Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Another four banned

Bought the SLP on tuesday just on the strength on Friday nights game, was reading through the paper and there was a colum about four lads being banned from all Charlton adn England who were part of a nortorious gang going into pubs and standing outside pubs accomidated by away fans stirring up trouble,find this hard to believe as their is hardly any trouble at Charlton as well as a nortorious gang
«13

Comments

  • edited February 2008
    I know the girlfriend of one of the "yobs". The reporting was a bit OTT - "foul-mouthed football yobs" made me smile, as if they'd deliver a kicking and then thank the victim afterwards for their time...

    link
  • was it Charlton or England related
  • charlton seens to be getting a name at the moment
  • dont think its the club, i think its the local OB trying to make a name for themseves
  • Its for nothing but association, no charges or anything. Was in the lads best interests to take the bans.
  • Am I being thick here?
    Have they actually been convicted of any crime?

    It seems they have received these bans because of who they know rather than what they've done (or haven't done). If they are banned for associating with known hooligans have the known hooligans also been banned.

    This smacks of overkill by the OB, like the letters sent before we played at shithurst to supporters who have never been convicted of a football related crime.
  • Id rather they acted to prevent the incidents before they happen rather than act afterwards.....

    not to say they should go around randomly slapping bans left right and centre, but by doing it on those by association, i think they know what they are doing.
  • "not to say they should go around randomly slapping bans left right and centre, but by doing it on those by association, i think they know what they are doing."

    No offence Suze, but they don't have a 'kin clue. Moving the palace game to a Friday night proved that.
  • I know a number of "hooligans" but living in Southampton I only see them occasionally but when I see them, am I associating with them, does that mean I can get banned. Also at every game you see lots of people shouting abuse at opposing fans and players (and our players) so by this logic any of those can be banned as well.

    It just seems to me they can say that, whoever, is likely to cause trouble because of who they know rather than anything they have done or intend to do.
  • Sponsored links:


  • It does seem very odd to me.

    If this report, and another i read are accurate, then they have been arrested, charged and banned for no more than 'acting a bit large'. and being associated with others who have convictions.

    What people say and what they do are two very different things however, as is what company people keep, and i find it staggering that it got as far as that stage let alone convicted when no real actual crime has ben made.

    Have known one of them around 15 years, and if he is seen as real danger to society then we're all in trouble.
  • really? is there proof that there was more trouble on the Friday night than there would have been had the game been on a saturday? If that game was on a Saturday, there would have been a substantial less amount of police, plus other sets of fans travelling throughout the area at the same time.

    Apparently there was a pub smashed up by London Bridge, any other trouble to speak of? personal injury? any innocent family football fans get set upon on any trains on Friday?

    Yeah, ok, so lots of people met earlier and got more drunk, the majority of those people are normal trouble free citizens so what harm was done? (apart from the oak running out of beer?!)
  • [cite]Posted By: AFKA Bartram[/cite]Have known one of them around 15 years
    Well thats you banned then mate.
  • New campaign lads, AFKA OUT!

    He's clearly not to be trusted and a hardend hoolie!
  • AFKA if I ever bump into you at a match please don't speak to me as I don't want to be associated with another known hoolie. lol
  • Not sure I want to know what condition his 'end' is in!
  • I know all 4 and another 2 who have the same before. Its purely by association, a file of dates and times etc seen with other "Risk supporters" they go Court, get banned or appeal. They appeal (in most cases get banned anyway) they get a large fine for their troubles. They were no angels but hadnt even been charged or arrested, let alone found guilty.
  • DA9DA9
    edited February 2008
    [cite]Posted By: AFKA Bartram[/cite]It does seem very odd to me.

    If this report, and another i read are accurate, then they have been arrested, charged and banned for no more than 'acting a bit large'. and being associated with others who have convictions.

    What people say and what they do are two very different things however, as is what company people keep, and i find it staggering that it got as far as that stage let alone convicted when no real actual crime has ben made.

    Have known one of them around 15 years, and if he is seen as real danger to society then we're all in trouble.

    Thats the point AFKA, they have not been arrested or charged with anything, its a ban because they decided to ban them by association, as I said, as a football fan your normal civil rights or rights by standard law of freedom of movement can go out of the window at a whim.
  • [quote][cite]Posted By: suzisausage[/cite]Id rather they acted to prevent the incidents before they happen rather than act afterwards.....

    not to say they should go around randomly slapping bans left right and centre, but by doing it on those by association, i think they know what they are doing.[/quote]

    Suz, you know me and lots of others who have or have been involved (although some you may not know have or have in the past), does that mean you deserve a ban?
  • [cite]Posted By: DA_9[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: suzisausage[/cite]Id rather they acted to prevent the incidents before they happen rather than act afterwards.....

    not to say they should go around randomly slapping bans left right and centre, but by doing it on those by association, i think they know what they are doing.

    Suz, you know me and lots of others who have or have been involved (although some you may not know have or have in the past), does that mean you deserve a ban?

    I haven't been present at the time though.....
  • Sponsored links:


  • its a breach of human rights.
    i know a good lawyer.

    luckily for me i only know EX hooligans...
  • [quote][cite]Posted By: suzisausage[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: DA_9[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: suzisausage[/cite]Id rather they acted to prevent the incidents before they happen rather than act afterwards.....

    not to say they should go around randomly slapping bans left right and centre, but by doing it on those by association, i think they know what they are doing.[/quote]

    Suz, you know me and lots of others who have or have been involved (although some you may not know have or have in the past), does that mean you deserve a ban?[/quote]

    I haven't been present at the time though.....[/quote]

    Neither were these lads when these "associates" committed there crimes, hardly fair is it. Just because you were not present does not matter, you have, and still continue to associate with known hooligans, one of whom you will not be aware of who has a very colourful past.
  • edited February 2008
    total joke, "associating" with the perpetrator of an offence cannot be a crime surely? what is this Stalin's Russia?

    they may have been "no angels" but not many are in any walk of life, not just football

    what happens if my best mate who i drink down the pub with secretly goes home and knocks seven bells out of his missus every night, am i a known "associate" of a wife beater?

    total victimisation
  • What about them muslim arseholes parading around Trafalgar Square made out to be suicide bombers. Perhaps they should be given a ban, from the British Isles.
  • edited February 2008
    [cite]Posted By: DA_9[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: suzisausage[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: DA_9[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: suzisausage[/cite]Id rather they acted to prevent the incidents before they happen rather than act afterwards.....

    not to say they should go around randomly slapping bans left right and centre, but by doing it on those by association, i think they know what they are doing.

    Suz, you know me and lots of others who have or have been involved (although some you may not know have or have in the past), does that mean you deserve a ban?

    I haven't been present at the time though.....

    Neither were these lads when these "associates" committed there crimes, hardly fair is it. Just because you were not present does not matter, you have, and still continue to associate with known hooligans, one of whom you will not be aware of who has a very colourful past.

    I don't believe these boys to be completely innocent, and they wouldn't have been banned for no reason.

    edited to say: nor have I ever been in trouble in the past with or without these people present. nor am I known to the club or the police as a potential trouble maker in any way.
  • I think the whole thing is out of hand, if we start to nick people through association i would be stuffed, i should have been done for the great train robbery as i was good friends with Buster Edwards , and i wasnt even born when they done the bloody thing
  • [quote][cite]Posted By: suzisausage[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: DA_9[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: suzisausage[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: DA_9[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: suzisausage[/cite]Id rather they acted to prevent the incidents before they happen rather than act afterwards.....

    not to say they should go around randomly slapping bans left right and centre, but by doing it on those by association, i think they know what they are doing.[/quote]

    Suz, you know me and lots of others who have or have been involved (although some you may not know have or have in the past), does that mean you deserve a ban?[/quote]

    I haven't been present at the time though.....[/quote]

    Neither were these lads when these "associates" committed there crimes, hardly fair is it. Just because you were not present does not matter, you have, and still continue to associate with known hooligans, one of whom you will not be aware of who has a very colourful past.[/quote]

    I don't believe these boys to be completely innocent, and they wouldn't have been banned for no reason.[/quote]

    Which is your perogative, but this was merely a case of him not liking faces and picking easy targets, even his own colleagues in the Met outed him asap because he was a bully.
    You will find that a lot of lads will hang around other "known faces" just for the kudos, doesnt mean they are guilty of anything other than association.
  • you can't have a conviction on the fact they aren't "completely innocent" that's totally contrary to the way in which the english legal system has (apparently) operated for centuries...
  • lets agree to disagree on this one then.
  • It sounds like the footballing equalivant of an ASBO, done to prevent rather then convict
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!