Billy Sharp attacked by a fan (violence in football)

[Pokitren]

At this point I'm out.
It's not up to the law to define exactly what a business or operation (such as a football club) does to protect its staff, customers and the public, because the law does not know the ins and outs of every business, let alone the layout of every commercial premises and football stadium in the land so what you are asking for is ludicrous...a football club should be it's own expert on how it protects its staff, same as a factory should consult the right people and be it's own expert in protecting its staff.
The legislation is abundantly clear. No supporter enters the field of play.
In some fantasy land the law might have the time to analyse the security and health and safety arrangements of every premises and piece of commercial property in the land providing bespoke guidance in every case.
Here in reality there is a catch all, very clear instruction that it is the duty of the occupier of a business to take reasonable steps (the word reasonable used because the law cannot know everything about every business) to protect staff/customers/the public.
If anything the injured players in pitch invasions have every right to pursue a case in tort law against the club for negligence.

'No supporter enters the field of play.' or 'No persons are permitted to encroach on playing area'?
There is a difference in these concepts. And this rule still applies to the persons who enter the field.
And the rule regarding the club should sound more specific, for example: The club must fence off the field from the possibility of exit of fans with a fence 3-5 meters high.
If not fenced, then the club broke the rule, if fenced, but someone did run out - what did the club break?
Otherwise, it turns out that if someone needs to get the club fined, he can just run out onto the field! But what if the competitors need it? Or maybe the association itself needs it?

 

[up the line]

'No supporter enters the field of play.' or 'No persons are permitted to encroach on playing area'?
There is a difference in these concepts. And this rule still applies to the persons who enter the field.
And the rule regarding the club should sound more specific, for example: The club must fence off the field from the possibility of exit of fans with a fence 3-5 meters high.
If not fenced, then the club broke the rule, if fenced, but someone did run out - what did the club break?
Otherwise, it turns out that if someone needs to get the club fined, he can just run out onto the field! But what if the competitors need it? Or maybe the association itself needs it?

Fences aren't permitted.
The rule is clear...clubs have agreed to them. It's up to a club to determine its own strategy for applying the rules.
I think the current rules are crystal clear and that clubs (who agreed to the rules) should be punished as well as the individual when they fail to adhere.
You think that the rules are somehow to vague for a club to understand that fans shouldn't get on the pitch and that they shouldn't be penalised when they allow it to happen and players/staff/other supporters are injured as a result.
That's pretty much where we are so I've nothing more to add.

 

[Welwyn Pilgrim]

Look at the behaviour of the Port Vale manager last night. His actions created a huge melee with players and staff from both teams. His actions can only lead to ignite the atmosphere within the crowd. I’ve no doubt the pitch invasion would’ve happened anyway but those in a position of responsibility should try setting an example but Clarke massively overstepped the mark.

 

[Pokitren]

Fences aren't permitted.
The rule is clear...clubs have agreed to them. It's up to a club to determine its own strategy for applying the rules.
I think the current rules are crystal clear and that clubs (who agreed to the rules) should be punished as well as the individual when they fail to adhere.
You think that the rules are somehow to vague for a club to understand that fans shouldn't get on the pitch and that they shouldn't be penalised when they allow it to happen and players/staff/other supporters are injured as a result.
That's pretty much where we are so I've nothing more to add.

Did the clubs voluntarily agree to the rules? Okay, that makes all the difference! Since they took responsibility voluntarily, they should be fined for violating it. If they needed more precise wording of the rules, they'd probably have the right to propose such a change, and since they don't, they're fine with everything, including paying fines.

And the vague wording - well, it is such in fact. If everyone is happy with everything, then so be it.

 

[bigalf]

Still no defence of the passionate fans from Nikkkkkkkk?

Do you recall the story that Michael and LaToya were the same person as they were never seen in the same room?

 

[Andy S]

Did the clubs voluntarily agree to the rules? Okay, that makes all the difference! Since they took responsibility voluntarily, they should be fined for violating it. If they needed more precise wording of the rules, they'd probably have the right to propose such a change, and since they don't, they're fine with everything, including paying fines.

And the vague wording - well, it is such in fact. If everyone is happy with everything, then so be it.

I'm sorry but I don't understand any of that!

 

[Joe Totale]

It's not 20000 fans though is it? It's a minority. There were no fans on the pitch for the Rangers Frankfurt final. It can be prevented but costs money.

Fair enough it's not 20,000 fans. It may be a minority but it's a pretty significant minority which following recent incidents requires addressing.

I don't think it's realistic for a club to be able to Police pitch invasions effectively, I think the only way it can be prevented is a combination of effective stewarding as well as self policing from the crowd.

 

[Ted]

Can we invest in one of those robots from "the Squid Games" and just set it up to shoot any pitch invader?

 

[Balham Green]

Fair enough it's not 20,000 fans. It may be a minority but it's a pretty significant minority which following recent incidents requires addressing.

I don't think it's realistic for a club to be able to Police pitch invasions effectively, I think the only way it can be prevented is a combination of effective stewarding as well as self policing from the crowd.

Worked in Seville. Good luck with the self policing.

 

[Fergy]

Serving 3 months in prison is about right imo.

 

[bigalf]

Latest advice from the Premier league to their member clubs.
Have special ‘sprinter stewards’ who are wearing football boots and can run fast. Honestly!!!

It would be laughable if it was not so serious .

 

[bigalf]

Jason Burt gets it spot on in the Telegraph this morning .

 

[Welwyn Pilgrim]

Clubs to play behind closed doors, they did that during the pandemic so do it again.

A player, manager or official will be seriously assaulted soon. Bad enough Billy Sharpe was head butted but next time who knows..

 

[HC Green]

Pitch invasions have always happened when teams win promotion, reach Wembley or escape relegation. Even at Home Park.
All that needs to happen is that an announcement is made that home supporters will be allowed on the pitch (if they have anything to celebrate) once the players and officials have exited and detail the legal consequences if not complied with.
If Everton had not won in such a dramatic fashion on Thursday I not sure there would have been a pitch invasion. The atmosphere in the ground after the third goal was verging on the realms of mass hysteria.
The referee must have been anticipating a pitch invasion as just before the final whistle he moved closer to the tunnel and sprinted for it when he blew for full time.
Like most people in the ground we were watching him after the 7 minutes went by.

 

[up the line]

Pitch invasions have always happened when teams win promotion, reach Wembley or escape relegation. Even at Home Park.
All that needs to happen is that an announcement is made that home supporters will be allowed on the pitch (if they have anything to celebrate) once the players and officials have exited and detail the legal consequences if not complied with.
If Everton had not won in such a dramatic fashion on Thursday I not sure there would have been a pitch invasion. The atmosphere in the ground after the third goal was verging on the realms of mass hysteria.
The referee must have been anticipating a pitch invasion as just before the final whistle he moved closer to the tunnel and sprinted for it when he blew for full time.
Like most people in the ground we were watching him after the 7 minutes went by.

Yes I'm sure that a politely worded announcement at Nottingham Forest to not diving headbutt opposition players was 'all that needed to happen'
I'm sure that 'all that needed to happen' at Port Vale was for people to be reminded that bottling people and punching opposition players in the face isn't the done thing, then they would have been totally happy to comply and form an orderly queue to get on the pitch in alphabetical order.

You seriously think that an announcement is going to have one iota of influence over people who have it in their mind to sprint at Billy Sharp and assault him?! Or the no mark goading viera with his phone right up in his mush...he's the sort of guy who'll hear an announcement and change his behaviour accordingly?!

The only thing that might penetrate their 'thought process' will be full stadium closures or points deductions... making them bear responsibility for the impact on the club they purport to support.
Used to be that a pitch invasion was inevitable but would pass, generally without injury to the opposition players and staff.
In today's emboldened 'i'll do what I like' era that cannot be relied upon.