Ross. Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 That was the point he made. Calling someone that on the way to a football match would be cretinous behaviour, and he (like the majority of others) wouldn't do that. What's the difference between calling someone a cretin on the way to the football or from the comfort of your home/office via a football message board? Why should only one be a potential breach of the law and not the other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie Bhoy Posted March 1, 2016 Author Share Posted March 1, 2016 This only seems to annoy utter c**ts - mainly Sellick-minded cretins. Can't think of a time it has once even remotely bothered or harmed me at a game. Thankfully, it's here to stay. Only if you look at the picture I have posted of Rangers, Aberdeen, St Johnstone, Motherwell, Partick Thistle & Hibs fans to name a few, protesting against this act, then you will see what you have said is bollocks. It has even had the Tartan Army hold a banner up in protest too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 This only seems to annoy utter c**ts - mainly Sellick-minded cretins. Can't think of a time it has once even remotely bothered or harmed me at a game. Thankfully, it's here to stay. Have you ever been at a game and celebrated your team scoring, and given it a "Get it up ye" to the opposition team/fans in the process? I would imagine most football fans have at some point. Even that could see you arrested for breaking this law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 So you are obviously unaware of the recent case where a police officer was found to have lied in court to try and obtain a conviction. The judge said the only reason he didn't take action against the officer was because his lies didn't affect the outcome of the case Also, Celtic have banned a number of fans so how can you post the lies that they have done nothing about any problem we have? Was it the same police officer that lied about not being able to recognise Dutch police officers on horseback? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Having thought about it, this appears to be a legislative version of the common law of breach of the peace which specifically covers football, so perhaps the act could be viewed as unnecessary from that point of view - what this Act deems "offensive" could be construed as such if you were going to, say, a rugby game or a concert under breach of the peace law. I think. Breach of the peace is whatever the officer who arrests you (and the Fiscal) says it is, and has been around since the dawn of time. The act is football-specific. The act allows for prosecutions even if no offense is actually committed. It's a very strange piece of legislation and why right-minded people don't object to it is a mystery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie Bhoy Posted March 1, 2016 Author Share Posted March 1, 2016 Was it the same police officer that lied about not being able to recognise Dutch police officers on horseback? That police officer is based in England. Are you incapable of reading? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie Bhoy Posted March 1, 2016 Author Share Posted March 1, 2016 Have you ever been at a game and celebrated your team scoring, and given it a "Get it up ye" to the opposition team/fans in the process? I would imagine most football fans have at some point. Even that could see you arrested for breaking this law. Exactly Ross. When Scotland play England and GSTQ gets booed or we sing about sending them homewards to think again, will we see arrests since that could offend the English fans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie Bhoy Posted March 1, 2016 Author Share Posted March 1, 2016 The act is football-specific. The act allows for prosecutions even if no offense is actually committed. It's a very strange piece of legislation and why right-minded people don't object to it is a mystery. Spot on. Football fans already get discriminated against with the drinking ban...now this kicks in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 That police officer is based in England. Are you incapable of reading? No its just yesterday police officers were unimpeachable paragons of virtue and now they lie at the drop of a hat, confused as to why you think I should believe one account but not the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie Bhoy Posted March 1, 2016 Author Share Posted March 1, 2016 No its just yesterday police officers were unimpeachable paragons of virtue and now they lie at the drop of a hat, confused as to why you think I should believe one account but not the other. One was found to be lying under oath in court...the other wasn't. Regardless...I thought you were all for believing people without any proof? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 One was found to be lying under oath in court...the other wasn't. Regardless...I thought you were all for believing people without any proof? A lie that made no difference, sounds like a simple misunderstanding and that that officers intentions were entirely honorable. But he did something selloik fans don't like, reporting one of theirs and suddenly he gets persecuted. Just like Saint Shay the Truthful and believable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 It does seem to only be the supporters of two clubs who are bothered by this, for some mysterious reason. The Act doesn't enter my thinking at all, in much the same way the assault law doesn't as I am not planning on beating anyone up. Having thought about it, this appears to be a legislative version of the common law of breach of the peace which specifically covers football, so perhaps the act could be viewed as unnecessary from that point of view - what this Act deems "offensive" could be construed as such if you were going to, say, a rugby game or a concert under breach of the peace law. I think. Breach of the peace is whatever the officer who arrests you (and the Fiscal) says it is, and has been around since the dawn of time. So, my amateur reading is that the Act is not necessary, but not for the reasons the OP thinks it is. Also, perhaps it's only fair the author of the article declares her own interest. I assume she just ran out of space before she was able to do that. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/c/celtic/7104362.stm Where you stand depends on where you sit, as they say. Whenever reading an article by anyone, it's always useful to find out a wee bit about the person who has written it. Like what school they went to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jute Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Spot on. Football fans already get discriminated against with the drinking ban...now this kicks in. Wonder which set of fans we can thank for the drinking ban.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swello Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 The act is football-specific. The act allows for prosecutions even if no offense is actually committed. It's a very strange piece of legislation and why right-minded people don't object to it is a mystery. I agree with a lot of what you say as the football-specific element of it is ill-conceived and I think there are some serious civil liberties issues with it - but it's perceived by many as a mechanism to punish old firm fans after years of soft soap from police and stewards towards them, so a lot of other fans (and those in wider society who have had to suffer them) are ok with it. The brutal truth is that if Celtic and Rangers fans had a bit of self-policing over the years, if the clubs in question hadn't played laughable lip-service to tackling sectarianism and if police in stadia had treated them in line with other fans - this flawed act simply wouldn't exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Gaines Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 The drinking ban is the same as everything else for me. Applied is a way to turn all football supporters up here into villains rather than look to address the real issue. For other cases, look at the recent stuff where they came out and spoke about how big a problem there was in Scottish football, and the very act we see being spoke about here. The act seems to be getting used responsibly, which is fair enough, but it's existing in the first place is a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarto Mutiny Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Like what school they went to? Perhaps that may be of concern to some...not to me, but each to their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 The drinking ban is the same as everything else for me. Applied is a way to turn all football supporters up here into villains rather than look to address the real issue. For other cases, look at the recent stuff where they came out and spoke about how big a problem there was in Scottish football, and the very act we see being spoke about here. The act seems to be getting used responsibly, which is fair enough, but it's existing in the first place is a problem. A little before my time, but was the 1980 Cup final not seen as the final straw and the excuse needed to ban drink from football, rather than as the sole reason for the ban? The Tartan Army at Wembley a few years earlier being one of a few high profile drunken incidents, and the growing casual culture being a major target for the police at the time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 If there was an Offensive Behaviour on Football Forums Act I know who would be first against the wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Perhaps that may be of concern to some...not to me, but each to their own. O.K. prissy drawers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dee Man Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 If there was an Offensive Behaviour on Football Forums Act I know who would be first against the wall. I think the majority of us would be for the firing squad. I'd just voluntarily hand myself in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.