As long as there are football rivalries there will be the element of violence, that's just how it is.
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Spurs thugs
- Thread starter spooky
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
I'm all for making the streets safer, and all that... But 2 years of your life gone because of that? Fuck me. I'm assuming they had a lengthy prior record then.
Smolik said:
I think the fact that they all traveled down there to have a scrap had a bearing too.
12 months, no previous, and by all accounts only sent a text!
MKYid said:
Should have just got pissed and run someone over. 3 month driving ban. Priorities are getting a bit mixed up.
you can riot, burn the fuck out of towns cause millions of pounds worth of damage beat up innocent passers by who want nothing to with it!.. all caught on cctv& only a community service orders passsed down!!
you can have an organised bare knuckle fight with a crowd including kids watching live at the venue & filmed for a tv documentary but its allowed because your a fucking pikey/romany/so called traveller!
but like minded people who want to have a minor tear up in a posh road in a seaside town get sent down for ridiculous amounts of bird!!.
read the article " no members of the public where involved"
i know theres loads on here who'll think i'm a complete pratt but i dont give a toss.. grew up in the culture of football violence (yes it was a culture much like mods, rockers etc) & as old as i am if it came to me & involved my lifelong mates i would still stand shoulder to shoulder.
most of those so called "thugs" are amongst the most loyal & passionate of fans not just of spurs but other clubs too!
ask any goon who "the bear" was!!.. i bet you to man they will say what a great person & fan of the club he was who loved the club & all the fans knew very well.. yet he was still thier biggest thug at a time when they had a decent turnout of people who went to football for the "alternate action".
next time you go out on a saturday night & see someone knocking the shit out of another person & possibly doing him some damage.. remember he'll probably only get an £80 quid fine for violent conduct & abh because its saturday night & he's had a drink!.
you can have an organised bare knuckle fight with a crowd including kids watching live at the venue & filmed for a tv documentary but its allowed because your a fucking pikey/romany/so called traveller!
but like minded people who want to have a minor tear up in a posh road in a seaside town get sent down for ridiculous amounts of bird!!.
read the article " no members of the public where involved"
i know theres loads on here who'll think i'm a complete pratt but i dont give a toss.. grew up in the culture of football violence (yes it was a culture much like mods, rockers etc) & as old as i am if it came to me & involved my lifelong mates i would still stand shoulder to shoulder.
most of those so called "thugs" are amongst the most loyal & passionate of fans not just of spurs but other clubs too!
ask any goon who "the bear" was!!.. i bet you to man they will say what a great person & fan of the club he was who loved the club & all the fans knew very well.. yet he was still thier biggest thug at a time when they had a decent turnout of people who went to football for the "alternate action".
next time you go out on a saturday night & see someone knocking the shit out of another person & possibly doing him some damage.. remember he'll probably only get an £80 quid fine for violent conduct & abh because its saturday night & he's had a drink!.
57 varieties said:
I am in total agreement fella. The 'myth' that hooligan-types are not real fans is just that, a 'myth'.
57varieties & nutter naylor. whilst i get where your coming from totally, i cant understand how blokes our age [assuming your 40-50] are still at it. ffs, young men have always been violent, not all, but many, thats a fact, but if your still actively looking for it in your 40's, i think you've missed out on something.
you got me wrong mate!.. long since retired from the alternate scene..& unless the chance of the one last big hurahh comes along thats the way i'll stay!,.. what i did say is that "if it came to me".. meaning if i was in the right place at the wrong time i'm not going to swerve it & i will stand my ground!..NO1JIB said:
theres many ages still activly taking part in fv you'd be surprised.. what really has suprised me is this event was so well covered in the media... i dare say if this was in shite street shite town there would have been no middle class brown noser using todays technology to it full !!....... its still happeneing everywhere just organised much more than it was in the late 70's/80's/90's due to police technology cctv, face recogniction via tfl/lul etc etc but usually silenced by the authorities.
much preferred/better in the days when you took your life in your hands going to away games when they knew who you where by your dress code & what direction you where coming from & you knew exactly where they'd be on your way to the opposing ground.. 4/5/600 on 4/5/600 & if you where nicked it was just a kicking from plod & put on your way!.
there where/are rules which still stand today by n large.
57 varieties said:
i'd have to stand me ground, me knees are fucked now, couldnt do a goon impression if i tried :biggrin:
it was different backalong, i didnt get you wrong, i know what your saying, theres a difference between looking for something and having it thrust upon you. i just think, how can a bloke in his 40's justify going looking for it ? my mrs would fucking kill me :w00t:
I am like 57 Varieties - well (WELL) into middle age & not involved in that scene at all.
But he is totally correct in what he says. If you went to away games in the 70's & 80's you had to be prepared to do you bit or you would be in all sorts of bother. Safety in numbers and all that.
Which is why we both seem to have a bit of sympathy with those that were given ludicrous sentances.
If i was on trial with those fellas & would have just said i was a traveller & it was part of my culture. Would have walked away scot free.
But he is totally correct in what he says. If you went to away games in the 70's & 80's you had to be prepared to do you bit or you would be in all sorts of bother. Safety in numbers and all that.
Which is why we both seem to have a bit of sympathy with those that were given ludicrous sentances.
If i was on trial with those fellas & would have just said i was a traveller & it was part of my culture. Would have walked away scot free.
The important part in sentencing is the context of the 'seriousness' (from statute, sentencing guidelines, etc) of offence and the character offender.
I could bore you with tedium and details of what constitutes 'seriousness', but then that would only serve to enforce how much of a dull fucktard and dreary cunt I am.
However, for those who may need to draw on the below information, a few things which are useful to know if you ever get in this 'situation':
First and most important 'plausible deniability', and the standard of proof being 'beyond reasonable doubt' for each element of the offence being accused of;
Secondly right to silence still exist, but adverse inferences can be drawn, not just generally with regards to guilt, but specifically in context of objects or items which could be perceived to be 'weapons';
'intent' and 'premeditation' is normally part of elevating the issues of 'seriousness' of the event;
and never blame anyone else for what happened (put up your own alibi defence by all means but don't actively accuse others) but the character element will more likely be admissible and used against you when you throw bad character evidence elsewhere.
NB> This advice is just general and is not intended to replace professional legal advise you will undoubtedly need at the time. Before you go fucking blaming me because you didn't have an exit strategy and you couldn't run fast enough you slow cunts.
I could bore you with tedium and details of what constitutes 'seriousness', but then that would only serve to enforce how much of a dull fucktard and dreary cunt I am.
However, for those who may need to draw on the below information, a few things which are useful to know if you ever get in this 'situation':
First and most important 'plausible deniability', and the standard of proof being 'beyond reasonable doubt' for each element of the offence being accused of;
Secondly right to silence still exist, but adverse inferences can be drawn, not just generally with regards to guilt, but specifically in context of objects or items which could be perceived to be 'weapons';
'intent' and 'premeditation' is normally part of elevating the issues of 'seriousness' of the event;
and never blame anyone else for what happened (put up your own alibi defence by all means but don't actively accuse others) but the character element will more likely be admissible and used against you when you throw bad character evidence elsewhere.
NB> This advice is just general and is not intended to replace professional legal advise you will undoubtedly need at the time. Before you go fucking blaming me because you didn't have an exit strategy and you couldn't run fast enough you slow cunts.
Paydro said:
fuck!! I actually agree with Paydro.
Paydro said:
maybe some of the 25 or so serving police officers convicted of fv offences including 3 in the last month (none of which you'll ever hear of in the media) could be screws in this hooligan jail!
tell a lie!!
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpoo ... -30231051/
I am such a pussy compared to you.57 varieties said: