• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Missiles being hoyed all game from North Stand Upper

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reiver said:
The club aren't liable at at all, the people throwing missiles would be liable.

Transport for London aren't liable for assaults on the tube.
Click to expand...

I feel for the club a bit about this and the stick they’ve taken. The only thing I think they may have been able to do better is managing the stewards they employ to do a better job, but then again there’ll be a head steward or manager employed whose job it is to make sure they do their jobs properly.

Even if you said it was above the stewards remit given the severity, the club pay the police to police the stadium and they also done fuck all. What were the club supposed to do about that, surely that falls on the commanding officer to make sure his staff are doing the jobs they’re paid to do correctly.

And ultimately the discussion wouldn’t even be taking place if the bellends who threw what they did didn’t do it in the first place.

Either scenario it boils down to people being responsible for their own actions instead of this blame culture.
 

Hull_Mackem said:
Some can't wait to slag the club off. How are they liable? People jump off bridges in the UK on a regular basis. Do they all have massive barriers to prevent it as the council would be liable otherwise? Of course not. It is expected that REASONABLE precautions are taken. They are. Not a single other club in the professional game puts barriers up in front of away fans. Get a grip.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with the Coventry game, but given that the initial precautions have now proved ineffective (albeit due a bunch of arseholes way overstepping the mark), if anything happens subsequently (with another bunch of known arseholes who have the potential to overstep the mark) and nothing has changed to the said precautions it might be difficult to argue that they are still reasonable.

Extra stewards and/or police may not be enough, if all they do is the same as the last lot did - more people watching & not doing anything is equally as ineffective as less people watching and doing nothing. Having stewards and police who actually take action would be an acceptable change.
 
General Zod said:
I tend to agree with the Coventry game, but given that the initial precautions have now proved ineffective (albeit due a bunch of arseholes way overstepping the mark), if anything happens subsequently (with another bunch of known arseholes who have the potential to overstep the mark) and nothing has changed to the said precautions it might be difficult to argue that they are still reasonable.

Extra stewards and/or police may not be enough, if all they do is the same as the last lot did - more people watching & not doing anything is equally as ineffective as less people watching and doing nothing. Having stewards and police who actually take action would be an acceptable change.
Click to expand...
But people who jump off a bridge often actually die. The council don't make any changes?
 
CatRyan said:
I'm not saying the people throwing stuff aren't responsible.
I'm saying the club are liable and should the precautions taken not be sufficient also negligent.
Click to expand...

so if i walk into the ground tomorrow and randomly throw a bottle into the crowd around me, the club are liable for that? are theatres liable if a theatre-goer hoys a bottle into a crowd?

as long as the club are trying to sort it out, and putting reasonable precautions in place (i.e more stewards and police, better training for stewards, more use of cctv etc..) then they can't be held 100% accountable for every action of a visitor to their property.

if what you are saying is true, then lawyers would surely advise the club to shut the stadium to spectators, as the potential to the club of prosecution for individual fan behaviour wouldnt be worth the risk
 
Reiver said:
The club aren't liable at at all, the people throwing missiles would be liable.

Transport for London aren't liable for assaults on the tube.
Click to expand...
how comes West Ham have been fined numerous times for trouble since we moved then?

the club is 100% liable
 
cbwhu said:
if you ave aims of getting back the Premier League you'll have to move them anyway
Click to expand...

not necessarily. the mags have the away end upstairs, and besides, even in our top tier the fans are still closer to the pitch than away fans at that sorry excuse for a football ground that yous have been lumbered with.
 
Not sure if this has been covered or not but have the club refused to pay for the Policing costs from this game ?

If the Police failed to protect the people they were paid to protect then surely we have a right to refuse either part of full payment ?
After all this is a commercial agreement with the police.

I know the owner has in the past had a gripe about how much we have had to pay the police therefore surely this a prime opportunity to reset the relationship between the club and the police.
 
Hull_Mackem said:
That was widespread trouble with fans going on the pitch at more than one fixture.
Click to expand...
were fined each time though not for an accumulation

it is the clubs responsibility to ensure the fans behave in the stadium

tunstallhill said:
not necessarily. the mags have the away end upstairs, and besides, even in our top tier the fans are still closer to the pitch than away fans at that sorry excuse for a football ground that yous have been lumbered with.
Click to expand...
has absolutely nothing to do with it, but carry on
 
cbwhu said:
were fined each time though not for an accumulation

it is the clubs responsibility to ensure the fans behave in the stadium


has absolutely nothing to do with it, but carry on
Click to expand...

whats it got to do with then? wasn't it to do with guaranteeing away fans a decent view and to get the atmosphere going or something?

either way, there is no seat at our ground that has a worse view than even the best seat at your 'ground'. should be kicked out of the league for me. its not a football ground, not safe, and generally is utter shite
 
General Zod said:
I tend to agree with the Coventry game, but given that the initial precautions have now proved ineffective (albeit due a bunch of arseholes way overstepping the mark), if anything happens subsequently (with another bunch of known arseholes who have the potential to overstep the mark) and nothing has changed to the said precautions it might be difficult to argue that they are still reasonable.

Extra stewards and/or police may not be enough, if all they do is the same as the last lot did - more people watching & not doing anything is equally as ineffective as less people watching and doing nothing. Having stewards and police who actually take action would be an acceptable change.
Click to expand...
They have also closed the first three rows for away fans.. What more could they do?
 
Reiver said:
That's your own supporters running onto the pitch etc.
Click to expand...
tunstallhill said:
whats it got to do with then? wasn't it to do with guaranteeing away fans a decent view and to get the atmosphere going or something?

either way, there is no seat at our ground that has a worse view than even the best seat at your 'ground'. should be kicked out of the league for me. its not a football ground, not safe, and generally is utter shite
Click to expand...
and you pay for it!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top