This is copy of a report from the FSF who I follow: The anatomy of a S14 (B) banning order Page 7 (13) here...http://old.fsf.org.uk/uploaded/publications/pdfs/tfs24.pdf So you probably still think that you’d have to do something fairly impressive for your local force to bring a case against you and threaten you with a banning order? You’d be wrong. » Suppose that you head to your next away match, perhaps a local derby or cup game, to pick up a ticket from a mate at a pub a short distance from the ground. » As it’s busy, a couple of policemen are there monitoring events, but it’s all good natured, and there’s no hint of any trouble. » You are corralled into a larger group of your fans by police near the away end; the police spotters are there with camcorders looking out for the troublemakers, but you largely ignore them as you make your way to the ground. » Walking in the throng towards the turnstiles the anticipation and atmosphere grows, and you exchange a few songs (and perhaps the odd choice word) with groups of home supporters you pass. All harmless, regular matchday occurrences for many, you may think. Unfortunately, each of these decisions could lead you on the road to a Football Banning Order under Section 14(B) of the Football Spectators Act of 1989, as amended by the Football (Disorder) Act 2000: » Police have used the fact that you have travelled to the game without a ticket as evidence that you are going to contribute to violence or disorder. Unknown to you, there were risk supporters in the pub you chose to stop at, or people on banning orders. The police have now identified you as associating with risk supporters. » Your choice of pub indicates you are intent on contributing to disorder with home fans. Conversely if you’d chosen a pub further away that wasn’t a typical matchday pub, the police use this as evidence that disorder was planned away from the ground. » You have been videoed in a police escort. If you weren’t a risk supporter, why else would you require an escort? The fact that you had no choice is irrelevant. » Swearing and gesturing at opposition fans has been taken as a sign of aggression. The police use this behaviour as evidence that you intend to commit disorder. A worst case scenario, of course, but each of these arguments has been used successfully by the police applying for FBOs. Section 14(B) is a civil sanction, the standard of proof is only “in the balance of probabilities”, rather than “beyond reasonable doubt”, as criminal cases require.
brb I think we all know what you mean. I would be interested to know if only ONE of the criteria was used for a banning order, or as I suspect, a combination of several of the conditions. The Police still need to provide evidence to seek to prevent the freedom of movement of any individual. In the case of somebody travelling without a ticket - to pick up one at their journies end, it would be a case of bad luck at being in the wrong pub at the wrong time. Any solicitor wouldn't have to be very good to overturn such a ban. As for anyone who might be stupid enough to swear or in any way provoke a breach of the peace - then they can probably expect to get a ban ( unless it's putting right the linesman - otherwise I'm snookered ! ).
Without actually reading the wording of the actual banning order legislation it is hard to comment but suspect that a large amount of common sense is used regarding the issuing of banning orders, while the chain of event brb suggested is very plausible there is no evidence that anyone has been banned follow such a scenario. All the banning orders I have heard of relate to more serious issues, usually involving violence or excessive aggression.
