RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
Well I wish Alan the best of luck in Court, they will decide.
No thats a stupid argument, trespassing on someone's land is a minor crime, if while committing that minor crime you do something major like stab someone then you have commited a major crime. Just because you did that doesn't make the minor crime anymore serious. We shouldn't be asking stabbing victims how we should punish people for trespassing. Distruping a football match peacefully shouldn't be a crime at all though it should get you banned from stadia for a while depending on the seriousness.
The guy that assaulted kirkland has what is arguably a shorter banning order than the Coventry fan though, 6 years vs indefinite, the wolves fan who also had cocaine on him got a 3 year ban.
Couldn't put it better then that.
Robo you have just lost the argument, you cannot have different situations for different times.
The next time I am late for work and I do 100mph I will tell the court it was a different situation to that time I did it on the way to visiting friends and therefore must be let off.
Well I wish Alan the best of luck in Court, they will decide.
I highlighted a specific comment because ten or so years ago things may have been different, things have escalated since then, see that I only highlighted one part of the quote?
but the courts won't decide because coventry city have banned him indefinitely, so what the courts decide is going to be irrelevant to him watching his team, of course you'd hope when we got new owners they would rescind the banning order once any banning order is up from the courts.
Well I wish Alan the best of luck in Court, they will decide.
Have things escalated or is football the safest it's ever been? because it feels like the later to me
Things have escalated in my opinion.
How many of us received a ban for going on the pitch when we played derby at highfield road in 2005?
Things have escalated in my opinion.
That's not it mrbluesky87, if I smash the window's of someone's house those residents would want me to feel the full extent of the law for breaking it, how is what Alan did any different? The FA will want to make sure that Alan is punished to the extent of the law, pitch invaders are a lottery you have the type like Alan who make a scene or you have the type who punch Goalkeepers in the face, as you never know which one is coming, all must be banned with the same ban to prevent it happening again.
END
That's on the thesis that we get new owners..?
no they probably won't as you can see from other punishments from the courts from much more serious and much less understandable breakings of that rule. He will likely get a short ban and small fine, perhaps just the fine. He absolutely should be punished to the same level other similar acts have been, thats whats fair.
In what way? football seems much more friendly and unfortunately a little sterile compared to how it was when I was younger, it's got more family friendly, safer, I remember fights in the disabled section between the west end and the away fans. I've not seen anything like that for years. Football fans are a much more diverse audience now, many more women, a lot less pissed up testosterone, alot more wealthy fans, I can't accept that a peaceful protest on a pitch now deserves more punishment than it did 10 or 20 years ago. Football is very safe these days.
In what way? football seems much more friendly and unfortunately a little sterile compared to how it was when I was younger, it's got more family friendly, safer, I remember fights in the disabled section between the west end and the away fans. I've not seen anything like that for years. Football fans are a much more diverse audience now, many more women, a lot less pissed up testosterone, alot more wealthy fans, I can't accept that a peaceful protest on a pitch now deserves more punishment than it did 10 or 20 years ago. Football is very safe these days.
I'd imagine that with the court ruling coming up, indefinite is just a synonym for provisional rather than meaning until the end of time.
Erm... following that logic, sometimes people who break a window enter houses and end up murdering the occupants, it's rare, but it happens.
Therefore the correct treatment of window-breakers is obviously a life sentence - they might just break a window, or they might murder the occupants. Only a life-sentence will stop window breakers and protect us from potential murderers.
It's an interesting idea, but it's not the way the law generally works. The punishment is supposed to fit the actual crime - not the potential crime. So, how far the law extends and how much punishment is needed is decided by the court - but it's rare that offenders of any nature are punished to the full extent of the law in terms of receiving the maximum sentence available.
Anyway, like I say, I don't want anyone to go one the pitch, regardless of how just the cause - but I also think the punishment should fit the crime. I'm not sure it does here.
Has it been said somewhere the ban he has got? People are going on about how harsh it is etc but do they know how long he is banned for? How can they say it is harsh when it is indefinite?
Surely it is safer because of the punishments? If you didn't get punished for having a fight in a terrace or running on the pitch then a lot more people would be doing it.
Surely it is safer because of the punishments? If you didn't get punished for having a fight in a terrace or running on the pitch then a lot more people would be doing it.
How many of us received a ban for going on the pitch when we played derby at highfield road in 2005?
Not to mention all those Southampton fans in our last match of the Championship !? Actually I best get a ban as well as I went on the pitch at the end of the Legends game at the Ricoh in August along with another 2000 or so !
He's talking about people running on the pitch.
You are literally the only person to mention the fucking hill.
You're right so what was post 85 hinting at:thinking about:
Didn't take long for Barry...
Post 85 didn't mention the hill
You're right so what was post 85 hinting at:thinking about:
One half of the chuckle brothersYou know what he was saying who else would it have been and who the hell is Barry?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?