Atmosphere (again)

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

I think we need to be realistic here, there's no chance of all that happening. But really all the laws enacted as a result of hillsborough need reviewing. As the police and government clearly fucked that up.
 
Point number 3 is going to be an interesting one.



I know of someone who got 6 months in prison for throwing a bottle when when West Ham fronted Spurs.

:dempsey:

Agree on all points by the way. As you said not many if any will ever happen.

A Yid in the Brighton vs ASC/YA set-to a year or two back got 18 months for 'waving his arms about in an aggressive manner'.
 
RE number 1, the club had the opportunity to do that this year. After the protest at the PL HQ in London every club was given 200k for the away fans. Few clubs such as Man U and Liverpool used that to take 3/4 quid off every away ticket. We used it for cheap coach travel put on by the club that you obviously can't drink on.
 
The difference is that pub fights or even gang violence is often localized and containable, whereas football violence is very threatening to the establishment because it happens anywhere and involves a very large number of people. I think part of the reason the government in the UK took such a strong stance in the 80s and 90s has a lot less to do with Hillsborough and a lot more to do with what they saw happening in Eastern Europe (and to an extent, England) at the time, i.e. football hooligans and political organizations mixing freely. Left and right. Often leading to anti-state violence. Can't have that now can we.

I'd love for the club to design the new stadium with an eye that one terrace could be converted to safe standing in the future. Or even build it with the safe standing rail seats in place, just permanently folded down until the day for action came. Our club would never be that aggressive about something like that though.

Interesting about anti-state violence. I wasn't aware about much of that in Eastern Europe during the 80s and 90s, except for Solidarity which, as I understand, was made up of a lot of football lads and obviously led to the overthrowing of the Communist regime in Poland. I know of the overlap between politics (both left and right wing) and football in Italy, and how this used to pose a threat to the state. Presume that with the reference to England, you are talking about the NF infiltrating Chelsea, West Ham etc?

It may have something to do with the punitive laws...I believe the state is more paranoid than we think. However, it's not a valid reason as no such link exists in this country at the moment, and the political organisations themselves could be dealt with if and when it did exist, if they were a legitimate threat to anyone. Also, I don't agree that football violence involves a very large number of people. In some ways it is harder to contain than a pub brawl, but in other ways it is easier as a police presence is generally already there or near. And gang violence is a much bigger problem and harder to contain IMO.
 
A lot of old school chaps look down on 'barmies' but, like 57, i have a lot of respect for 1882 for at least trying to do something about the atmosphere rather than just moaning about how shit it is.
I agree, I respect them as well. They are trying to do something about it, and what they are trying is much better than a club endorsed surfer flag. Also, I went to the game at Barnet and they actually enjoy themselves and have a laugh, and I respect them for this as well.
 
I think the stewards should ease up the 'sit down' malarkey.

But the key is the new stadium, and not allowing it to be more than 30k season ticket holders, with one stand being designated 'singing stand' or whatever name the club approves, to denote you are allowed/indeed encouraged to sing there.

While we're waiting for this 'New Jerusalem', 1882 to be encouraged as much as possible, and more blocks allocated to it wherever possible. The short-term future for us is Cup games, where many of the regulars, a large proportion of whom like to moan and whinge, and far too rarely sing and chant for us, don't go so often allowing new blood and renewed vigour into the stadium
 
buy tickets on the day - allow you to go there as a group with your mates and sit together - Once you have bought your ticket you have to go straight in (meaning no touting / passing on tickets) -means you go to the ground earlier as you want to get in the ground. Build up to the game will be longer / better - in line with Standing ( oldens will not want to be standing for that long moving them to other parts of the ground) and drinkig at your seat (will not be in the concourse)

Done.

I dont like the term subsidised tickets, who are they subsidising - just cheaper tickets, the club is ripping us off, cheaper tickets means a younger and more workign class supporter base - also means those who go will not be so demanding.
 
I guess the point is... despite my vested interest in lobbing some torn-up newspaper in the air as the teams come out, the REAL key is, if everyone in Block 35 sings LOUD and PROUD for 90 minutes, that in itself will generate an atmosphere in the other parts of the ground!
Simples!
 
I don't really understand what you mean by total wage bill. I think you mean total wage costs of everyone at the club. However why? From a financial point of view it doesn't make sense to do this. Maybe I am from a different planet but what have wages (an expenditure) got to do with subsidising ticket prices.I perhaps would understand profit but seeing as most teams don't make profit... Maybe 1% of revenue to subside tickets. BUT what is better is just having a general ticket price cap for everyone. I don't really understand what a subsidized ticket is anyway...the club pay for half the ticket? :avbcringe: Yes lower ticket prices might increase atmosphere.

Cheaper tickets, subsidized tickets, same difference. What I mean is that ticket prices should be lower. Yes, I mean the total wage costs of everyone at the club. Of course it doesn't make financial sense for the clubs to do this, but if they can afford to pay these gross wages to players, then they can afford to contribute a tiny part of that sum towards making it easier for fans to go to games OR reduce ticket prices (same basic outcome). If they literally can't afford this, then they need to stop paying stupid wages until they can.

Hmmm...The reason banning orders were brought in was because football grounds became out of control. This is not a high priority. You won't get one unless you have done something wrong. Might make hooligans perk up but why would you want that?

Have you not heard of the people who were banned for singing the Campbell song or the person recently banned for singing yid? Looking back further I can remember a 19 year old girl who was banned for throwing an (empty) water bottle at Darren Bent up at Sunderland one year. We've talked in this thread about someone not only banned but JAILED for moving his arms around, there was also the case of a famous older Spurs fan banned just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time (i.e. in a bar near to where there was an off) in Holland without doing anything wrong (not banned anymore thankfully) and I've heard of someone else banned for picking up a chair and then putting it down again during a fight. There's also the register kept by the old bill which monitors fans' movements and writes you down in a book if you so much as talk to known hooligans. Then if you commit ANY offence at football, e.g. swearing or pushing someone in the heat of the moment, they can give you a banning order. See this article http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/jun/17/football-hooliganism-laws I have no doubt that many of the posters here are on this list. I'm sorry but to say "you won't get one if you've done nothing wrong" is naive at best IMO.

Also, and I know this will be controversial, but yes I don't think it would be a bad thing if hoolies did perk up a little bit, and judging by comments on here I'm not the only person who thinks this. Obviously there are people who used to go for football just for a fight, but a large proportion of 'lads' are loyal fans who contribute a lot to the atmosphere, and used to contribute more in the 70s/80s/90s. It's no coincidence that the atmosphere used to be better when WHL was a more intimidating place to go. One of the best atmospheres I have experienced at a game in the UK was at Cardiff in the cup, a game in which both firms were out in force. Football violence is far from out of control at the moment, and it's incredibly rare that anyone who doesn't want to get caught up in it does; this was true even when it was more prevalent. Yes it costs a lot to police, but I doubt any more than the current 'police state' approach to football violence. So I think we can afford to loosen the laws, which would also have the positive effect of not demonizing football fans or banning people for next to nothing.

Whether you like to hear this or not but the police already turn a blind eye to offensive chanting and behaviour at football.

Well, my ST is in the Paxton but from what I've heard, in the Park Lane the away fans are allowed to get away with shouting whatever they want at Spurs fans but if anyone tries to respond they are threatened with being thrown out. This is hardly conducive to a good atmosphere.

People already turn up drunk at football. the intermittent breaks probably mean people drink more quickly anyway.

Fair point actually.

The football spectator laws are quite strict on religious imagery but the club are enforcing it

But the Star of David flag is a national flag, not religious imagery. If we are allowed English flags in football stadiums then surely by law we are allowed the Israeli equivalent. The club try and seem like they're on our side with the yids issue, but then they ban this when there is no need to.

I don't agree with any of number 10.

I would be genuinely and respectfully interested in why you don't agree with my suggestions on football. Am I right in saying you like the way modern football is structured, in terms of CL/EL and the other things I mention in this point?
 
Well, my ST is in the Paxton but from what I've heard, in the Park Lane the away fans are allowed to get away with shouting whatever they want at Spurs fans but if anyone tries to respond they are threatened with being thrown out. This is hardly conducive to a good atmosphere.

Few seasons ago I sat in Block 9 West Lower for an FA Cup game against Leeds. Worst mistake ever.

Throughout the game constant abuse from Leeds shouting over the walkway and leaning over the barriers, when I stood up to give some back the stewards sat me down and told me I was "inciting them and encouraging them", ended up being threatened with being thrown out if I didn't behave myself. Was like being at school.
A youth got taken down to the concourse for standing up and singing Oh when the Spurs with his hands above his head. Saw him with the police at the end of the game.
The police started filming the whole block row by row towards the end of the second half as loads of people were getting pissed off with the amount of shit coming our way from the cunts and the atmosphere was progressively getting worse.
To top it all off 2 old blokes a bit in front of us were Leeds fans, fully suited obviously on some sort of corporate.
I had a word with the steward about the "away fans" bit on the ticket, she just shrugged and said to ignore them.

Never again.
 
33b0psn.jpg

If this is the state of our Police Force, then we're ALL fucked!!
 
Back
Top Bottom