Dissapointing post that Jim, I don't recognise the scruffy drips and morons you describe as City fans or your lazy connection to the rioters. There were more rugby shirts on display in the riot than any city shirts.
As they've had numerous burglaries, I'm surprised the rugby clubs can get insurance on their tat shops. The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily mine.
I'm working off stats given to us by the Met when meeting with Merton Council on the Plough Lane move. Within months of them being there Sunderland fans entered the home end at Plough Lane and there was a very nasty set of violent incidents, I watched it live from the control room. Its based on stadium trouble. I've no data on Beverley races but I imagine the figures you are quoting are well outside of the race course and not taking place in or around the course. Drunk people in Beverley town centre go on very different set of figures regardless of where they have come from. Police would not class this as 'Horse Racing related arrests, the same as they dont class an arrest in Admiral of a man in a Millwall shirt as 'football related'. There were people wearing Hull FC shirts in Hull the other saturday during the trouble, should this go down as Rugby related incidents as Hull had played Saints that day? Inside stadiums there is more arrests for varying forms of disorder at football matches than at any other sports venue.
Tell that to plod and the media, when Villa fans kicked off in Whitefriargate well after a match it went down as football related violence. The recent disorder led to calls for those found guilty to be banned from attending football matches. The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily mine.
It was a lazy generalisation, you're right, and those types are at Rovers and Hull too for sure, I've seen plenty at Hull FC games. Our crowds are far bigger than the other clubs so the good people far outweigh them. What I was getting at is they are the types that will spoil it by not being able to drink in their seats without causing hassle. Packs of chavs embarrassing the club. You probably remember the pitch invaders and bottle throwers on the return from covid, they are the types I am talking about. I've no idea what the east stand is like at an FC game as I'm in the west on the half way line with a totally different demographic but they are probably a pain in the arse at Rugby too. The problem the FA have is crowds are generally much bigger and allowing alcohol in the seats is going to lead to more trouble. 99% will behave, of course they will, but unfortunately football has a minority that will spoil everything and it is bigger than the minority in other sports.
They definitely do class them as 'football related' if they involve people who are attending football matches, regardless of where the offence actually takes place, most football banning orders are issued for offences outside of a stadium, often a fair distance away from the stadium (including our own fans, several of whom have been banned for things that happened way down Anlaby Road).
I don't see the need to connect rioters to anything other than their own disorder, I only mention Hull FC shirts in the riot as its a fact and they were at home, if it had occurred a week on Saturday everyone would be blaming City v Millwall even though Millwall fans actually protected properties in a London riot. Most City fans were peacefully enjoying the Sesh anyway.
A lad I know well was heavily involved in it and got a lengthy banning order. I'm not sure it went on the stats as football violence though despite the headlines the Mail used. And if it did then I dont see it influencing the FA to change stadium rules as it was very well organised and arranged violence away from the ground. BTP stopped using football related arrests in the stats in 2017. General Police use all of them together so stadium incicents are included and the figure is tiny around 10 in 100,000 supporters nationwide. I guess the FA worry is they increase that number by allowing alcohol to be consumed during the game in seats. It is another case of the tiny minorty spoiling it for the majority.
As I said it was a lazy generalisation. The chav types I was referring to also attend Hull FC as I have said as well as hang around the City Centre all day every day. Perhaps they are more noticable at City for me because I'm in the East Stand and I'm keen to protect my kids from the sort of language and selfish behviour that follows them around. I am fully aware that 99.9% of our fan base are decent people, I am one of them!
Remember a court case a while back in Leeds where a bloke was fined for urinating in a shop doorway after they had played a night match. The magistrate said that in addition to the fine he would be applying for a banning order. He asked the defendant what he was laughing at to be told that he couldn’t stand football and had never been to Elland Road in his life.
Saw some pictures of big burly tattooed race goers the other day. Some lovely frocks and shoes on them.
Possibly true, the quote marks I used were deliberate. The perception of the demographics of football fans from people who don't go to football is very different from the reality of it.
I dont think drink is the problem with the stereotypes you describe Jim, I think they get their kicks from other forms not on general sale at the offical kiosks/bars on the concourse. As for non football arrests away from the stadium, that my be the case in other cities but in Hull, if something kicks off at 2.00 am three miles from the ground, outside a night club in the city centre but someone is seen wearing a football shirt or if a link can be made to the offender having been to a football match earlier in the day, then it becomes football related. That is fact and treated as such and mentioned in court. It has even become a football related offence when a drunk kicks off in a pub or elsewhere if it can be proved he has been watching football on the telly earlier!
Wow… That seems like quite a lot of nonsense to squeeze into one post. Well done. 1. Where is this ‘loads of disorder’ you refer to? Can’t think I’ve seen anything you’d call disorder, certainly not started by City fans, for many years. That’s despite Police pushing fans together without any segregation or escorts, when walking back over the bridge after the game. 2. Your description of ‘drips’ at City doesn’t sound like anyone I see at the game. If there was any trouble, and again I never see any, the people involved would be far more likely to be extremely well dressed I’d think. You seem to be thinking of an entirely different group of people? 3. Some City fans locked up after rioting? Really? Which ones? I certainly didn’t recognise anyone the HDM put up to find, but feel free to say which of the ones convicted go to City regularly? As for other posts…there seems to me to be much more fighting in and around stadiums in RL to me. Whether there are more arrests is a very different question, because there doesn’t seem to be the appetite to arrest non football fans as readily, and of course the higher levels of Policing at football are more likely to lead to high levels of arrests, even though one reason is the high level of compensation given to the Police for those officers at the game. CBA to find it again, but the hourly rates are eye watering. Yes it’s nice overtime for some of them (and a fairly senior one I knew admitted to me that he looked forward to football season because he could hit fans and get away with it…the dickhead) bit of more interest is the money claimed back by the organisation. I think it’s highly likely that they will turn a nett ‘profit’ on it. Your post genuinely makes no sense to me tbh
The way it's going Henley Regatta will shortly be more working class than football. The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily minem
