Bear banned for last minute winner celebration

Status
Not open for further replies.
weevlad said:
The faux outrage with "Police identified this guy and couldn't find a guy who stabbed someone in hope street coz the bear was wearing a scarf" really needs to stop. Its embarassing.

Can we imagine a world anywhere where crimes are allowed by everyone because one crime in the past was not solved and all the resources need to go on investigating that one crime?

I feel for the young bear, I would be gutted if I was banned from Ibrox. But don't go on the f**king pitch and you won't ever get banned. Stop with the whataboutery and stop stop pointing at Celtc and saying "they give them a stadium tour if they get caught", we are better than that
Click to expand...

This 'we're better than that' line needs some kind of explanation.

Politicians and the media certainly don't treat us as 'better'.

Will supporters feel 'better' knowing that a 15 year-old is to be made an example of by a club that effectively refuses to defend itself?

Who's 'we' anyway? Does this extend to people within the club that gave their full support to Whyte and the spivs who succeeded him?
 
StirlingGer said:
For being arrested? He has not even been to trial yet, for all we know he has done nothing wrong. Wouldn't be the first time the police have arrested someone when they shouldn't have.

Hopefully gets cleared at trial and takes this David Martin prick to the cleaners.
Click to expand...

As has been repeated multiple times in the thread:

The guy has acknowledged in his tweet that he was on the pitch celebrating with the players. He has confirmed that he was arrested after photos of him doing so were published, so they have him on film. I don’t see that there is any doubt that he did what he’s been accused of. I see no defence that will see him escape conviction.

Furthermore, posters continue to misunderstand the word ‘indefinite’ and make reference to sine die bans etc. Indefinite means ‘lasting for an unknown or unstated length of time’. There is no set time period, that’s the whole point of using the word. It could be 20 years. It could just as easily be 20 days. In truth, I’d suggest it will be reviewed after his conviction if he asks for it as per the letter.
 
StirlingGer said:
For being arrested? He has not even been to trial yet, for all we know he has done nothing wrong. Wouldn't be the first time the police have arrested someone when they shouldn't have.

Hopefully gets cleared at trial and takes this David Martin prick to the cleaners.
Click to expand...

Rangers don’t have to wait on a successful prosecution. It’s the club’s stadium and away ticket allocation. As long as they aren’t being discriminatory they can refuse access to both for any reason they wish. “Beyond all reasonable doubt” is replaced by “balance of probabilities”. If those responsible for security etc. have viewed footage and believe this guy was on the pitch then tough sh*t! And he’ll have zero come back against David Martin or anyone else at the club, regardless of any verdict in court.

His tweet on the issue is very telling of his mindset. Lashing out and using abusive language towards a club employee in a public place because he clearly feels he should be able to act as he pleases as he goes to away games and is fuming this isn’t the case.
 
Last edited:
deedle said:
Who's 'we' anyway? Does this extend to people within the club that gave their full support to Whyte and the spivs who succeeded him?
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
Valley Bluenose said:
As has been repeated multiple times in the thread:

The guy has acknowledged in his tweet that he was on the pitch celebrating with the players. He has confirmed that he was arrested after photos of him doing so were published, so they have him on film. I don’t see that there is any doubt that he did what he’s been accused of. I see no defence that will see him escape conviction.

Furthermore, posters continue to misunderstand the word ‘indefinite’ and make reference to sine die bans etc. Indefinite means ‘lasting for an unknown or unstated length of time’. There is no set time period, that’s the whole point of using the word. It could be 20 years. It could just as easily be 20 days. In truth, I’d suggest it will be reviewed after his conviction if he asks for it as per the letter.
Click to expand...

It certainly doesn’t seem the brightest thing to be doing with a trial pending, having admissions of actions and reasons for doing it plastered on Twitter.

I’m sure the lad’s representation will be chuffed to bits if he sees it.
 
deedle said:
This 'we're better than that' line needs some kind of explanation.

Politicians and the media certainly don't treat us as 'better'.

Will supporters feel 'better' knowing that a 15 year-old is to be made an example of by a club that effectively refuses to defend itself?

Who's 'we' anyway? Does this extend to people within the club that gave their full support to Whyte and the spivs who succeeded him?
Click to expand...

It doesn’t really, does it?

The club and support should set its own standards for behaviour and actions, rather than set the bar at a level other clubs do and we slate them for it.

Or we could act like and adopt the standards of the vhermin.

I know what I’m more in favour of.
 
MightyGersLand! said:
So you think of the 100 people who've done it with no repercussions that the first action should be to sin die a young lad?

Make him take a day off school, work or xbox for a meeting.
If he's late? Ban him to end of season.
Tell him if he makes the meeting its his last warning, deny him a cup final ticket? Or away tickets until end of season? Ban him for 4 months? (which I still think would be excessive given the circumstances) surely all better than the nuclear option as a first action.

For the record. I think the kid is probably as big a moron as me, if not more so.
It still doesn't mean I condone his behaviour or that of the head of security, who's taken the easy option and found a scapegoat instead of doing his job.
Click to expand...
People have been in court already. Nobody can say they didnae ken.
People said on here years ago that somebody would end up in trouble but were branded handwringers.
 
In my opinion the club have went over the top with this but I would question why Police Scotland would take this to court and possibly leave someone with a criminal record for over exuberance at celebrating a last minute winner.
 
deedle said:
This 'we're better than that' line needs some kind of explanation.

Politicians and the media certainly don't treat us as 'better'.

Will supporters feel 'better' knowing that a 15 year-old is to be made an example of by a club that effectively refuses to defend itself?

Who's 'we' anyway? Does this extend to people within the club that gave their full support to Whyte and the spivs who succeeded him?
Click to expand...
Take a look at the poppy thread.
 
Does the punishment fit the crime? I.M.O- No. I am certain that not one single Rangers supporter can say that in that one particular moment of a last minute winner would not be caught up in the moment and follow others onto the pitch. This was not a planned pitch invasion, he was just caught up in the moment and as such the club should show a bit of common sense and a bit of leniency to those involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: o7o
Bluenose1979 said:
It doesn’t really, does it?

The club and support should set its own standards for behaviour and actions, rather than set the bar at a level other clubs do and we slate them for it.

Or we could act like and adopt the standards of the vhermin.

I know what I’m more in favour of.
Click to expand...


Does the club apply the same rules to visiting supporters to our stadium that have been caught on camera breaking the stadium rules? Singing sectarian abuse towards us, banners mocking our club etc? If the club ( David Martin) is one for following rules to the letter of the club code, does he does all these I have asked.

Id also ask, has the club bee in close contact with Ayrshire H&S and the police on why this game was even allowed to go ahead when Kilamrnock's stadium had a number of health and safety issues in the first place?
This was the banner headline in the Daily Record the day after the game so, Killie allowed a game to go-ahead knowing their ground had safety issues?
"
Kilmarnock stadium has 'number of safety issues that need addressed urgently' say council officials
 
Last edited:
Broxi Bear 1873 said:
Does the punishment fit the crime? I.M.O- No. I am certain that not one single Rangers supporter can say that in that one particular moment of a last minute winner would not be caught up in the moment and follow others onto the pitch. This was not a planned pitch invasion, he was just caught up in the moment and as such the club should show a bit of common sense and a bit of leniency to those involved.
Click to expand...

I can say pretty categorically that I wouldn’t follow others onto the pitch. I’m sure many, many others can say the same.
 
aayjay said:
So for every "big goal" we score it's ok to go on the pitch ? He's been rightly banned for a period - that period is yet to be determined. By lashing out at the club he sure isn't going to help himself.
Click to expand...

I don’t even see any acceptance in any of his tweets that he actually did anything wrong. It’s just lashing out at the Club. He seems to think being on the pitch during a game is ‘fine’. We’ve seen other games quoted here but most are after the game (as the 55 celebration will be).

Not helped himself in any way at all when it comes to the Club reviewing, and setting a time period, on his ban. When he contacts them after his conviction to make his plea to be allowed back they’d be perfectly entitled to ask ‘where’s the remorse, have you learned your lesson, or will you do it again’. He’s been foolish in more than one respect,
 
muttley said:
Does the club apply the same rules to visiting supporters to our stadium that have been caught on camera breaking the stadium rules?
Click to expand...

Ask the club. How many supporters do you know of who have been arrested and charged for breach of the peace at Ibrox and have been welcomed back willingly?

I certainly can’t account for all these things. I’d imagine only the club can answer your question.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
I don’t even see any acceptance in any of his tweets that he actually did anything wrong. It’s just lashing out at the Club. He seems to think being on the pitch during a game is ‘fine’. We’ve seen other games quoted here but most are after the game (as the 55 celebration will be).

Not helped himself in any way at all when it comes to the Club reviewing, and setting a time period, on his ban. When he contacts them after his conviction to make his plea to be allowed back they’d be perfectly entitled to ask ‘where’s the remorse, have you learned your lesson, or will you do it again’. He’s been foolish in more than one respect,
Click to expand...
Just taking his lead from older people who just blame everything on Rangers.
 
Bluenose1979 said:
Ask the club. How many supporters do you know of who have been arrested and charged for breach of the peace at Ibrox and have been welcomed back willingly?

I certainly can’t account for all these things. I’d imagine only the club can answer your question.
Click to expand...

I don't know anyone that's been nicked at a match. The point I'm making is, if we apply the rules to the letter to our own support then we should apply the rules as stringently to everyone that also enters our stadium.
 
muttley said:
I don't know anyone that's been nicked at a match. The point I'm making is, if we apply the rules to the letter to our own support then we should apply the rules as stringently to everyone that also enters our stadium.
Click to expand...

Don’t disagree, but not sure how I can answer your post. Or what the point is in it unless you think the club doesn’t do so.
 
Bluenose1979 said:
It doesn’t really, does it?

The club and support should set its own standards for behaviour and actions, rather than set the bar at a level other clubs do and we slate them for it.

Or we could act like and adopt the standards of the vhermin.

I know what I’m more in favour of.
Click to expand...

Yes it does and who are 'we'?


The problem with threads like this (and those on similar issues like songs) is that people tend to adopt one of two polarised positions rather than appreciate the situation can only be dealt with by a two-pronged approach. IOW, fans must be accountable for their actions but they must also feel that the club has their back and does not simply view them as customers from hell that must be kept at arms-length.

If the club and support aren't together then 'we' is meaningless.


As I pointed out earlier, Lawwell instinctively understands the importance of defending Celtic as a unit. He would bear in mind the reaction among supporters in issuing a ban for what was certainly not a malicious act.

Was this even a consideration in Rangers' case? I very much doubt it.
 
deedle said:
Yes it does and who are 'we'?


The problem with threads like this (and those on similar issues like songs) is that people tend to adopt one of two polarised positions rather than appreciate the situation can only be dealt with by a two-pronged approach. IOW, fans must be accountable for their actions but they must also feel that the club has their back and does not simply view them as customers from hell that must be kept at arms-length.

If the club and support aren't together then 'we' is meaningless.


As I pointed out earlier, Lawwell instinctively understands the importance of defending Celtic as a unit. He would bear in mind the reaction among supporters in issuing a ban for what was certainly not a malicious act.

Was this even a consideration in Rangers' case? I very much doubt it.
Click to expand...

The club can have the support’s back without having to defend fans who break clear rules regarding behaviour.

Indeed the support could do the club a favour by not placing it in a position where it has to be seen to act.
 
Bluenose1979 said:
Don’t disagree, but not sure how I can answer your post. Or what the point is in it unless you think the club doesn’t do so.
Click to expand...


I Don't think the club applies the same rules to everyone that enters our stadium. We have visiting fans entering our stadium that sing sectarian abuse towards our support but I never hear of the club warning visiting fans that if they break the rules of our stadium they will be subjected to a ban from it.
 
muttley said:
I Don't think the club applies the same rules to everyone that enters our stadium. We have visiting fans entering our stadium that sing sectarian abuse towards our support but I never hear of the club warning visiting fans that if they break the rules of our stadium they will be subjected to a ban from it.
Click to expand...

The club announces its stance regarding these things across the PA prior to every game.

I take that as applying to everyone in the stadium.
 
deedle said:
Yes it does and who are 'we'?


The problem with threads like this (and those on similar issues like songs) is that people tend to adopt one of two polarised positions rather than appreciate the situation can only be dealt with by a two-pronged approach. IOW, fans must be accountable for their actions but they must also feel that the club has their back and does not simply view them as customers from hell that must be kept at arms-length.

If the club and support aren't together then 'we' is meaningless.


As I pointed out earlier, Lawwell instinctively understands the importance of defending Celtic as a unit. He would bear in mind the reaction among supporters in issuing a ban for what was certainly not a malicious act.

Was this even a consideration in Rangers' case? I very much doubt it.
Click to expand...
Lawwell banned Celtic fans for going over the hoarding at Rugby Park last season. I have sympathy for the boy, but that is how it is dealt with.
 
deedle said:
Yes it does and who are 'we'?


The problem with threads like this (and those on similar issues like songs) is that people tend to adopt one of two polarised positions rather than appreciate the situation can only be dealt with by a two-pronged approach. IOW, fans must be accountable for their actions but they must also feel that the club has their back and does not simply view them as customers from hell that must be kept at arms-length.

If the club and support aren't together then 'we' is meaningless.


As I pointed out earlier, Lawwell instinctively understands the importance of defending Celtic as a unit. He would bear in mind the reaction among supporters in issuing a ban for what was certainly not a malicious act.

Was this even a consideration in Rangers' case? I very much doubt it.
Click to expand...
The club and fans couldn’t be further apart.

No effort is made to fix that. We’re paying customers and regularly treated like an inconvenience.
 
Bowery Boy said:
Lawwell banned Celtic fans for going over the hoarding at Rugby Park last season. I have sympathy for the boy, but that is how it is dealt with.
Click to expand...

Anyone who thinks Liewell and the dhim support have anything like a harmonious relationship must be fortunate enough to not encounter many of them in their day to day life.
 
Wilkinsvolley said:
People have been in court already. Nobody can say they didnae ken.
People said on here years ago that somebody would end up in trouble but were branded handwringers.
Click to expand...
Ok. So your belief is that anyone charged with a breach of the peace. Not a conviction. A charge. In a Rangers top, merchandise, or on their way from and to a Rangers game should have a sin die ban from Ibrox, with a right to appeal only upon result of the court case?
I think that's harsh.

I warned the fly he's for it. I still don't think throwing a grenade at it from behind my couch would be justified. ;)
 
Bowery Boy said:
Lawwell banned Celtic fans for going over the hoarding at Rugby Park last season. I have sympathy for the boy, but that is how it is dealt with.
Click to expand...


Do you honestly think he did ban them? It's as likely a ban as their ban of the GB I think and more a PR exercise.
 
Broxi Bear 1873 said:
Does the punishment fit the crime? I.M.O- No. I am certain that not one single Rangers supporter can say that in that one particular moment of a last minute winner would not be caught up in the moment and follow others onto the pitch. This was not a planned pitch invasion, he was just caught up in the moment and as such the club should show a bit of common sense and a bit of leniency to those involved.
Click to expand...
To be honest I don't know about this boy's case but a lot of this going on the pitch when we score away from home has smacked of pre meditated to me. Phones out for selfies etc.

I would say though that he probably has a legal banning order before Rangers even sent that letter, at least until his case is heard. If he is cleared (which not sure how he can be since he is admitting it) the club are stating they will review it. If convicted he will get a banning order and Rangers will match whatever length that legal ban is.

His tweet is putting the boot into the club but I severely doubt that is the whole story and he is probably intentionally omitting that he has a ban anyway.
 
Bluenose1979 said:
I would suggest that is a mistake on your part personally and I doubt you’ll find many, if any clubs that specifically target that kind of messaging to away fans separately from home fans.
Click to expand...

you can suggest away mate but, Its aimed at us and again I doubt they ban any away fans from our stadium that have been nicked for sectarian singing or even thrown out the stadium for something.
 
We always claim to hold ourselves in higher regards with higher standards than the others accross the city, until something like this happens and then all the whataboutery starts. We all know the consequences of being arrested whilst attending a game!
If the lad had sense he would have sucked it up until the court case where he would have prob get off with it or at the very least a slap on the wrist, rather than tweet his admittance to guilt for everyone to see.
 
I could understand a warning/ticking off about going on to the pitch by this is way OTT.

The police have now set a standard on how someone going on to the pitch should be dealt with.

Any fan getting done by the police should use the excuse of the police being selective on the how fans of each club are dealt with.
 
muttley said:
you can suggest away mate but, Its aimed at us and again I doubt they ban any away fans from our stadium that have been nicked for sectarian singing or even thrown out the stadium for something.
Click to expand...

The club’s primary focus is on protecting its own reputation and the reputation of the supporters who represent it without breaking rules or even committing crimes.

Doubting it is your own personal and cynical stance against at the club, but something you should ask the club if you have such little faith in it.

Maybe ask the SLO if you think the club is not treating the support appropriately.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top