Football banning orders

[Bletchleyite]

The subject of football banning orders came up on another thread and I thought it worth a discussion.

I don't know a lot about them, but can someone who does summarise when they're applied and what they can include, and concerns surrounding them being misapplied?

Thanks.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'm no expert, but my understanding (from discussion on a football forum) is that they can vary a fair bit depending on who is given the order and why. Common features include having to surrender your passport when England play away matches and when tournaments are taking place, and being forbidden from certain areas (generally stadia and the surrounding area) when a football match is taking place.

No idea how strict the enforcement is, mind.

 

[roversfan2001]

The above terms mentioned are the generic terms that are applied in the vast majority of casis AIUI.

The most concerning part about FBO's for me is that there doesn't even need to be an offence committed (and therefore no conviction required). There just needs to be a belief that the banning order would help prevent violence and disorder. This extremely vague and wide-ranging umbrella basically gives the various police forces around the country the ability to ban anyone they don't like.

There's far more to them than 'you're not allowed into any football ground for 3 years'. The surrendering your passport for every international tournament rule is particularly onerous, this applies regardless of whether any of the home nations qualify or not!

Any criminal offence committed 24 hours either side of a football match can put someone in line for a banning order, as long as the police can prove that this behaviour was football related. Get into a fight in a pub the night before a game and you've got your season ticket in your wallet? Prepare for no passport every other summer for at least 3 years. For most people a scuffle in a pub would be dealt with and settled on the night, often without involving the police. If you're a football fan then it's possible to have extreme conditions placed on you for years. I'm not in any way defending people fighting on nights out, just demonstrating how FBO's can be misused.

They're one of the last remaining elements of Thatcher's war on football fans in the 1980s and they need to go, or at least be drastically reformed.

I'm unsure why anybody who isn't a lowlife thug scumbag should have any issue with football banning orders being extended to include rail travel? Ideally they'd extend to everywhere beyond the recipients' front doorsteps, but that's a different conversation! Unless you're suggesting that they are imposed in a manner that is questionable?

Ignoring the fact that they're handed out like goody bags at a kid's birthday party, do you really want people subject to FBO's to be placed under house arrest whenever their team play?

Being denied use of the railways is hardly 'house arrest'.

The suggestion that an FBO should extend everywhere beyond the receipient's front door has an implication that the receipient should be on house arrest, given the extreme conditions that can apply to them.

 

[Towers]

The above terms mentioned are the generic terms that are applied in the vast majority of casis AIUI.

The most concerning part about FBO's for me is that there doesn't even need to be an offence committed (and therefore no conviction required). There just needs to be a belief that the banning order would help prevent violence and disorder. This extremely vague and wide-ranging umbrella basically gives the various police forces around the country the ability to ban anyone they don't like.

There's far more to them than 'you're not allowed into any football ground for 3 years'. The surrendering your passport for every international tournament rule is particularly onerous, this applies regardless of whether any of the home nations qualify or not!

Any criminal offence committed 24 hours either side of a football match can put someone in line for a banning order, as long as the police can prove that this behaviour was football related. Get into a fight in a pub the night before a game and you've got your season ticket in your wallet? Prepare for no passport every other summer for at least 3 years. For most people a scuffle in a pub would be dealt with and settled on the night, often without involving the police. If you're a football fan then it's possible to have extreme conditions placed on you for years. I'm not in any way defending people fighting on nights out, just demonstrating how FBO's can be misused.

They're one of the last remaining elements of Thatcher's war on football fans in the 1980s and they need to go, or at least be drastically reformed.




The suggestion that an FBO should extend everywhere beyond the receipient's front door has an implication that the receipient should be on house arrest, given the extreme conditions that can apply to them.

My comment was rather flippant, although in some cases it probably wouldn't be a bad thing...

On a serious note, I fully appreciate that some fans might well feel that it's a bit of a 'sledgehammer' solution, but other examples exist in scenarios where a catch-all solution is required to curb antisocial issues - S59 Road Traffic comes to mind, allowing nuisance drivers to have their vehicles seized. There are often complaints about that being somewhat heavy handed, but they tend to come from teenage lads who just happened to end up in a car park full of all their mates, but definitely weren't responsible for any of the burnouts, racing, loud music etc... It sounds rather similar to your example of 'I just happened to get into a fight, in a pub, with my football season ticket in my pocket...'.

Do you really not think that, given the utterly abhorent behaviour of football fans at the time, Thatcher was entirely justified in taking steps? What are your feelings on known problem matches being played in empty grounds, or clubs being hit with fines when their fans repeatedly cause major issues - unfair?

 

[Bletchleyite]

For most people a scuffle in a pub would be dealt with and settled on the night, often without involving the police.

You see, I see a pub fight as a serious offence - assault and drunk/disorderly which should be prosecuted as such, plus criminal damage to any pub furniture damaged during it.

If you can't control your fists when you're drunk, don't drink in public.

Nonetheless I wouldn't see it as appropriate that these would apply to conduct outside of attendance at or travel to/from a football match.

 

[DarloRich]

I would say a tool required to deal with an issue, however I would prefer the tool not to be sledgehammer! The nature, cause and effect of a banging order is unknown to the public.

I know a bloke who has a banning order for going on the pitch after a goal. He got pushed over the hoarding. Now, he is a bit of lad and a bit of a heid the baw but not deserving of a banning order.

Do you really not think that, given the utterly abhorent behaviour of football fans at the time, Thatcher was entirely justified in taking steps?

Thatcher and her creature Moynihan , like many commentators on this subject, were clueless. No idea what was causing the problem. No interest in finding out. No plans to defeat those problems. No connection with people who went to football, no understanding of thier lives and no desire to find out one. Just seek to criminalise ALL football fans and require ONLY football fans to carry an ID card.

Funny how that doesn't seem to generate the kind of wibble it does for other sections of society! Imagine if all opera goers or rugger buggers were required to carry an ID card. How would that go down?

 

[roversfan2001]

Do you really not think that, given the utterly abhorent behaviour of football fans at the time, Thatcher was entirely justified in taking steps?

Maybe so, but the steps were wrong then and wrong now.

What are your feelings on known problem matches being played in empty grounds,

Sledgehammer to crack a nut.

or clubs being hit with fines when their fans repeatedly cause major issues - unfair?

I do actually agree with this one. It puts pressure on the clubs to help target the troublemakers.

You see, I see a pub fight as a serious offence - assault and drunk/disorderly which should be prosecuted as such, plus criminal damage to any pub furniture damaged during it.

If you can't control your fists when you're drunk, don't drink in public.

Nonetheless I wouldn't see it as appropriate that these would apply to conduct outside of attendance at or travel to/from a football match.

I don't disagree, but that doesn't detract from my point.

On a serious note, I fully appreciate that some fans might well feel that it's a bit of a 'sledgehammer' solution, but other examples exist in scenarios where a catch-all solution is required to curb antisocial issues - S59 Road Traffic comes to mind, allowing nuisance drivers to have their vehicles seized. There are often complaints about that being somewhat heavy handed, but they tend to come from teenage lads who just happened to end up in a car park full of all their mates, but definitely weren't responsible for any of the burnouts, racing, loud music etc... It sounds rather similar to your example of 'I just happened to get into a fight, in a pub, with my football season ticket in my pocket...'.

S59 is a load of bovine excrement too (and I don't drive a souped up chav wagon so there's no vested interest there for me). Also not really the same scenario as I described - a football fan potentially being subject to an FBO for something not at all football related.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Do you really not think that, given the utterly abhorent behaviour of football fans at the time, Thatcher was entirely justified in taking steps? What are your feelings on known problem matches being played in empty grounds, or clubs being hit with fines when their fans repeatedly cause major issues - unfair?

Absolutely not. Even in the worst days of the 1970s and 80s, it was always a tiny minority of football fans that caused trouble. Thatcher basically put ALL football fans in the hooligan box, which led to police treating them as troublemakers by default, rather than as citizens they had a duty to protect.

This of course indirectly led to the deaths of 97 people after South Yorkshire Police screwed up: many of them were children, so not your typical skinhead hooligan.

 

[Towers]

Doubtless one of the main difficulties here is that many of the worst groups of yobs essentially operate as if they were organised crime groups, albeit their crime of choice is thuggery. Short of infiltrating these operations from the inside, which would require a huge volume of police resources, the best that can be done is to police reactively, with the result being FBOs, matches played in empty grounds, and so on. I think, given those circumstances, these measures are pretty reasonable?

Although, I've never really understood what is achieved by punishing clubs directly, as they surely have as little time for the yobs as anybody else, and it's doubtful that the idiots care enough to curtail their activities I'd have thought - the football seems to be pretty much secondary to the hooliganism.

 

[roversfan2001]

Doubtless one of the main difficulties here is that many of the worst groups of yobs essentially operate as if they were organised crime groups, albeit their crime of choice is thuggery. Short of infiltrating these operations from the inside, which would require a huge volume of police resources, the best that can be done is to police reactively, with the result being FBOs, matches played in empty grounds, and so on. I think, given those circumstances, these measures are pretty reasonable?

Although, I've never really understood what is achieved by punishing clubs directly, as they surely have as little time for the yobs as anybody else, and it's doubtful that the idiots care enough to curtail their activities I'd have thought - the football seems to be pretty much secondary to the hooliganism.

You vastly overstate the extent of the hooliganism issue. In England in 2022 hooliganism is virtually non-existent. FBO's are often used not against these 'organised crime groups' (rarely seen outside Danny Dyer films), but against people who really aren't deserving of one (see DarloRich's post above).

 

[Towers]

You vastly overstate the extent of the hooliganism issue. In England in 2022 hooliganism is virtually non-existent. FBO's are often used not against these 'organised crime groups' (rarely seen outside Danny Dyer films), but against people who really aren't deserving of one (see DarloRich's post above).

Hmm.... Granted it isn't like it once was, thank heavens. But when it happens, it happens pretty spectacularly. Local derby games requiring one side to be bussed into town in convoy after riots at the previous match. The repeated carnage at European games, inevitably at least helped on its way by England fans. And then of course the low level stuff that goes on every weekend across the nation during the season. For us 'outsiders' who aren't burdened with the duty to perpetually jump in and defend football, it's pretty stark that there is still one hell of a stinking culture issue to be addressed. I don't think removing sanctions is the way to do that, not at this stage anyhow.

I do hope though that one day the 'beautiful game' might re-emerge from the fog of the yobs and the multi-million pound sleaze that seems to have spoiled it; both demons are as bad as each other I'm sure!

 

[Cloud Strife]

Although, I've never really understood what is achieved by punishing clubs directly, as they surely have as little time for the yobs as anybody else, and it's doubtful that the idiots care enough to curtail their activities I'd have thought - the football seems to be pretty much secondary to the hooliganism.

Perhaps so in the UK, but in the Continent, a lot of hooligans are hand in hand with the clubs. Wisła Kraków is an excellent example: https://www.goal.com/en-us/news/the-polish-sopranos-the-story-of-how-violent-gangsters-sent

“Teddy Bear” once served jail time for throwing a knife at Dino Baggio’s head as Wisla Krakow hosted Parma in a UEFA Cup tie in 1998.

Eighteen years later, the infamous hooligan and his gang extended their control from the terraces to the boardroom, and amid reports of violence, drug dealing and racketeering brought one of Poland’s biggest clubs to its knees.

It's by no means an exception. Most Polish clubs are connected to their host cities financially in some way, and very few are genuinely financially independent. It would take an essay to explain it all, but it leads to a very unhealthy situation where the hooligans dominate stadiums and football as a whole. There are some honourable exceptions, but by and far, Polish football is at the mercy of hooligans and politicians.

 

[DarloRich]

Hmm.... Granted it isn't like it once was, thank heavens. But when it happens, it happens pretty spectacularly. Local derby games requiring one side to be bussed into town in convoy after riots at the previous match. The repeated carnage at European games, inevitably at least helped on its way by England fans. And then of course the low level stuff that goes on every weekend across the nation during the season. For us 'outsiders' who aren't burdened with the duty to perpetually jump in and defend football, it's pretty stark that there is still one hell of a stinking culture issue to be addressed. I don't think removing sanctions is the way to do that, not at this stage anyhow.

I do hope though that one day the 'beautiful game' might re-emerge from the fog of the yobs and the multi-million pound sleaze that seems to have spoiled it; both demons are as bad as each other I'm sure!

I don't think you know what you are talking about. Sorry. It isn't "a duty to perpetually jump in and defend football" - it is about having to challenge this kind of bunkum that people comfortably offer as enlightened and informed commentary, when it is nothing of the sort, before we can have any kind of sensible debate.

May I ask: When did you last go to a game? When did you last travel to an away game? Have you met anyone with a banning order?

 

[Ediswan]

And then of course the low level stuff that goes on every weekend across the nation during the season.

Even generally well-behaved football fans can be unruly. Stevenage used to have a problem with fans strolling across the dual-carriageway running between the car park and the stadium. Not waiting for a gap in the traffic then moving quickly, just strolling across and forcing traffic to slow/stop. No amount of signs would persuade them to go by the slightly longer route and use the pedestrian underpass. There is now a tall fence down the middle of the dual-carriageway.

 

[DarloRich]

Even generally well-behaved football fans can be unruly. Stevenage used to have a problem with fans strolling across the dual-carriageway running between the car park and the stadium. Not waiting for a gap in the traffic then moving quickly, just strolling across and forcing traffic to slow/stop. No amount of signs would persuade them to go by the slightly longer route and use the pedestrian underpass.

how awful - they should be banned.

The subject of football banning orders came up on another thread and I thought it worth a discussion.

I don't know a lot about them, but can someone who does summarise when they're applied and what they can include, and concerns surrounding them being misapplied?

Thanks.

here is the Sentencing Council note on Banning Orders: https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.u.../ancillary-orders/14-football-banning-orders/

The court must make a football banning order where an offender has been convicted of a relevant offence and it is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that making a banning order would help to prevent violence or disorder

and some further easily digestible information here: http://www.lac.qmul.ac.uk/our-legal-blog/items/football-banning-orders-the-unknown-dangers.html

The main aim of FBOs is to prevent organised disorder at football games and deter hooligans from engaging in violence. The robust stance against football disorder is justified by Crown Prosecution Service to prevent harm to ordinary law-abiding fans and act as a deterrence.

 

[roversfan2001]

Local derby games requiring one side to be bussed into town in convoy after riots at the previous match.

As far as I know, there's only one match in the country where that is required and it happens to involve the club I support. The 'riots' only involved one set of fans, in their own town centre, after the first meeting between the sides in 17 years.

And then of course the low level stuff that goes on every weekend across the nation during the season.

Having followed my club up and down the country for a few years, by varying modes of transport and with different groups of people, I can count on one hand the number of violent encounters that I have witnessed.

For us 'outsiders' who aren't burdened with the duty to perpetually jump in and defend football, it's pretty stark that there is still one hell of a stinking culture issue to be addressed. I don't think removing sanctions is the way to do that, not at this stage anyhow.

I do hope though that one day the 'beautiful game' might re-emerge from the fog of the yobs and the multi-million pound sleaze that seems to have spoiled it; both demons are as bad as each other I'm sure!

And this last bit is cast iron proof that you don't really know what you're talking about. Green Street was a fictional film you know?

 

[Towers]

As far as I know, there's only one match in the country where that is required and it happens to involve the club I support. The 'riots' only involved one set of fans, in their own town centre, after the first meeting between the sides in 17 years.

Having followed my club up and down the country for a few years, by varying modes of transport and with different groups of people, I can count on one hand the number of violent encounters that I have witnessed.

And this last bit is cast iron proof that you don't really know what you're talking about. Green Street was a fictional film you know?

I've edited my response, as I feel we're veering way off topic and getting into a probably very pointless disagreement! Never an issue to have differing views of course, but sometimes pretty fruitless arguing about it, so I shall accept your better informed judgement as a regular matchgoer and leave it there - or we'll end up with the footie version of the DOO thread!

 

[DarloRich]

As far as I know, there's only one match in the country where that is required and it happens to involve the club I support.

it happens in a couple of places i know of: Swansea/Cardiff & Newcastle/Sunderland

I've edited my response, as I feel we're veering way off topic and getting into a probably very pointless disagreement! Never an issue to have differing views of course, but sometimes pretty fruitless arguing about it, so I shall accept your better informed judgement as a regular matchgoer and leave it there - or we'll end up with the footie version of the DOO thread!

I am not against banning orders at all and i am very happy to discuss them. I do get annoyed with casual generalisations about football fans as it deflects from the point under discussion.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I do hope though that one day the 'beautiful game' might re-emerge from the fog of the yobs and the multi-million pound sleaze that seems to have spoiled it; both demons are as bad as each other I'm sure!

Again, even at the worst of it it was a very small minority who caused trouble. Why not go to a game at your local club this weekend, the vast majority will be dads with their kids, not the coked-up idiots from Green Street.

I do worry a bit about some of the young lads in their late teens now, whose only experience of those dark days is from films like Green Street which do glamourise it in a way, but even then it's a tiny minority. You might hear some boisterous singing but that'll be about it.

Even generally well-behaved football fans can be unruly. Stevenage used to have a problem with fans strolling across the dual-carriageway running between the car park and the stadium. Not waiting for a gap in the traffic then moving quickly, just strolling across and forcing traffic to slow/stop. No amount of signs would persuade them to go by the slightly longer route and use the pedestrian underpass. There is now a tall fence down the middle of the dual-carriageway.

In any other context, pedestrians using their "strength in numbers" to force cars to slow down would be applauded.

 

[Wynd]

It would be a fitting, almost poetic, outcome should this discussion turn ugly.

I didnt know these were a thing, and I cant say im surprised or disappointed that they are.

I would say a tool required to deal with an issue, however I would prefer the tool not to be sledgehammer! The nature, cause and effect of a banging order is unknown to the public.

I know a bloke who has a banning order for going on the pitch after a goal. He got pushed over the hoarding. Now, he is a bit of lad and a bit of a heid the baw but not deserving of a banning order.


Thatcher and her creature Moynihan , like many commentators on this subject, were clueless. No idea what was causing the problem. No interest in finding out. No plans to defeat those problems. No connection with people who went to football, no understanding of thier lives and no desire to find out one. Just seek to criminalise ALL football fans and require ONLY football fans to carry an ID card.

Funny how that doesn't seem to generate the kind of wibble it does for other sections of society! Imagine if all opera goers or rugger buggers were required to carry an ID card. How would that go down?

You are right to point to class, and the oppression of the working classes as one of the primary drivers for some of the behavior we are discussing. Its interesting to me that many in football circles are aware of the class struggle, but appear unaware of the paradox of being turned against each other by associations and loyalties to different clubs in the same sport. Is that willful blindness, or the need to "other" someone at the same level to deal with the general frustrations of their lives?

The idea that those who go to Opera, or Rugby would generate anything like the levels of disorder or violence is laughable. How many police need to attend Rugby matches, or Opera houses hahaha!

I can see it now, the west end brawl, the Mulberry handbags and Dinner jackets, stained in blood because someone dared to say Puccini is better than Verdi! Honestly, get a grip of the argument you are trying to make here!

Whats more telling is that you are aware of the groups above the working classes who would be likely candidates for the oppression of working classes. Yet, when the dog whistle of othering those on the opposing team is blown, many football fans would choose the same old tripe whilst blindly ignoring the very oppression that causes all this pain in the first place. Its pretty difficult to sympathise with that.

It seems they would much rather live vicariously through a contrived melodrama than actually deal with their problems.

All this is of course ignoring the pertinent the fact that plenty of upper and middle class folk are in to football and regularly attend matches.

You vastly overstate the extent of the hooliganism issue. In England in 2022 hooliganism is virtually non-existent. FBO's are often used not against these 'organised crime groups' (rarely seen outside Danny Dyer films), but against people who really aren't deserving of one (see DarloRich's post above).

I cant comment on England, well, not entirely, but last summer has set in solid concrete my views on football. I was already basically there with the homophobia, racism, sexism, ageism, general slander and foul mouthed day to day dialogue of football patter...

I was talking to someone recently who told me that they had to be escorted by police, along with other customers, from shops in George Square due to the levels of violence. An isolated incident? Every weekend there is a derby in Glasgow, there is violence. So much violence that even in parts of Scotland where we dont have issues, we suffer. I cant even sip my upper class G&T on a Scotrail HST anymore for heavens sake!

There are plenty of decent law abiding fans who are uninterested in any of this violence, and see football for what it is, a soap opera for men. But they have a responsibility not to tolerate this crap. Participation is acquiescence, decent football fans must demand higher standards.

 

[DarloRich]

All this is of course ignoring the pertinent the fact that plenty of upper and middle class folk are in to football and regularly attend matches.

Post 1990 they do. Before that? No so much.

The idea that those who go to Opera, or Rugby would generate anything like the levels of disorder or violence is laughable. How many police need to attend Rugby matches, or Opera houses hahaha!

I can see it now, the west end brawl, the Mulberry handbags and Dinner jackets, stained in blood because someone dared to say Puccini is better than Verdi! Honestly, get a grip of the argument you are trying to make here!

I wasn't being entirely serious but my point is that the kind of restrictions people, perhaps like you, celebrate on placing on entirely law abiding football fans would simply be unacceptable if placed on similar entirely law abiding people in other walks of life.

As for Rugby: the worst anti social behaviour I have seen has been at Rugby.

PS you don't want to mess with the Verdi Ultras. They are naughty.

 

[Broucek]

I am very much against football-related (or any other) violence but I'm DEEPLY concerned by laws that allow such disproportionate overreach. The response of the authorities to these concerns is often "but it was never intended to be used that way". Even if we take those words at face value (haha) then there's still a risk that they are misused down the line by less well-meaning people...

 

[roversfan2001]

I cant comment on England, well, not entirely, but last summer has set in solid concrete my views on football. I was already basically there with the homophobia, racism, sexism, ageism, general slander and foul mouthed day to day dialogue of football patter...

Plenty of homophobia and sexism on show within football this summer too then? The Euro 2020 final was a shambles from top to bottom, acting like that is a normal occurance up and down the country is ridiculous.

I was talking to someone recently who told me that they had to be escorted by police, along with other customers, from shops in George Square due to the levels of violence. An isolated incident? Every weekend there is a derby in Glasgow, there is violence. So much violence that even in parts of Scotland where we dont have issues, we suffer. I cant even sip my upper class G&T on a Scotrail HST anymore for heavens sake!

As I'm sure you're well aware, the violence linked to Glasgow Derby days is about far more than football. Using that as a stick to beat football fans with is disingenuous.


People who get their football knowledge from the news will always have a poor view of how fans behave. "Thousands of fans attended games this weekend and didn't cause any trouble" doesn't make the News at Ten.

 

[Yew]

I am very much against football-related (or any other) violence but I'm DEEPLY concerned by laws that allow such disproportionate overreach. The response of the authorities to these concerns is often "but it was never intended to be used that way". Even if we take those words at face value (haha) then there's still a risk that they are misused down the line by less well-meaning people...

Wide reaching laws that are only intended to be used in extreme circumstances have an unfortunate habit of becoming normalised over time.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Seeing as "class" has been brought up, it's worth remembering that many of the hoolie crews of the 1980s were not made up of predominantly working class people. By day they were stockbrokers, bankers, lawyers and other white-collar types. They just liked to get coked up and have fights at the weekend.

 

[Chew Chew]

I'm no expert, but my understanding (from discussion on a football forum) is that they can vary a fair bit depending on who is given the order and why. Common features include having to surrender your passport when England play away matches and when tournaments are taking place, and being forbidden from certain areas (generally stadia and the surrounding area) when a football match is taking place.

No idea how strict the enforcement is, mind.

A lad I know got one for a flag he had at a game.

He got a 3 year ban.

His conditions were he had to go to his local police station to check in at a time that would make it impossible to travel to see the team he supported.

He had to give up his passport when they were away in Europe and also for when Scotland were playing away even though he doesn't follow Scotland.

He was banned from every professional ground in Scotland so couldn't go to any of the top 4 leagues grounds but he was still able to go to game at the levels beneath that.

 

[AlterEgo]

A lad I know got one for a flag he had at a game.

He got a 3 year ban.

His conditions were he had to go to his local police station to check in at a time that would make it impossible to travel to see the team he supported.

He had to give up his passport when they were away in Europe and also for when Scotland were playing away even though he doesn't follow Scotland.

He was banned from every professional ground in Scotland so couldn't go to any of the top 4 leagues grounds but he was still able to go to game at the levels beneath that.

I suppose the question is, what was the flag and why did it attract the attention of the police?

 

[DarloRich]

I suppose the question is, what was the flag and why did it attract the attention of the police?

one dreads to think if it is relating to Scottish football! ( suspect old firm related)

 

[baz962]

As far as I know, there's only one match in the country where that is required and it happens to involve the club I support. The 'riots' only involved one set of fans, in their own town centre, after the first meeting between the sides in 17 years.

Having followed my club up and down the country for a few years, by varying modes of transport and with different groups of people, I can count on one hand the number of violent encounters that I have witnessed.

And this last bit is cast iron proof that you don't really know what you're talking about. Green Street was a fictional film you know?

The trouble might not be as bad as it used to be , but it's still there. I have a season ticket to a London prem club and see some. I'm also an ex doorman and security at Wembley. I have seen and dealt with quite a bit. Doesn't always hit the news . And the police quite often head it off. I have been separated after a match. I have seen trouble at arsenal v spurs. I have seen Millwall smash up Watford town centre. Been threatened by football fans both while doing security and as a train driver. Literally just the other day saw problems at st pancras with fans getting escorted off a train.

 

[AlterEgo]

I worked with a bloke who got a FBO after a massive fight during the Birmingham derby game. He got 8 months in jail for it as well.

He was unable to continue working as a guard because of the conditions of the FBO and was "busted" to work in customer relations for a couple of years. It actually made him a better employee and he's now an onboard manager (forget what XC call them! Customer Service Managers?). People who work for XC will know who I'm on about.

I always felt positively that XC were able to work something out with him. Regardless of his obvious failings, he was actually a very good employee - the sort of guard and the sort of customer relations rep most of us would choose to come across - and I felt the FBO was too blunt a tool. Nonetheless, he didn't complain about it.