M_Porter Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Huge implications for football I think : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-21699007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted March 7, 2013 Admin Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Agree with this entirely.It is a decison taken by the local police, depending on where you go around the country we see varying levels of police on duty.If that is the way the want to do it let them pay for it.Maybe a large number is sometimes required, but equally there are many instances where there are literally police all around a ground when there is no need Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 My issue is that we already pay for it. I pay my tax so the government can run a police service to assit the community and uphold the justice system. We pay them to serve the communities we live in. If i live in a low crime area, i don't moan that the police spend more time in a high crime area, it's what i'm paying for. Similarly if there is an event in my community, i expect the authorities to police it as neccessary. I don't moan if the event happens to have nothing to do with me, i'm sure events that i am involved don't interest others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Always Believesham Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 I know it costs the clubs involved but I'm with the police on this one, if there wasn't a game on, the place wouldn't need policing. On the pluss side, it may cut down eccessive spend and heavy-handedness if they aren't billing the Football Club. A couple of years ago, Swansea were told if City went by 'bubble', it would cost a fraction of what the police would charge Swansea if we weren't forced to travel by coach. Where does that leave that decision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 If houses didn't get burgled, estates wouldn't need policing. I understand what you're saying but everyone misses the point that police are already paid for by us to serve our communities in whatever guise that takes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 If houses didn't get burgled, estates wouldn't need policing. I understand what you're saying but everyone misses the point that police are already paid for by us to serve our communities in whatever guise that takes. And also, two blokes having a punch up in a boozer miles away from a football ground is neither the fault or responsibility of the football club. The fact that they are wearing different coloured shirts is neither here nor there. Not the club's responsibility. You might as well charge inBev or SABMiller for the cost of all Friday and Saturday night policing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redcityman Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Hopefully all clubs will follow suit, too long have the police treated football as a free meal ticket. Paying twice for a service we already pay for, maybe they'll have more time now to catch real criminals (thats if they can be bothered to get out of their cars or even bother to turn up) instead of creating problems that don't already exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M_Porter Posted March 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Hopefully all clubs will follow suit, too long have the police treated football as a free meal ticket. Paying twice for a service we already pay for, maybe they'll have more time now to catch real criminals (thats if they can be bothered to get out of their cars or even bother to turn up) instead of creating problems that don't already exist. I have to agree im sure it was looked upon as an easy bit of income for the police, infact I would go so far as to say it was illegal under the monopolies act. I mean really the police decide how many officers they need, no one can object so its in the forces interest to get as many officers as it can to the ground. I dont mind paying for in the ground policing, its no diferent from any other event, in that if you host it you need to provide and pay for the safe envoirement but outside as all ready pointed out, I dont see how the club can be held finacialy liable for a fight in a pub 2 miles away even if its football related. Cheers Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHIPLEY RED Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 If houses didn't get burgled, estates wouldn't need policing. I understand what you're saying but everyone misses the point that police are already paid for by us to serve our communities in whatever guise that takes. Hope you say the same when your taxes are put up to pay the short fall in the police budget because thats what it will ultimately mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 it's a really difficult one this, so what will the answer be then?, rely on the old bill who are actually on duty for that particular area for policing outside of the ground?, who will escort (if an escort is needed to railway stations)?. it will inevitably result in cops being taken from their normal patrols all over police force areas. in a way the cops could call the clubs bluff here and say we can't afford to pay for the extra manpower, therefore we cannot guarantee safety around the ground or railway stations/bars etc. I think some games might end up being called off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M_Porter Posted March 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 it's a really difficult one this, so what will the answer be then?, rely on the old bill who are actually on duty for that particular area for policing outside of the ground?, who will escort (if an escort is needed to railway stations)?. it will inevitably result in cops being taken from their normal patrols all over police force areas. in a way the cops could call the clubs bluff here and say we can't afford to pay for the extra manpower, therefore we cannot guarantee safety around the ground or railway stations/bars etc. I think some games might end up being called off. I appreciate what your saying, but I dont see how that falls under the clubs remit... When it snows it's not the club that decides the carpark is dangerous and calls the game off its the HSO The only responsability the club has is inside the ground I would assume But yeas as you say its a tricky and as i said in my OP "Huge implications for football I think" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 it's a really difficult one this, so what will the answer be then?, rely on the old bill who are actually on duty for that particular area for policing outside of the ground?, who will escort (if an escort is needed to railway stations)?. it will inevitably result in cops being taken from their normal patrols all over police force areas. in a way the cops could call the clubs bluff here and say we can't afford to pay for the extra manpower, therefore we cannot guarantee safety around the ground or railway stations/bars etc. I think some games might end up being called off. That would be a bit like the cops saying 'we can't afford the extra manpower it takes to police Hartcliffe so it's going to be an unpoliced area from now on'. I mean, what are the police for? They aren't there to walk about and look decorative, they are paid to go where their services are required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 it's a really difficult one this, so what will the answer be then?, rely on the old bill who are actually on duty for that particular area for policing outside of the ground?, who will escort (if an escort is needed to railway stations)?. it will inevitably result in cops being taken from their normal patrols all over police force areas. in a way the cops could call the clubs bluff here and say we can't afford to pay for the extra manpower, therefore we cannot guarantee safety around the ground or railway stations/bars etc. I think some games might end up being called off. No, because they are still obliged to keep law and ordet. About time they remebered that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 I appreciate what your saying, but I dont see how that falls under the clubs remit... When it snows it's not the club that decides the carpark is dangerous and calls the game off its the HSO The only responsability the club has is inside the ground I would assume But yeas as you say its a tricky and as i said in my OP "Huge implications for football I think" That would be a bit like the cops saying 'we can't afford the extra manpower it takes to police Hartcliffe so it's going to be an unpoliced area from now on'. I mean, what are the police for? They aren't there to walk about and look decorative, they are paid to go where their services are required. No, because they are still obliged to keep law and ordet. About time they remebered that. So who will pay for the extra manpower when needed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 So who will pay for the extra manpower when needed? No-one is asking them to do any more than they are doing at the moment. The police are trying to exhort football clubs - and therefore every football fan - by making them pay for things that were considered an ordinary part of policing in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 No-one is asking them to do any more than they are doing at the moment. The police are trying to exhort football clubs - and therefore every football fan - by making them pay for things that were considered an ordinary part of policing in the past. Look, I am not on one side or the other, more like devils advocate on this one, but I suspect most of the old bill on duty are brought in from all over the force area on overtime, so as not reduce normal policing levels elsewhere in it's area, who will pay now (after this ruling)?, given that we are talking about over 50 games in total in Bristol alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M_Porter Posted March 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 No-one is asking them to do any more than they are doing at the moment. Yes whilst thats true I think what Esmond is saying that as it stands we PAY for the amount of police outside the ground, if we no longer need to do that then the police have to pay for them selfs which inturn means they will have a shortfall of income that will prob see our council tax rise..... So yes although as you say "no one is asking them to do anything diferent" someone diferent now has to pay for it The police are trying to exhort football clubs - and therefore every football fan - by making them pay for things that were considered an ordinary part of policing in the past. Again another valid point and as said we already pay for policing so why does the club have to pay again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Hope you say the same when your taxes are put up to pay the short fall in the police budget because thats what it will ultimately mean. I'll have too. I could save you loads of tax every year and do away with public services altogether, but seeing as that doesn't really make sense our only option is to contribute to a central pot, a tax if you will, and out of that pot run our public services. By your argument i should been demanding a tax refund as i have never personally used the police service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Look, I am not on one side or the other, more like devils advocate on this one, but I suspect most of the old bill on duty are brought in from all over the force area on overtime, so as not reduce normal policing levels elsewhere in it's area, who will pay now (after this ruling)?, given that we are talking about over 50 games in total in Bristol alone. I think the point is that sporting fixtures, regular events in the commucity should accounted for by the police annually, seeing as they are supposed to serve that community.. It shouldn't be the case that this is some how out of the ordinary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fodbarmyarmy Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 No-one is asking them to do any more than they are doing at the moment. The police are trying to exhort football clubs - and therefore every football fan - by making them pay for things that were considered an ordinary part of policing in the past. It certainly won't be considered an ordinary part of policing any more.... The bottom line though, is that apart from control for safety reasons as with any large event , the police should not be needed at all... The question should be how can we make the thugs pay instead of the club & normal fans ?............. Look out for more arrests and higher fines on way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Look, I am not on one side or the other, more like devils advocate on this one, but I suspect most of the old bill on duty are brought in from all over the force area on overtime, so as not reduce normal policing levels elsewhere in it's area, who will pay now (after this ruling)?, given that we are talking about over 50 games in total in Bristol alone. How the police manage their overtime and budget isnt my concern. They need to allocate their resources properly to meet their obligstions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 I think the point is that sporting fixtures, regular events in the commucity should accounted for by the police annually, seeing as they are supposed to serve that community.. It shouldn't be the case that this is some how out of the ordinary. and exactly where will that money come from within their already shrinking budget, that have included lowering of police numbers?, the money will have to come from somewhere and I think most tax payers will be saying **** this we pay more than enough already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 It certainly won't be considered an ordinary part of policing any more.... The bottom line though, is that apart from control for safety reasons as with any large event , the police should not be needed at all... The question should be how can we make the thugs pay instead of the club & normal fans ?............. Look out for more arrests and higher fines on way I agree with this. I rarely see any police presence at Bristol. That said, it's the same argument for any type of crime, in that it shouldn't happen in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 How the police manage their overtime and budget isnt my concern. They need to allocate their resources properly to meet their obligstions. What even when your council tax goes up to cover the cost?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 What even when your council tax goes up to cover the cost?. Simply put, it wont. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Peacock Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 They will use more specials. A lot of the police on duty at football matches are specials anyway and so the clubs are paying for someone who doesn't get paid. It would be interesting to know how much training in crowd control they have received. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 It certainly won't be considered an ordinary part of policing any more.... The bottom line though, is that apart from control for safety reasons as with any large event , the police should not be needed at all... The question should be how can we make the thugs pay instead of the club & normal fans ?............. Look out for more arrests and higher fines on way Now that, I like! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
22A Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 If there's a massive gig at the Colston Hall or a baloon festival in the area, extra police may be in attendance in the area, but only football clubs seem to be asked for policing costs. Remember the legalised protection racket. 1. Police decide how many officers are needed inside the ground. 2. The police decide the fee for those officers. 3. If the club don't pay or even simply dispute the costs, the police withdraw the Safety Certificate so the game cannot go ahead. Conversely, a Scottish Chief Constable actually refused to send any officers to one of the clubs in his area. "There are murders, rapes, assaults, burglaries and arson taking place in this town. It is a waste of resourdes to have officers stand round watching the local football team". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M_Porter Posted March 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 Remember the legalised protection racket. 1. Police decide how many officers are needed inside the ground. 2. The police decide the fee for those officers. 3. If the club don't pay or even simply dispute the costs, the police withdraw the Safety Certificate so the game cannot go ahead. As i said earlier " I would go so far as to say it was illegal under the monopolies act." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted March 7, 2013 Report Share Posted March 7, 2013 So who will pay for the extra manpower when needed? No one. If they don't have the budget to provide the man power, then they let fans get to the ground under their own skin. When/if trouble starts outside of the ground their remit is to respond. If that means council tax bills going up so be it. They are paid to police the city, if they don't have the manpower or resources to do it, without charging a private company for doing their Business as usual jobs, then this has to be flagged up and money and resource provided from central or local government. Inside the ground is a different matter, I expect if this ruling causes problems, the cost of policing inside the ground will double or treble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.