Saturday was my first home match for a couple of years due to work abroad.
At half time I was desperate for a cigarette but couldn't see anyone outside the gates.
My dad told me everyone just puts up with it and waits until full time. Is this true or do the gates men let you out and back in for a sneaky one?
0
Comments
Its only two hours .i'm sure people can wait that short time to carry on killing themselves.
Your not meant to drink it mate, just use the urinal
Tek a boo son, tek a boo.
Only taken 3 seasons for them to notice mind.
What is the problem with people drinking at Football and before / after ? It's a social event.
What is the problem with people drinking at Football and before / after ? It's a social event.
He was being ironic
Like it or not it is illegal in a place of work.
I would be interest to know how you would feel if your season ticket money was used to pay the fine.
PS I am a smoker and manage to go two hours without one. Do you seriously not manage to get through 90 minutes without a cigarette every day.
I seem to remember when the ban first came in that the club said people would not be allowed to go outside and then come back in. Don't the tickets have the standard declaration about re-admittance which affects this?
Why cant we do something like that
It shows people that they are not treated like 2nd class people a because they are football fans and b because they smoke
Only Charlton...
Don't know if either of the above are on wind-ups. But heres my threepenneth. I smoke but I don't drink. So going by whats written above all drinkers should be put to sleep, at birth and the sale of alcohol banned. I haven't noticed many gangs of "smoked up (tobacco only)" yobs starting trouble on a night out but can the same can't be said for those "pissed up" yobs.
I rally don't want to go down this road (but I will).
You don't see many bar staff suffering from lung disease because they work in a place where people drink alcohol.
You don't see massive increases in the number of children with asthma because their parents drink.
And you don't see the government forced to take action to ban drinking in the way it has seen fit to ban smoking.
Sorry but you can not win a pro-smoking argument with an anti-drinking one.
If you want to argue for smoking at least use the pro-choice one.
Don't see how thats relevant at all, as nobody on the thread has tried to justify driving whilst under the influence of anything.
The same as you don't win the legalise drugs argument by comparing the dangers of it to drinking.
I think someone Mum once said "Two wrongs, don't make a right."
The pro-choice argument is much stronger and much more valid.
"I don't smoke, and nor do I intend to, but I'm uneasy about a blanket ban because it sets a dangerous precedent about the reach of the state." Lembit Opik, ex Liberal Democrat MP
"This is not an issue about smoking. It's about freedom. I do not smoke and I do not like going into smoky places, and so I don't. That is my choice. There is no need for more nanny-state government interference." Philip Davies, Conservative MP