Fan behaviour rules

[Tamworthram]

10 hours ago, Gaspode said:

I was subjected to a police dog shoving its nose into my groin when we played Stoke a couple of years ago. I thought it was just being friendly so I reached down to scratch it’s head only to be given a right telling off by the accompanying bolshy policewoman. Perhaps if she’d explained it was a sniffer dog and asked if I minded being searched I might have reacted more favourably….

To be fair, police dogs don’t normally attend events to socialise and make friends with the supporters ? so I’m not surprised at the police officers reaction.

[Ian Buxton's Bat]

I'd go for bans for individual invaders and points deductions and/or forfeiture of games (play-offs / cups) for multiple invaders.

There's no way anyone could identify and individually ban all those numpties at Notts Forest v Blades play off - but would they have been on the pitch if they'd known Blades would have taken their place at Wembley?

If a losing side's fans invade the pitch after a play-off then slap them with a points ban for the next season.......say 21 points

[Tamworthram]

25 minutes ago, Ian Buxton's Bat said:

I'd go for bans for individual invaders and points deductions and/or forfeiture of games (play-offs / cups) for multiple invaders.

There's no way anyone could identify and individually ban all those numpties at Notts Forest v Blades play off - but would they have been on the pitch if they'd known Blades would have taken their place at Wembley?

If a losing side's fans invade the pitch after a play-off then slap them with a points ban for the next season.......say 21 points

Your proposal presupposes that the perpetrator is considering the consequences before they act. Not always the case especially when alcohol is involved.

There is an argument I guess that the same applies to lifetime bans but, I don't care too much if an individual suffers as a result of their actions because they didn't consider the consequences beforehand. 

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

10 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

Hypocrisy.
 

The powers that be won’t take strong measures to rule out swearing by players, aggression, dissent, cheating,  all of which have a profound social effect, especially on kids who love the game and on fans. And the reason they won’t take strong measures is that their revenues rely on the ‘passion’. 
And then they pump this out 

Of course they should act against criminality. But they should also act against the causes of it 

Mentioned this before in a fashion.  Sharp squaring up to some old bloke at his team coach, Austin with his crying pose etc, Malone with his general twatishness .  All these things provoke pissed of behaviour.   Very surprised  with the situation at the time that Austin didn't get someone running on and clocking him.  You get t**** but you also get a built up reaction caused by events. 

[ramit]

9 hours ago, Tamworthram said:

Well one of the obvious intentions of a lifetime ban is to deter others rather than improve the behaviour of the offender. Depending on the severity of the crime I certainly do support lifetime bans. It’s not as if they are being locked up for life. They can still get on with the rest of their life but they’re not welcome here.

A scare tactic to keep the rest in line eh, well i don't approve of that either.

[Alty_Ram]

It's a mixed bag of measures so its hard to have an opinion on all of it as a whole but some of the things mentioned worry me a lot more than others. I really don't like pyros, they are deeply unpleasant to be next to and it makes me very edgy when people chuck them about, particularly in the direction of people who perhaps haven't seen it coming. Aside from danger to eyes and potential burns I guess they could also set off all sorts of breathing related conditions.

The pitch invasion aspect is a problematic one to try and apply half measures as it covers anything from a good natured celebration of promotion or survival after the final whistle and hugging your mate on the pitch,  to a drunken idiot wanting to celebrate and interact with one of their own players during a game, to a full-on attempt to get to a player with an intention to seriously injure them. Problem is that you won't know which it is until events unfold. Pyros keep getting into grounds and so can weapons and it is totally realistic to suggest that it is a matter of time before something very very serious happens and a player, official or opposition fan is killed within the playing area. Frankly even if it is a punch and someone then sparks out and hits their head on a hard surface like an advertising hoarding or the hard pitch surround then that could be lethal. How do you stop some of it without stopping all of it though. I guess this is where we were a long while back when fences went up, ultimately with such disastrous consequences. We can't go there again.

As has been mentioned on here before. I remember distinctly the shock that greeted Monica Seles getting stabbed while playing Tennis. Some guy with serious issues wandered on and knifed her in the back. If it can happen at tennis then it can certainly happen at football with a much bigger crowd and chance of having someone there with an intent to cause a problem. The sheer number of fans that can spill onto a pitch of a decent sized game makes it completely impossible to keep an eye on everyone to see if they are harmless or not. Recent behaviour is forcing the hand of the authorities though. Can you by sheer weight of stewards and police prevent it ? And who will pay ?

[Leeds Ram]

Realistically something had to be done following last season where a number of incidents not just at pride park but across the country. I understand why people want to use pyrotechnics to add an extra spice, but they are a fire hazard as well as being bad for asthma sufferers. On the pitch invasions we did have a few last year, so a clampdown is in order but I don't think they'll be dolling out bans for a mass invasion on the last day of the season. 

[Tamworthram]

33 minutes ago, ramit said:

A scare tactic to keep the rest in line eh, well i don't approve of that either.

It’s a clear warning of the consequences you might face if you breach the rule rather than a scare tactic. I certainly do approve.

Do you not think that some folk might think twice before committing the offence if the consequences were made clear in advance? Surely that’s got to be a good thing.

Luckily, I have never suffered, and remarkable there seems to be very few actual injuries, but if prior notification prevents just one person from committing the more serious and dangerous offence (letting off pyrotechnics or ripping out and lobbing chairs for example) then I’m all for it. I accept the difficulty is where do you draw the line for imposing a lifetime ban? 

Edited July 26, 2022 by Tamworthram

[ramit]

8 hours ago, Tamworthram said:

It’s a clear warning of the consequences you might face if you breach the rule rather than a scare tactic. I certainly do approve.

Do you not think that some folk might think twice before committing the offence if the consequences were made clear in advance? Surely that’s got to be a good thing.

i am not saying it wouldn't work on some level, i just don't agree with such tactics.  To socially exclude someone for life as a message to others is unethical IMO.  Hardened authoritarianism appears to have many supporters, be careful what you wish for though.

[Tamworthram]

1 minute ago, ramit said:

i am not saying it wouldn't work on some level, i just don't agree with such tactics.  To socially exclude someone for life as a message to others is unethical IMO.  Hardened authoritarianism appears to have many supporters, be careful what you wish for though.

Well we’ll have to disagree then. Issuing a message of the potential consequences, should you be thinking about committing an offence, is absolutely ethical IMO. Also, it’s not just “a message to others”. The perpetrators of the crime themselves would/should be aware before they transgress. 
 

With regard to “hardened authoritarianism”, I did say a lifetime ban would need to be dependent on the severity of the offence (it will take people with bigger brains than me to work that one out) and I really don’t think banning someone for life from football grounds is the thin end of the wedge you seem to fear.

[Srg]

8 minutes ago, ramit said:

i am not saying it wouldn't work on some level, i just don't agree with such tactics.  To socially exclude someone for life as a message to others is unethical IMO.  Hardened authoritarianism appears to have many supporters, be careful what you wish for though.

Would you expect to be allowed back into Alton Towers if you took coke in the bogs and jumped the safety rails on the rides?

[Mucker1884]

2 hours ago, Ian Buxton's Bat said:

I'd go for bans for individual invaders and points deductions and/or forfeiture of games (play-offs / cups) for multiple invaders.

There's no way anyone could identify and individually ban all those numpties at Notts Forest v Blades play off - but would they have been on the pitch if they'd known Blades would have taken their place at Wembley?

If a losing side's fans invade the pitch after a play-off then slap them with a points ban for the next season.......say 21 points

No, you're right... but haul a dozen of them away to the courts for a lifetime ban, repeat at 5 other grounds, and before you know it, we have 72 fans banned for life, and somewhere in the region of 20k* others thinking "Do you know what, I don't think I'll risk it next time"!

Sounds good to me!

 

... And remember... they don't need to be fighting, spitting, or swearing.  They don't need to be attacking, or threatening players (or oppo fans).  They don't need to be intoxicated in any way.  They can even be in full on party mode, fancy dress, and hugging everyone in sight, all with big grins on their faces! 
They are already breaking the law just by being on the pitch. 
Nabbing them should be right up there on the "Easiest job in the world" list.  Certainly for coppers, if not stewards.

 

Now... all we need is some coppers, in the right place at the right time.  That debate, I ain't getting in to!  ?

 

 

 

*Based on 6 pitch invasions x 3k to 4k at each?  I've no idea how many fans can fit on a pitch!   ?‍♂️

[Mucker1884]

1 hour ago, ramit said:

A scare tactic to keep the rest in line eh, well i don't approve of that either.

 

23 minutes ago, ramit said:

i am not saying it wouldn't work on some level, i just don't agree with such tactics.  To socially exclude someone for life as a message to others is unethical IMO.  Hardened authoritarianism appears to have many supporters, be careful what you wish for though.

With respect my friend, is there any possibility you may change your stance once a player gets stabbed... or do you need to wait until that happens, as (understandably) you can't see into the future?

Let's just find a way to keep 'em off, eh?  The "KEEP OFF THE GRASS" sign doesn't seem to be achieving much!

Better to be seen to be trying, than not trying at all?  No?  

Edited July 26, 2022 by Mucker1884

[ramit]

8 hours ago, Mucker1884 said:

 

With respect my friend, is there any possibility you may change your stance once a player gets stabbed... or do you need to wait until that happens, as (understandably) you can't see into the future?

Let's just find a way to keep 'em off, eh?  The "KEEP OFF THE GRASS" sign doesn't seem to be achieving much!

Better to be seen to be trying, than not trying at all?  No?  

i don't pretend to have all the answers of how to best improve fan behavior, a problem with deeper roots in societal structure, but i know what i don't like.

A personal monkey cage for each fan would solve many problems with fan behavior, except perhaps spitting and poo chucking.

[Ellafella]

13 hours ago, Gaspode said:

I was subjected to a police dog shoving its nose into my groin when we played Stoke a couple of years ago. I thought it was just being friendly so I reached down to scratch it’s head only to be given a right telling off by the accompanying bolshy policewoman. Perhaps if she’d explained it was a sniffer dog and asked if I minded being searched I might have reacted more favourably….

is that where you'd hidden your weed? ?

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

20 minutes ago, Mucker1884 said:

No, you're right... but haul a dozen of them away to the courts for a lifetime ban, repeat at 5 other grounds, and before you know it, we have 72 fans banned for life, and somewhere in the region of 20k* others thinking "Do you know what, I don't think I'll risk it next time"!

Sounds good to me!

 

... And remember... they don't need to be fighting, spitting, or swearing.  They don't need to be attacking, or threatening players (or oppo fans).  They don't need to be intoxicated in any way.  They can even be in full on party mode, fancy dress, and hugging everyone in sight, all with big grins on their faces! 
They are already breaking the law just by being on the pitch. 
Nabbing them should be right up there on the "Easiest job in the world" list.  Certainly for coppers, if not stewards.

 

Now... all we need is some coppers, in the right place at the right time.  That debate, I ain't getting in to!  ?

 

 

 

*Based on 6 pitch invasions x 3k to 4k at each?  I've no idea how many fans can fit on a pitch!   ?‍♂️

People have gone on the pitch on masse at the end of games when they get promoted, reach a play off final, any final for a long time.  99% go on to celebrate.  All the police you want won't stop it.   I wouldn't want to either as it was a huge turning point in British football after being fenced in. Very different to a couple of randoms jogging over the pitch during a game which is annoying and probably should have a 12 month banning order.  If they had more random turnstile checks, that would eradicate issues with flares - 12 month banning order and weapons- court decided ban/sentencing.  I'm not convinced anyone would be stupid enough to carry or use a weapon in a stadium nowadays to be honest.  It's the rogue element that need stopping.  Indeed, the best way  to gauge their behaviour may be when they go on the pitch .  Easiest way to get rid of the 1% in quickest time.

[Day]

16 hours ago, Simmo’s left foot said:

What do people think? 

https://www.dcfc.co.uk/news/2022/07/english-football-comes-together-to-toughen-measures-addressing-fan-behaviour-at-matches

The rules have clearly been put in place not to ruin atmospheres, but the safety of other fans and players on the pitch. 

Being a fan does not give you the right to enter the ground and do as you please as you paid for your ticket, you enter any venue be it a cinema, pub, supermarket, or even post online be it social media platforms or forums like this, you have condition of entry guidelines in place. 

So whilst it might not be illegal to film others using pyro, if social media platforms agree not to allow that content posted on their websites, they are the rules, likewise they could today ban all dog photos if they so please. They are privately owned platforms.

Regardless of personal opinion on the new rules, we all have 2 choices, either obey them or run the risk of facing a lifetime ban.

It’s been made pretty clear, so anyone caught in possession of drugs, pyro or run on to the pitch can now have zero complaints when they receive the ban.

This all should come as no surprise after the scenes at the backend of last season, they had to act and appear to be doing so with strict zero tolerance, it remains to be seen if it is just a threat or action is taken.

[Mucker1884]

However many good natured people "invade" the pitch after a promotion, title win, or play off qualification, I'd wager there are more in the stands (and/or on the terraces, where applicable) hoping that the players catch their breath, then return to join in the celebrations/receive the adulation of the crowd/thank the fans for their loyal support/wave their goodbyes after retiring from a 20 year playing career, with devotion in their hearts, and tears in their eyes... etc ... etc!

 

 

    +   

 

 

Has gotta be better than...

  + Oh...  erm... Well, maybe they'll pop up into the directors box, if we're lucky!  

 

 

I literally don't care how many people tell me how "fantastic" it was being on the pitch in the rain after the Southampton game.  "Pfft", I say unto them!

Seeing the glorious sun glisten off that trophy as our whiter-than-white-topped heroes proudly paraded around the full perimeter of the pitch... thanking us... celebrating WITH us... waving to us... and holding that silver beauty aloft for each and every one of us to catch more than a fleeting glimpse... was not only my first ever post match experience*, but something I will cherish for eternity, taking the memory to my grave... No doubt with my heart still proudly pumping!  ?

 

*Yeah... OK... I did kinda expect that every week, to be fair!   ?

 

 

 

 

 

PS:
OK, we were away... but how many on here claim that night at Elland Rd to be right up there as their best ever footy night?  That's because the players had the opportunity to join in the celebrations.  Teamwork!  Players, fans (and Mel! ?) in perfect harmony!

 

 

 

Edited July 26, 2022 by Mucker1884

[Mucker1884]

26 minutes ago, David said:

The rules have clearly been put in place not to ruin atmospheres, but the safety of other fans and players on the pitch. 

Being a fan does not give you the right to enter the ground and do as you please as you paid for your ticket, you enter any venue be it a cinema, pub, supermarket, or even post online be it social media platforms or forums like this, you have condition of entry guidelines in place. 

So whilst it might not be illegal to film others using pyro, if social media platforms agree not to allow that content posted on their websites, they are the rules, likewise they could today ban all dog photos if they so please. They are privately owned platforms.

Regardless of personal opinion on the new rules, we all have 2 choices, either obey them or run the risk of facing a lifetime ban.

It’s been made pretty clear, so anyone caught in possession of drugs, pyro or run on to the pitch can now have zero complaints when they receive the ban.

This all should come as no surprise after the scenes at the backend of last season, they had to act and appear to be doing so with strict zero tolerance, it remains to be seen if it is just a threat or action is taken.

[Ram-Alf]

15 hours ago, ilkleyram said:

I don’t like blanket bans as a matter of principle

What about flasks of tea, The odd nip of whiskey, A scarf or woolly hat, Them poor old uns in the West Stand have it bad enough as it is with all the tutting and gnashing of gums, They at least need to keep warm for pity's sakes.