Ultras / Casuals / Commandos

**Macy** · 26/04/2005, 7:40 AM

Originally Posted by Bosco

The point is that there were enough garda at the game but they were all in the wrong place

Exactly - there were plenty there, they were in the ground in their riot gear, whilst one or two were outside at the known flashpoint. That's not a question of resources, that's a question of them being thick (unless you think there's some conspiracy to hype up potential trouble, increasing the number of gardia needed on duty on match days, meaning more of them get a nice chunk of overtime).

**Macy** · 26/04/2005, 7:49 AM

Originally Posted by noby

So, are there groups in this country that claim to be firms?

Bohs Soccer Casuals for one. Really p�sses me off when Bohs always make out their whiter than white in any Bohs v Rovers trouble.

Not sure Rovers have a firm per se, but certainly have "handy lads". WAR can probably answer for certain.

Not forgetting the Pats IPF and the Longford Intercity Crew either - if anyone remembers that post on the old eL board, that one of the Dublin phone ins believed and did a show on

**paul_oshea** · 26/04/2005, 9:19 AM

unless you think there's some conspiracy to hype up potential trouble, increasing the number of gardia needed on duty on match days, meaning more of them get a nice chunk of overtime

that wasnt the point i was making, but thats a given. i misread the statement, doh, sorry about that. 100 riot police inside the stadium, then quite correctly they werent properly organised, but that itself makes me think of any country town on a saturday night, when they wont go where there will be trouble.

**WeAreRovers** · 26/04/2005, 10:36 AM

Originally Posted by Macy

Not sure Rovers have a firm per se, but certainly have "handy lads".

I'll just leave the above quote to answer for itself as I couldn't possibly comment.

KOH

**Carlin** · 26/04/2005, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by soccerc

At then time I contacted as did others both the Garda Press office and the local stations who denied any arrests associated with the game or indeed if there had been any arrests in the area of Tolka Park that afternoon.

Yes but the Gardai also claimed that there was only one arrest after the Bohs-Rovers match last November. Which is b�llocks seeing as I personally know of 4 people who were arrested after the match.

In other words, the Garda have been known to tell lies.

**anto eile** · 26/04/2005, 1:29 PM

ten arrests after Rovers v gypos last november. my mate was amongst them. he was aressted for loitering..as he was walking down the road a gard (2nd time in 2 minutes) stopped him.he got annoyed at the gard.gave a bit of cheek, and the gard arrested him.as for the 100 lads who battered each other before the game..well they got what could be described as a garda escort to the game, never mind any of them being arrested.gards are useless corrupt cowards

**aido_b** · 26/04/2005, 11:44 PM

Originally Posted by soccerc

The problem I have and I don't want to attack the poster is that his original "assertion" fully reseached and documented is untrue.

The poster then backtracked claiming a mistake. However, it is supposed to be from a thesis and yet one vital piece of "evidence" has been shown to be untrue at the least.

At then time I contacted as did others both the Garda Press office and the local stations who denied any arrests associated with the game or indeed if there had been any arrests in the area of Tolka Park that afternoon.

A thesis that is still a work in progress. As for you commenting that you contacted the Garda press office straight after the game, I've done this on a couple of occasions, not only in incidents relating to soccer games and I have rarely got any sort of coherent reply. Also when I started out in Journalism I made the mistake of contacting a Garda Station regarding violent scenes in Dublin City Centre one night, I was immeditely told to get in touch with their press office. No Garda station is allowed to release details such as arrests without first consulting with the press office.

This is the reason why the only time one ever gets info from the Guards is either in the form of a contact within the Guards or in the form of Statements.

I have no reason to make up these facts so please stop presuming that I am and try to accept that I have no reason to lie about this subject

Aido

**soccerc** · 27/04/2005, 12:13 AM

Originally Posted by aido_b

A thesis that is still a work in progress. As for you commenting that you contacted the Garda press office straight after the game, I've done this on a couple of occasions, not only in incidents relating to soccer games and I have rarely got any sort of coherent reply. Also when I started out in Journalism I made the mistake of contacting a Garda Station regarding violent scenes in Dublin City Centre one night, I was immeditely told to get in touch with their press office. No Garda station is allowed to release details such as arrests without first consulting with the press office.

This is the reason why the only time one ever gets info from the Guards is either in the form of a contact within the Guards or in the form of Statements.

I have no reason to make up these facts so please stop presuming that I am and try to accept that I have no reason to lie about this subject

Aido

Aido

Firstly, I never said I contacted the Garda Press office straight after the game. I waited at least 24 hours then made contact when certain alleged events were reported in a newspaper. Note I contacted both the press office and local stations and in that order and got very coherent replies. You need to know who to ask for and the questions to ask - that will come with experience, along with any contacts you can make.
I never said you lied did I?

I replied to your original post about 14 Millwall fans stopped with three of them being arrested outside the ground. That never happened. The three public order offences were nothing to do with those allegations and as the Garda� told me at the time they were not associated with Tolka Park.

**hamish** · 27/04/2005, 2:17 AM

What worried me most was Adam's point re. the FAI Security Officer. Even if there NEVER was, NEVER is or NEVER likely to be soccer related violence at games in Ireland, surely, the FAI bloke would have a plan/scheme/whatever pre-organised IN THE EVENT of trouble. The English police have multiple practises which could be used/adopted, I presume the Gardai have public order strategies and there are many, many studies from (correct me on this) the Likes of Leicester University or some such institutions - all a wealth of information which should be immediately used by this Security officer.
Also, dialogue with clubs/supporters club, here, would help. The England v Ireland debacle should be a warning and if this FAI guy hasn't a clearly defined plan or even proposals to do something about even POTENTIAL trouble, he shouldn't be in his job, period. I'm open to correction on the above, but, when I used to organise even schools internationals in the 90's for God's sake, I made it a point to liaise with the cops in the vicinity of the game to arrange security elements, even if it was to avoid traffic dangers with a shower of excited schoolkids congregating at grounds.
It was also easy to liaise with School Principals etc to ensure that the, shall we say, more volatile students attending were well supervised or even barred from coming.
Now, a schools international would not be quite a potential problem BUT I felt it was my duty to at least be prepared in the eventuality. The FAI Security Officer has no excuses. There will always be clowns/hooligans/call-em-what-you-will at major events (music concerts/sports etc) and being prepared is the pre-requisite for any organisation organising such events.

**aido_b** · 28/04/2005, 8:53 PM

I came across some excellent research undertaken by the Social Issues Research Centre in Englnad on the topic of soccer hooliganism. Its a great read,

http://www.sirc.org/publik/fvexec.html#_VPID_1

**hamish** · 28/04/2005, 10:33 PM

Originally Posted by aido_b

I came across some excellent research undertaken by the Social Issues Research Centre in Englnad on the topic of soccer hooliganism. Its a great read,

http://www.sirc.org/publik/fvexec.html#_VPID_1

Thanks for that link, aido b, have read about about football violence but here there and everwhere, if you know what I mean. But that's a great site with loads of info. you posted - big help, thanks man.

**stojkovic** · 29/04/2005, 10:01 AM

CASUALS
To my knowledge the term CASUALS was first coined by Liverpool fans in late 70s early 80s. On their many trips to Europe they would walk into shops and 'lift' the latest trendy gear. At the time LACOSTE and POLO were the big names. They would sell the gear back home to pay for their trip. Liverpool fans were known all over Europe as 'well-behaved' on the hooligan front but thieving *******s. Trips to Paris and Milan were always favoured. This type of thing was depicted in a programme about the WC82 called 'Arrividerci Millwall' if anyone remembers it.

ULTRAS
As someone said this term was started by Italians and copied all over the world.

**Macy** · 29/04/2005, 10:11 AM

Why did this myth about the scousers not having hoolie's originate? Just because they were snide blade fighters, doesn't mean they weren't hooligans. Don't believe everything you read in the hoolie books.

Casuals sprang from the 70's, originally to not look like the stereotypical football fan, so as to avoid the attention of the police (at a time when it was colour overload - scarves tied to wrists etc). Theory was, look like a well off joe bloggs (

) and slip into towns/grounds unnoticed. From there it became part of the culture to try and out do rival firms by what you wore as well as violence.

**stojkovic** · 29/04/2005, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by Macy

Why did this myth about the scousers not having hoolie's originate? Just because they were snide blade fighters, doesn't mean they weren't hooligans. Don't believe everything you read in the hoolie books.

Possibly because up until 1985 Liverpool had NEVER been banned in Europe.

Man United
Leeds
Tottenham
Rangers
West Ham

Had all received some form of ban from UEFA in the 70s and early 80s.

**Macy** · 29/04/2005, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by stojkovic

Possibly because up until 1985 Liverpool had NEVER been banned in Europe.

Man United
Leeds
Tottenham
Rangers
West Ham

Had all received some form of ban from UEFA in the 70s and early 80s.

Case proven then

**GavinZac** · 29/04/2005, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by stojkovic

Possibly because up until 1985 Liverpool had NEVER been banned in Europe.

Man United
Leeds
Tottenham
Rangers
West Ham

Had all received some form of ban from UEFA in the 70s and early 80s.

thats like saying harold shipman wasnt a murderer until he was convicted.

**stojkovic** · 29/04/2005, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by GavinZac

thats like saying harold shipman wasnt a murderer until he was convicted.

And shipman performed his duty in front of 50,000 people, hundreds of journos and tv cameras all across Europe, did he ?

Bad comparison.

**GavinZac** · 29/04/2005, 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by stojkovic

And shipman performed his duty in front of 50,000 people, hundreds of journos and tv cameras all across Europe, did he ?

Bad comparison.

hooligans arent gladiators, they typically dont/didnt take to the field "in front of 50,000 people, hundreds of journos and tv cameras all across Europe".

if you think Liverpool never caused any trouble, then you're either a fan or read a book by a fan.