Bohs fan fails to get 'hooligan associates' ban lifted

[BohDiddley]

It probably a question that has been asked a million times elsewhere but is there any way to communicate to these people that they are not wanted?

Like this? A policy statement that was followed by immediate, determined action.
Given your apparent expertise and willingness to pronounce on the issue, while minimising your own, one might have expected you to be familiar with the club policy on hooligans. For your information, they have been conspicuous by their absence, as have their flags, from Dalymount Park this season.

[A face]

Like this? A policy statement that was followed by immediate, determined action.
Given your apparent expertise and willingness to pronounce on the issue, while minimising your own, one might have expected you to be familiar with the club policy on hooligans. For your information, they have been conspicuous by their absence, as have their flags, from Dalymount Park this season.

BohDiddley, i love it man. Genuinely. Fair play to Bohs for this. I love it, get the message out there.

Minimising my own, no way man. I singled out a guy over a month ago at the cross because he was acting the maggot, and he, deservedly so has been banned from the cross. I dont shy away from this crap at all, and i was going back into the stand when my mates said it was best to go to another part of the ground for the rest of the game. The same guy was known to the Gardai so it was a good call. And i'll do it any other time as well.

We had an incident a few years back where a guy had parked in car in front of a residents driveway, he came back after the game and residents surrounded him because he didn't get proper parking, he was left know in no uncertain terms they weren't happy about it but it was in no way violent. Raised voices at best. The motorist agreed and apologised.

A journalist was passing at the same time and took his notes, article followed about the violent scenes in Turners Cross and how football attracted all of this stuff.

The residents in reaction to the incident and the article invited the journalist and the motorist (fair bit of effort to track him down, all they had was a licence plate) to a residence committee meeting three days later. Both turned up and the motorist admitted he was wrong (again) etc. but the journalist through his questioning at the meeting exacerbated the whole situation again and reported in another article that there were continuing violent scenes away from matchday and how the problem was escalating (he didn't come straight out and say what happened on the Monday but lead the reader to believe that).

This was a fawking residence committee meeting. I mean where do you go from there. Were they all off to the Lions Club to organise the next ruck?

This is what your dealing with man. The guy cant park his car and there was riots.

I love the fact that statement was there, i hope to god the BSC have read it and learnt it by heart. I'm telling ya, clubs need to seriously have zero tolerance to this and one guy that hangs around with the BSC we wont miss.

[skitz3]

Aren't you a bit old to be supporting Shels now though...?

Ha you made a joke. So the stereotype about people from Derry having no personallity isn't true then?

[SilkCut]

This "Hooligan" element don't seem to understand the effect they have on the league as a whole. Their presence contributes to the fact that many people don't attend games and as a result clubs are struggling financially. As I said in another thread clubs need to get families through the turnstiles but why would you go to a game where your wife or kids are at risk of abuse. I for one hated going to Bohs and Rovers games because of the "fans" who used to travel with them. Its more of a shame when you realise most of their real fans are incredibly knowledgeable and very good company to share a pint with after a game. If clubs end up banning a small number of innocent people to eliminate the guilty then for the good of the game we will all have to live with that. There is always the big TV in the pub.

[thischarmingman]

How can you possibly say you are a football fan or say you care about your club if you hang around with people that do such damage to it, and football as a whole in this country?

[EalingGreen]

Like this? A policy statement that was followed by immediate, determined action.
Given your apparent expertise and willingness to pronounce on the issue, while minimising your own, one might have expected you to be familiar with the club policy on hooligans. For your information, they have been conspicuous by their absence, as have their flags, from Dalymount Park this season.

When i first read through this thread, as a football fan I was instinctively sympathetic to Bohs, but as a Libertarian I still had a nagging doubt as regards the dangers of "guilt by association", especially by an unaccountable and non-judicial body like a football club.

However, having read the Bohs' admirable and unequivocal policy statement, combined with their apparent willingness to act over the Derry incident, I now have no sympathy whatever for the guy who's bringing the Court case.

[EalingGreen]

This "Hooligan" element don't seem to understand the effect they have on the league as a whole. Their presence contributes to the fact that many people don't attend games and as a result clubs are struggling financially. As I said in another thread clubs need to get families through the turnstiles but why would you go to a game where your wife or kids are at risk of abuse. I for one hated going to Bohs and Rovers games because of the "fans" who used to travel with them. Its more of a shame when you realise most of their real fans are incredibly knowledgeable and very good company to share a pint with after a game. If clubs end up banning a small number of innocent people to eliminate the guilty then for the good of the game we will all have to live with that. There is always the big TV in the pub.

I think this gets to the nub of the issue, though perhaps not quite how you meant! "Normal" fans like you and me can see the damage hooliganism, even a hooligan image, can do to the game.
However, the hoolies themselves don't see it that way. The hard core, at least, genuinely see themselves as the "real" supporters of the club i.e. they will even risk getting hurt to demonstrate that support. Indeed, should a club's on-field fortunes decline, so that the general support starts to drift away, these hoolies carry it as a "badge of honour" that they are sticking with the club regardless. In fact, they often make a virtue out of it: i.e. "we may not be the best team, but we're the hardest etc".

Worse still, they actually scorn those ordinary supporters who first refuse to let their wives/girlfriends/kids etc attend and who then decline to attend themselves. From the hoolies' point of view, "ordinary" fans are "safe" from the hoolies' activities, since they (hoolies) invariably claim they "don't go looking for trouble, we just won't walk away if it comes to us", or that they "only fight other hoolies". Therefore, if the ordinaries stop coming, they're no real loss, since they were never "true" fans in the first place.

Deep down, I don't think the hoolies' motives are anything to do with football itself. Rather, I feel there is something lacking in their lives so that they need the sense of belonging and identity which comes with being in a gang. Worse still, it is not (imo) "mindless violence" as it's often described. On the contrary, perhaps due to hormonal influences (adrenalin? testosterone?), the real hard core get a clear "kick" out of fighting, even (especially?) if it involves personal risk. As such, they are more likely to get away with a rumble as part of a mob at a football match than e.g. outside a pub on a Friday night.

Consequently, it is imperative that all clubs make it abundantly clear that there is no place whatever for hooligans anywhere near football (as Bohs appear here to be doing). However, since there is only so much the clubs can do, they also need the whole-hearted support of the rest of their supporters, plus the authorities (FAI, police and judiciary), so that following bannings, fines and imprisonment, loss of jobs etc, the hoolies eventually get the message that getting involved in violence at football matches simply brings them more trouble than its worth.

Of course, that is not to say that they will suddenly be weaned off their addiction to violence entirely and become model citizens. Sadly, they are merely likely to become someone else's problem. But if so, at least football can absolve itself of blame.

[Block G Raptor]

I don't know this guy personally but probably would know him to see. As my user name would suggest I watch Bohs from Block G in the Jodi and always have and hopefully always will (until we move to harristown of course)a lot of the BSC would also be in Block G or on the steps at the end of Block G, during the course of he game I would have conversations with plenty of the lads around me and I would now fear that if any of the people I'm talking turn out unbeknownst to me to be BSC could I be facing a ban? whilst I am 100% behind the club in getting rid of the BSC Filth I just hope they will be very thorough in investigating "Associates" of Hooligans before just dishing out bans on anecdotal evidence

[Greenforever]

I don't know this guy personally but probably would know him to see. As my user name would suggest I watch Bohs from Block G in the Jodi and always have and hopefully always will (until we move to harristown of course)a lot of the BSC would also be in Block G or on the steps at the end of Block G, during the course of he game I would have conversations with plenty of the lads around me and I would now fear that if any of the people I'm talking turn out unbeknownst to me to be BSC could I be facing a ban? whilst I am 100% behind the club in getting rid of the BSC Filth I just hope they will be very thorough in investigating "Associates" of Hooligans before just dishing out bans on anecdotal evidence

i would imagine that if you're not arriving to the game with them, socialising with them outside afterwards, and seen to be a part of them you'r not likely to have anything to worry about.

you could always have a word with the head of security during a game and introduce yourself and assure them of your support in ridding themselves of the problem

[Greenforever]

I think this gets to the nub of the issue, though perhaps not quite how you meant! "Normal" fans like you and me can see the damage hooliganism, even a hooligan image, can do to the game.
However, the hoolies themselves don't see it that way. The hard core, at least, genuinely see themselves as the "real" supporters of the club i.e. they will even risk getting hurt to demonstrate that support. Indeed, should a club's on-field fortunes decline, so that the general support starts to drift away, these hoolies carry it as a "badge of honour" that they are sticking with the club regardless. In fact, they often make a virtue out of it: i.e. "we may not be the best team, but we're the hardest etc".

Worse still, they actually scorn those ordinary supporters who first refuse to let their wives/girlfriends/kids etc attend and who then decline to attend themselves. From the hoolies' point of view, "ordinary" fans are "safe" from the hoolies' activities, since they (hoolies) invariably claim they "don't go looking for trouble, we just won't walk away if it comes to us", or that they "only fight other hoolies". Therefore, if the ordinaries stop coming, they're no real loss, since they were never "true" fans in the first place.

Deep down, I don't think the hoolies' motives are anything to do with football itself. Rather, I feel there is something lacking in their lives so that they need the sense of belonging and identity which comes with being in a gang. Worse still, it is not (imo) "mindless violence" as it's often described. On the contrary, perhaps due to hormonal influences (adrenalin? testosterone?), the real hard core get a clear "kick" out of fighting, even (especially?) if it involves personal risk. As such, they are more likely to get away with a rumble as part of a mob at a football match than e.g. outside a pub on a Friday night.

Consequently, it is imperative that all clubs make it abundantly clear that there is no place whatever for hooligans anywhere near football (as Bohs appear here to be doing). However, since there is only so much the clubs can do, they also need the whole-hearted support of the rest of their supporters, plus the authorities (FAI, police and judiciary), so that following bannings, fines and imprisonment, loss of jobs etc, the hoolies eventually get the message that getting involved in violence at football matches simply brings them more trouble than its worth.

Of course, that is not to say that they will suddenly be weaned off their addiction to violence entirely and become model citizens. Sadly, they are merely likely to become someone else's problem. But if so, at least football can absolve itself of blame.

Excellent post!!

[A face]

I think this gets to the nub of the issue, though perhaps not quite how you meant! "Normal" fans like you and me can see the damage hooliganism, even a hooligan image, can do to the game.
However, the hoolies themselves don't see it that way. The hard core, at least, genuinely see themselves as the "real" supporters of the club i.e. they will even risk getting hurt to demonstrate that support. Indeed, should a club's on-field fortunes decline, so that the general support starts to drift away, these hoolies carry it as a "badge of honour" that they are sticking with the club regardless. In fact, they often make a virtue out of it: i.e. "we may not be the best team, but we're the hardest etc".

Good post but i even think that gives them more credit that they deserve.

Lets face it, a lot of these guy have issues, dysfunctional background, they come from a social crisis area, they have behavioural problems and this is just a means interacting with their counterparts as a very basic and primitive level, the lowest common denominator or else they were just the guys that were always singled out as 'no hopers', guys that would never be able to get it together enough to do anything with themselves and they are just fufilling this prophesy.

Is not actually a football related issue in the wider scheme of things, its a social problem. They are skangers but they are skangers that cant function on their own, either because they are intimidated when not in a group, ala cowards or the behavioural issues they have, the limited social skills forcing them to exist like this. I'd say alot of them should be in some sort of care.

[superfrank]

I totally disagree with this decision by Bohs.

It's a terrible way to treat a fan of the club. He hasn't done anything wrong, as Bohs have said, and yet they still think he should be punished because of who his friends are.

There should be a crackdown on the hooligan elements in the league but it should be on those people actively involved in it, not "associates".

I also don't agree with this idea that being friends with a hooligan makes you as bad as them. We all have friends who do things that we wouldn't do, whether it be hooliganism, drug-dealing, whatever. But unless we help them out, we're not guilty for what they do.

I'm guessing this guy was found to be an "associate" of hooligans because Bohs had a list of hooligans. I guess they banned them as well. Therefore, he wouldn't have been associating with them at a Bohs match or around Dalymount. How did Bohs find out he "associates" with them then? And is it really the business of a football club, who gladly accepted his money for years, to make judgements on what a person does when he isn't anywhere near the club?

This is a dangerous precedent set by Bohs, and upheld by the Courts. Who knows how many other Bohs fans, or fans at other clubs for that matter, "associate" with hooligans?

[EalingGreen]

Good post but i even think that gives them more credit that they deserve.

Lets face it, a lot of these guy have issues, dysfunctional background, they come from a social crisis area, they have behavioural problems and this is just a means interacting with their counterparts as a very basic and primitive level, the lowest common denominator or else they were just the guys that were always singled out as 'no hopers', guys that would never be able to get it together enough to do anything with themselves and they are just fufilling this prophesy.

Is not actually a football related issue in the wider scheme of things, its a social problem. They are skangers but they are skangers that cant function on their own, either because they are intimidated when not in a group, ala cowards or the behavioural issues they have, the limited social skills forcing them to exist like this. I'd say alot of them should be in some sort of care.

What you say is correct, I'm sure for many of the hoolies (and especially for the hangers-on on the fringes, I'd guess).

But whilst circumstances might be different in Dublin/Eircom (I wouldn't know), we shouldn't underestimate all hoolies as "dysfunctional no-hopers" etc.

In England, at least, surprising numbers of the hard core thugs who persist with hooliganism beyond their teenage years (i.e. after many impressionable youngsters drop out) are otherwise functioning members of society, with "respectable" jobs, wives, families etc. OK, we mightn't be talking about the members of the Metropolitan Elites who fill the glossy magazines, or get featured in the Economist etc, but it's by no means unknown for them to be teachers, bank workers, self-employed tradesmen etc.

As such, their choice of recreational behaviour is entirely "rational" i.e. they're in a suit and tie five days a week, so they go out with one set of friends on a Friday night, take the family out shopping etc on a Sunday and Saturdays are "at the football with the lads".

This gives them the opportunity to indulge one of their passions, which is running around in a gang, on the look out for a rumble. To be quite honest, that is little different from other people who seek their thrills by other hazardous means, whether it be by rock climbing, motor racing, hang gliding etc*, or even those who take it further and join the Army or something (i.e. to do it full time)

Of course, it is entirely different in the key sense that these other activities are all entirely legitimate and lawful, so no excuse should be made for the hoolies. But imo the reason why society has at best only managed to suppress football hooliganism, rather than eradicate it entirely, is because the authorities (both inside and outside football) still fail to understand why many hoolies do what they do.

Quite simply, they do it because they enjoy it, and the price they have to pay for their enjoyment (the occasional kicking, arrest, fine etc) is generally low enough to be one worth paying for their "fun". A good example of this is seen in England where at club level, the various local constabularies eventually managed to clamp down on the known hooligans on their own patch. So the hoolies started concentrating only on away games. So the police responded by sending "spotters" along to assist the local police. So then the hoolies responded by concentrating their efforts on overseas games (club, Ingurland etc), where the local police were invariably utterly unprepared, and any hoolies that did get detained were usually just thrown out the country, since the locals just wanted rid of them without the hassle and expense of Courts and prisons etc. And as the UK authorities have responded to this latest development with Banning Orders etc (i.e. surrender Passports, report to local Police Stations etc), the hoolies are now switching to organising matchday fights by Internet, Mobiles etc, at locations often well away from the actual stadium, often hours before or after the game, so as to keep the cops guessing. If you think about it in their terms, this is actually very rational behaviour, however deplorable. Moreover, it is the actions of people who are anything but dysfunctional or incapable of organisation.

Consequently, unless or until all the relevant agencies (clubs, decent fans, police, courts etc) combine to enforce a concerted and long-term campaign, resulting in the price to the hoolies becoming too high to pay, then we will continue to have to suffer these scumbags, to a greater or lesser degree.

* - With all due apologies to any rock climbers, motor racers or hang gliders who may be reading. (I mean to say, you may be "mad", but that doesn't make you "bad" or "dangerous to know"! )

[passerrby]

I have to assume that bohs did not take this dicision lightly and have excellent reasons for not wanting this person from "supporting" their club.

[Macy]

This is a dangerous precedent set by Bohs, and upheld by the Courts. Who knows how many other Bohs fans, or fans at other clubs for that matter, "associate" with hooligans?

He's only failed in getting the ban lifted in lieu of the full hearing, it hasn't actually been upheld. Hopefully they'll be run out of court and have to pay mucho compensation, as I agree it's ridiculous.

Going on the report in the paper, it seems that the worst he did was get the same scheduled plane from Dublin to Cork as the BSC and end up entering the ground with them, unless the BSC are now scheduling planes as well?

If they have evidence produce it and ban him on that, if not he shouldn't be guilty by association.

I have to assume that bohs did not take this dicision lightly and have excellent reasons for not wanting this person from "supporting" their club.

If they have, Then they should use those reasons to ban him.

[OneRedArmy]

I find the presumption that owners of private property should be required to demonstrate the reasons for exclusion of someone to what is effectively a criminal standard of proof absolutely ridiculous (which is what many of the posters on here are stating).

Surely this is the equivalent of a club bouncer saying "not in those shoes", ie you don't get a right to due process. Are his civil liberties being infringed by being denied access to a football match? Again, I don't think so.

Its possible that Bohs may come unstuck through communicating to Cork that this guy was a trouble maker, but if they only communicated the fact that he was barred from Dalymount, then again this is questionable.

A lot of the moral outrage here ignores what rights you have and don't have as an individual under the law of this land.

Make no mistake, if judgment favours the banned individual the impact of precedent on nightclubs etc who frequently refuse entry on "spurious" grounds could be huge.

[geysir]

Going on the report in the paper, it seems that the worst he did was get the same scheduled plane from Dublin to Cork as the BSC and end up entering the ground with them, unless the BSC are now scheduling planes as well?

If they have evidence produce it and ban him on that, if not he shouldn't be guilty by association.

If they have, Then they should use those reasons to ban him.

Association is a serious offense, already agreed upon by the Bohs membership.
'There is no place in the Bohemian Football Club for groups who espouse, advocate or support such behaviour. Any person attached to such groups, associating with known members of such groups, or supporting or condoning the group itself or its activities, either implicitly or tacitly, will be banned from Dalymount Park and, if appropriate, have their membership revoked.'


Bohs have exercised their right to refuse him entry to Dalymount
but by what right are the other clubs banning him entry to their grounds?

[A face]

Bohs have exercised their right to refuse him entry to Dalymount but by what right are the other clubs banning him entry to their grounds?

'Not tonight son, you're not wearing the right shoes!" .... its as easy as that.

There is no way that this will come undone. If the club(s) dont want to admit him then they dont have to. Its that simple.

Can anyone see a judge letting this fly and lift the ban

If months down that line something serious happens like someone gets stabbed, Bohs surely couldn't be held culpable given that judge undermined efforts to avoid things like this happening.

Do Bohs keep recordings from their CCTV footage?

[geysir]

I understand that unless there is a law specifically prohibiting discrimination against people who are wearing for example, denims, hoods, trainers, then a nightclub can discriminate according to its publicly stated policy re dress code.
But they couldn't legally discriminate on racial grounds.

I still think there has to be/or should be, that each LOI club has some common adopted public "solidarity" policy in writing, e.g. "barred from one then barred from all".

[Docboy]

Some pretty right-wing sentiments being expressed here lads. Guilty by association, gives me a shiver just thinking about it. Surely you must realise that life is bit more complex than that. What if he knows these people his whole life, just because he'll acknowledge them doesn't necessarily mean he condones their behaviour.

That said I don't the full circumstances, just commenting on the perceived injustice.