about. They protect monsters in Rotherham, Rochdale etc at the expenses of the children of the British working class, and come down hard and heavy on any wrongdoing. Swearing, shouting, fighting. Instant heavy force. Plenty of funding, while they deny them basic freedoms like the right to police protection from criminals. Sorry to rant but there is more to the heavy handed actions of officials, it's an ingrained discriminatory culture which football fans are on the wrong end of. You are on top form tonight. Very balanced - a huge chip on both your shoulders. I mistakenly thought this was a football forum. I have to say I will struggle to take anything you say seriously after that nonsense. This is a thread about criminal actions of our supporters and their punishments, I would have thought perspectives on the legal system and it's application were relevant. Sorry we don't agree.
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Sept 14, 2014 20:11:26 GMT
It's pathetic. A team got relegated and reacted with anger at rival fans cheering their demise. Police got involved in a few tustles and that's it. People CONVICTED for threatening words...big deal. Grow up. I would hope older fans from a world which isn't run by teletubby wimpy fools would understand what I'm saying....were in a situation where mere words gets you in jail. It's a horrible, totalitarian world we are edging towards. A few drunk English football fans go on the pitch and have a tussle with aggressive cops: straight in court, banning orders, criminal records etc. As yet, Rotherham council all in jobs, and hundreds of abusers walk free despite plenty willing to testify. Don't tell me this isn't a political issue. The cowardly sods target nice easy football fans while monsters walk free...and football fans are targeted for this as its an almost exclusively British thing. Agree with that mate. You should change your name - your views aren't controversial at all as far as I can see, unfortunately it's the truth. Some Charlton fans got prison for singing nasty songs with a racial element. Fair enough if words can get you in prison, why aren't people spouting ALL hatred imprisoned? The police let Abu Hamza continue his hatred every Friday night outside Finsbury Park mosque. Other people can walk around with a placard saying "UK you will pay, Bin Laden on his way". Why are the police reluctant to target these people? I would argue allowing this hatred to be spouted on our shores is a real threat to national security and should be treated as such. People running on the pitch deserve punishment (I never said it was right) but not prison - save that for the people who are a real threat to society. Burn a poppy and get a £50 fine. Run on a bit of grass and get jail. Exactly. Nice one Bruno!
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Sept 14, 2014 20:48:44 GMT
It's pathetic. A team got relegated and reacted with anger at rival fans cheering their demise. Police got involved in a few tustles and that's it. People CONVICTED for threatening words...big deal. Grow up. I would hope older fans from a world which isn't run by teletubby wimpy fools would understand what I'm saying....were in a situation where mere words gets you in jail. It's a horrible, totalitarian world we are edging towards. A few drunk English football fans go on the pitch and have a tussle with aggressive cops: straight in court, banning orders, criminal records etc. As yet, Rotherham council all in jobs, and hundreds of abusers walk free despite plenty willing to testify. Don't tell me this isn't a political issue. The cowardly sods target nice easy football fans while monsters walk free...and football fans are targeted for this as its an almost exclusively British thing. Its not a political issue. Its just you, someone obviously frustrated with the way society has developed, extrapolating out a minor incident where football fans broke the law and were punished within the limits of those laws into a cause celebre for your own political convictions. Ah, the "it's the law so it's not up for debate argument" I m fairly charged politically, no doubt, but I have made some valid, reasoned points and I wanted to share them.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2014 21:02:51 GMT
Its not a political issue. Its just you, someone obviously frustrated with the way society has developed, extrapolating out a minor incident where football fans broke the law and were punished within the limits of those laws into a cause celebre for your own political convictions. Ah, the "it's the law so it's not up for debate argument" I m fairly charged politically, no doubt, but I have made some valid, reasoned points and I wanted to share them. I consider myself "fairly charged politically" as well. And, I am absolutely not suggesting that the law is not up for debate. But you dilute that validity by focusing on a minor and juvenile incident where nobody is being abused at the expense of real political issues. We might even agree on some things.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2014 21:18:27 GMT
Controversial - you say that the Rovers fans that were caught up in the arrests and trouble were under severe prvocation? Well, maybe that was because they had gone onto the pitch to protest/release their anger/whatever other excuse and were then jeered by the Mansfield fans. If they'd stayed off the pitch and respected the law in the first place, none of ths would have happened at all.
You seem to me to be the sort of person who pokes a wasps nest with a stick then runs off crying when some of them sting you. It's simple, if you stay off the pitch, you're far less likely to get into trouble. The huge majority of Rovers fans managed to stay off on that day, why not the few hundred that invaded the pitch? And for what reason? I get the point about going on and celebrating a major achievement (I went on our pitch after we reached the playoff final) and although it is illegal and the stewards tried not very hard to stop us, it was different. But why go on when something bad's happened? I'd rather slink off quietly rather than making a t*t of myself on the pitch, square up to a police horse and end up in trouble.
|
|
gasfred
Joined: July 2014
Posts: 75
|
Post by gasfred on Sept 14, 2014 22:13:58 GMT
having been on the recieving end of a proper pitch invasion (jpt) it looks like we have been shafted big time.
|
|
|
Post by Curly Wurly on Sept 14, 2014 22:31:24 GMT
Controversial - you say that the Rovers fans that were caught up in the arrests and trouble were under severe prvocation? Well, maybe that was because they had gone onto the pitch to protest/release their anger/whatever other excuse and were then jeered by the Mansfield fans. If they'd stayed off the pitch and respected the law in the first place, none of ths would have happened at all. You seem to me to be the sort of person who pokes a wasps nest with a stick then runs off crying when some of them sting you. It's simple, if you stay off the pitch, you're far less likely to get into trouble. The huge majority of Rovers fans managed to stay off on that day, why not the few hundred that invaded the pitch? And for what reason? I get the point about going on and celebrating a major achievement (I went on our pitch after we reached the playoff final) and although it is illegal and the stewards tried not very hard to stop us, it was different. But why go on when something bad's happened? I'd rather slink off quietly rather than making a t*t of myself on the pitch, square up to a police horse and end up in trouble. What you miss Oldland Glover, is the sense of injustice that may of us have at the diligence of the Avon & Somerset Police in prosecuting Rovers supporters on two main occasions last season, whilst largely allowing our Red cousins to go scot-free for a larger and more provocative pitch invasion - especially when the police commissioner promised zero-tolerence. I would agree that the advice to stay off the pitch is sensible, but a number of the arrests made on May 3rd had nothing to do with being on the pitch and arose around the ground afterwards. If you read the court reports, you'll notice that many of the arrests arose following indignation at the violent treatment the police were dishing out to "contain" the situation. As indicated in a previous post, there is a need to calm down the aggressive response of many of our supporters. But to all those sounding like sunday school teachers, I can count loads of occasions in my 40 years of supporting Rovers where completely innocent people have been indavertently caught up in violence and suffered injustices as a result.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Sept 15, 2014 7:44:34 GMT
Dont go on the pitch, dont get in trouble however harsh any penalty may be.
That SIMPLE.
Stop making bloody excuses and just accept it
Screw City and whatever they may have got away and any perceived injustice and take responsibility for our and your own actions.
Maybe the old bill got heavy handed with a few, but guess what dont do it and you wont get sodding hit
|
|
|
Post by timothyq on Sept 15, 2014 7:51:10 GMT
I'm correct in assuming this was the date of the infamous horse punching incident? And people are actually complaining about the sentences handed down to those who were involved in the scenes that accompanied it? And this moaning is going on against the background of one of our best punching a player at Braintree?
I guess people just suspend all reason when it comes to their football club, absolutely ludicrous.
|
|
|
Post by Bath Gas on Sept 15, 2014 8:12:55 GMT
Further names and details of offences in today's EP link
|
|
|
Post by Curly Wurly on Sept 15, 2014 8:36:56 GMT
Dont go on the pitch, dont get in trouble however harsh any penalty may be. That SIMPLE. Stop making bloody excuses and just accept it Screw City and whatever they may have got away and any perceived injustice and take responsibility for our and your own actions. Maybe the old bill got heavy handed with a few, but guess what dont do it and you wont get sodding hit But it is not that simple. I'll agree that going on the pitch is a completely bad idea. It was at Wycombe, but sensible stewarding and policing meant that that was all treated as a light hearted event by the authorities. But my point is that it is not only people on the pitch that were prosecuted that day, it was not only people "looking for trouble" that found it. The views espoused by many on here are sensible (if patrronising) but naive in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by timothyq on Sept 15, 2014 8:40:44 GMT
Dont go on the pitch, dont get in trouble however harsh any penalty may be. That SIMPLE. Stop making bloody excuses and just accept it Screw City and whatever they may have got away and any perceived injustice and take responsibility for our and your own actions. Maybe the old bill got heavy handed with a few, but guess what dont do it and you wont get sodding hit But it is not that simple. I'll agree that going on the pitch is a completely bad idea. It was at Wycombe, but sensible stewarding and policing meant that that was all treated as a light hearted event by the authorities.But my point is that it is not only people on the pitch that were prosecuted that day, it was not only people "looking for trouble" that found it. The views espoused by many on here are sensible (if patrronising) but naive in my opinion. Nothing is as patronising as the suggestion that people at football matches should be excused from normal standards of behaviour.
|
|
|
Post by Curly Wurly on Sept 15, 2014 8:44:18 GMT
But it is not that simple. I'll agree that going on the pitch is a completely bad idea. It was at Wycombe, but sensible stewarding and policing meant that that was all treated as a light hearted event by the authorities.But my point is that it is not only people on the pitch that were prosecuted that day, it was not only people "looking for trouble" that found it. The views espoused by many on here are sensible (if patrronising) but naive in my opinion. Nothing is as patronising as the suggestion that people at football matches should be excused from normal standards of behaviour. Where did I suggest that? The patronising thing....no the pathetic thing is that you still come on here pretending to be a Rovers fan, when everyone knows that you are not.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2014 9:15:36 GMT
What surprised me the most was how lenient the Judge was
|
|
|
Post by Curly Wurly on Sept 15, 2014 9:53:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Sept 15, 2014 9:56:50 GMT
Right. Back in the day it was a given we invaded the pitch, in years gone by hooliganism was far worse. Look at 80s.
Now, the authorities decide even going on pitch isnt acceptable and hey presto, voicing dissent on the pitch is a heinous crime. Get it straight - assault is assault. Same definition as any other context. We were all comfortable singing "g*****" to long haired players a few years ago. Now the papers and telly tell me that's a terrible crime.....so lock them up etc. Nobody gave a Damn before someone told them they should, and they offer a scapegoat to hate in return for your blind obedience.
If the authorities decided having a rant on the pitch wasn't a big deal, you'd find another socially created villain to hate on. Whatever the radio said.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Sept 15, 2014 10:08:46 GMT
Right. Back in the day it was a given we invaded the pitch, in years gone by hooliganism was far worse. Look at 80s. Now, the authorities decide even going on pitch isnt acceptable and hey presto, voicing dissent on the pitch is a heinous crime. Get it straight - assault is assault. Same definition as any other context. We were all comfortable singing "g*****" to long haired players a few years ago. Now the papers and telly tell me that's a terrible crime.....so lock them up etc. Nobody gave a Damn before someone told them they should, and they offer a scapegoat to hate in return for your blind obedience. If the authorities decided having a rant on the pitch wasn't a big deal, you'd find another socially created villain to hate on. Whatever the radio said. If a pitch invasion was confined to being beneath box one and sack the board chanting i suspect no one would have been arrested. Of course when asked to leave the pitch people suddenly get uptight What justification was there to go to the away end. And no a few s**theads goading is not an acceptable excuse? Thousands of people didnt go on the pitch. Self control. We could all vent our spleen at box one if we wished from the terrace
|
|
|
Post by Curly Wurly on Sept 15, 2014 10:10:31 GMT
Right. Back in the day it was a given we invaded the pitch, in years gone by hooliganism was far worse. Look at 80s. Now, the authorities decide even going on pitch isnt acceptable and hey presto, voicing dissent on the pitch is a heinous crime. Get it straight - assault is assault. Same definition as any other context. We were all comfortable singing "g*****" to long haired players a few years ago. Now the papers and telly tell me that's a terrible crime.....so lock them up etc. Nobody gave a Damn before someone told them they should, and they offer a scapegoat to hate in return for your blind obedience. If the authorities decided having a rant on the pitch wasn't a big deal, you'd find another socially created villain to hate on. Whatever the radio said. I'm not sure I would have put it like that, but I agree that societal norms change and what was acceptable 30-40 years ago may not be now (and vice versa of course). I was also going to disagree with you about it being a "given" that "we invaded the pitch", but look back at footage of loads of games from the 1970s and it happened regularly. But you and I know that good natured exuberance was not the way to describe what happened on 3rd May.
|
|
lockleazer
Tarki Micalleff
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 411
|
Post by lockleazer on Sept 15, 2014 21:07:08 GMT
The 'judge' defended a peadophile andin doing so saved him a jail sentance.. now punishment for people that break the law at football is right and fair but how can this woman justify send a lad to prison for 6 weeks for aggressive behaviour and pitch invading yet act to stop a guilty peadophile from going to jail .... this is the behaviour of judges that is wrong .. in this womans eyes a bloke going ott at football despite not injuring anyone is deemed a worse person and more of a danger to society than a peadophile. ... unbelievable im not sticking up for football troublemakers im saying that the sentencing of criminals has to be fair and realistic this is proof that people like lynn matthews have an issue with football fans rather than the actual crime committed www.bristolpost.co.uk/Father-caught-child-porn-spared-jail/story-11256492-detail/story.html
|
|