Brighton fan handed three year banning order after climbing boundary at Sincil Bank

Billy the Fish · Feb 23, 2017

Easy 10 said:
Well I'd be surprised at the severity of this sentence if he was no longer under a banning order. If he was though, then he's bang to rights.

Regardless though, I've been going to football for 30-odd years, and have always found it pretty easy not getting involved in organised punch-ups with other fans. Similarly, I've never felt compelled to hurdle the barriers to wildly celebrate a goal on the running track at non-league football ground. This way, I find I get to go to as many games as I like.

Works for me anyway.

He can't have been under a current banning order. If he was he'd be charged with a criminal offence with a possible prison sentence. They'd be throwing the book at him rather than another banning order.

He's served his time for the other thing, you can't harrass people for the rest of their lives based on previous crimes. It wouldn't surprise me if DB has pushed for the ban because of his previous.

empire · Feb 23, 2017

Nixonator said:
In that case you'd need a rather large catapult which could propel you 200 odd miles as well.

He's had a mare,a I don't know the last day fixture mare

Mayonaise · Feb 23, 2017

That does seem really harsh!

Sheebo · Feb 23, 2017

The Kid Frankie said:
Matty's FBO for the Spurs incident was lifted some time ago. If you serve two thirds of an FBO without getting into any bother then you can apply to have it withdrawn, which is what he did. So he was not breaching by being in Lincoln.

I do hope everyone handing out the standard insults for a situation like this has NEVER encroached the pitch at a football game before. Otherwise they feel the same way about the Lincoln fans who did the same at the end of that game. Or perhaps the Man City game at Withdean. Or the Swindon Playoff game game. Or the last game at The Goldstone. Do I need to offer more examples?

Exactly as I thought - seemed obvious to me Or the paper would have picked up on that detail.

Pretty pink fairy · Feb 23, 2017

empire said:
Can't believe the plebs on here,so your telling me,of we score last min goal at villa park to win the league 3000 bha fans won't be going on pitch
****ing deluded

To many divs who don't know the score :thumbsup:

regards
DR

Buzzer · Feb 23, 2017

carlzeiss said:
Millwall enjoying themselves after their giant killing FA cup upset .

[yt]NLiVYJltScU[/YT]

Hardly embarrassing themselves. Pitch invasions after giant-killing cup wins or last day must win games are part and parcel of British football culture, aren't they? The day that scenes like these become criminal offences is the day I fall out of love with football.

Pretty pink fairy · Feb 23, 2017

Billy the Fish said:
He can't have been under a current banning order. If he was he'd be charged with a criminal offence with a possible prison sentence. They'd be throwing the book at him rather than another banning order.

He's served his time for the other thing, you can't harrass people for the rest of their lives based on previous crimes. It wouldn't surprise me if DB has pushed for the ban because of his previous.

this
regards
DR

Steve in Japan · Feb 23, 2017

empire said:
He's had a mare,a I don't know the last day fixture mare

I feel suitably chastened and will give myself a NSC banning order for at least 2 hours. After this post. Promise.

Buzzer · Feb 23, 2017

This banning order also puts paid to the myth that fans who end up with banning orders aren't "proper" fans: Bloke travels a 450 mile round trip to see his local team play a non-League side, gets caught up in the heat of the moment when his team scores - sounds like a dedicated Brighton fan to me.

empire · Feb 23, 2017

Buzzer said:
This banning order also puts paid to the myth that fans who end up with banning orders aren't "proper" fans: Bloke travels a 450 mile round trip to see his local team play a non-League side, gets caught up in the heat of the moment when his team scores - sounds like a dedicated Brighton fan to me.

Spot on,

Bruntburger · Feb 23, 2017

Buzzer said:
This banning order also puts paid to the myth that fans who end up with banning orders aren't "proper" fans: Bloke travels a 450 mile round trip to see his local team play a non-League side, gets caught up in the heat of the moment when his team scores - sounds like a dedicated Brighton fan to me.

This - usually they are the more noisy and passionate fans. The type the players frequently call for....

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Gazwag · Feb 23, 2017

Captain Sensible said:
Didn't Balkham say on The Roar that Lincoln and the Stewarding style was very 'challenging' on the day? That a lot of stewards were drafted in and were not normally stewards at football. Hinting at the fact that the stewarding was over zealous and not what we are used to at football. I can see that this incident probably grew out of that.

I would agree many of the stewards did not have a clue what they were doing. The was one idiot (steward) who was rugby tackling as many Lincoln fans as he could at the final whistle trying to stop their pitch invasion on his own.

BN9 BHA · Feb 23, 2017

Billy the Fish said:
He's served his time for the other thing, you can't harrass people for the rest of their lives based on previous crimes. It wouldn't surprise me if DB has pushed for the ban because of his previous.

I would not be surprised if this was the real reason.

Caveman · Feb 23, 2017

It's a shame the players didn't show as much passion that day!

That seems a ridiculous over reaction, what about all the Lincoln fans that came onto the pitch at the end, So do we assume the police are tracing these people and the judge will do the same?

Deleted member 2719 · Feb 23, 2017

Harsh but UNfair.

Easy 10 · Feb 23, 2017

I've flip-flopped on this as the info has leaked out

Under an FBO at the time - totally justified punishment
No FBO - harsh

I guess the moral is, don't be a tool at football. Once you've been a prick and got yourself known to the authorities, your card is always marked.

Harry Wilson's tackle · Feb 23, 2017

Stat Brother said:
A couple of months ago the away team scored in front of the north stand. (Shouldn't be too hard to work out who!!)
The scorer and teammates celebrated in front of us in the north end of the east.
A mid teenage lad sat in front of us, threw his plastic bottle at them.
Not hitting any players but clearing the hoardings.

He was removed.

I was surprised (and pleased that common sense had prevailed) to see him somewhat sheepishly back in his seat, last week.

I think it's fairly safe to say had this bloke done the throwing, he'd have received, another, banning order.

Yes. That's life. I have been on the end of that sort of treatment in a different context. On reflection . . . bang 2 rights. If you repeatedly bend over with 'kick me' tattood on your arse, you will be kicked. If you do it only once you'll probably be told to stop being silly. If you kick someone else, people will be looking at you, and will quickly have your boots off you, later, even if you are swinging them about merely to get the dust off. Next . . .

sjamesb3466 · Feb 23, 2017

Seems harsh as although I am normally very critical of the hooligan scene and completely agree with the original FBO based on the reports detailed on this thread, if all he has done is jumped on a barrier then he may have been a bit of a plonker but not doing anything worthy of a ban. Surely a visit from the old bill to remind him that his card is marked and any daft behaviour in the future will be looked upon in a poor light would have sufficed .

studio150 · Feb 23, 2017

Buzzer said:
This banning order also puts paid to the myth that fans who end up with banning orders aren't "proper" fans: Bloke travels a 450 mile round trip to see his local team play a non-League side, gets caught up in the heat of the moment when his team scores - sounds like a dedicated Brighton fan to me.

And how many other dedicated Brighton fans decided to follow his lead and go over the wall.

Seens to me they were quite able to celebrate the goal without the need to get pitchside.

Even the 3rd goal at Brentford didn't see any fans jump over the wall.if these hundredsof fans are able to showself restraint and just celebrate the giak(s) on the terrace why was the chap unable to do the same.

I suppose the next question is whether the Albion will look to ban him from the Amex for a longer period than his current 3 year ban.

yorkshire seagull · Feb 23, 2017

Goldstone1976 said:
Genuine question: does anyone know if there is a difference in law between encroaching on the playing surface after FT as opposed to during the game? Perhaps this is why he was treated differently? Pure guesswork here...

It does seem harsh to give a FBO if all he did was jump a barrier and run around behind the goal for a few seconds before hopping back over the barrier...

I think what people are forgetting is that he didn't just run along the side of the pitch, he leapt over the advertising hordings and jumped onto the goal net. I'm fairly sure that it was the hanging from the net itself that warranted his ejection, as this was potentially damaging the equipment. He also tried to stop the stewards taking him out of the stand by climbing over the seats and hiding behind other fans.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Brighton fan handed three year banning order after climbing boundary at Sincil Bank

Technocrat

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Banned

Languidly Clinical

Banned

Well-known member

Languidly Clinical

Well-known member

New member

5 millionth post poster

DOCKERS

Well-known member

Deleted member 2719

Guest

Brain dead MUG SHEEP

Harry Wilson's Tackle

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Share this page