Sent off for squirting

[Wolfie20]

4 hours ago, richinspain said:

Isn't encroachment onto the pitch a lifetime ban offence? Isn't assaulting a player a lifetime ban?

Personally, a lifetime ban for me would be the minimum he should receive.

Lets ban him in the afterlife as well then.

[PistoldPete]

4 hours ago, richinspain said:

Isn't encroachment onto the pitch a lifetime ban offence? Isn't assaulting a player a lifetime ban?

Personally, a lifetime ban for me would be the minimum he should receive.

IS encroachment onto the pitch a lifetime ban? I don't think so .. if so half our fans would have one then. Assaulting a player is a criminal offence and I would expect anyone who did that to be banned for life. Tricking  someone  into drinking urine is not any offence I know of certainly not on the level of assault.      

[Ramarena]

5 hours ago, ilkleyram said:

About 5 miles from Guiseley is Bradford which has a large (25% ish of the total) population of Pakistanis.  Pakistan is a country with a known incidence of Typhoid which can spread through contact with urine.  Should the distributor of this urine have typhoid, would a lifetime ban be inappropriate then?  And how would Tony Thompson know?

There's 'bantz' and name calling of goalies ('you fat barsteward' etc etc) and then there's behaviour beyond any level of acceptability

[ilkleyram]

1 hour ago, BaaLocks said:

Descendants of Pakistanis don't carry diseases just because their grandparents came from there. To suggest they do is, well, racist. Even if your suggestion is that people from Braford travel to Pakistan, your suggestion that people who follow a football team a few miles away are likely to be carrying typhoid just because they live near people who have family in Pakistan is, well, racist.

Even if you disagree with both points above the connection of your points to arrive at your riduculous conclusion shows, at least to me, some really disconnected belief systems.

So while you're dishing out personal insults I think your user name is appropriate for your views of me, BaaLocks.  Reread my comments and try to understand the point I was making

[Day]

42 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

IS encroachment onto the pitch a lifetime ban? I don't think so .. if so half our fans would have one then. Assaulting a player is a criminal offence and I would expect anyone who did that to be banned for life. Tricking  someone  into drinking urine is not any offence I know of certainly not on the level of assault.      

Would fall under a public order section 38 offence I would imagine, which can result in time behind bars.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/38

[PistoldPete]

45 minutes ago, David said:

Would fall under a public order section 38 offence I would imagine, which can result in time behind bars.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/38

I think that is aimed at acts of commercial sabotage. So I don't think so. It maybe some kind of technical offence but not one I can think of.. not like assaulting a player.

It's not worth a lifetime  ban and not worth the goalie getting sent off. 

 

[Ram-Alf]

1 hour ago, David said:

Would fall under a public order section 38 offence I would imagine, which can result in time behind bars.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/38

I'd sooner go to prison than work at a Spoons ?

[BaaLocks]

1 hour ago, ilkleyram said:

So while you're dishing out personal insults I think your user name is appropriate for your views of me, BaaLocks.  Reread my comments and try to understand the point I was making

So let me tell you the point I think you were making, and then you can tell me if I was wrong.

I understood that what you said was that Guiseley is near to Bradford and there are lots of Pakistanis in Bradford, that is only a short distance from Guiseley. And in Bradford there are lots of people whose families come from Pakistan, and there is a lot of typhoid in Pakistan. Therefore, there was a risk that the person who peed in the bottle could have given the goalkeeper typhoid, an opinion you have come to because you live in that area and have three friends who have gone to Pakistan to visit their family.

That feels about the size of what you have said - yes? If it isn't please feel free to inform me otherwise, if it is then I have to repeat it's a view that is somewhere between strange and downright racist in it's conclusion. That is not a personal insult, it is the conclusion of reading what you have posted - you are nothing but a user of a forum, nothing I say to you or anyone can be in any way personal.

As for my user name, I shall let the admins decide if it passes their consideration of what might be offensive. Given I've been here for more than a few weeks, I'm going to take it that they don't find it offensive - I hope the disquiet caused to you by reading it does not lead you to lose too much sleepor other affliction.

 

[LazloW]

36 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I think that is aimed at acts of commercial sabotage. So I don't think so. It maybe some kind of technical offence but not one I can think of.. not like assaulting a player.

It's not worth a lifetime  ban and not worth the goalie getting sent off. 

 

I assume you’re just trolling at this point.

[Day]

47 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I think that is aimed at acts of commercial sabotage. So I don't think so. It maybe some kind of technical offence but not one I can think of.. not like assaulting a player.

It's not worth a lifetime  ban and not worth the goalie getting sent off. 

Doesn’t read like it’s commercial sabotage only. Take this for example….

2) It is also an offence for a person, with any such intention as is mentioned in paragraph (a), (c)or (d) of subsection (1), to threaten that he or another will do, or to claim that he or another has done, any of the acts mentioned in that subsection.

There will be an arrest once the person has been identified, will also be a deserved lifetime ban.

The football pitch is the players place of work, if you threaten their safety in any way, in my opinion you should no longer be allowed to enter any football stadium again. 

I think this is worse than a punch, it’s clearly been pre planned to ensure they have the same bottle that the players drink from, to then urinate in and swap the bottle. I just can’t get my head around how they thought it was a great idea, or even “banter”.

Urine contains all kinds of bacteria and toxins, not to mention what could have been on the culprits hands when handling the bottle possibly round the bottle top which would have touched the keepers mouth. There’s a reason why we all wash our hands after going to the toilet.

Really struggling to understand how you can’t see this isn’t worthy of a lifetime ban. You will struggle to find an exact law that covers pissing in another mans drink, you can be sure though they will find one that covers it and I hope he gets locked up for a few weeks for it.

[Eddie]

Many diseases may be transmitted via bodily fluids (of which urine is one, of course).

[PistoldPete]

10 hours ago, David said:

Doesn’t read like it’s commercial sabotage only. Take this for example….

2) It is also an offence for a person, with any such intention as is mentioned in paragraph (a), (c)or (d) of subsection (1), to threaten that he or another will do, or to claim that he or another has done, any of the acts mentioned in that subsection.

There will be an arrest once the person has been identified, will also be a deserved lifetime ban.

The football pitch is the players place of work, if you threaten their safety in any way, in my opinion you should no longer be allowed to enter any football stadium again. 

I think this is worse than a punch, it’s clearly been pre planned to ensure they have the same bottle that the players drink from, to then urinate in and swap the bottle. I just can’t get my head around how they thought it was a great idea, or even “banter”.

Urine contains all kinds of bacteria and toxins, not to mention what could have been on the culprits hands when handling the bottle possibly round the bottle top which would have touched the keepers mouth. There’s a reason why we all wash our hands after going to the toilet.

Really struggling to understand how you can’t see this isn’t worthy of a lifetime ban. You will struggle to find an exact law that covers pissing in another mans drink, you can be sure though they will find one that covers it and I hope he gets locked up for a few weeks for it.

Except none of the conditions of section 1 apply.. no public anxiety, no injury, no economic loss. 
 

I would be prepared to wager that he isn’t locked up, and would be surprised if he is charged with any criminal offence. 
 

it seems I am in the minority on this forum… so let’s move on and agree to disagree. 

[Day]

45 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Except none of the conditions of section 1 apply.. no public anxiety, no injury, no economic loss. 
 

I would be prepared to wager that he isn’t locked up, and would be surprised if he is charged with any criminal offence. 
 

it seems I am in the minority on this forum… so let’s move on and agree to disagree. 

Fair enough.

I mean, when this person gets away with it without punishment, we'll have to get used to people pissing in drinks and swapping them out in supermarkets hoping someone doesn't notice the seal broken.

After all, it's not a criminal offence.

[Bwash_Ram]

Cant believe Kenneth Willaims hasnt visited this thread yet.

[jono]

On 20/11/2022 at 14:33, PistoldPete said:

Well yes if he had typhoid and knowingly passed it on a lifetime ban would be appropriate. Otherwise like I say very OTT otherwise. 

Not OTT in my view. That isn’t a flash of red mist which anyone could fall foul of. That is an act that has been thought about and executed with forethought and deliberation. 

Perhaps at some point in the future, after a mountain of contrition, the ban could be relaxed but that behaviour was so disgusting and uncivilised that the offender has no place in any sort of sporting arena. The lifetime ban is more than a punishment; it is a signal of a communities total rejection of someone who could do that. 

[Anon]

The old testament has the right idea on cases like this. An eye for an eye. This scrubber should be forced to drink a bottle of the 'keeper's piss.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

8 minutes ago, Anon said:

The old testament has the right idea on cases like this. An eye for an eye. This scrubber should be forced to drink a bottle of the 'keeper's piss.

Preferably that first one of the day that's lay dormant for 7 hrs and has that wonderful aroma of Rogan Josh.

[Mucker1884]

35 minutes ago, jono said:

Not OTT in my view. That isn’t a flash of red mist which anyone could fall foul of. That is an act that has been thought about and executed with forethought and deliberation. 

Perhaps at some point in the future, after a mountain of contrition, the ban could be relaxed but that behaviour was so disgusting and uncivilised that the offender has no place in any sort of sporting arena. The lifetime ban is more than a punishment; it is a signal of a communities total rejection of someone who could do that. 

 

An excellent post all round, but the one emboldened word sums things up perfectly.  

 

[Carl Sagan]

What's missed here is that the goalie was punished for going after the fan, but in a very limited way, squirting the liquid at him. I feel it's a completely understandable and quite measured and the sending off should be rescinded. What a vile act by the perpetrator.