Israel / Palestine
- Thread starter Beebo
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
dutchguylivingintheuk
Veteran
It was the other way around, yes they where some ''ultras'' among the macabi fans but political denial lead to a police force understaffed and underequipped to prevent an gaint mob attacking Macabi fans because they where Jewish, in the tiktok/X/maroc.nl forums they spoke of jew-hunting.
Amsterdam(Major police etc.) decided to take these indications before the game not to serious because otherwise they feared headlines like ''Macabi fans refused, due to muslim youths'' which is exactly what happened adding to that, there was someone in the water it was not a muslim no it was a Macabi fan because he saw no other way to escape and random attack.
Similar with widely reported attack on a taxi driver it turned out the taxi driver was the one attacking, wonder which religion of peace he followed? Exactly he was not a christian and not a jew,
spen666
Über Member
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...o-safety-advisory-groups-west-midlands-police
The actual report by HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary
The actual report by HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary
Psamathe
Guru
I'm getting confused about different aspects becoming conflated.
Is Home Secretary losing confidence because she didn't like the ban of Maccabi supporters or because Chief Constable used AI and inadvertently/stupidly passed AI untruths to a Parliamentary Committee.
My understanding is the Maccabi supporter ban was due to the risk of violence. Doesn't make much difference who was going to be violent against who, either way to avoid violence the Police felt they didn't have the capacity to control they recommended a ban.
It must be more political or social policy if it's the case that it's local Muslim groups who presented the risk from Israel's actions against Palestinians - not something for Police to resolve.
I'm increasingly feeling Police use of AI is being used to condemn the banning decision (and hence make it "antisemitic") basically conflating quite separate issues.
Is Home Secretary losing confidence because she didn't like the ban of Maccabi supporters or because Chief Constable used AI and inadvertently/stupidly passed AI untruths to a Parliamentary Committee.
My understanding is the Maccabi supporter ban was due to the risk of violence. Doesn't make much difference who was going to be violent against who, either way to avoid violence the Police felt they didn't have the capacity to control they recommended a ban.
It must be more political or social policy if it's the case that it's local Muslim groups who presented the risk from Israel's actions against Palestinians - not something for Police to resolve.
I'm increasingly feeling Police use of AI is being used to condemn the banning decision (and hence make it "antisemitic") basically conflating quite separate issues.
spen666
Über Member
Possibly one of the most horrific things I have ever heard.
Are you really advocating that mob ruloe applies.
Do you think women should have to stay at home and not go on nights out because police cannot prevent men attacking and raping women.
Basically you are arguing for the punishment of the victim by giving into the aggressors.
No doubt you support Putin in stealing Ukranian land and believe Trump will be right to steal Greenland.
It is not for the police to ban victims. What sort of society do you want to live in?
Psamathe
Guru
I note you chopped off that last part of my sentence so you could be outraged. The sentence continued ", either way to avoid violence the Police felt they didn't have the capacity to control they recommended a ban." (same paragraph, even same sentence!).
The context of that comment was in relation to whether there should be a ban on the supporters or not. If the Police felt they would have been unable to control any violence they they have to prevent it from happening. To allow something to go ahead when they believe there would be violence beyond their ability to control it would be irresponsible.
The social implications of that are not under Police control and are for others to address.
ie it is not the job of Police to address and resolve the ills of society but to prevent crime and keep the population safe.
AuroraSaab
Pharaoh
Wasn't the issue that they blamed Maccabee fans for the risk though? In not being honest that it was also about fears of violence from others West Midlands Police in effect stopped an important, relevant issue from being brought to light. It's not their job to address all society's ills but it's not within their remit to cover them up either.
PurplePenguin
Senior Member
The police routinely make decisions about football matches. Allocations are cut, matches rescheduled etc. all in the name of security. Why does this particular decision attract so much attention?
spen666
Über Member
I cut lots off because it was not relevant to the point I was making
You seem to impose punishing victims and supporting mob rule if the mob break the law sufficiently.-
It is never acceptable to support criminals by banning the victims.
You clearly have not thought through the bigger picture of what you are supporting. It is a horrific situation you want to exist
PurplePenguin
Senior Member
Also, to add, clubs are paired such that they can't play at home on the same day e.g. Arsenal and Tottenham, Manchester United and City, Liverpool and Everton.
Furthermore, if Cologne ever play Arsenal again, I'm fine with their fans being banned. They're not safe.
Furthermore, if Cologne ever play Arsenal again, I'm fine with their fans being banned. They're not safe.
AuroraSaab
Pharaoh
Because the justification given was the violence likely from visiting fans, hiding the fact that it was also about the violence likely from homegrown activists towards those fans. It's not unreasonable to expect the police to be honest and transparent in their decision making, especially contentious ones.
AuroraSaab
Pharaoh
Is that because opposing supporters will fight if they're in the same town together or so one city's force doesn't need double the number of officers on duty on the same day? They don't cancel the FA Cup if it's Liverpool vs Everton.
Last edited:
spen666
Über Member
Predominantly due to numbers to police it - as you say Liverpool play Everton at least twice a season.
Its also partially because you would have 4 sets of fans in area if both teams were at home..... and the chief constable wants his free seats at both games *
The latter is of course just a made up libellous allegation with no known basis in fact
matticus
Legendary Member
Well that escalated quickly!
PurplePenguin
Senior Member
An example. If Arsenal play Spurs at home, then there are 57,000 Arsenal fans and 3,000 Spurs fans in the premier league. In theory, in the FA Cup, Spurs would receive an allocation of 9,000, but there is no way the police will allow that, so the allocation would be cut (a security decision and Arsenal would be fined). The kick-off time of the match is subject to police review - they have a strong preference for it to not be a late kick-off to prevent pre-match drinking. Their approach on this has softened lately though.
The Spurs fans arrive by a dedicated entrance with extra police and horses. They are often prevented from leaving at the end of the match to allow crowds to disperse first and then they are given an escort out of the area.
In London, there is the policing available to police more than one event (maybe not in Liverpool), so it would be possible for both Spurs and Arsenal to play at home, but then there would be 57,000 Arsenal fans and a similar number of Spurs ones all out in North London on overlapping transport routes. This could, of course, be policed, but it would mean that they would need more police in total than they would if the matches were on different days, so they play on different days.
All of these precautions are taken for Arsenal and Spurs. They're rivals, but pretty docile in the grand scheme of things and there's rarely any trouble.
I'm cynical of many things the UK police do, but they are pretty good with football games.
When Arsenal play away at more hostile places such as Roma, they arrange special buses to transport fans directly to the stadium. The buses are often attacked. It's generally a disgrace. Nothing seems to be done about it. It's not headline news.
Presumably buses were an option for the Villa match; however, in addition to all the Villa fans, the police would have had to deal with protestors who believe that Israeli teams should not be participating and the thoroughly pleasant Maccabi fans. It's worth noting that the CEO of Maccabi has admitted they have a racism problem. I believe the police said, the match could go ahead if they had more police available. This all seems pretty standard stuff to me and not worthy of government comment.