Barrel of Fun
Abort, retry, fail
Brovian said:
That is a sensible outlook. I dont see why that has any connection with the daily mail, it is sensible. The mail - NOT!
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Brighton hooliwankers
- Thread starter Behind Enemy Lines
- Start date
That is a sensible outlook. I dont see why that has any connection with the daily mail, it is sensible. The mail - NOT!
HampshireSeagulls
Moulding Generation Z
The Keeper said:
It seems to have been reported by every single source this way, so yes, I would reckon this was the case. Didn't see many women or children in the group that were trying to assault the pub - but there were women and children inside. It sounds like you are trying to justify this whole sorry episode as a few blokes having a playful rumble under the cover of "football" - do you believe that these blokes should be walking the streets, or do you think that they deserve to be locked up for their actions?
If the Cardiff fan was going to the pub after a match, it will still be classed as football related violence - he was a Cardiff fan, he was wound up by other fans, and he kicked off. It wasn't as though it was a Monday evening and they were taking the piss because he was a ginger. As for the cone throwing incident - it can't be anything but football related - and how braindead must you be to pick up a cone and throw it when you are being escorted by the police! Bit like kicking a copper and hoping to get away with it...
It was just the tone of whining judgmentalism that made it read like a Mail editorial, or worse, a letter from one of their green ink brigade - not that he's alone in that given some of the other pontiifcating in this thread.BarrelofFun said:
What a load of shit. You seem to be talking as if NSC is acting like a kangaroo court which it isn't. It's reacting to the sentencing by a court - that had access to the FACTS - of MINDLESS THUGS who trashed somebodies place of work filled with many innocent bystanders enjoying a drink.Brovian said:
The Keeper
New member
HampshireSeagulls said:
I know they were football related incidents thats why the punishment was so high, I was making the point to London Irish that it DOES make a difference to the sentance, he seemed to think it didn't!
Also those Leeds fans in the pub, was it not also reported that when they saw the Brighton lot, they shouted
'They're here, they're here!' and went to the door to confront them.
None of them went to the match and all had their best Stone Island on!!
See page three. I know to a certain extent I'm trying to defend the indefensible but frankly I don't care, my personal feeling are easily overriding my sense of moral and civil outrage.Simster said:
Just editing because I've seen your other reply. Yes, I think 'whining judgmentalism' sums it up pretty nicely.
Last edited:
HampshireSeagulls
Moulding Generation Z
The Keeper said:
Didn't see that report, but wearing Stone Island means that they must have deserved it!
The Keeper
New member
HampshireSeagulls said:
Also they did not go to the game , were not Leeds travel club members and were involved in an altercation earlier in the day.
The Keeper
New member
Starry said:
Please tell me why they came to Brighton without tickets?
Have any of them ever been involved in trouble before?
Mr C
..ooOOoo..
From a few years ago, does anyone remember that fat guy who had his hair slicked back, wore a brown jacket and spent most of his time staring back at us away fans trying to incite violence?
Oh and he had those spotty little teenagers hanging around him. No doubt they viewed him as some sort of role model, clearly desperate to suck him off.
Oh and he had those spotty little teenagers hanging around him. No doubt they viewed him as some sort of role model, clearly desperate to suck him off.
Infernal Optimist
New member
- Aug 15, 2003
- 169
The video footage shown on South East Today clearly shows the Leeds fans outside of the pub behaving agressively and fighting, then forced back into the pub by the weight of numbers of the Brighton 'mob'. That doesn't suggest innocent bystanders to me, it says equally guilty.
One other thing. If this was pre-meditated, why choose a pub in the middle of the Lanes in one of the busiest squares in Brighton? Which was covered by CCTV?
Especially, on a sat night where just about every policeman on duty in Brighton will be in the vicinity?
Sorry the idea that this was all planned doesn't wash with me. The idea that alcohol induced idiocy broke out on both sides does though...
Punishment? Yes very much so. These sentences? Harsh and typical of an establishment that treats crime against property more seriously than crimes against people. Especially, if it attracts favourable publicity.
I for one can't see what filling our overcrowded prisons with drunken idiots for these durations is acheiving.
Far better to have them repaying their debt to society by community punishments or weekend curfews?
One last thought, if they weren't football fans, what is the point in banning them from football grounds for 10 years?
One other thing. If this was pre-meditated, why choose a pub in the middle of the Lanes in one of the busiest squares in Brighton? Which was covered by CCTV?
Especially, on a sat night where just about every policeman on duty in Brighton will be in the vicinity?
Sorry the idea that this was all planned doesn't wash with me. The idea that alcohol induced idiocy broke out on both sides does though...
Punishment? Yes very much so. These sentences? Harsh and typical of an establishment that treats crime against property more seriously than crimes against people. Especially, if it attracts favourable publicity.
I for one can't see what filling our overcrowded prisons with drunken idiots for these durations is acheiving.
Far better to have them repaying their debt to society by community punishments or weekend curfews?
One last thought, if they weren't football fans, what is the point in banning them from football grounds for 10 years?
Well said, but wasted here I'm afraid. NSC has got its dander up: they are all scum apparently (even though most people on here don't know them personally) and all the sentences are richly deserved.Infernal Optimist said:
Infernal Optimist
New member
- Aug 15, 2003
- 169
It is like the Daily Mail letters page on here sometimes isn't it? 
That said, it had to be punsihed, if your girlfriend or mum had been in the pub you wouldn't be happy...
I just think the Criminal Justice System is more about being seen to do something than actually preventing crime. It also operates a system where certain crimes are heavily punished while others, especially frauds and other 'white collar' crimes are deemed less serious.
In this case, it smells of political interference from Sussex Police's senior management. Right from the arrests which Meridian cameras where 'invited' along to, through the Argus photo's and editorials, camera's outside of the court.
This was intended as a 'show' trial and in show trials no one gets a slap on the wrist do they?
I trust that next time there is a large scale fight inside or outside a pub in the City, that the Police take it as seriously as they clearly did this one.....
That said, it had to be punsihed, if your girlfriend or mum had been in the pub you wouldn't be happy...
I just think the Criminal Justice System is more about being seen to do something than actually preventing crime. It also operates a system where certain crimes are heavily punished while others, especially frauds and other 'white collar' crimes are deemed less serious.
In this case, it smells of political interference from Sussex Police's senior management. Right from the arrests which Meridian cameras where 'invited' along to, through the Argus photo's and editorials, camera's outside of the court.
This was intended as a 'show' trial and in show trials no one gets a slap on the wrist do they?
I trust that next time there is a large scale fight inside or outside a pub in the City, that the Police take it as seriously as they clearly did this one.....
Albion Rob
New member
Infernal Optimist said:It is like the Daily Mail letters page on here sometimes isn't it?
That said, it had to be punsihed, if your girlfriend or mum had been in the pub you wouldn't be happy...
I just think the Criminal Justice System is more about being seen to do something than actually preventing crime. It also operates a system where certain crimes are heavily punished while others, especially frauds and other 'white collar' crimes are deemed less serious.
In this case, it smells of political interference from Sussex Police's senior management. Right from the arrests which Meridian cameras where 'invited' along to, through the Argus photo's and editorials, camera's outside of the court.
This was intended as a 'show' trial and in show trials no one gets a slap on the wrist do they?
I trust that next time there is a large scale fight inside or outside a pub in the City, that the Police take it as seriously as they clearly did this one.....
As far as the BBC and the Argus are concerned, I don't think it is a stitch up. This is the first time the plod has been able to get their hands on anyone for any serious trouble in Brighton so the media are always going to be interested.
As far as cameras outside court is concerned, I would imagine this is the largest number of convicted football hooligans sent to prison for 'activity' in the city for quite some time so it was always going to be a big local story.
To be fair to the reporters at the Beeb and the Argus, they would have stayed on top of this one from the off and been ringing the police to set everything up.
HampshireSeagulls
Moulding Generation Z
OK, let's be honest. The facts are pretty straightforward, as they were caught on camera breaking the law. Nice and simple. It's not a case of people get on their high horses - the timing of this court case was bad - we were waiting for the ground announcement, and a high profile hoolie case was not going to help. As it turned out, we had the result before the case - but people are not "into" hoolies - they are a pain in the arse, and it's people like this that lead to the way that police treat fans at football matches. You are never going to find much support for hoolies on a board like this!
The problems with this case are:
Leeds were in town, it was going to be a difficult day, and the police presence was increased, and probably quite "up for it". With Leeds coming in, the "fans" who never attend matches are liable to be there to kick off. It does not really matter who went looking for who, or who said what, the CCTV evidence makes it pretty clear that the pub was attacked and seriously damaged through herd mentality. Every single person in that group made the choice to take part, therefore they must pay the price.
Whether Leeds baited them or not is really neither here nor there - the offences were committed. For whatever reason, we have not seen anyone else come to court - only the Crown Prosecution Service will know why this is.
The sentences were harsh - harsher than if it was just Wayne and Shayne having a kick off in the high street on a Friday. The violence was linked to football, although only one Brighton person attended the match, the targets were Leeds fans. It has become apparent on here that although only one bloke attended the match, the rest have, at some point, been followers of Brighton, which is why they are all now banned. The sentences were harsh when compared to sentences that are handed out for similar offences, and yes Meridian did it's usual bit to ensure that this was high visibility. The blokes did not help themselves, as we have pointed out, with their braindead comments or attitudes. Obviously, these were the ones who were worthy of putting on telly, the rest went into court without threatening the camera man!
Our next problem will be Millwall/Palace. The police presence will be increased, known troublemakers will be in the town, which will bring in thugs that may not be Brighton fans but who are looking for Millwall fans to attack. The CCTV will be on, and anyone that gets caught will therefore know what to expect.
The problems with this case are:
Leeds were in town, it was going to be a difficult day, and the police presence was increased, and probably quite "up for it". With Leeds coming in, the "fans" who never attend matches are liable to be there to kick off. It does not really matter who went looking for who, or who said what, the CCTV evidence makes it pretty clear that the pub was attacked and seriously damaged through herd mentality. Every single person in that group made the choice to take part, therefore they must pay the price.
Whether Leeds baited them or not is really neither here nor there - the offences were committed. For whatever reason, we have not seen anyone else come to court - only the Crown Prosecution Service will know why this is.
The sentences were harsh - harsher than if it was just Wayne and Shayne having a kick off in the high street on a Friday. The violence was linked to football, although only one Brighton person attended the match, the targets were Leeds fans. It has become apparent on here that although only one bloke attended the match, the rest have, at some point, been followers of Brighton, which is why they are all now banned. The sentences were harsh when compared to sentences that are handed out for similar offences, and yes Meridian did it's usual bit to ensure that this was high visibility. The blokes did not help themselves, as we have pointed out, with their braindead comments or attitudes. Obviously, these were the ones who were worthy of putting on telly, the rest went into court without threatening the camera man!
Our next problem will be Millwall/Palace. The police presence will be increased, known troublemakers will be in the town, which will bring in thugs that may not be Brighton fans but who are looking for Millwall fans to attack. The CCTV will be on, and anyone that gets caught will therefore know what to expect.
Infernal Optimist
New member
- Aug 15, 2003
- 169
Still don't think they'll be following up the next Stag do that ends in violence, notebooks and Video cameras at the ready do you?
It a question of justice and this shouldn't be about, what leisure activity you were indulging in before hand or whether there is CCTV film we can give to the press.
It should be about the facts of the case and a fight should be treated the same whether it occured after a football match or after church.
It surely cannot be right, that someone is punished more because football was involved or that a flim was available?
Punishments must be based on what actually happened, not where it happened, when, or what sporting event took place that day, or on what positive publicity can be generated....
It a question of justice and this shouldn't be about, what leisure activity you were indulging in before hand or whether there is CCTV film we can give to the press.
It should be about the facts of the case and a fight should be treated the same whether it occured after a football match or after church.
It surely cannot be right, that someone is punished more because football was involved or that a flim was available?
Punishments must be based on what actually happened, not where it happened, when, or what sporting event took place that day, or on what positive publicity can be generated....
Infernal Optimist
New member
- Aug 15, 2003
- 169
HampshireSeagulls said:
Tend to agree with all you have written there accept for two points;
1. You seem to accept that the CPS decided not to prosecute the Leeds fans very easily, surely its illegal or it isn't, not it's illegal if you live locally? The Leeds fans are shown just as clearly on the video evidence as the local thugs are.
2. You accept that punishments are more severe because it was football. Why? surely its the same crime on a stag do on a Saturday in July, as it is on a Saturday during the season. If we were to say that we are going to punish anyone from say, Wigan more than the rest of the country for certain crimes, that would seem a little unfair?
What justification is there for singleing out football fans for additional punishments?
PS. No offence to anyone from Wigan or Leeds for that matter
Last edited:
Albion Rob
New member
Infernal Optimist said:
Hard to say but if a 20 bloke stag do gets involved in a huge ruck which sees thousands of pounds worth of damage done to a pub in Brighton and they are all sentenced together then I would almost guarentee the Argus and the TV companies will turn out.
Whatever way you look at the incident itself (taking away the football aspect) it is a very unusual event to take place in a town centre and therefore has good news value. Christ, if it took place in Moulsecoomb it would have been hailed as a riot.
I'm not getting in to the rights and wrongs of the sentence and whether I think it was harsh or not but am just stating why I think there was such a media buzz about it all.