Nibor

http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/DivisionalShooting/0,,10794~201325,00.html Those numbers aren't quite up to date (I think mid December). Note how few players taking that many shots have more on target than off target. Also interesting how many additional chances the players who have scored more have. I'd like to see the facts and figures supporting the idea that Baldock isn't very good, because these aren't them.

He scores one and we hold onto a lead and lose momentum and end up losing three one, who's to say what would happen? Point is, he scored two, from five chances. Missed one sitter. The one on ones weren't sitters they were decent chances but not ones you'd expect to score every time - MK Dons missed two like that as well. Let's not mention El Abd (who was otherwise good) giving away the first goal or all three central midfielders and three central defenders letting them walk unchallenged through the middle of the pitch for the second shall we?

Baldock's header miss was a big blow but the one on ones weren't as simple as they might have been. Not a good angle and covering defenders made it hard for him to go across the keeper. Scoring two out of five chances is a normal return for a striker so why people make such a big deal about it is beyond me. I said at the start of the season he'd break 20 - and only two strikers since Taylor have done that for us in the league - and he will. JET wasn't at his best but I'd make two points. One: He still created a lot - sprung the offside trap for Baldock four times I think and started the move that led to his good chance in the first half. Two: On the two or three prominent times he lost the ball he was carrying it out of defence, with no passing options in front or level with him, and being challenged by two or three opponents together. To be honest I think some people watch too much Premiership. You can't expect a striker to score every chance and when they've got 33 goals between them just over half way through the season complaining about either of them is complete nonsense.

Not over the moon about giving such a long contract to a 29 year old but agree we do need a bit of steel. I hope this type of signing remains the exception though and we stick in general to the policy of young talent. I would suggest double wages and captain's armband is nonsense. Doesn't add up with SCMP or common sense. Hope he does well.

You're not bored of this angle yet then? I am.

I'm never really convinced by three at the back, it always seems to lead to confusion.

On the evidence of the first half we've taken substantial steps backwards.

Agree. I'm now about as disillusioned with the ****wits running the club and the minority of ****wits that support it as I've ever been. I dread to think who we will end up with now.

By all accounts what happened at the Walsall game was disgusting behaviour from the police but I don't see how it's related to what we're talking about here. They're very different circumstances IMO.

If the facts are as stated then yes it was an injustice, I haven't disputed that. I suspect there's more to it myself. Anyway, I'm not sure what you think I don't get? Heavy handed policing and zero tolerance from the club have everything to do with how other fans behave. They didn't just wake up and decide one day to be a bastards about it. It took years of violence for the current state of affairs to evolve. It will not change whilst people condone, excuse and continue that kind of thing so it makes no sense at all to complain about injustice at the same time as attempting to justify hurling coins. I'm pretty sure nobody's been jailed without a trial so I think we can leave the dictatorship comparisons out.

There are either some inconsistencies here or some info missing. Why was the lady visibly distressed? Who were you swearing at? If they were a mate, why didn't they give a statement in your defence? Your brief seems a little unusual too. I am struggling to see how you got convicted here if this is the full story. You seem to have a lot of bad luck with police but if the facts are as you say they are and you didn't do anything wrong, then you should write to the chairman of the club and protest your ban, the FSF for support and the IPCC as to why you were wrongfully arrested and why your accuser was not charged with making a false statement. I would have thought your experiences would make you even more anti violence at football since that is the root cause and continuing excuse for heavy handed policing.

I expect the police officer found it as unlikely as I do that you managed to identify the culprit correctly. To notice someone in an away crowd of over a thousand throw a coin, follow it's trajectory and see it hit a city fan, and to do so in the dark is quite a feat. What's indisputable however is that even were that all true, none of it excuses throwing a coin back and potentially injuring someone completely innocent. The "victim" instantly became not just a criminal but a complete moron when he threw it back and deserves everything he gets.

There was no excessive force or intentional provocation at the derby was there?

You're a fantastic moderator aren't you? Out of touch - sorry I'm not the one wishing I lived in the 80s.

By expectation I meant expectation really. I saw plenty of people committing violent offences at the ground, I know it was all caught on CCTV, it's not rocket surgery to put two and two together. Why anybody takes these second hand protestations of innocence as gospel is beyond me. Anyway, people who are violent at football are scumbags. There's nothing controversial or debateable about that so nobody should be shy saying it. Our tolerance should be nil for violence, it's that simple. As for death camps, I think they're too expensive to administer. It's not like we'll get any useful work out of the scumbags is it?

I expect the ones arrested were the scumbags hitting police horses, throwing things and fighting. I don't care whether they were doing that inside the ground or outside - not sure why you feel that makes a difference. I doubt very much people who ran on the pitch for a bit of a boast (who, to be clear, I've never labelled scum or vermin) were getting raided at 5am. Of course, you will find the people who want to defend violence at football will swear blind that their mate did nothing, innocent people are getting pinched, blah blah blah - frankly it's not believable when there's CCTV and a long painstaking id process involved. And let's be honest, dawn raids? We're talking knocking on doors here not armed swat teams. Who's being sensationalist really?

Couple of points: They must have shaken those fists pretty hard to injure 16 people. I know from watching them that there was far more to it than that. Hurling objects into the crowd, throwing punches - even at other city fans who tried to calm one of them down, punching a police horse... could go on. You might just about be stopping short of condoning violent behaviour but you are trying to pretend it was just over exuberance which it was not and trying very hard to excuse it. Attitudes like yours are why it continues to happen. By the way, writing aggressively on the internet (which I'm not doing) and behaving violently at a football stadium are worlds apart so there's no real irony there. There is however irony in how keen you are to complain about the police whilst ignoring one of the chief causes of their over zealousness.

Yes they would have, you can see the pitch from all stands pretty much. It was hard to miss. There were people throwing things at the police and getting into scuffles all over the place. If you literally ran off down the tunnel out of the atyeo on 90 minutes you might have missed it but it would have taken effort. Well it was on the news. I didn't mention the east end so please stop making stuff up. People from all stands ran onto the pitch and made a beeline for the way end.

Just from waiting to leave the Dolman I saw dozens of "City fans" hurling things into the away end personally and there were many well documented reports as well as Sky footage of the same, and you can bet there's a whole lot of cctv of it too. I find it hard to believe anybody in the ground could miss this.

No, you and the others defending violence at football matches are a disgrace. Every decent human being can see that. Here's the thing parkender. I simply don't believe the people who claim they or their mates were victimised and did nothing wrong. You see, people who are guilty often protest their innocence. There's no evidence to corroborate these claims that people are being arrested for nowt, not one bit, and there's plenty of reason not to believe it - not least what I saw with my own eyes at the derby match. The Charlton fans you're talking about (in this article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-24746019) deserved everything they got in my opinion. Why would we want someone glorifying racism and murder anywhere near a football match? On the derby night, I've no sympathy for anybody that ran onto the pitch and made a beeline for the away fans. Anybody who threw something is someone I don't ever want at a football match again. If that upsets you, tough titty. I'm not trying to be a superfan, this is the sort of reaction that normal human beings should have. We would suffer far less overbearing policing if you people stopped making excuses every time there was violence and started making these "people" unwelcome.

Yeah because I don't want violence at football. What a person I disagree with.

Don't see how, they've not been banned or convicted then have they? But being released without charge doesn't mean they won't be rearrested after their stories have been checked. I don't see why anybody who doesn't deserve it will be in the fallout because there'll be so much footage. I neither know nor care about Charlton fans but would point out that the police only get away with over zealous policing because of the sort of behaviour demonstrated at the Rovers game.

I always chuckle when the old "grass" argument comes out. The last resort of criminals is using a bit of stigma to try and protect themselves.

I doubt very much anybody innocent is being wrongfully banned or convicted because there's reams of CCTV. It'll certainly take more than vague rumour from the small minority that consistently defend those who want to have a scrap at football to convince me. Bottom line is, if someone goes to a football match and can't control themselves and breaks the law, I don't want them there. You're welcome to disagree if you like, I don't mind one bit.

You are spending your time insulting someone you don't know on the internet because they are pleased that some people who have been violent at a football match are going to get dealt with. If my posts upset you so badly you should probably put me on ignore.