Why we should be protesting against those running our club

[Brown Nose]

I have no problem with it I'm afraid. If some complete **** (**** no.1) wants to let flares or fireworks off in an enclosed space at a football match full of people who have paid to be there without fear of injury or thick smoke, and then some other **** (**** no.2) assists in making it impossible to bring **** no.1 to justice, then they're both as culpable as each other. **** 'em. Pair of ****s.

Perhaps if UFS helped the club to find the twats involved then justice would be fairly distributed but they won't be doing this. Ever.

So you immediately accept the club version of events despite there being literally no evidence against the fan banned?

No wonder our fan base are so deferential.

 

[popillius]

So you immediately accept the club version of events despite there being literally no evidence against the fan banned?

No wonder our fan base are so deferential.

No. But then, that's not what I said.

You seem to have taken the word of the people involved without any question as to their involvement in what happened or their refusal to help investigate the matter, without having been there or having seen any of the evidence the club may have.

You see, it's easy to make stupid, sweeping statements. No wonder our fan base is often so eager to believe everything it reads.

My point, if you'd bothered to at least try and understand it, is that ultimately the UFS could have assisted the club in trying to find who was responsible. It is absolutely the case that many of them know exactly who was involved but will protect those people rather than give information to the club about them. They therefore reap what they sow. I have no ****ing sympathy. That is very different to being openly accepting of everything the club does, has done or will do.

 

[popillius]

A lot of supposition seems to have gone into both the club’s decision and the subsequent review, which seems to have been conducted by at least one of the same people. If fans are acting the twat I’m definitely in favour of banning/killing them, but if there’s no evidence they did then sanctioning them despite that smells pretty strongly of vendetta.

Only to be expected, I guess, in a country whose criminal justice system so frequently convicts people without conclusive evidence.

And I get a lot of this but the UFS seem determined not to help identify the culprit but instead, protect them. The photo is very clear in that you can see who is directly in front and to the side of the flare and yet I'm pretty sure not one of them would be prepared to name the person who brought it into the ground. In that case, I have little to no sympathy with them being banned because they are complicit.

 

[popillius]

You seem to be pre determining the event involved UFS on this example.

Okay, let's say for argument's sake it didn't.

Are those that have been banned prepared to help the club out by naming those who brought the flare into the ground and ignited it?

This is still the relevant question to ask. I'm guessing the answer was along the lines of 'Me, guv? Nah, I don't know anyone I was with in that group, 'specially not the bloke right next to me with the burny thing. Never seen 'im before in me life guv. None of us 'ave'

 

[Miles Away]

That's it in a nutshell, isn't it?

 

[Thefoxinoz]

Okay, let's say for argument's sake it didn't.

Are those that have been banned prepared to help the club out by naming those who brought the flare into the ground and ignited it?

This is still the relevant question to ask. I'm guessing the answer was along the lines of 'Me, guv? Nah, I don't know anyone I was with in that group, 'specially not the bloke right next to me with the burny thing. Never seen 'im before in me life guv. None of us 'ave'

So what you appear to be saying is, if that was your best mate, family member who did this, then you'd dob them in without hesitation!