The Ref Stop

Port Vale v Portsmouth

I think we are talking at cross purposes. A 10 year ban will effectively stop hi wanting to go to matches anytime in the future.

What needs to be added to this is CFA to enforce, so he can't go and watch his kids (if he has any) playing football.

Additionally, we should be looking to extend an FBO to other sports - so he can't watch rugby, etc.

I would also like the banning order to ban him from Sky, TNT, Netflix so he has to suffer BBC1 afternoon tele on a Saturday after (Dion Dublin on Homes under the Hammer will be the closest they get to football for 10 years) ;)
 
The Ref Stop
Southerner In The North said:
Not sure it’s enforceable when tested what you just showed is clubs act illegally which interesting.
Click to expand...
You keep saying clubs aren't allowed to do this but so far, you haven't provided any evidence that this is the case. You seem to be conflating court-imposed football banning orders which it does appear have to have a limited lifespan, with stadium bans by clubs, which as far as I can tell, do not.

Based on the multiple examples I found, some of which I have already linked to from various different clubs it seems evident that these can be indefinite.

Please provide a link to a reliable source that supports what you're saying.

Also, as previously requested, please provide a link to substantiate your claim that a West Ham fan had a lifetime ban overturned due to it being an indefinite ban.

Otherwise all we have from you are unsourced and unsubstantiated claims.
 
Peter Grove said:
You keep saying clubs aren't allowed to do this but so far, you haven't provided any evidence that this is the case. You seem to be conflating court-imposed football banning orders which it does appear have to have a limited lifespan, with stadium bans by clubs, which as far as I can tell, do not.

Based on the multiple examples I found, some of which I have already linked to from various different clubs it seems evident that these can be indefinite.

Please provide a link to a reliable source that supports what you're saying.

Also, as previously requested, please provide a link to substantiate your claim that a West Ham fan had a lifetime ban overturned due to it being an indefinite ban.

Otherwise all we have from you are unsourced and unsubstantiated claims.
Click to expand...
I have provided sourced material above and another poster has mentioned the West Ham case also
 
Kent Ref said:
IF it was illegal for a club to ban somebody for life would an individual not have taken the club to court, won (if you're right) and this debate would not even be taking place?

I think a club can ban anybody due to private property etc. Same as a pub, gym etc.

I may be wrong.
Click to expand...
They can’t if a FBO was previously issued for the offence basically you can’t be punished twice.
 
Southerner In The North said:
They can’t if a FBO was previously issued for the offence basically you can’t be punished twice.
Click to expand...
You're still overlooking the fact that the club reserve the right to refuse entry, without reason (usual caveats so long as not on basis of prejudice).

So Court bans for 5 years. That just means that legally they aren't allowed to attend.

This is different to a club then saying, we're still not allowing you access to our private land.

They are not the same thing and the bit I think you're not considering here.

Again, if I own a shop and you come in, and I don't want to serve you I do not have to. There is no legal right to be allowed to buy a ticket to a football game. There is no legal right to be allowed access to the ground, even if you have a valid ticket. The club, completely separate to any legal processes, are not obliged to allow someone to enter/attend games at their ground.
 
Once again, the most concerning thing to come out of this is the number of people on social media that find it funny.

For this reason alone, an example MUST be made of him!
 
A 62 year old has been arrested and charged. I am willing to bet that once the authorities have dealt with him Port Vale will be issuing a lifetime ban.
 
Faris said:
I think you've missed the word possibly when you've read what I posted.
Click to expand...
Maybe because it was doing such heavy lifting in your post. You implied he was young and his actions impacted by another factor. You've been shown to be half wrong already.
 
Southerner In The North said:
I have provided sourced material above and another poster has mentioned the West Ham case also
Click to expand...
There are no links or sources for anything you've posted. You've posted what looks like an article about the time limits that apply to footballing banning orders but a) we don't know where that comes from and b) it doesn't address the question of whether clubs can impose a lifetime ban.

As for the West Ham fan, your saying it (and even another poster mentioning it) does not constitute a verifiable source for the claim.

It seems that the epistemological principle known as Hitchens's Razor would apply here.

It holds that, "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."

Otherwise, it means anyone could write whatever they want, state that it's sourced (but without providing any sources) and everyone has to accept it as true.
 
Brian Hamilton said:
Maybe because it was doing such heavy lifting in your post. You implied he was young and his actions impacted by another factor. You've been shown to be half wrong already.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I watched the video embedded in this site on my phone. I got his age wrong, I guess I can look forward to be called up to do VAR, imagine what imagine what mistakes I could make with massive UHD screens. I find your posting style interesting, I was making a passing comment on what I thought may influence someone to behave outside of the norms. I don't understand why you have made such a big issue about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top