Joint statement from Caley Jags Together and the Ross County Supporters Club.

 

Speaking from personal experience I would say there is a time/place for it ....

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, for years it was not allowed at Toronto FC (or other MLS clubs). This ended up with a situation much like that being faced in Scotland right now. People who wanted to do it - many of them young, enthusiastic and perhaps at times over exuberant, but a few supposedly older and wiser heads too - got hold of inappropriate materials. I have seen people roll up at TFC games with road flares, marine flares, industrial smoke grenades and all sorts. Bottom line is that these are not safe in a crowded environment either because of the temperature of the flares or the noxious nature of the smoke that is not meant for a confined space with several thousand pairs of human lungs ! The club, the league, and the police - quite rightly - clamped down on this. Arrests were made, banning orders were issued and bag and body searches are still a regular occurrence because of this. (although we have not yet got to the (league mandated) stage that they have at hockey and baseball - even in Toronto - with a full airport style metal detector scan)

There was a lot of trust lost between club and fans in those ensuing years as two specific supporters groups continued this and eventually got banned. The 'responsible' supporters groups who had been asking for the same thing since the very start, and were happy to work with the club just like the supporters at a couple of teams who allowed (controlled) pyro got short shrift because of it.

Fast forward to last year and one of the changes in the close season was that smoke is now allowed. it is supplied by the club and rated safe for use (even if it still gets in your throat), the persons using it have been safety trained (legal liability requirement) and its use is loosely agreed for certain portions of the game (after a goal, or at certain points where specific songs are sung). Its maybe not as 'dynamic' as lighting it up whenever you feel like it, but its a damn site safer for everyone and does definitely add something to the atmosphere.    

 

I felt that the statement had more to do with cjt than it did with the actual issue. It was a self promotion and attention seeking statement. More of a look at us than anything else. 

Wanting our own fans banned and trying to shop them is pathetic. If they aren't happy with it then let the police deal with it. No need whatsoever to attention seek over it. 

I suppose we will hear the usual rubbish about making sure the club aren't fined or docked points etc. The league hasn't fined anyone over this and there is no indication they will or will ever dock points over this. A very poor justification. 

7 minutes ago, Joe DiMaggio said:

I felt that the statement had more to do with cjt than it did with the actual issue. It was a self promotion and attention seeking statement. More of a look at us than anything else. 

Wanting our own fans banned and trying to shop them is pathetic. If they aren't happy with it then let the police deal with it. No need whatsoever to attention seek over it. 

I suppose we will hear the usual rubbish about making sure the club aren't fined or docked points etc. The league hasn't fined anyone over this and there is no indication they will or will ever dock points over this. A very poor justification. 

Except it's not the league who have cited the club, it's the SFA as they deal with these matters when it's the Scottish Cup.

Just change league for sfa then and the point is exactly the same. Cjt aren't protecting the club from some mythical points deduction or expulsion from the cup. They are self promoting and attention seeking and actively working against the fans they pretend to represent. It is the job of the police to go after people with smoke bombs if they so choose. 

I think there are a few mixed messages in here.  Urging youngsters not to bring pyro into the ground is not being against the youngsters, it is actually being supportive.  It is simply reminding folk that bringing in pyro risks criminal sanctions being taken and nobody wants that to happen. To some though, the use of pyro will be seen as an act of bravado - an act of rebellion against authority.  At the end of the day, if they get a criminal record, they will only have themselves to blame.  Regardless of what the dangers may or may not be and what happens in other countries, the bottom line is that it is illegal here.  If you don't like the law, campaign to change it, but don't break the law just because you don't like it - it aint worth the risk.

One of the sad things about this debate is that it sidelines the one simple thing that really would make a difference to the atmosphere in grounds - the reintroduction of terracing.  It has been absolutely great to see the youngsters jumping up and down and hear them chanting at the front of Section E these last two games - it has brought an atmosphere that the football on display abjectly failed to do.  But the irony is that the youngsters would be able to do that far more safely if the bloody seats weren't in the way.  There is also the issue that standing at the front has annoyed a good few folk who had to move to other seats because their view was blocked - that could be a real problem with a bigger crowd.

There is no doubt that properly designed terracing supported by common sense crowd control is perfectly safe.  By having everyone in that area standing and allowing a bit of movement within the area it really helps to bring together those who want to create a noise. The reintroduction of terracing is long overdue and would make a far bigger impact on the creation of atmosphere within grounds than the relaxation of legislation on pyro could ever do.

23 hours ago, CaleyD said:

Except it's not the league who have cited the club, it's the SFA as they deal with these matters when it's the Scottish Cup.

Pedant

It's not really being pedantic.

As things stand, the SPFL (League) don't really have a firm set of rules for dealing with issues such as this and for league matches it falls outwith the responsibilities of the SFA.  For Scottish Cup matches it's very different as it alls entirely to the SFA to deal with any such issues and they do have a firm set of rules in place for it.

To what lengths they will go in terms of issuing sanctions is anyone's guess.....however, IMO, with them looking to bring sanctions against Celtic for events at the Stranraer game, then the SFA will feel (rightly or wrongly) that they also have to take action against others....even though the issues elsewhere are a fraction of what they are among that set of supporters.

It is covered by the criminal law act 1995. Punishable by law regarding entering a stadium with a smoke bomb or flare as stated at the back of a season ticket book.

1 hour ago, 12th Man said:

It is covered by the criminal law act 1995. Punishable by law regarding entering a stadium with a smoke bomb or flare as stated at the back of a season ticket book.

No on has said otherwise or claimed they are allowed in the ground. Not sure what your point is?

I suppose in some ways, taking pyrotechnics illegally into football grounds is simply regarded by those who do it as some kind of rite of passage.... or a step along the career pathway towards an appearance on The Jeremy Kyle Show.

Quite amazing that a straightforward post reminding fans to obey the law and have due regard for the safety of themselves and others should generate a thread running to fully six pages.

4 minutes ago, Kingsmills said:

Quite amazing that a straightforward post reminding fans to obey the law and have due regard for the safety of themselves and others should generate a thread running to fully six pages.

Maybe its burned out now though.  Time to let the dust (and smoke) settle!

4 hours ago, IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER said:

Wouldn't we all?  But the point as it relates to Pyro has nothing to do with slavery.  Quite the opposite in fact, because anybody who rebels in this context risks losing some of his (or her) freedoms.

On 1/28/2016 at 9:32 AM, IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER said:

 

Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery.

Malcolm X

But your point was?

Emmeline or Panky as I used to know her. And all the goodie two shoe oldies show their worth in response. We are all slaves to the stupidity of "rules" and "laws". Rebels refuse to.

2 hours ago, IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER said:

Emmeline or Panky as I used to know her. And all the goodie two shoe oldies show their worth in response. We are all slaves to the stupidity of "rules" and "laws". Rebels refuse to.

"Show their worth"?  Does that include the oldies who, while continuing in their establishment jobs, encourage the youth to screw their futures for an hour of infamy without a valid cause?

3 hours ago, IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER said:

Emmeline or Panky as I used to know her. And all the goodie two shoe oldies show their worth in response. We are all slaves to the stupidity of "rules" and "laws". Rebels refuse to.

Awfergodsake IHE, can you not accept that you've got old along with the rest of us and the 70s were a very long time ago now?

Be careful with the smoke bombs youngsters . Severe sentences getting doled out now 

http://www.motherwelltimes.co.uk/news/local-headlines/motherwell-fan-gets-five-months-for-setting-off-smokebomb-1-4018500

42 minutes ago, jagster said:

Be careful with the smoke bombs youngsters . Severe sentences getting doled out now 

http://www.motherwelltimes.co.uk/news/local-headlines/motherwell-fan-gets-five-months-for-setting-off-smokebomb-1-4018500

I'm not really surprised at the banning order (particularly if he'd already breached one) but 5 months is pretty damn extreme! I'd have said a fine or some community work would be more appropriate. Can only assume that the judge is setting some kind of example.

How many points were Motherwell deducted?

Just to be safe I would ban everyone sitting in that section. 

18 minutes ago, Fraz said:

I'm not really surprised at the banning order (particularly if he'd already breached one) but 5 months is pretty damn extreme! I'd have said a fine or some community work would be more appropriate. Can only assume that the judge is setting some kind of example.

Judge is on the board of CaleyThistleUnitedForever IMHOM8.

5 months in  prison, 2 year ban on football matches and a criminal record.

I too would have thought community service or a fine and suspended sentence would have been appropriate. He did himself no favours though ignoring the ban until the trial.

Looks like he is being made an example of and I pity the next person who sets one off as I think it could be even harsher.

Edited February 2, 201610 yr by 12th Man

I said in a previous post that I thought the joint statement was a hint of what may happen. This guy has been dealt with very harshly. Not only has he been jailed and banned from matches but I'd be very surprised if he's not booted out of the army. Then he has the problem of convincing any other employer to give him a chance.

As has been suggested I think he's been used as an example and the court has come down hard. This case will now set a precedent for how sherrifs treat any future cases and, unless an appeal can change the sentence, the next person will get equal or worse.

1 hour ago, 12th Man said:

5 months in  prison, 2 year ban on football matches and a criminal record.

Wow! That's almost into the category of the 14 years transportation to Australia that you get for shooting a bird! On the other hand, our soft touch prison policy probably means he'll be out in a fortnight.

Seriously, though, much as I loathe this pyro nonsense, this does seem a bit over the top. What would this judge hand out for mugging an old lady then?