Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Trust make formal complaint to FA
Comments
-
I haven't received mine. Stamps foot.1
-
Got mine......... another good read.
0 -
Got mine too, and that was indeed a great piece. Loved the picture of Roly as the Mad Hatter.Dippenhall said:Got my copy of the CAST newsletter and congrats to the team. Especially enjoyed Heather's Alice in Wonderland piece recommend it to anyone who hasn't read it.
0 -
I think we plan to do it, bear with us, and thanks for the idea.shirty5 said:
A week tomorrow since the complaint was passed. Anything from them? Any consideration passing this on to the Kick it Out campaign?castrust said:After consideration, the Charlton Athletic Supporters' Trust have now made a formal complaint to the FA regarding comments made by CEO Katrien Meire earlier this month.
We have asked The FA to investigate a breach of conduct regulations and the possibility of bringing the game into disrepute.
The full complaint letter can be read here.
3 -
Hope it was a first class one, Curb_It.Curb_It said:I haven't received mine. Stamps foot.
You know what the Post Office is like....
0 -
Seriously? This again? I thought we'd just put this tedious debate to sleep.Dippenhall said:
@Mametz I suggest you revisit your third hand reference to the Football Offences Act and correct your facts.Mametz said:
I can see where you are coming from and in many cases I would agree with you but when one is calling for an enquiry into somebody else's integrity it is important that one's statement of the facts is beyond reproach.iainment said:You might not be seeking it but sometimes things are best left unsaid.
As we know any team performs best with a united front. Don't give anything to the other side, let them work it out themselves.
The law does not make it an offence to throw to throw "anything" on the pitch, it categorically refers to throwing "any missile" in the direction of the pitch.
So you could throw a crisp packet into the air that lands on the pitch and it would not be an offence because (i) it is not a missile if it does not have a target and (ii) a missile has the character of a weapon see Webster definition:
"...an object (as a weapon) thrown or projected usually so as to strike something at a distance"
For a beach ball or any other object to be defined as a missile it must have been propelled with force intended to cause injury.
Get a life.
There's no need to be so condescending as to tell someone to "Get a life"; let alone when you're arguing to toss something that's already been addressed multiple times. In fact, the exact wording has been quoted verbatim from The Football (Offences) Act 1991 (via legislation.gov.uk) three times in this thread.
Despite the specific offence being quoted 3 times in this thread, you still appear to simply be wrong when you state "does not make it an offence to throw [to throw] "anything" on the pitch, it categorically refers to throwing "any missile":2. Throwing of missiles.
If you have a copy of the act that has different wording then I'm genuinely interested, because every where I've looked it's used the precise words "to throw anything": despite the section title.
It is an offence for a person at a designated football match to throw anything at or towards—
(a)the playing area, or any area adjacent to the playing area to which spectators are not generally admitted, or
(b)any area in which spectators or other persons are or may be present,
without lawful authority or lawful excuse (which shall be for him to prove).
It was debated at the time, and it's been debated here - Mametz would appear to be correct as per the wording of the act. The chances of it ever being enforced in the context of a beachball is obviously zero - it's not in the public interest; no harm has been caused to anyone nor is it any way a serious action.
Move on.2 -
I threw verbals at Iain Dowie countless times, I think I best hand myself in before they get to me!
It's all in the eye of the beholder, laws will always cover their based and a broader spectrum than perhaps need be to cover freak cases etc.
Anyway back on topic.. let's pray for the FA to pull their fingers out and give us a response, shoving it under the carpet when it involves issues such as mentioning racism is not a great idea for them, imho.0 -
If you have a copy of the act that has different wording then I'm genuinely interested, because every where I've looked it's used the precise words "to throw anything": despite the section title.LuckyReds said:
Seriously? This again? I thought we'd just put this tedious debate to sleep.Dippenhall said:
@Mametz I suggest you revisit your third hand reference to the Football Offences Act and correct your facts.Mametz said:
I can see where you are coming from and in many cases I would agree with you but when one is calling for an enquiry into somebody else's integrity it is important that one's statement of the facts is beyond reproach.iainment said:You might not be seeking it but sometimes things are best left unsaid.
As we know any team performs best with a united front. Don't give anything to the other side, let them work it out themselves.
The law does not make it an offence to throw to throw "anything" on the pitch, it categorically refers to throwing "any missile" in the direction of the pitch.
So you could throw a crisp packet into the air that lands on the pitch and it would not be an offence because (i) it is not a missile if it does not have a target and (ii) a missile has the character of a weapon see Webster definition:
"...an object (as a weapon) thrown or projected usually so as to strike something at a distance"
For a beach ball or any other object to be defined as a missile it must have been propelled with force intended to cause injury.
Get a life.
There's no need to be so condescending as to tell someone to "Get a life"; let alone when you're arguing to toss something that's already been addressed multiple times. In fact, the exact wording has been quoted verbatim from The Football (Offences) Act 1991 (via legislation.gov.uk) three times in this thread.
Despite the specific offence being quoted 3 times in this thread, you still appear to simply be wrong when you state "does not make it an offence to throw [to throw] "anything" on the pitch, it categorically refers to throwing "any missile":2. Throwing of missiles.
It is an offence for a person at a designated football match to throw anything at or towards—
(a)the playing area, or any area adjacent to the playing area to which spectators are not generally admitted, or
(b)any area in which spectators or other persons are or may be present,
without lawful authority or lawful excuse (which shall be for him to prove).
It was debated at the time, and it's been debated here - Mametz would appear to be correct as per the wording of the act. The chances of it ever being enforced in the context of a beachball is obviously zero - it's not in the public interest; no harm has been caused to anyone nor is it any way a serious action.
Move on.
This.
0 -
Yup, very enjoyableDippenhall said:Got my copy of the CAST newsletter and congrats to the team. Especially enjoyed Heather's Alice in Wonderland piece recommend it to anyone who hasn't read it.
0 -
How come everyone's got theirs bar me? Sort it out trust....
Okay, I will wait patiently as I'm sure its a big job.1 -
Sponsored links:
-
If you have a copy of the act that has different wording then I'm genuinely interested, because every where I've looked it's used the precise words "to throw anything": despite the section title.LuckyReds said:
Seriously? This again? I thought we'd just put this tedious debate to sleep.Dippenhall said:
@Mametz I suggest you revisit your third hand reference to the Football Offences Act and correct your facts.Mametz said:
I can see where you are coming from and in many cases I would agree with you but when one is calling for an enquiry into somebody else's integrity it is important that one's statement of the facts is beyond reproach.iainment said:You might not be seeking it but sometimes things are best left unsaid.
As we know any team performs best with a united front. Don't give anything to the other side, let them work it out themselves.
The law does not make it an offence to throw to throw "anything" on the pitch, it categorically refers to throwing "any missile" in the direction of the pitch.
So you could throw a crisp packet into the air that lands on the pitch and it would not be an offence because (i) it is not a missile if it does not have a target and (ii) a missile has the character of a weapon see Webster definition:
"...an object (as a weapon) thrown or projected usually so as to strike something at a distance"
For a beach ball or any other object to be defined as a missile it must have been propelled with force intended to cause injury.
Get a life.
There's no need to be so condescending as to tell someone to "Get a life"; let alone when you're arguing to toss something that's already been addressed multiple times. In fact, the exact wording has been quoted verbatim from The Football (Offences) Act 1991 (via legislation.gov.uk) three times in this thread.
Despite the specific offence being quoted 3 times in this thread, you still appear to simply be wrong when you state "does not make it an offence to throw [to throw] "anything" on the pitch, it categorically refers to throwing "any missile":2. Throwing of missiles.
It is an offence for a person at a designated football match to throw anything at or towards—
(a)the playing area, or any area adjacent to the playing area to which spectators are not generally admitted, or
(b)any area in which spectators or other persons are or may be present,
without lawful authority or lawful excuse (which shall be for him to prove).
It was debated at the time, and it's been debated here - Mametz would appear to be correct as per the wording of the act. The chances of it ever being enforced in the context of a beachball is obviously zero - it's not in the public interest; no harm has been caused to anyone nor is it any way a serious action.
Move on.
Section 2 Football Offences Act
"Throwing of missiles.
It is an offence for a person at a designated football match to throw anything at or towards......"
The "anything" is under the heading "Throwing Missiles" ergo throwing anything which constitutes a missile.
Move on.
0 -
That would seem to be a very vague approach to drafting legislation. If the people drafting the legislation meant "any missile", they could have written "any missile". The fact that they chose to write "anything" makes me inclined to believe they meant "anything".Dippenhall said:
The "anything" is under the heading "Throwing Missiles" ergo throwing anything which constitutes a missile.
Move on.
Personally, I read the sentence that follows the heading as defining the term missile, not the other way around.
1 -
Section 2 Football Offences ActDippenhall said:
If you have a copy of the act that has different wording then I'm genuinely interested, because every where I've looked it's used the precise words "to throw anything": despite the section title.LuckyReds said:
Seriously? This again? I thought we'd just put this tedious debate to sleep.Dippenhall said:
@Mametz I suggest you revisit your third hand reference to the Football Offences Act and correct your facts.Mametz said:
I can see where you are coming from and in many cases I would agree with you but when one is calling for an enquiry into somebody else's integrity it is important that one's statement of the facts is beyond reproach.iainment said:You might not be seeking it but sometimes things are best left unsaid.
As we know any team performs best with a united front. Don't give anything to the other side, let them work it out themselves.
The law does not make it an offence to throw to throw "anything" on the pitch, it categorically refers to throwing "any missile" in the direction of the pitch.
So you could throw a crisp packet into the air that lands on the pitch and it would not be an offence because (i) it is not a missile if it does not have a target and (ii) a missile has the character of a weapon see Webster definition:
"...an object (as a weapon) thrown or projected usually so as to strike something at a distance"
For a beach ball or any other object to be defined as a missile it must have been propelled with force intended to cause injury.
Get a life.
There's no need to be so condescending as to tell someone to "Get a life"; let alone when you're arguing to toss something that's already been addressed multiple times. In fact, the exact wording has been quoted verbatim from The Football (Offences) Act 1991 (via legislation.gov.uk) three times in this thread.
Despite the specific offence being quoted 3 times in this thread, you still appear to simply be wrong when you state "does not make it an offence to throw [to throw] "anything" on the pitch, it categorically refers to throwing "any missile":2. Throwing of missiles.
It is an offence for a person at a designated football match to throw anything at or towards—
(a)the playing area, or any area adjacent to the playing area to which spectators are not generally admitted, or
(b)any area in which spectators or other persons are or may be present,
without lawful authority or lawful excuse (which shall be for him to prove).
It was debated at the time, and it's been debated here - Mametz would appear to be correct as per the wording of the act. The chances of it ever being enforced in the context of a beachball is obviously zero - it's not in the public interest; no harm has been caused to anyone nor is it any way a serious action.
Move on.
"Throwing of missiles.
It is an offence for a person at a designated football match to throw anything at or towards......"
The "anything" is under the heading "Throwing Missiles" ergo throwing anything which constitutes a missile.
Move on.
Dippenhall,
It is a bit strange that you resurrect this thread after five days, state your point of view and then you people to move on.
I am not a lawyer but I have had lots of occasions in my job where I have had to look at a law and interpret what it's intended meaning is.
In this case I looked at at the Act itself, not "third hand", as you incorrectly and pointlessly state, and my understanding would be that the reference " to throw anything" is the definition the Act intends the word "missile" to mean. In my experience the law frequently does this to avoid semantic arguments that could result in comparing Webster's and other dictionaries.
I am prepared to leave it there but I won't tell people " move on" if they might know more on this subject than I do and could correct me.
3 -
Dippenhall said:
If you have a copy of the act that has different wording then I'm genuinely interested, because every where I've looked it's used the precise words "to throw anything": despite the section title.LuckyReds said:
Seriously? This again? I thought we'd just put this tedious debate to sleep.Dippenhall said:
@Mametz I suggest you revisit your third hand reference to the Football Offences Act and correct your facts.Mametz said:
I can see where you are coming from and in many cases I would agree with you but when one is calling for an enquiry into somebody else's integrity it is important that one's statement of the facts is beyond reproach.iainment said:You might not be seeking it but sometimes things are best left unsaid.
As we know any team performs best with a united front. Don't give anything to the other side, let them work it out themselves.
The law does not make it an offence to throw to throw "anything" on the pitch, it categorically refers to throwing "any missile" in the direction of the pitch.
So you could throw a crisp packet into the air that lands on the pitch and it would not be an offence because (i) it is not a missile if it does not have a target and (ii) a missile has the character of a weapon see Webster definition:
"...an object (as a weapon) thrown or projected usually so as to strike something at a distance"
For a beach ball or any other object to be defined as a missile it must have been propelled with force intended to cause injury.
Get a life.
There's no need to be so condescending as to tell someone to "Get a life"; let alone when you're arguing to toss something that's already been addressed multiple times. In fact, the exact wording has been quoted verbatim from The Football (Offences) Act 1991 (via legislation.gov.uk) three times in this thread.
Despite the specific offence being quoted 3 times in this thread, you still appear to simply be wrong when you state "does not make it an offence to throw [to throw] "anything" on the pitch, it categorically refers to throwing "any missile":2. Throwing of missiles.
It is an offence for a person at a designated football match to throw anything at or towards—
(a)the playing area, or any area adjacent to the playing area to which spectators are not generally admitted, or
(b)any area in which spectators or other persons are or may be present,
without lawful authority or lawful excuse (which shall be for him to prove).
It was debated at the time, and it's been debated here - Mametz would appear to be correct as per the wording of the act. The chances of it ever being enforced in the context of a beachball is obviously zero - it's not in the public interest; no harm has been caused to anyone nor is it any way a serious action.
Move on.
I can categorically state from previous actual legal experience that you are wrong in your reading and understanding of the legislation and in your reading and understanding of the definition for "missile".
Now everyone.....Move on..
Well done to the trust for a very well written complaint letter.2 -
@mametz this is also my reading of the Act.
Technically throwing anything onto or towards the pitch is illegal.
That is not to say it is criminal, but illegal, yes.0 -
Can I just say I am completely indifferent to the law on throwing missiles or stress balls on the pitch. Zero interest. This was another crowbar to try to remove the infestation from our club. That's all. To keep their pitifull profile in the public eye. Sanctimony won't remove them. Katrien made a whole series of horrible statements referring to our fan base last season. The question is to make their presence at the Valley so hatefull they would rather leave forever. CAST and CARD are both doing their best to force the vermin to consider leaving. Anything else is a waste of time.
#getthemout8 -
Very good read this addition, well done to the Trust0
-
Has everyone "moved on" now?
If so, where have they all moved to? Just wanted to know as I don't really fancy going there.3 -
Not sure........Off_it said:Has everyone "moved on" now?
If so, where have they all moved to? Just wanted to know as I don't really fancy going there.
When people ask me how I am I reply "getting there......"
Don't know where "There" is 'tho......0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Curb_It said:
How come everyone's got theirs bar me? Sort it out trust....
Okay, I will wait patiently as I'm sure its a big job.
The Trust has a generous equal opportunities policy which endeavours to embrace all disadvantaged groups, but I'm not sure if it extends to Plumstead. If it doesn't turn up tomorrow maybe Badger would lend you his ?2 -
Haha, cheeky Pico!
Your names off the list. :-)
0 -
Thank you!Dippenhall said:Got my copy of the CAST newsletter and congrats to the team. Especially enjoyed Heather's Alice in Wonderland piece recommend it to anyone who hasn't read it.
0 -
Excellent read, especially enjoyed the 'Alice in Wonderland' piece by Heather. Keep up the fight.0
-
Yes, @Dippenhall has misunderstood the purpose of the headings to sections in Acts of Parliament. To quote Lord Justice Harman: if there were no doubt at all about the meaning of the paragraph, it would not be right to overrule it by the heading.DRAddick said:Dippenhall said:
If you have a copy of the act that has different wording then I'm genuinely interested, because every where I've looked it's used the precise words "to throw anything": despite the section title.LuckyReds said:
Seriously? This again? I thought we'd just put this tedious debate to sleep.Dippenhall said:
@Mametz I suggest you revisit your third hand reference to the Football Offences Act and correct your facts.Mametz said:
I can see where you are coming from and in many cases I would agree with you but when one is calling for an enquiry into somebody else's integrity it is important that one's statement of the facts is beyond reproach.iainment said:You might not be seeking it but sometimes things are best left unsaid.
As we know any team performs best with a united front. Don't give anything to the other side, let them work it out themselves.
The law does not make it an offence to throw to throw "anything" on the pitch, it categorically refers to throwing "any missile" in the direction of the pitch.
So you could throw a crisp packet into the air that lands on the pitch and it would not be an offence because (i) it is not a missile if it does not have a target and (ii) a missile has the character of a weapon see Webster definition:
"...an object (as a weapon) thrown or projected usually so as to strike something at a distance"
For a beach ball or any other object to be defined as a missile it must have been propelled with force intended to cause injury.
Get a life.
There's no need to be so condescending as to tell someone to "Get a life"; let alone when you're arguing to toss something that's already been addressed multiple times. In fact, the exact wording has been quoted verbatim from The Football (Offences) Act 1991 (via legislation.gov.uk) three times in this thread.
Despite the specific offence being quoted 3 times in this thread, you still appear to simply be wrong when you state "does not make it an offence to throw [to throw] "anything" on the pitch, it categorically refers to throwing "any missile":2. Throwing of missiles.
It is an offence for a person at a designated football match to throw anything at or towards—
(a)the playing area, or any area adjacent to the playing area to which spectators are not generally admitted, or
(b)any area in which spectators or other persons are or may be present,
without lawful authority or lawful excuse (which shall be for him to prove).
It was debated at the time, and it's been debated here - Mametz would appear to be correct as per the wording of the act. The chances of it ever being enforced in the context of a beachball is obviously zero - it's not in the public interest; no harm has been caused to anyone nor is it any way a serious action.
Move on.
I can categorically state from previous actual legal experience that you are wrong in your reading and understanding of the legislation and in your reading and understanding of the definition for "missile".
Now everyone.....Move on..
Well done to the trust for a very well written complaint letter.0 -
And thank you, too.Eynsfordaddick said:Excellent read, especially enjoyed the 'Alice in Wonderland' piece by Heather. Keep up the fight.
0 -
Has the FA sent a response?0
-
They could at least give an honest response 'Dear CAST, you seem to be under the mistaken impression that the FA exists for some purpose other than to provide a talking shop for stuffed shirts and Blazers. Having read your complaint, the chaps had a little chortle and have decided the appropriate response is to do FA.
Yours sincerely
Mr waste of space.2 -
Any response from the FA? And have you informed the Kick it out, organisation?0
