nwgull
Well-known member
Not so. When thrown, bottles settle into a trajectory of turning rapidly end-to-end. This is what makes them dangerous when full, as I can attest to first hand, as if the end hits you on the head it'll do far more damage than the larger, softer sides, but it means they empty rapidly if no top is on. Also, what water is left when it hits will be rapidly forced out, meaning less likelihood of serious injury.
Regarding coins and other potential missiles, it depends where you draw the line, taking into account the practicalities of policing any controls. It's relatively easy to stop people taking larger, visible items in, or keeping an eye out for bottles with lids on, but not to have everyone empty their pockets of coins, lighters etc. Also, although there have been recent incidents of coin and lighter throwing, they're less common than throwing bottles, so it also come down to likelihood. Coins is a non-starter anyway, until we become cashless, as even if you didn't take any in, what do you do once you splash the paper and need change?
Exactly. Everybody has a legit need to carry around cash. And even if they were to ban anything other than folding cash, they’d then need to price everything sold in the concourses in multiples of £5. It’s even less practical than banning shoes in case we get some Arab tourists that want to show their displeasure in the most extreme way in their culture. Banning sealed bottles is however quite easy, and it doesn’t really cause a huge amount of inconvenience.
I remember someone threw their mobile phone at a Chesterfield player in that heated game up at Saltergate back in 2000. That’s probably the stupidest thing I’ve seem thrown at a football match for a couple of reasons.