All Activity

Obviously I mean that any infringement of the law is dealt with by the law in the country where the offence took place. Motherwell is a Scottish club. So I mentioned Scottish law. If a Motherwell fan assaulted someone while following our club in Europe, I obviously wouldn't expect the Scottish authorities to deal with it. The same applies here. Scotland explicitly criminalises football-match possession of pyro. From what I can see, Germany regulates pyro mainly through general explosives law and stadium/football regulations. We could potentially identify the culprits and deal with them at club level, as I mentioned previously.

We were fined 20,000 Euros for fans discharging pyro in Germany. Even if we were able to identify them, I can't see the Scottish police taking any action.

No one is saying that, though, especially not me. I said if anyone is seen to be breaking the law (and under the Fireworks and Pyrotechnic Articles Scotland Act 2022, it is an offence to possess pyrotechnic articles at designated sporting events) then they should be dealt with accordingly by the authorities, as well as "alongside their season ticket being revoked and them personally being banned."

Do you think Block E, the Bois, or whatever they are called this week walk about with Membership cards in their wallets? How do you ban 'a group' from Fir Park? I keep referring to the lad, who left the stand against Freiburg, if the club wanted to lay down a marker, then he'd be the best way to go about it. Maybe the club think its not worth the hassle, or think the fine is worth paying, or think (inwardly) that the fine for it is ridiculous...I dont know, but I do find it odd that its never been dealt with, as I reckon someone will know who he is.

The club have the final say who gets into the ground or not, they are judge and jury re any alleged infringements of the ground rules, code of conduct etc not the police. So the club can ban any individual or group they want from the ground, suspend ST's etc If however these infringements also break any current laws in force then yes the police should be involved as they have a duty of care re public saftey, although i would not hold my breath waiting for that to happen. Nothing is difficult here, how much cash are the club willing to waste on fines and sanctions before they take decisive action, instead of sitting back paying the fines and hoping the problem will go away.

I agree action could only work on an individual basis. Season Ticket holder or not, that should be the route taken. Groups should not be penalised for the actions of one or two. But Motherwell simply identifying individuals and then passing the buck to the police and Court System is nonsense. It's Motherwell who are falling foul of the Authorities, so it's up to them to come up with an effective, direct solution. If the police witness instances where they believe the Courts should be involved....assault as an example....then that's down to them. As is happening elsewhere. This is Motherwell's problem to solve and they have the means available. Like any other business they are entitled to exclude anyone who disrupts that business. Whether they are willing to use that right appears to be the issue.

There's no middle ground then? It's either come in and read the riot act and issue threats, or do nothing? Here's a question. You say that areas of the stadium should be closed if people don't toe the line. Cool. What about season ticket holders in that area who aren't guilty of anything? Are you forcing them to move seats? Where are you putting them? Or are you telling someone who happens to sit in that section of the ground that they're out on their ear because someone lit a flare? Season ticket paid for, but no longer valid? That's a nice little court case waiting to happen. Unless you have some answer to the above that would legally cover the arse of the club, then it's unworkable. The situation can easily be remedied. You don't aim any messaging or threats at any "groups", you simply say that anyone who is identified as breaking the law will have their details handed to the police. Simple as that. From there, it will be the decision of the country's legal framework to decide what happens, alongside their season ticket being revoked and them personally being banned.

Aye ok then, have lots of negotiations and ask them all nicely to behave knowing they will ignore you because they know nothing will happen. Then the club can start to worry about the next lot of fines or sanctions heading to Fir park for the club to cover, tens of thousands wasted due to their inabillity or willingness to take any action.

Is there a single instance in the history of football where being heavy-handed, banning groups of people from grounds, shutting areas of the stadium and so on has actually ever worked long-term? We've seen it tried in this country and others. That approach doesn't work.

Its got to be individuals...any grouping is far too loose as explained by Mr Watson. As for the pitch invader (again singular), this must be the easiest person to identify...but maybe the club are happy to pay it lip service.

The club needs to grow a set and get tough, whatever you think about the rules and regulations at the ground they are there for a reason for all fans to follow and comply. The only "negotiation" required is "listen carefully i shall say this only once" anymore pyro displays, pitch incursions, or behaviour contrary to the code of conduct will not be tolerated, and groups or individuals identified as culpable will be banned from the ground, areas of the stadium shut etc. Is that clear.

Clubs simply cannot stop fans from entering the pitch area. But for those that do there should be repercussions. Be it a short term ban for individuals or an extended ban if repeated. Might not stop the Club being fined but at least it would show the authorities that there is a willing to address the issue. That willingness would likely be reflected in any action taken against the club. What we have witnessed so far from Motherwell is a softly softly approach which has had no effect whatsoever. Now we hear of attempts to arrange meetings so that those who have consistently damaged the Club's reputation and hurt it financially can put their point of view across. Almost like a negotiation. Really! Who are we? Celtic? As weeyin says above, it really is quite simple. Stop using Pyros and/or invading the pitch or you will not be attending games.

Carrot and stick. Ask them not to do it. Negative consequences when they do. So far, the club has only implemented the first part.

I know I have mentioned this before (and the pyro is completely separate matter) but how does anyone stop a single, solitary person from going on the pitchside (the individual did not go on the park as far as I could tell.

I'm always in favour of engaging fans as often as possible, but "get their points across and find solutions" feels a bit like avoiding the issue. Unless and until the rules are changed, the solution for pitch invasions is "don't invade the pitch and the solution for pyro is "don't use pyro inside the ground.

Seems like the "adult" way ahead if we want to avoid the situation turning into a negative atmosphere at Fir Park. However, it does need to be more than just words and will require buy in by both sides. Particularly by those that like to push boundaries.

Copied and pasted. OK, I'll aim to address some of the above points which have been raised. Of course, I’m in a position where I’d have a way in to speak to some of those in Block E, despite not being a member of that group, as I sit in that section and have known many of the long-standing members for several years now, but cards on the table, the “Well Bois” first started going to the games together around 15 years ago when some of Block E were still at Primary School. While we’re here it’s probably not of interest to anyone outside that section but as @thisGRAEME highlighted Bois and Block E are two separate groups. We’ve also got a member of Block E who was recently elected to the Society back earlier this year and is doing some excellent work with our events workstream, bringing fresh ideas to the table and hopefully enabling us to appeal to a younger audience with the rest of the board getting on a bit. That’s not me trying to avoid scrutiny, that’s me just setting out the situation. In a personal capacity or even with a Society hat on, it’s not easy for any individual to get a large group of 18/19 year olds who want to push the boundaries to listen to them, especially not one who is almost double their age. I'm sure you can imagine how that goes down from time to time. That said, to answer @ScottW1886's question around were conversations had and they ploughed on regardless, the answer to that is no. Many conversations have been had since then though and hopefully we can make some progress. I’d like to think those who are vocally pro-pyro, and especially those who want to argue for safe or legal usage (something I've done in the past), can see when there have been incidents that have resulted injury or cost the club money then discussions needs to be had I can’t comment for the Club but speaking personally I’m very much against collective punishment, others will have different views, but I think we need to avoid a large fall-out situation. We can’t change what’s happened in the past, but we can change how we work going forward. FYI, I've helped facilitate a meeting that has been scheduled for next week where the representatives from the Club Board and the Society will meet with the guys from that section. Again, I can’t comment for the Club so I can’t say what actions will come from that for now, but to their credit the Board and notably the Chairman have said they want as many from Block E as possible, especially younger guys who they may not have engaged with previously, to be present so they can get their points across and find solutions.

Must say I’m missing the SPL - to have almost 3 weeks off for this utter tosh is not enjoyable . feels like we crammed in a stupid amount of games , didn’t get a full pre season and then put the breaks on for weeks for a glorified set of friendlies

Do you have a link?

100% agree. Apparently Robertson said '...as a defender, it is almost instinctive not to simply allow a striker to shoot, with “every fibre” telling you to do something to stop him' When you're a professional player I'd expect your instinct not to get sent off for a DOGSO should be well developed.

Never heard AR but it wasn't a split second thing , he had time to decide and back off , Scotland dont help themselves with the self sabotage.

Good post from Derek Watson over on P&B about the situation for anyone interested.

For an allegedly experienced international defender to make that challenge is inexcusable. I know Robertson was doing his bit as captain trying to explain that it's a defender's mindset to never let anyone past them, but that just made it worse for me. As I've said a few times, I remember Fergie always saying that he drilled his defenders to never commit fouls like that. His approach was that the striker still had to find the target and beat the keeper - and if they did score, he'd want 11 players on the pitch to respond. That's the mindset you should have as a top defender, especially that early in the game. Hope Miller gets a run out soon or he might start looking for an Irish granny.

Thought it was a stupid and lazy challenge, even if he had tried to make it look like a genuine challenge for the ball, he might have got away with a yellow or just let attacker shoot...sold the jerseys in first 10 mins.

Let’s hope Miller gets a start against North Macedonia. Ferguson has done absolutely nothing in these past two games to justify retaining his spot. In fact, he was absolutely dugmeat against Switzerland.