Trouble in Lincoln? Probably Not!

[Mark_w]

Im not sticking up for anyone here but just because they cause trouble doesn't mean they don't support Leicester? if you're gay, straight, lesbian, trouble maker, disabled, a criminal, rich or poor and support your club, you're still a fan.

Obviously you will get trouble makers that are not fans but don't expect them all to be like that.

They damage the reputation of the club, how is that support? They do it whether or not there is a match on, even though they know it will tarnish the reputation of the football club. Not very good 'fans' then are they?

[samstown92]

They damage the reputation of the club, how is that support? They do it whether or not there is a match on, even though they know it will tarnish the reputation of the football club. Not very good 'fans' then are they?

Still fans, maybe they're not good for the club and the reputation of the club but some of them will still support Leicester and watch the games. You can't judge or stereotype people that you don't know.

[Mark_w]

Still fans, maybe they're not good for the club and the reputation of the club but some of them will still support Leicester and watch the games. You can't judge or stereotype people that you don't know.

The ones who do that, that are violent and have a major negative impact on the club are not. They aren't fans they are just thugs. I don't know why anyone would want to stand up for people who are giving the majority of decent Leicester City supporters a bad name. They shouldn't hide behind the club, or use our team as an excuse for violence. They can find legal methods of doing so, they don't have to piss on the football team that they claim to support.

[Guest Basildon Fox]

They damage the reputation of the club, how is that support? They do it whether or not there is a match on, even though they know it will tarnish the reputation of the football club. Not very good 'fans' then are they?

What reputation are they damaging exactly?

[Guest]

Lots of good points

Totally agree with most of that.

I long for the day fans can be trusted to go to matches without the need for supervision.

Im not sticking up for anyone here but just because they cause trouble doesn't mean they don't support Leicester?

I didn't say they don't support Leicester.

[samstown92]

The ones who do that, that are violent and have a major negative impact on the club are not. They aren't fans they are just thugs. I don't know why anyone would want to stand up for people who are giving the majority of decent Leicester City supporters a bad name. They shouldn't hide behind the club, or use our team as an excuse for violence. They can find legal methods of doing so, they don't have to piss on the football team that they claim to support.

I'm not standing up for them, just I don't see why people stereotype or judge people they don't know. Some of them maybe passionate about their club or where they are from, in the 80's they were classed as proper fans and nowadays they are not even classed as fans. But I agree some will hide behind our club to just cause violence but majority of clubs have them.

[Mark_w]

I'm not standing up for them, just I don't see why people stereotype or judge people they don't know. Some of them maybe passionate about their club or where they are from, in the 80's they were classed as proper fans and nowadays they are not even classed as fans. But I agree some will hide behind our club to just cause violence but majority of clubs have them.

Well I'm only talking about the people who are using the club as an excuse for violence. As I think the people who went to Lincoln only to cause violence despite there being no team to support are. The fans who went and enjoyed themselves without feeling the need to cause any trouble I have no problem with but if you go just to cause trouble then you are hiding behind the club just to cause violence.

[davieG]

I'm not standing up for them, just I don't see why people stereotype or judge people they don't know. Some of them maybe passionate about their club or where they are from, in the 80's they were classed as proper fans and nowadays they are not even classed as fans. But I agree some will hide behind our club to just cause violence but majority of clubs have them.

They were never classed as proper fans by me and my associates in the 80s, it's because of people like these that fans who actually want to watch the game and support the team are treated as criminals and have their freedom to support their team severely curtailed, people hell bent on fighting and creating mayhem are not being stereotyped they're being called exactly what they are, thugs and what's equally sad is they're proud to be labelled as such.

[Deucalion]

We probably need to differentiate between different types of trouble.

I don't want to be associated with people who think it is acceptable to be violent towards other people. Football is no reason to be injuring people, surely.

But...I have no problem with groups of football fans having a laugh. When I used to go away, I used to find it really funny to see groups of Leicester fans in obscure places making asses of themselves. By this I mean drinking, singing, wearing traffic cones on their heads, that kind of thing. It is part of the theatre of football. Swindon away used to be great for this because on the way, there are many very posh, small towns and villages where the locals would consider a group of lads singing outside a pub to be the height of thuggery.

I don't want football to lose it's irreverence, just the violence.

[Guest MattP]

They damage the reputation of the club, how is that support? They do it whether or not there is a match on, even though they know it will tarnish the reputation of the football club. Not very good 'fans' then are they?

People damage the reputation of the club by running on the pitch, being drunk, booing, doesnt mean they don't support the club.

I've known hooligans who care about the club far more than I do, they cry the same tears when we get relegated and share the same joy on promotion.

Not excusing the behaviour of course, but this pompous self righteous attitude of some people thinking they can decide who is a fan and who isnt is complete bollocks.

[Guest Col city fan]

They were never classed as proper fans by me and my associates in the 80s, it's because of people like these that fans who actually want to watch the game and support the team are treated as criminals and have their freedom to support their team severely curtailed, people hell bent on fighting and creating mayhem are not being stereotyped they're being called exactly what they are, thugs and what's equally sad is they're proud to be labelled as such.

I think this is all based upon intent.

If people go to football matches, Hell bent on causing trouble, with the intention of causing trouble, then they aren't going to a game specifically to watch the game.

However, I remember being with my mates at quite a few games during the 80's where, although we didn't go out looking for trouble, it found us. Maybe this was because we were 16/17 years old, and there was usually a group of 6/7 of us. So we were seen as fair game.

Portsmouth away was a great example on a few occasions. Walking back from Fratton to the tube station ended up frequently with being attacked from all angles by lots of little Pompey scrotes running at us like rats. I can think of similar examples at Filbert Street. Derby at home springs to mind.

What do some people do when cornered? Stand there and take a beating, or fight your way out of that corner?

The problem with branding football fans as thugs or hooligans or whatever you want to call them is that the label is targeted at all those who are seen to be 'fighting', including those who are doing it in self defence.

There was no intent on the part of me and my pals to go to football for fighting. Sometimes we found ourselves having to resort to self defence against those wanting to rip our fookin heads off.

Are we therefore not fans?

I think it's about intent and thank God times have changed.

[Deucalion]

I think this is all based upon intent.

If people go to football matches, Hell bent on causing trouble, with the intention of causing trouble, then they aren't going to a game specifically to watch the game.

However, I remember being with my mates at quite a few games during the 80's where, although we didn't go out looking for trouble, it found us. Maybe this was because we were 16/17 years old, and there was usually a group of 6/7 of us. So we were seen as fair game.

Portsmouth away was a great example on a few occasions. Walking back from Fratton to the tube station ended up frequently with being attacked from all angles by lots of little Pompey scrotes running at us like rats. I can think of similar examples at Filbert Street. Derby at home springs to mind.

What do some people do when cornered? Stand there and take a beating, or fight your way out of that corner?

The problem with branding football fans as thugs or hooligans or whatever you want to call them is that the label is targeted at all those who are seen to be 'fighting', including those who are doing it in self defence.

There was no intent on the part of me and my pals to go to football for fighting. Sometimes we found ourselves having to resort to self defence against those wanting to rip our fookin heads off.

Are we therefore not fans?

I think it's about intent and thank God times have changed.

Fair point.

[davieG]

People damage the reputation of the club by running on the pitch, being drunk, booing, doesnt mean they don't support the club.

I've known hooligans who care about the club far more than I do, they cry the same tears when we get relegated and share the same joy on promotion.

Not excusing the behaviour of course, but this pompous self righteous attitude of some people thinking they can decide who is a fan and who isnt is complete bollocks.

But if it wasn't for some of these people and I'm talking about those who go with the intent of fighting running on the pitch wouldn't be illegal and being pissed would be treated as funny as for booing that's a bit desperate saying it damages the club.

How anyone can justify or excuse those that go with violence in mind when it's them that have ensured that we all get treated like criminals I simply cannot comprehend, it's nothing to do with being self righteous I simply object to being filmed, searched, followed, I object to seeing my family in fear of their safety, of innocent fans being man-handled by stewards/police for simply singing or standing and this is all down to those intent on violence and I blame them completely.

[Guest Col city fan]

But if it wasn't for some of these people and I'm talking about those who go with the intent of fighting running on the pitch wouldn't be illegal and being pissed would be treated as funny as for booing that's a bit desperate saying it damages the club.

How anyone can justify or excuse those that go with violence in mind when it's them that have ensured that we all get treated like criminals I simply cannot comprehend, it's nothing to do with being self righteous I simply object to being filmed, searched, followed, I object to seeing my family in fear of their safety, of innocent fans being man-handled by stewards/police for simply singing or standing and this is all down to those intent on violence and I blame them completely.

Intent... I agree completely. These people aren't 'football' fans in my mind. They are fans of fighting and causing bovver.

[Daggers]

But I agree some will hide behind our club

To be honest, it's not the best place to hide unless they are in one of those big bins on wheels - but even then it'll stand out because there's nothing else about.

Do they use disguises?

If they were incognito as a car or a turd on Milan's driving seat or something then maybe I can see how they'd get away with it.

[Guest MattP]

But if it wasn't for some of these people and I'm talking about those who go with the intent of fighting running on the pitch wouldn't be illegal and being pissed would be treated as funny as for booing that's a bit desperate saying it damages the club.

How anyone can justify or excuse those that go with violence in mind when it's them that have ensured that we all get treated like criminals I simply cannot comprehend, it's nothing to do with being self righteous I simply object to being filmed, searched, followed, I object to seeing my family in fear of their safety, of innocent fans being man-handled by stewards/police for simply singing or standing and this is all down to those intent on violence and I blame them completely.

I completely agree Davie, the actions of them are abhorrent and we all suffer for them.

That doesn't change that the fact some of them passionately support Leicester though.

[davieG]

I completely agree Davie, the actions of them are abhorrent and we all suffer for them.

That doesn't change that the fact some of them passionately support Leicester though.

Seemingly for the wrong reasons and frankly I wish the hadn't / didn't because a large proportion of what I found exciting about attending a football match has been wiped out.

[Guest MattP]

Seemingly for the wrong reasons and frankly I wish the hadn't / didn't because a large proportion of what I found exciting about attending a football match has been wiped out.

I agree, quite a few people I feel like about mind.

[Larry_LCFC]

I doubt there will be any police free fixtures this season now. Everywhere we go, the police will watch us. All because a few chavvy little scumbags decided to try and be hard. Without a doubt it will have tarnished the clubs reputation. Its been all over the news. Im ashamed of some of our "fans".

[1964FOX]

Lincoln will not affect the policing of future games, we had a reputation prior to this but each match is assessed on an individual basis and the main factors are the amount of fans and how many of them are what has been described on this thread as thugs. This assessment is heavily intelligence led and as we have seen this is not an exact science.

[Steven]

We still went, and this is how we saw it.

Until it was time to leave, we actually had a really nice day.

This point deserves a greater analysis, as I would argue at what point are football clubs responsible for the behaviour of its fans? Should it extend into town and city centres that could be miles from the ground itself?

Quite. It seems mere association to a club extends the footprint.

[Leicester_Loyal]

I doubt there will be any police free fixtures this season now. Everywhere we go, the police will watch us. All because a few chavvy little scumbags decided to try and be hard. Without a doubt it will have tarnished the clubs reputation. Its been all over the news. Im ashamed of some of our "fans".

There is not any police free fixtures ever, anywhere. What exactly did our fans do? Nothing.Stop talking bollocks, you're making yourself look an idiot. Oh btw, we have always had a reputation, ever since the early 80s, we always will have. Just like we will probably get filmed every match, just like every other club does.

[Burmesefox]

Quite. It seems mere association to a club extends the footprint.

Great turn of phrase Steven, "extends the footprint".

If a regular visitor to bars and clubs in Leicester causes fights on the way home do the bars and clubs pick up the tab? Do they heck. In fact many incidents that occur in clubs that involve unlawfulness (i.e drugs) get turfed out onto the street pronto so it absolves that establishment from involvement and responsibility Of course football needs to pay for safety in the ground and potentially a proportion of costs in the immediate vacinity of the ground but that is where it should end.

On another note, I know some of these thugs (not my fault; just that of schooling, where I lived, old friendships, etc). Many of these lads are very loyal fans. Just because we do not seek association with them doesn't mean that they are not supporters of the club. Whilst their actions are misguided, thoughtless, and aborent you cannot dismiss them as not being fans. The word fan comes from an abbreviation of the word fanatic. It can be argued that their fanaticism is demonstrated to a higher level than us normal supporters by virtue of their violent actions. No one is excusing their behaviour but understanding it is the key to resolving the problem. The "firm" gives these Herberts a sense of belonging and purpose - they actually do feel that they are representing their home town. Yes, we could write for hours and hours on this topic and still debate the reasons but essentially a proportion of working class lads have always been involved in this sort of thing. Football violence can be traced back to the 1920's and before - it's nothing new. The disenfranchised will seek an identity (teddies, mods, rockers, skins, casuals, hoodies, etc) and also an outlet for their agression (gigs, football matches, bank holiday seaside resorts, riots, EDF rallies, estates, etc).

[Guest Col city fan]

Great turn of phrase Steven, "extends the footprint".

If a regular visitor to bars and clubs in Leicester causes fights on the way home do the bars and clubs pick up the tab? Do they heck. In fact many incidents that occur in clubs that involve unlawfulness (i.e drugs) get turfed out onto the street pronto so it absolves that establishment from involvement and responsibility Of course football needs to pay for safety in the ground and potentially a proportion of costs in the immediate vacinity of the ground but that is where it should end.

On another note, I know some of these thugs (not my fault; just that of schooling, where I lived, old friendships, etc). Many of these lads are very loyal fans. Just because we do not seek association with them doesn't mean that they are not supporters of the club. Whilst their actions are misguided, thoughtless, and aborent you cannot dismiss them as not being fans. The word fan comes from an abbreviation of the word fanatic. It can be argued that their fanaticism is demonstrated to a higher level than us normal supporters by virtue of their violent actions. No one is excusing their behaviour but understanding it is the key to resolving the problem. The "firm" gives these Herberts a sense of belonging and purpose - they actually do feel that they are representing their home town. Yes, we could write for hours and hours on this topic and still debate the reasons but essentially a proportion of working class lads have always been involved in this sort of thing. Football violence can be traced back to the 1920's and before - it's nothing new. The disenfranchised will seek an identity (teddies, mods, rockers, skins, casuals, hoodies, etc) and also an outlet for their agression (gigs, football matches, bank holiday seaside resorts, riots, EDF rallies, estates, etc).

Great post. Very interesting. Some great books have been written on the subject of football violence, obviously most of them published in the 80's around the time.

It's a massive subject, sociologically, based very simplistically, around gang culture, groupthink, belonging to something an all that.

There has been a lot of stuff also written about the sociological impact on broader society of NOT allowing people to engage in football violence. Eg. The prevalence of domestic violence has risen year on year and links are made to this ie. the argument is that young men have to vent frustration in some way, and if not in football related stuff, it may appear elsewhere.

I'm not advocating this of course, I just find the whole subject fascinating.

[1964FOX]

Great post. Very interesting. Some great books have been written on the subject of football violence, obviously most of them published in the 80's around the time.

It's a massive subject, sociologically, based very simplistically, around gang culture, groupthink, belonging to something an all that.

There has been a lot of stuff also written about the sociological impact on broader society of NOT allowing people to engage in football violence. Eg. The prevalence of domestic violence has risen year on year and links are made to this ie. the argument is that young men have to vent frustration in some way, and if not in football related stuff, it may appear elsewhere.

I'm not advocating this of course, I just find the whole subject fascinating.

I have to agree I also find this subject fascinating, a very strange dynamic. Clearly there are those who are simply violent but a lot of them are otherwise very nice peope who turn into some sort of monster when in a group at a football match. There is no excuse for any sort of football violence and I very glad it is now all but gone but I find it a very interesting subject especially as I have an inside angle on it, employment wise not involvement.