Hooligans, We Thank You

[sglosbcfc]

No it wasn't teams like Arsenal and Birmingham had large black supports. Arsenals North Bank had big crews of black and white lads. You got abuse of black players at Ashton Gate but it was hardly rife as City had black hooligans.

Didn't know about Arsenal, but Birmingham's Zulus were well known for being the country's first multi cultural football firm.

[sglosbcfc]

I heard racial abuse at Ashton Gate as recently as the Blackburn Rovers game.

That is shocking, imagine losing a player like Albert or Marvin because some clown tries to stir up racism at the Gate.

[fgrsimon]

Been watching City since 1983 on and off and at no point did I ever think that I'd enjoy it more if I was getting my head kicked in or kicking someone else's in. You can talk about 'scarfers' being left alone but in reality it was all too easy for innocent people to get caught up in trouble. Luckily I managed to avoid it myself (Chelsea at the Gate in 1990 was about the closest I saw) but plenty didn't.

A guy I was at school with in Stroud called Richard Aldridge was killed at a Huddersfield v Chelsea game in the early 1980's, beaten to death with a pool cue and he was definitely not someone who would have ever been involved in hooliganism. Just one death from hooliganism makes defending it or reminiscing about it pointless. I've always subscribed to the view that if you want to "be a man" and fight, join the army. That's what real bravery is all about

Yes the atmosphere at Ashton Gate was much better in the 1980's, I stood on the East End very regularly but I think this is far more to do with all seater stadiums than the prospect of trouble.

I don't ever recall experiencing racism at Ashton Gate or when following City away though. The last time I can remember monkey chants was at Exeter City games in the early 1980's when I was a student there.

[NickJ]

If we were still living with the1970’s hooligan culture would Steve Lansdown be prepared to put many millions of pounds into the club? I don’t think so.

That would be a good thing, on the presumption it applied to all other clubs.

[snarf]

I heard racial abuse at Ashton Gate as recently as the Blackburn Rovers game.

You're lying just to prove your point.

I've been going to Ashton Gate for (nearly) 20 years. I've NEVER heard a racist chant. Well......only against Celts (gypsies) but that's fine because we are openly racist against you english.

Tiocfaidh ár lá

[Monkeh]

wrong

get your facts right you ****

http://www.thefootba...announced-dead/

http://iamiain.wordpress.com/2010/08/04/my-first-nffc-blog-of-the-season/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/2555681.stm

say again?

[Monkeh]

You're lying just to prove your point.

I've been going to Ashton Gate for (nearly) 20 years. I've NEVER heard a racist chant. Well......only against Celts (gypsies) but that's fine because we are openly racist against you english.

Tiocfaidh ár lá

in the 80's there were chants of "we an't got no n'ers" I remember them clearly and two of the people I go with talk about it regularly,

Wasn't it 3 or 4 years ago a City fan (i know who he is so won't name him) killed a rovers fan in a pub with 2 pool pools in a sock?

You really want that back?

[MC RISK77]

Been there done all that in the 'East End' or Covered End if you like, seems that some seem to think that hooligans ;'shaped'; our club, or even football itself, which let's face it only a moron of the highest order would consider as a positive. I am a working class lad, and see no reason why I should feel the need to fight the opposition fans, perhaps it's because I am not a coward? Perhaps I care about the club too much, and even football as a whole.

The fact that when I go to a footbal match, especially City or England the only passions that I want to see is that that is on the pitch and the vocal support from the terraces.

I have a theory that those that cause trouble at matches are not football fans at all, just sad window lickers, cowards that need to fight as a gropup to show to others that they are indeed 'hard 'men, whilst the rest of us know the real truth in that these losers are exactly that ...losers.

This sort of nonsense that blights my club is one of the reasons we have not been a top flight club, mostly, and I want rid of your stupid inbred mentality asap, and I am glad you have made yourselves known on here, as if really the rest of us didn't suspect.

You call us 'limp wristed' and yet I have had the pleasure of seeing football holligans without their mates on a one to one, and they I can confirm are just wee babby's.

Morons...

What a fantastic post, I have witnessed first hand some of citys self acclaimed crew in action, the last of which about 4 of them got turned over by 4 spotty foreign teenagers.....was frankly a little embarrassing to watch, maybe they needed another 10 beer bellied mates to help them out by throwing some chairs about, after which they could have gone around claiming they had destroyed these lads.

[MC RISK77]

You're lying just to prove your point.

I've been going to Ashton Gate for (nearly) 20 years. I've NEVER heard a racist chant. Well......only against Celts (gypsies) but that's fine because we are openly racist against you english.

Tiocfaidh ár lá

I have heard racism in the Dolman stand in the last few years, there was a chap in block B i believe who is rife with comments of a racial nature

[snarf]

http://www.army.mod....oin/join.aspx

There you go, knock yourself out.

Funny moral compass you got there mate.

So a punch up at the football is bad, but committing violent terrorist acts for the Government is OK?

Consenting adults arranging a fight is bad, but dropping wmd's on innocent civilians is OK?

[redcityman]

Funny moral compass you got there mate.

So a punch up at the football is bad, but committing violent terrorist acts for the Government is OK?

Consenting adults arranging a fight is bad, but dropping wmd's on innocent civilians is OK?

Of course the killing of civilians is wrong, unfortunately this is what happens when you put people in power who put personal gain and emotions before the greater good, but for you to infer that every one involved a fight is a consenting or even an adult is plain stupid.

May I ask why you support an English football club considering you appear to have such a strong dislike of anything English!

[chipdawg]

Funny moral compass you got there mate.

So a punch up at the football is bad, but committing violent terrorist acts for the Government is OK?

Consenting adults arranging a fight is bad, but dropping wmd's on innocent civilians is OK?

He has a point though; if you join the military you are 'consenting' to be sent to Afghanistan to fight against the Taliban who 'consent' to fighting against you. On top of all that you get paid a good wage AND the weather is better. I take your point about the government-sponsored terrorism, but I guess that if you joined the army you probably wouldn't view the British government as an oppressive tool of capitalism

[snarf]

Of course the killing of civilians is wrong, unfortunately this is what happens when you put people in power who put personal gain and emotions before the greater good, but for you to infer that every one involved a fight is a consenting or even an adult is plain stupid.

May I ask why you support an English football club considering you appear to have such a strong dislike of anything English!

You're saying only English people can support English clubs?

[Monkeh]

Funny moral compass you got there mate.

So a punch up at the football is bad, but committing violent terrorist acts for the Government is OK?

Consenting adults arranging a fight is bad, but dropping wmd's on innocent civilians is OK?

Disagree with that the solders are doing their job they are not terriosts the govenment are (if you believe that) the solders are just doing their jobs and they have my upmost respect anyone of our boys in a conflict zone are hero's

[pongo88]

"If we were still living with the1970’s hooligan culture would Steve Lansdown be prepared to put many millions of pounds into the club? I don’t think so."

That would be a good thing, on the presumption it applied to all other clubs.

I agree that it would be nice if clubs lived on their income and the big clubs were not financed by Russian oligarchs, rich sheiks, mysterious foreign businessmen etc. Unfortunately as long as professional clubs have been around money has played an important part.

In the past it was rich local businessmen who put money into clubs. Harry Dolman put over £50K into City in the 50’s to pay of debts. (Approx £1m in today’s terms). There are other examples for virtually any club. Apart from lower league clubs most of these types of businessmen have disappeared from football as they have been “out-bid” by the foreign billionaires. I’m glad we’ve got Steve Lansdown as he seems to be a real supporter of the club.

As least there is one advantage of the current system – it’s far more open. In the past, before the maximum wage was abolished, a lot of the payments to players were the money in the brown envelope type. Big scandal at Sunderland about this in the 50’s (a bit before my time

[snarf]

If they wanna meet up off the beaten track and have a fight, then what's the problem? They're not causing any harm or loss to you. This is supposed to be a free country. Just because you don't like it or understand it, what gives you the right to try and stop it?

It's like the Voltaire quote: ''I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it''.

Just because it doesn't fit in with your false moral framework of how society should be. But we know that's bullshit because you're happy to buy products from corporations who badly mistreat people. That doesn't bother you in the slightest.

[Monkeh]

If they wanna meet up off the beaten track and have a fight, then what's the problem? They're not causing any harm or loss to you. This is supposed to be a free country. Just because you don't like it or understand it, what gives you the right to try and stop it?

It's like the Voltaire quote: ''I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it''.

Just because it doesn't fit in with your false moral framework of how society should be. But we know that's bullshit because you're happy to buy products from corporations who badly mistreat people. That doesn't bother you in the slightest.

until some one is killed and that will happen sorry to generalise but the "younger" generation tend to come "tooled" up now carrying knifes etc, some one will be killed if your all for that then your just as guilty as the person carrying out the act,

[pongo88]

If they wanna meet up off the beaten track and have a fight, then what's the problem? They're not causing any harm or loss to you. This is supposed to be a free country. Just because you don't like it or understand it, what gives you the right to try and stop it?

It's like the Voltaire quote: ''I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it''.

Just because it doesn't fit in with your false moral framework of how society should be. But we know that's bullshit because you're happy to buy products from corporations who badly mistreat people. That doesn't bother you in the slightest.

There are several problems. Firstly sometimes young relatively “ innocent” people go along with this, expecting a bit of handbags at 6 paces, and end up in a violent situation where they could be seriously injured of killed.

Second, there is often trouble on the route to the pre- arranged point and people who have no involvement with the hooligans get caught up in the fighting.

Third, shops / local businesses are sometimes smashed up. Good fun for the hooligans but not so nice for the owners who are trying to make a living.

[Randy Marsh]

This is ridiculous. Without hooliganism we wouldn't have Danny Dyer.

[Monkeh]

This is ridiculous. Without hooliganism we wouldn't have Danny Dyer.

and thats a bad thing?

[Martyn Hocking]

'Come and have a go at the East End aggro' was the standard incitement to a scrap circa 1978, followed by 'you'll never take the East End' if the challenge was taken up and the opposition repelled. As a 14-year old, I happily joined in the singing but would run a mile if any fighting started. In 40 years of attending City games, I've only been whacked once and that was miles away from the ground on Anchor Road before a Rovers match. 30 Gas V me and my brother - I was grateful I only got hit once.

There's no doubt that the threat of fighting breaking out - whether it be inside AG or in the park - gave some of my teenage visits to the EE an edge, but I had no desire to join in - I guess I just liked the exposure I got to 'hard lads' at a point in my life when I was still a boy but desperately wanted to be a man.

Heysel changed my mind completely. I was at university watching the game on TV and just thought: 'There but for the grace of God go I and any number of other innocent fans'. Hillsborough rammed the point home further - caging fans in like the animals those in authority believed them to be led to the deaths of 96 innocent people.

I do really miss the buzz of the terraces - the surges down them when we scored and the physical experience of bouncing and being bounced around by a mob of ecstatic City fans can never be recreated in an all-seater ground. But in truth, my 48-year old self would still opt for a seat in the Dolman even if the EE reverted to terracing.

[JM91]

Interesting subject really in terms of the roots of football, i mean do the 1960's and 70's count as the roots? infact are they even relevant today? probably not.

look back to the 30's and it wasn't uncommon for fans to watch city at home one week and rovers at home the next, that's even closer to the roots of football, should we go back to those days? or even look further back to when the majority of clubs from the south were amateur, many forming on the basis of old public schoolboys such as old etonians (eton), Wanderers (Harrow) or Old Cartusians (Charterhouse) in fact if you really delve into the roots of modern association football they don't even lie within the working class. traditional mob football was closer to rugby.

really my point here is that the 60's and 70's are not the roots of football, not even close. while it may be the roots of some of our older fans' memories of football. football is constantly changing against the socio-economic background of this country and even further abroad now. while in the 70's and 80's hooliganism was common, it really has no place in modern football. football is a business right now, in order to appeal to a wider audience you have to be rid of the hooligan elements. look at Italian football as an example for where the football market and hooliganism crossover, it really is one or the other.

funny thing is you can see that the football clubs are extremely central to the identity of a lot of football hooligans, you speak to one and it's clear they tend to love the club more than the next man. the problem is, as has been shown in the thread, that they believe what they do is actually for the good of the club. to any non-hooligans it it blatantly apparent that what they do is bad for the club. which leads to the killer blow now, these people are actively discouraged from football games. one by product of family stands is to dissuade anti-social fans from attending and this is not an accident, the less dysfunctional fans you have the more potential for the other four types of fans you can have (temporary, local, devoted and fanatical).

the saying there's no room for nostalgia in sport is incredibly relevant here. football doesnt just change over time, it changes to the extent that the aspcts of 15 years ago, 30 years ago, 50 years ago are almost completely irrelevant to modern sport, and i'd be willing to bet that in 30 years going to a match will be completely different and todays experience will be largely irrelevant.

[poland_red]

in the 80's there were chants of "we an't got no n'ers" I remember them clearly and two of the people I go with talk about it regularly,

Wasn't it 3 or 4 years ago a City fan (i know who he is so won't name him) killed a rovers fan in a pub with 2 pool pools in a sock?

You really want that back?

it was only a few years back - which kinda' proves 'it' never went away. what did, was the in ground atmosphere, which is one of the points up for debate. for the record, don't know the ins and outs of the case but from what some have alluded too there was a lot that didn't come out in the press about the incident, but I stand corrected if I'm wrong on that. either way though, it was a very low act and a moment for all city to hang their heads in shame. no-one should die in football related incidents, and frankly anyone who puts a pool ball in a sock to bash someone on the head with is a bloody idiot who deserves the book to be chucked at them. or even a sock with a pool ball in it to see how they like it. Clearly, that crosses a very obvious line and can't be condoned in any shape or form.

[snarf]

There are several problems. Firstly sometimes young relatively “ innocent” people go along with this, expecting a bit of handbags at 6 paces, and end up in a violent situation where they could be seriously injured of killed.

Second, there is often trouble on the route to the pre- arranged point and people who have no involvement with the hooligans get caught up in the fighting.

Third, shops / local businesses are sometimes smashed up. Good fun for the hooligans but not so nice for the owners who are trying to make a living.

Agree about this point. If they damage public or private property, they should throw the book at them.

But alot of this is snobbish anti-working class sentiment. Football hooliganism is alot less barbaric than fox hunting. But because it's exclusive to the working classes, the middle class operated media demonise it and condition people to think it's socially unacceptable.

[Bazooka Joe]

No, No,No !

The quality was MUCH better Chris Crowe-Jantzen Derrick- Hugh McIllmoyle -Chris Garland etc ???? leading on to Gowie, Cheese, Sir Geoff ,Ritchie, Jimmy Mann etc etc

Todays lot doesn't come anywhere near (maybe Albert tho')

Let's not forget Johnny Quigley, Bobby Kellard and Gerry Sharpe (whose career ended prematurely following a nasty tackle) amongst others. But we did have some crap players too (Gordon Parr o.g, o.g, o.g!)

[SimplyRed]

There's an awful lot of complete and utter tosh in some of the posts on this thread.

For the life of me, I can't imagine anyone trying to justify civil violence as some sort acceptable social pastime. Nor can I accept that football hooliganism positively contributed to football in this country. The same bleeding hearts who claim that football has become sanitised and is no longer a vehicle for the working classes do themselves an injustice by implying that the working classes are violent morons who like nothing better than a punch-up on a Saturday night, at the same time condemning the middle and upper classes for 'spoiling their fun'.

I am working class and a football fan and proud of it. I detest violence in all forms and I can honestly say I enjoy football more now than I ever did as a young man in the 70's. My lasting impression from the 70's is that of some numpty in the East End, who spent the entire game with his back to the pitch trying to goad the rest of the fans into some violent episode or other. Football fan? Don't make me laugh.

Football was infiltrated by neanderthal thugs who hid behind the badge of a football team pretending to be fans. The more gullible were drawn in thinking that was the way to 'belong' and it became tribal. The only reason these dimwits languished in and around football was because it was an easy way to incite violence - it certainly wasn't because they liked football.

[poland_red]

There's an awful lot of complete and utter tosh in some of the posts on this thread.

For the life of me, I can't imagine anyone trying to justify civil violence as some sort acceptable social pastime. Nor can I accept that football hooliganism positively contributed to football in this country. The same bleeding hearts who claim that football has become sanitised and is no longer a vehicle for the working classes do themselves an injustice by implying that the working classes are violent morons who like nothing better than a punch-up on a Saturday night, at the same time condemning the middle and upper classes for 'spoiling their fun'.

I am working class and a football fan and proud of it. I detest violence in all forms and I can honestly say I enjoy football more now than I ever did as a young man in the 70's. My lasting impression from the 70's is that of some numpty in the East End, who spent the entire game with his back to the pitch trying to goad the rest of the fans into some violent episode or other. Football fan? Don't make me laugh.

Football was infiltrated by neanderthal thugs who hid behind the badge of a football team pretending to be fans. The more gullible were drawn in thinking that was the way to 'belong' and it became tribal. The only reason these dimwits languished in and around football was because it was an easy way to incite violence - it certainly wasn't because they liked football.

a very eloquent post, but considerably off the landing spot. To dismiss all hooligans - which you appear to be doing - as having no interest in football is so hilariously wrong I almost feel l have to double check this isn't some sort of prank post. I'm sure there were / are a few people who jumped onto football purely for the opportunity of a bloodbath, but you're referring to a small minority of psychos.

[pongo88]

Agree about this point. If they damage public or private property, they should throw the book at them.

But alot of this is snobbish anti-working class sentiment. Football hooliganism is alot less barbaric than fox hunting. But because it's exclusive to the working classes, the middle class operated media demonise it and condition people to think it's socially unacceptable.

Snarf – you’ve completely lost me with this one!

I can’t see how being against hooliganism can be described as “snobbish anti-working class sentiment.” I don’t think I’m a snob and I come from a working class background.

Hooligans come from all walks of life and football is no longer purely working class entertainment.

As to - “the middle class operated media demonise it and condition people to think it's socially unacceptable.” – well, I don’t think you are giving the average person sufficient credit for their own intelligence. You can fool some of the people all of the time, and you can fool all of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.

Also, in todays electronic / internet / twitter etc world the media is no longer just controlled by large businesses. There are many opportunities for ordinary people to make their views known and to share information – e.g. this forum.

[Otter1991]

You're lying just to prove your point.

I've been going to Ashton Gate for (nearly) 20 years. I've NEVER heard a racist chant. Well......only against Celts (gypsies) but that's fine because we are openly racist against you english.

Tiocfaidh ár lá

Yeah okay then. What point am I trying to make? I agree with your posts earlier on in the thread....

[i hate you butler]

Didn't know about Arsenal, but Birmingham's Zulus were well known for being the country's first multi cultural football firm.

sorry to pee on your bonfire but i think you'll find the zulus only came on the scene circa 83 west ham man utd spurs even villa had multicultural mobs way before that

and i still maintain the city are white chants a load of pony btw