Lads in court re Pompey game

[saintjay77]

The main benefit from keeping away fans in is that it means those home fans who DO want to be a million miles away from potential trouble can at least make their escape.

 

Fair point but in this day and age I can't blame them for trying something different. Football related violence has been in decline for years but it's not going to be gone for good unless changes are made to make things better.

 

I'm not sure if the police consider the fence being a success or not but on paper I would have thought they think it went fairly well. There was obviously a couple of problem area's that they might think longer about if there is a next time. We shall see though.

 

I wonder how much difference in cost there is between the fence and policing compared to the policing to keep the away fans in? That must have something to do with the decision making?

[aintforever]

It's been said already that keeping them in doesn't solve the problem. The numptys that want to hang about and give it the bigun from behind a line of police will do so even if the skates are kept in all day.

 

If being locked in doesn't work why were we locked in at Portsmouth and Millwall?

 

You will always get some who hang around but most will just get bored and go down the pub, plus the rozzers can clear the area around the stadium so that the indreds can get on their coaches with no bother. The fans who walk to the station are always going to be a magnet for idiots regardless, its better for everyone if most Saints fans are on their way home.

[70's Mike]

If being locked in doesn't work why were we locked in at Portsmouth and Millwall?

 

You will always get some who hang around but most will just get bored and go down the pub, plus the rozzers can clear the area around the stadium so that the indreds can get on their coaches with no bother. The fans who walk to the station are always going to be a magnet for idiots regardless, its better for everyone if most Saints fans are on their way home.

 

Exactly it happens all over the country, Away fans are kept locked in, it is only in the world of Hampshire Police Southampton Division it does not.

[saintjay77]

Exactly it happens all over the country' date=' Away fans are kept locked in, it is only in the world of Hampshire Police Southampton Division it does not.[/quote']

 

It only happens at football! Why are football fans so retarded that they are unable to leave a game along with opposition fans without acting like tools?

 

Why is it only football fans that need to be segregated?

 

Why is it only a minority of tools that give football fans a bad name?

[70's Mike]

It only happens at football! Why are football fans so retarded that they are unable to leave a game along with opposition fans without acting like tools?

 

Why is it only football fans that need to be segregated?

 

Why is it only a minority of tools that give football fans a bad name?

 

Those questions are a deeper issue, the question I asked is why Hampshire Police Southampton Division want to do things different to every other police force ?

[Rowan Gorilla 5]

Hold on, so that more or less excuses the police from any responsibility in any form of social disobedience....

That's their job, whether the people they monitor are the Einsteins of this world or the John W******ds. You can't say the police weren't at fault for allowing fans to mix on the excuse that the people they are allowing to mix are numpties....

Jesus H....

 

So, if person A acts like a numpty then it is person B's fault?

[Turkish]

So, if person A acts like a numpty then it is person B's fault?

 

Would you consider it acceptable policing if they allowed a known peodophile to hang around an infants school at the end of the day, take and abuse a child, stand around filming the pedophile whilst he waited for his victim, then arrest them afterwards once the crime had happened? Or would it be better to remove the peadophile from the area and then let the children out of school? Thus preventing not only the crime and the effects that would have on the victim but also the expense of custody and the judicial process.

Edited 14 November, 2010 by Turkish

[saintjay77]

Those questions are a deeper issue' date=' the question I asked is why Hampshire Police Southampton Division want to do things different to every other police force ?[/quote']

 

Don't know their actual reasons but constantly doing things the same will never make things any better. It would be nice to know their reasons. Someone mentioned before some human rights thing but I can't see that being correct. I know many think the old bill thought they would be able to nick a few people they were after but I can't see that being discussed at any pre match meetings or the club agreeing to the fence on that basis. It must have been a combination of things IMO but would be nice to know the club's and police's views on it or if they would do the same again?

 

Some questions for NC if anyone gets the chance maybe?

[Turkish]

Don't know their actual reasons but constantly doing things the same will never make things any better. It would be nice to know their reasons. Someone mentioned before some human rights thing but I can't see that being correct. I know many think the old bill thought they would be able to nick a few people they were after but I can't see that being discussed at any pre match meetings or the club agreeing to the fence on that basis. It must have been a combination of things IMO but would be nice to know the club's and police's views on it or if they would do the same again?

 

Some questions for NC if anyone gets the chance maybe?

 

Well they have done a pretty good job of stamping out football related disorder over the last 15 years or so. Go back to the 70's and 80's and there was large scale disorder somewhere every week. These days its rare and any events are massively exagerated and blown out of proportion. 20 years ago there would have been hardly any arrests for the scenes outside SMS. Today we have people in jail for rattling a fence, a media frenzy with it being headlines of the echo on numerous occasions, TV film crews following around the police then making a documentary out of it all and disgracefully wrongly, innocent people wrongly arrested with their pictures, names and addresses splashed all across the echo when in some cases the only evidence being that they were there. Well i was there too, about 50 foot away, not involved, did not attempt to be involved and so were many around me, how would you feel if that was you in the echo, if that was you banned from SMS whilst on bail and missed the JPT final, if that was you explaining to your employers and family why you need to go to court for two weeks and if that was you facing jail for nothing other than being present when a so called riot kicks off? Because it could have been if you have decided to walk that way and have a look at what was going on.

 

Is it just conicidence that these ridiculous sentances are being handed out at a time when A/ The police tactics were at best questionable and B/at a time when police are facing budget cuts? Will the students who kicked off this week and caused damage to government property and assaulted police officers face jail? I bet they dont. Football fans are an easy target, they can give police easy convictions, few willl argue that the sentances are too high and if they do then as we see on here, most will say they deserve all they get, which gives the police carte blance to do what they like, unquestioned by the majority of the public and supported by the media who absolutely love it. Until people start smashing up government property campaining for hooligans rights that is never going to change and we will continue to see people jailed for one thing on a saturday afternoon within a few miles of a football ground and given a 50 fine for the same on a friday night.

Edited 14 November, 2010 by Turkish

[Rowan Gorilla 5]

Would you consider it acceptable policing if they allowed a known peodophile to hang around an infants school at the end of the day, take and abuse a child, stand around filming the pedophile whilst he waited for his victim, then arrest them afterwards once the crime had happened? Or would it be better to remove the peadophile from the area and then let the children out of school? Thus preventing not only the crime and the effects that would have on the victim but also the expense of custody and the judicial process.

 

That's a ridiculous comparison and you know it.

 

The Probation Service would have dropped a tremendous b*llock on that particular example.

 

Anyway, I think most would consider it a bit Judge Dredd if the police did away with such formalities as judicial process and custody.

[Daren W]

So, if person A acts like a numpty then it is person B's fault?

 

If it's person A's responsibility to ensure person B doesn't behave like a numpty then the answer is most definitely yes...

 

I really can't believe people are defending the police on this. You're dealing with a local derby with a history of violence and ill feeling. The home team loses 4-1 and you let the away fans out at the same time??? And you wonder why people get arsey?

 

We all know violence at football games is blighting the sport but for ****s sake, the police are there for a reason. You can't let the two sets of fans out at the same time and then act all surprised when things get lairy...

[Daren W]

That's a ridiculous comparison and you know it.

 

The Probation Service would have dropped a tremendous b*llock on that particular example.

 

Anyway, I think most would consider it a bit Judge Dredd if the police did away with such formalities as judicial process and custody.

 

And jailing people for rattling a fence isn't???

[Turkish]

That's a ridiculous comparison and you know it.

 

The Probation Service would have dropped a tremendous b*llock on that particular example.

 

Anyway, I think most would consider it a bit Judge Dredd if the police did away with such formalities as judicial process and custody.

 

Answer the question, is it acceptable? Or should the police go to lengths to ensure no crime is commited, rather than let one be commited then arrest the criminal later? Like it or not and most of you wont, the police tactics were very questionable, i have never heard of a derby in the UK for 20 odd years where they have let fans out at the same time. Of course, this does not excuse that actions of those that go looking of for it, but anyone with any ounce of common sense knows that a team losing 1-4 at home in a derby against their bitter rivals means there is a strong possibility of some form of violence occuring and letting fans confront each other within minutes of the final whistle when emotions were still running high was making violence even more likely.

[jam]

Answer the question, is it acceptable? Or should the police go to lengths to ensure no crime is commited, rather than let one be commited then arrest the criminal later? Like it or not and most of you wont, the police tactics were very questionable, i have never heard of a derby in the UK for 20 odd years where they have let fans out at the same time. Of course, this does not excuse that actions of those that go looking of for it, but anyone with any ounce of common sense knows that a team losing 1-4 at home in a derby against their bitter rivals means there is a strong possibility of some form of violence occuring and letting fans confront each other within minutes of the final whistle when emotions were still running high was making violence even more likely.

 

Following on...

Some people on here seem to think that because anyone looking for / getting involved in violence after the game should be responsible for any trouble they get into then that absolves the police tactics from any criticism.

 

Is it not fair to say that:

a) if you go kicking off outside a football ground after a game that's been covered on live television and the area's swarming with OB then you need your head examined

b) the decision to let fans out at the same time is at best asking for trouble and at worst looking for trouble.

[chocco boxo]

Will there be a fence for Brighton?

What will be the Police s tactics for this one?

Hopefully no trouble but I bet the Police will be out in force with their cameras?

[saintjay77]

Well they have done a pretty good job of stamping out football related disorder over the last 15 years or so. Go back to the 70's and 80's and there was large scale disorder somewhere every week. These days its rare and any events are massively exagerated and blown out of proportion. 20 years ago there would have been hardly any arrests for the scenes outside SMS. Today we have people in jail for rattling a fence, a media frenzy with it being headlines of the echo on numerous occasions, TV film crews following around the police then making a documentary out of it all and disgracefully wrongly, innocent people wrongly arrested with their pictures, names and addresses splashed all across the echo when in some cases the only evidence being that they were there. Well i was there too, about 50 foot away, not involved, did not attempt to be involved and so were many around me, how would you feel if that was you in the echo, if that was you banned from SMS whilst on bail and missed the JPT final, if that was you explaining to your employers and family why you need to go to court for two weeks and if that was you facing jail for nothing other than being present when a so called riot kicks off? Because it could have been if you have decided to walk that way and have a look at what was going on.

 

Is it just conicidence that these ridiculous sentances are being handed out at a time when A/ The police tactics were at best questionable and B/at a time when police are facing budget cuts? Will the students who kicked off this week and caused damage to government property and assaulted police officers face jail? I bet they dont. Football fans are an easy target, they can give police easy convictions, few willl argue that the sentances are too high and if they do then as we see on here, most will say they deserve all they get, which gives the police carte blance to do what they like, unquestioned by the majority of the public and supported by the media who absolutely love it. Until people start smashing up government property campaining for hooligans rights that is never going to change and we will continue to see people jailed for one thing on a saturday afternoon within a few miles of a football ground and given a 50 fine for the same on a friday night.

 

TBH I agree with you. We are a long way off the violence in the 70's and 80's but there is still an element that follow football like no other sport. Should we just accept that and deal with it when it happens or take messures to try and get rid of it completly?

 

The fence was a different idea that can be considered a success and a failure on different counts. It was decided before the match to have a fence and I guess all results considered it was decided to use it no matter what. So win lose or draw they were going to let everyone out at the same time and get rid. Had they spent the money on putting the fence up and organising the operation but still kept the away lot in they would have been criticized for blowing a shed load of money when budgets should be tight and so on.

 

The worse bit of all is the media splashing names and address's all over the place. Which makes it all the worse when some of the accused come away from it with a clean slate! I think I could take being wrongly accused as long as the judicial system goes on to prove my inocense but being publicly trashed would be more damaging that actually being found guilty of anything. Innocent until proven guilty doesnt seem to exist anymore.

 

Football fans will always be an easy target as long as there are idiots that act up thinking its acceptable cause its football. Any rational person would look at the sentances and think they are not deserved when they are compared to other crimes and punnishments but also any rational person would know that football related crime is treated differently due to the 70's and 80's. Doesnt make it right but until football can be followed like any other sport it will always be treated differently.

[ericb]

The police are their every game with their cameras - If you dont act like a c*ck then it will not be pointed in your direction. Simple.

 

Is that right? So me turning up late last season meant i was acting like a cock, since i had a camera stuffed in my face as i queued outside the ground. Or maybe the entire Northam where acting like cocks this season when the police decided to film us the entire game for no apparent reason.

 

Or maybe, just maybe, the police don't give a flying **** about if you've done nothing wrong or not and will instead take any opportunity they can find to gather data on people in the off chance it makes their life's easier in the long run?

 

Now some may not have a problem with that, but personally i do. It's an erosion of our civil liberties and makes a joke of innocent till proven guilty.

 

I wish i could remember where i saw it, but not that long ago a paper was published by a major university that showed that we have more totalitarian monitoring now in the UK than Stalin ever did in his version of the USSR (cctv, monitoring of emails, collection of identity on chipped cards, storage of [admittedly personally surrendered] data on social networking sites, loyalty cards, traffic cameras, the list goes on when you think of it)

[Kaiser Soze]

And jailing people for rattling a fence isn't???

 

Daren, did the Pink print your article regarding this? Your points were spot on.

[Turkish]

Daren, did the Pink print your article regarding this? Your points were spot on.

 

They did and it was an excellent article, 100% spot on.

[Turkish]

TBH I agree with you. We are a long way off the violence in the 70's and 80's but there is still an element that follow football like no other sport. Should we just accept that and deal with it when it happens or take messures to try and get rid of it completly?

 

The fence was a different idea that can be considered a success and a failure on different counts. It was decided before the match to have a fence and I guess all results considered it was decided to use it no matter what. So win lose or draw they were going to let everyone out at the same time and get rid. Had they spent the money on putting the fence up and organising the operation but still kept the away lot in they would have been criticized for blowing a shed load of money when budgets should be tight and so on.

 

The worse bit of all is the media splashing names and address's all over the place. Which makes it all the worse when some of the accused come away from it with a clean slate! I think I could take being wrongly accused as long as the judicial system goes on to prove my inocense but being publicly trashed would be more damaging that actually being found guilty of anything. Innocent until proven guilty doesnt seem to exist anymore.

 

Football fans will always be an easy target as long as there are idiots that act up thinking its acceptable cause its football. Any rational person would look at the sentances and think they are not deserved when they are compared to other crimes and punnishments but also any rational person would know that football related crime is treated differently due to the 70's and 80's. Doesnt make it right but until football can be followed like any other sport it will always be treated differently.

 

this for me is utterly shameful. IMO no one should have their name released to the press until convicted or admitting guilt. Apart from as you say the whole thing about the basis of our judicial system being innocent until proven guilty (which is b******, if so why were they banned from SMS and the JPT final whilst on bail?) It also influnces the trial. Any memeber of the jury could pick up the echo and read the media embellished reports about what was supposed to have happened, what xxxx is being acussed of and it could influcence their verdict by what it in the written press. An associate of one of the jury might know one of the defendants and people talk, again that could and probably would influcence a verdict, we have seen on here how quick people are to judge, condemn and accuse without knowing any of the facts with some having a "lock um up and throw away the key" attitude.

 

It seems to me the echo have glorified this whole sorry event, i have lost count of the amount of headlines this has given them and they have delighted in reporting every sentance. I am not for one minute saying that events should go unreported, but there is a police and media agenda to this whole thing, that much is obvious.

[Rowan Gorilla 5]

Answer the question, is it acceptable? Or should the police go to lengths to ensure no crime is commited, rather than let one be commited then arrest the criminal later? Like it or not and most of you wont, the police tactics were very questionable, i have never heard of a derby in the UK for 20 odd years where they have let fans out at the same time. Of course, this does not excuse that actions of those that go looking of for it, but anyone with any ounce of common sense knows that a team losing 1-4 at home in a derby against their bitter rivals means there is a strong possibility of some form of violence occuring and letting fans confront each other within minutes of the final whistle when emotions were still running high was making violence even more likely.

 

No, paedophilia is not acceptable and the comparison is still daft.

 

Unfortunately with finite resources it is not possible to go to the lengths required to ensure that no crime is committed. Sometimes the only option is to allow a crime to happen and then arrest the criminal later. This is not Minority Report.

 

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that your team losing 4-1 to a local rival is no reason to balloon off and start hurting people, damaging property and acting like a wally.

[Turkish]

No, paedophilia is not acceptable and the comparison is still daft.

 

Unfortunately with finite resources it is not possible to go to the lengths required to ensure that no crime is committed. Sometimes the only option is to allow a crime to happen and then arrest the criminal later. This is not Minority Report.

 

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that your team losing 4-1 to a local rival is no reason to balloon off and start hurting people, damaging property and acting like a wally.

 

So why does every other police force in the country have the rescources and deem it appropriate to do all they can too stop fans coming face to face minutes after the final whistle? This includes keep away fans in the ground. They do it with us everytime we visit Fratton Park.

Edited 15 November, 2010 by Turkish

[SnailOB]

The Police also have a responsibility to the other 20-30000 fans that wanted to leave the area and NOT get involved or caught up in any 'potential' violence.

 

The excuse that those that wanted trouble would wait is a stupid excuse to use. If the police held the away fans back and 20mins or so later there are still saints fans lingering around then the police could easily identify those fans looking for bother as quite frankly there would be little excuse for any saints fan to still be in the area.

 

The decision to let all fans out at the same time when they knew that there was a high percenatge risk of trouble was totally unexcusable. I would say it was very poor policing. Personally i feel that the police put members of the public in danger in order to try and force some prosecutions !

[saintjay77]

this for me is utterly shameful. IMO no one should have their name released to the press until convicted or admitting guilt. Apart from as you say the whole thing about the basis of our judicial system being innocent until proven guilty (which is b******, if so why were they banned from SMS and the JPT final whilst on bail?) It also influnces the trial. Any memeber of the jury could pick up the echo and read the media embellished reports about what was supposed to have happened, what xxxx is being acussed of and it could influcence their verdict by what it in the written press. An associate of one of the jury might know one of the defendants and people talk, again that could and probably would influcence a verdict, we have seen on here how quick people are to judge, condemn and accuse without knowing any of the facts with some having a "lock um up and throw away the key" attitude.

 

It seems to me the echo have glorified this whole sorry event, i have lost count of the amount of headlines this has given them and they have delighted in reporting every sentance. I am not for one minute saying that events should go unreported, but there is a police and media agenda to this whole thing, that much is obvious.

 

That's the thing though. Innocent until proven guilty should be the case but as soon as the press release as much detail as they did the accused rights have been taken away already.

 

On a broader scale it's difficult to know if someone accused of football related violence should be banned from football matches until proven guilty or not. If proven innocent it makes it look like they are hard done by. But if not it makes sense.

 

If you were accused of a violent act at work you would probably be suspended until an investigation proved your guilt or innocence so it's probably fair enough.

 

Trial by press should be stopped no matter a persons guilt or innocence though.

[saintjay77]

The Police also have a responsibility to the other 20-30000 fans that wanted to leave the area and NOT get involved or caught up in any 'potential' violence.

 

The excuse that those that wanted trouble would wait is a stupid excuse to use. If the police held the away fans back and 20mins or so later there are still saints fans lingering around then the police could easily identify those fans looking for bother as quite frankly there would be little excuse for any saints fan to still be in the area.

 

The decision to let all fans out at the same time when they knew that there was a high percenatge risk of trouble was totally unexcusable. I would say it was very poor policing. Personally i feel that the police put members of the public in danger in order to try and force some prosecutions !

 

To be fair, if they wanted to do that they wouldn't have bothered putting the bloody fence up.

 

They thought, rightly or wrongly, that using a fence along with a high number of police, the public safety would not be compromised and the fans would also be dispersed quicker.

 

They either left an opening on purpose so the few mongs that couldn't resist looking for a chance to get involved could leg it across the garage forcourt. Or they under estimated peoples inability to respect boundaries put in place.

 

Still would be nice to hear from the police or someone on that side of the fence for their thoughts on if it was considered a success or not.

[Turkish]

That's the thing though. Innocent until proven guilty should be the case but as soon as the press release as much detail as they did the accused rights have been taken away already.

On a broader scale it's difficult to know if someone accused of football related violence should be banned from football matches until proven guilty or not. If proven innocent it makes it look like they are hard done by. But if not it makes sens

 

If you were accused of a violent act at work you would probably be suspended until an investigation proved your guilt or innocence so it's probably fair enough.

 

Trial by press should be stopped no matter a persons guilt or innocence though.

 

In a football related case a few years back, it took over a year from arrest to bring the case to court, for most of that time the guys on bail had to stay in their house for three hours before and 2 hours after every time their team played a game regardless of if it was home or away. For some, this involved leaving work two hours early to make sure they met their bail conditions for an evening game being played 150 miles away. Half of the people on this trial were aquitted, for those that weren't their ban started on the day of conviction, ignoring the fact that they had already been effectively not only been banned but under virtual house arrest during match times for a year already. how is this right?

[Turkish]

To be fair, if they wanted to do that they wouldn't have bothered putting the bloody fence up.

 

They thought, rightly or wrongly, that using a fence along with a high number of police, the public safety would not be compromised and the fans would also be dispersed quicker.

 

They either left an opening on purpose so the few mongs that couldn't resist looking for a chance to get involved could leg it across the garage forcourt. Or they under estimated peoples inability to respect boundaries put in place.

 

Still would be nice to hear from the police or someone on that side of the fence for their thoughts on if it was considered a success or not.

 

I'd like too know, now they have their convictions, why they didn't do what every other police force in the country does and keep the away fans in. They were quick enough to claim the glory for the arrests, have the film crews follow them and enjoy all the publicity, they were quick to scaremonger with tales of how violent our youth are and they need to be crushed, they need to also explain their actions and why they thought letting two groups of fans who hate each other face each other within minutes of the final whistle was the correct course of action to take.

[saintjay77]

In a football related case a few years back, it took over a year from arrest to bring the case to court, for most of that time the guys on bail had to stay in their house for three hours before and 2 hours after every time their team played a game regardless of if it was home or away. For some, this involved leaving work two hours early to make sure they met their bail conditions for an evening game being played 150 miles away. Half of the people on this trial were aquitted, for those that weren't their ban started on the day of conviction, ignoring the fact that they had already been effectively not only been banned but under virtual house arrest during match times for a year already. how is this right?

 

Just based on that it doesnt sound right at all. I am guessing there are various reasons why it took so long to get to court, made up or real reasons, but the one thing that looks really bad is when you say there ban started. I always assumed that if you are nicked for something and spend time locked up before a trial, any sentance would start from the time you were 1st locked up. So in theory a ban from football should do the same IMO. Im no legal beagle though so would probably get loads wrong if I was in that position.

[saintjay77]

I'd like too know, now they have their convictions, why they didn't do what every other police force in the country does and keep the away fans in. They were quick enough to claim the glory for the arrests, have the film crews follow them and enjoy all the publicity, they were quick to scaremonger with tales of how violent our youth are and they need to be crushed, they need to also explain their actions and why they thought letting two groups of fans who hate each other face each other within minutes of the final whistle was the correct course of action to take.

 

Im just trying to give my opinion based on what could have been said or though from either side. I think it would be fair enough for someone to ask questions of the police but doubt there is a proper way of doing it. Maybe someone can write to the local main copper in charge? Or maybe to the local MP? Fair questions deserve a fair answer IMO.

 

Probably be like Pi**ing into the wind though.

[Turkish]

Im just trying to give my opinion based on what could have been said or though from either side. I think it would be fair enough for someone to ask questions of the police but doubt there is a proper way of doing it. Maybe someone can write to the local main copper in charge? Or maybe to the local MP? Fair questions deserve a fair answer IMO.

 

Probably be like Pi**ing into the wind though.

 

BTW dont think for a minute i am anti police or pro hooligan, no the police aren't responible for the actions of individuals, but they are responsible for preventing and solving crimes. Given the mass of experience, publicity and funding that goes into policing football i simply think that their tactics on the day were wrong. It didn't make MR x shake the fence, it didn't make Mr Z throw a stone and jump around a lot, but given the amount of publicity and arrests this whole thing has been given and as someone that was there on the day and witnessed the Riot of Freeborn garages first hand, i'd like to know why they employed the tactics that they did, given it is something most other police forces decided it is not wise to do. I do think that they know they got it wrong and throwing people into prison for shaking a fence is the knee jerk reaction to this.

[red robbo]

the police will never admit to getting it so wrong,it makes sense to keep the away fans in the surrounding area can be cleared and monitored on cctv thats the way its been done in the past.I think Hants plod just want to justify their exsistance and keep the FIO's(most inapt title!) in a nice cushy job.I thought Daren's piece in the pink was spot on i bet there's no response from ob.

[dickyhale]

Mr Ross was found NOT GUILTY by a jury today.....

[Turkish]

Mr Ross was found NOT GUILTY by a jury today.....

 

excellent, finally a bit of common sense. How many more are there too go?

[dickyhale]

excellent, finally a bit of common sense. How many more are there too go?

 

I think two or three more tomorrow. Judge Gary Burrell QC was in fine form today........... I hope l never have to appear in front of him

[Turkish]

I think two or three more tomorrow. Judge Gary Burrell QC was in fine form today........... I hope l never have to appear in front of him

 

at least they didn't get Boggis. Nicknamed bang 'em up Boggis, although i think he may have retired now. Fingers crossed for those tomorrow.

[dubai_phil]

Being cynical this was so obviously going to happen.

 

The Target culture of the old regime gave the OB a perfect opportunity for what they saw as easy numbers.

 

Anyone with an ounce of logic would understand that at a high risk match the away fans NEED to be kept in while the home fans disperse, I joked earlier about laying in wait and fights across the City which COULD have happened, but the critical point is still this - no logical statement from the OB as to why they allowed the away fans out at the same time. If they THOUGHT the fence had the problem solved then why hasn't the architect of THAt idea been sacked?

 

There is still not ANY justification for what the idiots did that day, whether those in court were guilty of fence rattling on not, SOMEBODY did it and taking a step back would have been what any right minded person would (or should) have done. But deep down I will never be rid of the thought that someone felt they could earn a bonus cheque by some easy arrests.

[Norm]

Im just trying to give my opinion based on what could have been said or though from either side. I think it would be fair enough for someone to ask questions of the police but doubt there is a proper way of doing it. Maybe someone can write to the local main copper in charge? Or maybe to the local MP? Fair questions deserve a fair answer IMO.

 

Probably be like Pi**ing into the wind though.

 

 

Why not do just that, write to

Chief Superintendent Matthew Greening

Southampton Central

Civic Centre

Southampton

Hampshire

 

 

SO14 7LG

 

I bet you get a reply.

Edited 17 November, 2010 by Norm
Error

[JackanorySFC]

Mr Ross was found NOT GUILTY by a jury today.....

 

Suprise suprise - The Echo havn't mentioned a word about it today, the same as a mate of mine who was found Not Guilty last week. If the verdict was the other way round however....

[Turkish]

Suprise suprise - The Echo havn't mentioned a word about it today, the same as a mate of mine who was found Not Guilty last week. If the verdict was the other way round however....

 

of course they haven't, it's an embarassment for them given the public hangings that they think these guys deserve.

[Vershinin]

Mr Ross was found NOT GUILTY by a jury today.....

 

Great news.

[Turkish]

glad to see a bit of common sense at last. Just out of interest does this mean they have now all been aquitted or are there any left?

[dune]

BTW dont think for a minute i am anti police or pro hooligan.

 

[saintjay77]

Why not do just that, write to

Chief Superintendent Matthew Greening

Southampton Central

Civic Centre

Southampton

Hampshire

 

 

SO14 7LG

 

I bet you get a reply.

 

I'm not someone who thinks they were completely out of order with the fence.

 

I don't think it worked as well as they wanted it too and I don't think it's the right solution for any match day. But the idea of getting rid of fans as quick as poss or punishing minor offences to try and force the numpty element out is more on the side of a good idea than bad.

 

IMO fans should be able to go and watch a football match without thoughts of getting into trouble. If it can happen in rugby and other sports I'm sure it can happen in football.

 

There will always be idiots but football shouldn't have to suffer for them.

[100%Red&White]

IMO.

 

The fact that Hants OB decided to let the skates out and go against everything that’s done at any other high risk fixture in this country, including down here before, suggests they wanted arrests. We had an escalating hoolie problem and they probably wanted convictions to send out a warning – it’s was openly stated in the local media before the bournemuff game that they were specifically targeting Saints fans. As it turned out, just anyone would do.

 

They erected an impenetrable steel barrier outside the Northam end so anyone coming out of the Kingsland side of it could only have gone in the opposite direction to where the ‘Freebourne battle’ took place. That would have meant those involved in this particular trouble must have come out of the Itchen North. I’d bet those fans were just amazed to see the 4000 skates spilling onto Britannia Road and just reacted, like many had done inside the ground, exchanging insults and the situation immediately developed and quickly got out of hand in the ‘heat of the moment’. It’s just that the OB had their cameras firmly fixed on only the Saints fans despite both sides playing up. It looks like a controlled situation was allowed to develop, as many other potential trouble makers were tucked up on the other side of the stadium, giving a manageable number of ‘scapegoats’ enough rope to hang themselves. For some certainly ‘wrong place, wrong time’.

 

Will be interesting to see what happens next Tuesday.

[100%Red&White]

Why would it? It's just a normal game? Nothing in the slightest like pompey.

 

Because:

 

It will be a big crowd.

 

There will be 3k Brighton fans.

 

There's a fairly local rivalry.

 

There's quite a bit at stake on this game.

 

And as the OB let bournemuff fans out at the same time and there was immediately a confrontation I think it will be interesting to see if they still believe this is the best option.

 

Brighton fans wont miss their trains, there aren't any.

[stanthemanfairoak]

someone better phone c s matt greening at THE CIVIC NOW!f

Because:

 

It will be a big crowd.

 

There will be 3k Brighton fans.

 

There's a fairly local rivalry.

 

There's quite a bit at stake on this game.

 

And as the OB let bournemuff fans out at the same time and there was immediately a confrontation I think it will be interesting to see if they still believe this is the best option.

 

Brighton fans wont miss their trains, there aren't any.

[dune]

Because:

 

It will be a big crowd.

 

There will be 3k Brighton fans.

 

There's a fairly local rivalry.

 

There's quite a bit at stake on this game.

 

And as the OB let bournemuff fans out at the same time and there was immediately a confrontation I think it will be interesting to see if they still believe this is the best option.

 

Brighton fans wont miss their trains, there aren't any.

 

Just go home after the game, or go a for drink, or a meal. That way you won't get into trouble.

 

After the Portsmouth cases everyone saints fan that would ideally enjoy a ruck knows the score so they have no excuse for getting involved around the stadium or in town and then complaining after.

Edited 18 November, 2010 by dune

[100%Red&White]

Just go home after the game, or go a for drink, or a meal. That way you won't get into trouble.

 

After the Portsmouth cases everyone saints fan that would ideally enjoy a ruck knows the score so they have no excuse for getting involved and then complaining after.

 

Yeah, so keep the Brighton fans in for 20-30 minutes and it gives everyone, who wants to, to get back to the pub without the potential of a confrontation.

[dune]

Yeah, so keep the Brighton fans in for 20-30 minutes and it gives everyone, who wants to, to get back to the pub without the potential of a confrontation.

 

And what about the majority of Brighton fans that deserve to be given the opportunity to get back to their cars without sticking out like the proverbial sore thumb?

 

Letting everyone out at the same time is the best option for normal fans. The only people it doesn't suit is the miniscule minority that want to fight. Law and Order is about protecting the innocent, not about protecting criminals from themselves. For that fundamental reason Hampshire Constabulary did the right thing for the Portsmouth game and they should continue to do it.

[dune]

LOL you mong. There is no rivalry why keep the fans in?

 

TBF 3000 away fans for a noddy club like Brighton is unusual so their undesireables will be out in force, and it is a fact that Crystal Palace are their local rivals (for them at least) so we are likely to be seen as rivals by their derby deprived feral delinquents.