Celtic FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2014/15 Mod Warning post #6011

Dempsey · 09-12-2013 12:07AM

Antifa161 wrote: »

It will be forgotten about when the media find the next stick to beat the fans with. "Fan brings bodhrán to football stadium" or something.

Saying seats being broken is a reason we won't have standing areas is like saying cannabis won't be legalised because everyone who smokes it is a criminal.

I see you've pluralised 'things'. What other, credible incidents have their been, of a magnitude great enough to negate the grievances raised by FAC?

It did, but the fuss made was fractional of what it is now

Nonsense

A Strawman Argument

The GB have a history of breaking rules of stadiums and the law of the land, they were at one stage banned from Celtic Park because the club had enough of their shít.

The same group of idiots being neds will get more media attention no matter whether its 1k of vandalism or 20k. Its inevitable.

Antifa161 · 09-12-2013 12:08AM

Dempsey wrote: »

they were at one stage banned from Celtic Park because the club had enough of their shít

lol that's that settled then eh!

Dempsey · 09-12-2013 12:13AM

Antifa161 wrote: »

lol that's that settled then eh!

It wouldnt surprise me if the 1st order of business at CP tomorrow is to ban the GB group and disperse section 111 as originally planned.

Antifa161 · 09-12-2013 12:16AM

Dempsey wrote: »

It wouldnt surprise me if the 1st order of business at CP tomorrow is to ban the GB group and disperse section 111 as originally planned.

Nor me. And with the team seemingly doing quite well on the park it's a great time for the board to make that move.

They might let us into the EPL once our atmosphere is awful enough.

Dempsey · 09-12-2013 12:18AM

Antifa161 wrote: »

Nor me. And with the team seemingly doing quite well on the park it's a great time for the board to make that move.

They might let us into the EPL once our atmosphere is awful enough.

Vandalism and putting other people's safety at risk are the hallmarks of a great atmosphere :rolleyes:

Antifa161 · 09-12-2013 12:21AM

Dempsey wrote: »

Vandalism and putting other people's safety at risk are the hallmarks of a great atmosphere

Well evidently it is, isn't it, since the atmoshpere at Friday's game was excellent and this happened. Just like the great atmosphere at all our games is caused by this group of disgraceful drunken ned teenage hooligan scumbags that Parkhead would be better without.

Whose safety was put at risk btw? I can't keep up with all this hyperbole.

Dempsey · 09-12-2013 12:24AM

Antifa161 wrote: »

Whose safety was put at risk? I can't keep up with all this hyperbole.

Pyrotechnics have health risks, especially in the hands of neds and the main reason for the 1st CP ban they got was over ignoring safety regulations. Nothing hyperbole about it at all.

Antifa161 · 09-12-2013 12:29AM

How come we don't frequently hear about people getting burnt or lung cancer or whatever is supposed to happen from it, given that it's used all over the world?

Celtic banned the GB for using pyro in their section, full of people who want to be there (remember when the club were stopping people relocating toward there) then a month or so later they had a big pyro show on the pitch and all the smoke blew toward the disabled and family sections. Just another one for the hypocrisy files I guess.

Dempsey · 09-12-2013 12:41AM

Antifa161 wrote: »

How come we don't frequently hear about people getting burnt or lung cancer or whatever is supposed to happen from it, given that it's used all over the world?

Celtic banned the GB for using pyro in their section, full of people who want to be there (remember when the club were stopping people relocating toward there) then a month or so later they had a big pyro show on the pitch and all the smoke blew toward the disabled and family sections. Just another one for the hypocrisy files I guess.

A fan got hospitalised with lung damage this year because of a smoke bomb in the midlands. Again, this year a fan was killed at a match in South America by a flare. If you arent aware of the health risks and incidents where people are injured because of them then you're probably not trying to find out.

Read the statement made again, much of it is about continually ignoring safety regulations.

There is a difference between pyrotechnics in the possession of neds and professional pyrotechnics hired by the club. The main one is that they will take responsibility for the health and safety of those around the stadium whilst using them, the neds continually havent taken responsibility for anything they've done.

Antifa161 · 09-12-2013 12:49AM

Dempsey wrote: »

A fan got hospitalised with lung damage this year because of a smoke bomb in the midlands. Again, this year a fan was killed at a match in South America by a flare.

Two incidents. Of course there may be more, but the fact remains they are extremely isolated incidents and if we banned things based on those ratios there wouldn't be much left we could do.

Read the statement made again, much of it is about continually ignoring safety regulations.

Most of the safety regulations are complete and utter bollocks though, and that is the key issue here. You'd have to be willfully ignorant to just focus on rules being broken rather than the rules themselves. By standing up at a match you are breaking safety regulations. Utter nonsense.

There is a difference between pyrotechnics in the possession of neds and professional pyrotechnics hired by the club.

There's also a difference between pyrotechnics in the possession of neds and pyrotechnics in the possession of football fans, as evidenced by the thousands and thousands of times it is used without any harm to anybody. Throwing them onto the pitch on the other hand, is out of order. I honestly don't think that was anybody in the GB simply because they know how damaging that would be to the pro-pyro argument, for want of a better term.

The main one is that they will take responsibility for the health and safety of those around the stadium whilst using them

And yet nobody's health and safety was threatened. Nobody was harmed. Forster was a few yards away from a smokebomb, so long as he didn't try and eat it he was grand, and he was - although again, it should not have been on the pitch as it causes a delay.

Dempsey · 09-12-2013 01:07AM

Its a risk, its been assessed by safety experts and its one that has been judged that it can be done without. Safety Regulations are in place because people and crowds are idiots and often put themselves in harms way whether they realise it or not. There is a reason why Celtic enforce these H&S rules, its because they have no other choice! They'll get pinged for not dealing with it properly. They'll get pinged by the SPFL if they are seen to haven't done enough to prevent what happened last friday. There is a set in stone protocol when it comes to H&S, Celtic have no choice but to implement them. The neds have ignored the warnings and reprieve given by Celtic. They are forcing the clubs hand and they are making it a very easy decision.

Antifa161 · 09-12-2013 01:10AM

Dempsey wrote: »

Its a risk, its been assessed by safety experts and its one that has been judged that it can be done without.

The same experts who tell us standing up is a hazard. You can see why there are people who do not respect their opinion in the slightest. We've had fans get banners and 2-sticks confiscated because of "health and safety". The term has been abused so much it holds little weight and is just a blanket excuse these days.

Safety Regulations are in place because people and crowds are idiots and often put themselves in harms way whether they realise it or not.

I think that's an extremely naive opinion. Fans' safety is one of the reasons we have regulations such as all-seaters.

Coillte_Bhoy · 09-12-2013 03:38AM

Dai;y Record not getting carried away i see :rolleyes:

826483431.jpg?1386547209

Antifa161 · 09-12-2013 04:03AM

ahaha fantastic

The front page should be a warning about potassium poisoning from eating bananas!

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 09-12-2013 10:50AM

Dempsey wrote: »

A fan got hospitalised with lung damage this year because of a smoke bomb in the midlands. Again, this year a fan was killed at a match in South America by a flare. If you arent aware of the health risks and incidents where people are injured because of them then you're probably not trying to find out.

Read the statement made again, much of it is about continually ignoring safety regulations.

There is a difference between pyrotechnics in the possession of neds and professional pyrotechnics hired by the club. The main one is that they will take responsibility for the health and safety of those around the stadium whilst using them, the neds continually havent taken responsibility for anything they've done.

I believe a ned burned his arm on Friday night well according to a news report.
I have Asthma and being anywhere near any of the crap that comes out of these things brings on an attack

bobbysands81 · 09-12-2013 11:02AM

Why would anyone who goes to a match want to rip up the seats? I just don't get that kind of behaviour. The laws are there to deal with these people so deal with them.

The plc and the media are being petty and political by using this as a rod to beat the Green Brigade with. Individuals caused this destruction, not a group so go after those individuals.

Dempsey · 09-12-2013 02:10PM

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Dai;y Record not getting carried away i see :rolleyes:

Antifa161 wrote: »

ahaha fantastic

The front page should be a warning about potassium poisoning from eating bananas!

Thats the assessment of a security expert that worked for the SFA. What would he know, eh?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-24931711

A man whose father was killed by a flare at an international football match 20 years ago says "nothing has been learnt" from the tragedy.

"I can only describe what I thought was an aeroplane about to hit the stadium," Mr Hill said.

"I could hear this huge rushing noise and I remember looking round and I couldn't see anything - and the next thing I was aware of, my dad fell forwards.

"I didn't put the two events together - the noise and my dad falling forwards. I thought my dad had simply had a heart attack or had fallen.

"So I leaned forward to try and pick my dad up and when I stepped back, I realised I couldn't lift him on my own. I looked, and both my hands were covered in blood.

"And my jeans, I can remember, and my shoes, were covered in blood.

"That just stopped me for a moment. And then I remember shouting, 'Can somebody help me please? Something's happened to my dad!' "

No football fan should have to go through that

Picture of a linesman getting injured from a smoke cansiter last month.

http://espnfc.com/news/story/_/id/1348414/bolivian-boy-killed-by-flare-at-copa-libertadores-game?cc=5739

"There was a loss of brain matter as the projectile, a plastic tube, penetrated the (boy's) skull. Due to this, death was immediate," doctor Jose Maria Vargas told local media at the Hospital Obrero in Oruro, according to Brazil's Globo.

Just reading about how the fan in South America died is just horrific tbh

If ever the day comes that a flare or smoke bomb does cause life threatening injuries or a death I'm sure the two of you will bleat on about pyrotechnics in the hands of neds being an acceptable risk at football grounds. Shameful attitude tbh

bobbysands81 · 09-12-2013 02:18PM

Dempsey, no doubt all that's true and no doubting flares and other pyro are dangerous but the Record headline is a tad OTT and without doubt scaremongering bordering on hysteria.

Taken in context very few people die from pyro at sporting events in any given year whilst 150 people die every year in the States from peanut allergies.

This isn't a dig at you but at the hysteric headline from the Record... which has probably been prompted by someone else.

Antifa161 · 09-12-2013 02:26PM

Dempsey wrote: »

Thats the assessment of a security expert that worked for the SFA. What would he know, eh?

Well given that they're the same people who tell us flags, banners, 2 sticks and standing up are hazardous, not much I imagine. You keep ignoring this though.

A man whose father was killed by a flare at an international football match 20 years ago says "nothing has been learnt" from the tragedy.

Wow that sounds like a totally unbiased view. 20 years ago, says it all really.

If ever the day comes that a flare or smoke bomb does cause life threatening injuries or a death I'm sure the two of you will bleat on about pyrotechnics in the hands of neds being an acceptable risk at football grounds. Shameful attitude tbh

You're going to have to display a bit more logic and intelligence before you try talking down to me like that. Your argument ignores all statistic and probability and chooses to appeal to emotion by relying on a tiny number of accidents. I'll repeat myself here because once again you ignored it - if we're banning things because of tiny numbers of accidents then there won't be a whole lot left we can do.

Jelle1880 · 09-12-2013 02:27PM

I have to agree with bobby though, that headline is sensationalist to the extreme.

That incident with the kid in Brazil was due to someone using an actual flare gun (like the ones you find on ships or whatever), not a normal flare.

It's tragic obviously, but it's not comparable, like the arguments you will hear from people that say safe standing can not be brought back due to Hillsborough, or how flares can lead to another Bradford.

I wouldn't mind seeing something like Norway, where authorities have legalized the use of pyro if it is done in accordance with police and the fire departments.

Antifa161 · 09-12-2013 02:31PM

Jelle1880 wrote: »

I wouldn't mind seeing something like Norway, where authorities have legalized the use of pyro if it is done in accordance with police and the fire departments.

That sounds like a good compromise. Groups like the GB can plan it as part of displays and clear it with the club first. Like I said, I really do not think you'd find any of the actual GB lads throwing it around the place because they're a bit up their hole about what they do.

You can't leave the pyro to the clubs because then we get more of those ****ey displays like Celtic did for the Ajax match.

BBE mentioned having asthma and not being able to be near them. With all due respect, that is your problem. Don't sit near these sections. If I have sensitive ears I don't demand everyone keeps the noise down. It's a bit selfish to want the majority to miss out because of the tiny minority.

Dempsey · 09-12-2013 02:33PM

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Dempsey, no doubt all that's true and no doubting flares and other pyro are dangerous but the Record headline is a tad OTT and without doubt scaremongering bordering on hysteria.

Taken in context very few people die from pyro at sporting events in any given year whilst 150 people die every year in the States from peanut allergies.

This isn't a dig at you but at the hysteric headline from the Record... which has probably been prompted by someone else.

I disagree, its the opinion of a security expert that worked for the SFA. If neds continue in the vein they are, eventually an accident is going to happen. The issue needs to be dealt with before a serious injury/death happens, not after.

That stat is pointless because the risk assessments are apples and oranges. The fact of the matter is that this sort of risk can easily be removed from attending football matches. Acute peanut allergies can develop at any time, foods that arent suppose to contain nuts, could have traces. Whats the statistics on idiots with nut allergies eating food that contain traces of nuts?

Antifa161 wrote: »

BBE mentioned having asthma and not being able to be near them. With all due respect, that is your problem. Don't sit near these sections. If I have sensitive ears I don't demand everyone keeps the noise down. It's a bit selfish to want the majority to miss out because of the tiny minority.

Drivel of the highest order

Antifa161 · 09-12-2013 02:35PM

I get the impression if a man with a tie and clipboard told Dempsey Santa was real he'd be there waiting for him at the chimney on xmas eve. Sure isn't he an official?!

PauloMN · 09-12-2013 03:04PM

Antifa161 wrote: »

Groups like the GB can plan it as part of displays and clear it with the club first.

The don't have a very good record of doing that either, with their "football related" Bobby Sands banner. :pac:

Antifa161 · 09-12-2013 03:07PM

PauloMN wrote: »

The don't have a very good record of doing that either, with their "football related" Bobby Sands banner. :pac:

Maybe they assumed since it's perfectly ok to have poppy displays, tributes to the army, minutes silences and applause for politicians, songs about William Wallace etc that an inoffensive display about Sands and Walalce would be ok. More fool them really. Had they ran it by the club first, the club would have said no - which is exactly the double standard the display was protesting about.

Eirebear · 09-12-2013 03:12PM

Antifa161 wrote: »

BBE mentioned having asthma and not being able to be near them. With all due respect, that is your problem. Don't sit near these sections. If I have sensitive ears I don't demand everyone keeps the noise down. It's a bit selfish to want the majority to miss out because of the tiny minority.

But...but....hasn;t it been the defence line of these groups that away games don't have sections?
What then?
A ban on asthmatics or those with other breathing issues from traveling away games so the "majority" can enjoy their pyro in peace?

Eirebear · 09-12-2013 03:14PM

And yes, the tabloid headline is sensationalist...but come on, that's hardly surprising!

Dempsey · 09-12-2013 03:15PM

Antifa161 wrote: »

Maybe they assumed since it's perfectly ok to have poppy displays, tributes to the army, minutes silences and applause for politicians, songs about William Wallace etc that an inoffensive display about Sands and Walalce would be ok. More fool them really. Had they ran it by the club first, the club would have said no - which is exactly the double standard the display was protesting about.

No maybes or assumptions about it. They were told no political displays in order to get a reprieve from the banning order. They have proven to the club that they cannot be trusted with even the most simplest of instructions yet the club is expected to trust them with smoke grenades and flares?! You couldnt make it up!

Dempsey · 09-12-2013 03:18PM

Sky Sports News ‏@SkySportsNews 34s

Celtic ban 128 fans from attending home and away games following events at Motherwell's Fir Park on Friday #SSN

Celtic dish out the bans as expected

EDIT

http://www.celticfc.net/newsstory?item=5066

FOLLOWING events on Friday evening at Fir Park Stadium, Celtic Football Club today announced that it has issued precautionary suspensions against 128 individuals preventing them attending matches involving Celtic, pending further investigation. These suspensions will cover matches at Celtic Park and away matches.

In addition, the Club will be relocating around 250 season book holders in Section 111 to other areas within the stadium, or offering refunds covering the remainder of the season to those who do not wish to be relocated.

Events such as those on Friday night do not represent the Celtic support or the Club. These events were an embarrassment to our great football club and are absolutely indefensible.

It is clear that there is an element which has no hesitation in bringing Celtic’s name into disrepute. This is something the Club will not tolerate and we therefore have no other option but to take this action. We will not allow the great name of Celtic to be damaged in this way any more - our supporters deserve more than this.

While recent events are very regrettable, we would like to thank our many thousands of fans for the wonderful, positive backing which they continue to give to Celtic. We are sure these supporters will understand the position which the Club is in and we are also sure they will unite with the Club as we move forward.

Celtic Football Club is in excellent shape on and off the field. The Club is in a very safe and strong position and we have a young, exciting team working hard to deliver quality football and success for our supporters, as they did on Friday evening with a magnificent performance. This is what we want to be talking about and this is what we want to celebrate.

Celtic has a proud 125-year history and fundamental to that history have been our fans. Our supporters enjoy a wonderful reputation earned across many years, many families and many generations. This is something we must protect vigorously.

Antifa161 · 09-12-2013 03:19PM

Why are the club telling them they can't have political displays then having a minute's applause for a politician? Why are the club playing Bobby Sands' music in their official "lounge" but you're not allowed to have a picture of him in the stadium? Why can't the club be "trusted" not to treat people with double standards?

Imagine someone like Lawwell lecturing you on the history of Celtic FC. Jesus christ.

Celtic FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2014/15 Mod Warning post #6011

Comments