Jump to content
Cornwall Football Forum

We Two

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


We Two last won the day on February 13

We Two had the most liked content!

About We Two

  • Rank
    Premier Contributor

Recent Profile Visitors

1,597 profile views
  1. WE'RE ALL DOOMED CAPTAIN MAINWARING ! WE'RE ALL DOOMED !!! This thread has run its course, lets not pre-judge Falmouths or St Blazeys ability to create a safe enviroment based on past experiences or we will end up debating every game that St Blazey play. With 9 x red cards 48 x yellow and 7 x sin bin, there can be no doubt that Blazey have their behavioural problems and it's down to them to sort it out, one thing for sure is that their demise will not be helped by pre-judging them on this forum before every game they play.
  2. And some fell on stoney ground ! Promotion of these events won't help stop them, lets hope we can learn to behave responsibly before someone is injured.
  3. Our post was about advice to an individual who had made certain allegations of a certain calibre about another individual, nothing of which would involve the F.A. unless by choice.
  4. It was made abundantly clear to the majority who the comments were aimed at, and it wasn't Mickey Mouse, to name the office he holds is enough. If anyone has what they believe to be a legitimate doubt about the law, check out why a wolves fan has a total bill of £1,450 presented to him by the LAW courts for his behaviour at a match. Theres no doubt that unpleasantries took place, and hopefully the perpetrator gets his come uppance, what we were warning Leeds against was naming a person as being responsible for inviting him to the ground in the knowledge that he would cause problems and was invited for that reason. No one named ??
  5. The written word if seen to be defamatory by an agrieved person at whom the remarks were aimed, does not come under the jurisdiction of the F.A. M'lud. The law states that defamation is defined as:- Words that cause harm to your reputation or livelihood. The law also states that:- Libel is a written defamatory statement. For those two reasons alone we thought that Leeds would appreciate our concern for his wellbeing, without predujice of course. Hopefully the whole episode will be put to bed and we can get on with supporting teams that concentrate on their football, and the supporters who don't have an agenda of badmouthing particular clubs at every opportunity.
  6. Read our quote which was that there is no hiding place etc, many of us on the forum know who he is, probably the majority FROM ST BLAZEY where Leeds spends some of his leisure time in the social club. Identifying him would be a piece of cake for that club and its officials if they were so minded. Flippant references to what could have been a serious event for all concerned will do little to diffuse a potentially corrosive atmosphere between fans.
  7. Be very careful Leeds, The Cornwall Football Forum is no hiding place if the accused decides to take legal action on grounds of unfounded character assassanation. You have already named his official capacity at St Blazey, so there is no doubt who you are referring to. To the neutral fans you do appear to have issues with certain clubs on a regular basis , St Blazey being one of them.
  8. Come on Leeds, get your facts right, Bodmin were playing at home ! 😂
  9. Without downgrading the tragedy 40 miles up the road, where's the connection with a debate on safety at football grounds on a football forum Al.
  10. That's good news providing the check involves confirmation that the insurers liability covers the criteria that step 6 upwards demands. With 40 clubs in the S.W.P.L. alone it's likely that several insurance companies and policys are involved, so if the question posed is do you have the required insurance answer yes or no, there is a good chance that some who honestly believe they have the right cover, may fall short of the mark. Unless of course the C.C.F.A. or an F.A. representative physically checks the policy, or unless clubs have had catagoricall details of what is required to be included in their policy. A lifetime of dealing with insurance companies teaches you to not only check every word in a policy, but also the possible interpretation of them. We need to point out that it's not our intention to alter the opinions of the people who have an opposite view to ours, but simply to point out the possible predicament that a club or supporter could innocently land themselves in through lack of the appropiate knowledge of a particular situation. Good luck to Falmouth, St Blazey, and the rest of the S.W.P.L. for the rest of the season, and to their law abiding supporters.
  11. Taking due care regarding the safety of the public that you encourage to enter an area that you are resposible for, is a legal requirement regardless of whether its a 20,000 capacity stadium or a toddlers play group of 20, That criteria also applies to sports groups at any level, or in a nutshell, any public event. It would also be worth checking if your Public Liability Policy covers you just for an accidental incident or an event like the one at Falmouth which could be construed as malice with intent and a whole new insurance ball game. ( No pun intended ) The idea that stadia rules and performance licences don't apply at a certain level, offers a false sense of security if used as a reason to avoid our responsibility to public safety. Much as in the case of selling alcohol to the public, the licencee would be ill advised not to have adequate insurance to cover disorder.
  12. Has anyone considered how their club would stand if some one was injured as a result of violent conduct and an insurance claim ensued.? If due care had not been taken to at least try to ensure the safety of its supporters, it's very doubtful that an insurance company would accept liability and committee members of the club involved would legally be held culpable. We are probably moving in to the realms of the unlikely we would hope, but as in the case of Falmouth they thought it unlikely that someone would be so idiotic as to approach opposition supporters with a lighted flare in the hope of causing trouble. Surely a couple of fellas with high viz coats emblazoned with the clubs name on them to indicate their authority to act on behalf of the club would be preferable to no authority at all. No need for any physical intervention, just advice that the police would be called if the problem persisted. We can bury our heads in the sand and hope that all goes well, but if it doesn't the final outcome is not likely to be very palatable, and clubs should recognise the duty of care they should take to protect their paying customers. This applies to all organisations and clubs that entertain the paying public, not just Falmouth or St Blazey !
  13. Argyle have thousands some weeks with no problems at all, then there are some weeks where they do. The idea that we had X number last week with no problem, so we won't have a problem next week doesn't work unfortunately, the clientele changes week on week. Based on that philosophy, our house didn't catch fire last year should we cancel our fire insurance ????
  14. As a potential deterrent to the perpetrator we would suggest, plus you will find that at other publically attended events, stewards are not only obligatory but so is first aid for the public attending the event. Failure to adhere to those requirements is a reason to close an event if the police consider there is a perceived danger to the public. Stewards will not stop the idiot element from attending a match and causing trouble, but at least the paying public are entitled to feel they have some form of protection if needed.
  • Create New...