News: Rugby league fans in mass brawl

[vidmar]

We didn't see anything after the match (mind you we went round the back of the Eastern Stand back to the carpark after the game)
Certainly wasn't anyone off the supporters bus and most of the regulars (were on the Southern Hill Western side not the Joey Johns Stand.)
As usual, no problems with the locals (We were stood at the back of the Hill on the concourse behind the main Manly group) and a cheery G'day fellas as we took our spot and a bit of banter about the game and our losing streak and we chatted with local supporters during the game without incident (good set of lads as it happens)
**** result and I must admit to being filthy as I left the ground and the in-bred wearing the Tigers baseball cap (Go figure?) that tried to give us a serve at the end of the game was in la la land and was basically (and graphically) told to go away by us and also a couple of knights fans which he promptly did.

 

[Dan]

If you are going to quote me you should quote the full sentence! You clearly can read only fragments of sentences.

The full quote is

I dont care who was at fault, but whoever it was for either teams supporters should face a life ban for the football. A disgusting low act and totally unneeded.

Translated for you says
"I dont care who was at fault, but whoever it was should face a life ban"

The point I am making is that, I dont care which team they supported, whoever is at fault should be given the flick from football for life

 

[DSM5]

Life?  It was a brawl Dan, not a knifing.  No one died.  Life?  Maybe you think Choc should have been banned for life for hitting a sponsor.  Same thing really.  People get heated and act impulsivly.  That shouldn't mean a life sentence for something regretted.       

 

[Dan]

Life?  It was a brawl Dan, not a knifing.  No one died.  Life?  Maybe you think Choc should have been banned for life for hitting a sponsor.  Same thing really.  People get heated and act impulsivly.  That shouldn't mean a life sentence for something regretted.        

With two people being repeatedly kicked in the head whilst they were down by a group of people.........really the kind of people that are best left away from football as fans.

A little punch up between 2 people I can handle, a group mentality brawl shows that those responsible cant be trusted at games.

I dont mind seeing a biff on the field, they rarely get out of hand, this is beyond that though

 

[ManlyBacker]

You are going against the code of this site Dan and starting to make sense. Four straight losses and it has to mean quadruple 'demerit points' for you this week

 

[Dan]

You are going against the code of this site Dan and starting to make sense. Four straight losses and it has to mean quadruple 'demerit points' for you this week

Yeah so it seems. When you take the emotion out of it all the whole thing makes more sense mate

 

[Rex]

What is wrong with you guys?  ... We like it ...   

You "like" watching people getting (allegedly) criminally bashed - both players on a field as well as fans in a carpark, DSM? And you assume we all "like" this too?

Does it matter whether they are Manly supporters or Newcastle supporters?  If we would condemn one and not the other, then how shallow and hypocritical would that make us?

 

[Rex]

No moral judgement on alcohol intended, but:

What is the role of alcohol in these type of incidents?  And what is the culpability of the people who profit from the increased sale of alcohol?

Who promoted and/or profited from the increased sale of alcohol to fans?  The Newcastle Knights?  The NRL?  And who would we expect to see desperately pointing the finger at others and accepting none of the responsibility?

 

[DSM5]

Rex, you're doing what Dan accuses me of, miss-quoting.  When there's a stink on the field , 'we', (the Royal 'we') the fans, get all excited and roar approval, or haven't you been to a match lately.  It's not chess out there.  Hypocricy is all around us Rex.  We fine Choc 10K for hitting a sponsor, then talk about banning a supporter for life for hitting another supporter.  If it is then we should call for the life banning of Choc.  Both incidents are not nice, but neither are they a life banning incident.  It's probably a police matter and someone will get charged and go to Court over it and plead their case.  Not guilty until proven.  Now where have I heard that?      

 

[Dan]

Rex, you're doing what Dan accuses me of, miss-quoting.  When there's a stink on the field , 'we', (the Royal 'we') the fans, get all excited and roar approval, or haven't you been to a match lately.  It's not chess out there.  Hypocricy is all around us Rex.  We fine Choc 10K for hitting a sponsor, then talk about banning a supporter for life for hitting another supporter.  If it is then we should call for the life banning of Choc.  Both incidents are not nice, but neither are they a life banning incident.  It's probably a police matter and someone will get charged and go to Court over it and plead their case.  Not guilty until proven.  Now where have I heard that?      

How often do you see a player on the ground, being kicked in the head by several other players?

The one or 2 times you have seen anything close, the one player responsible has faced long bans.

 

[DSM5]

The kicking is an allegation made by Newcastle supporters.  Only an allegation at this stage.  If it's proven, then sure a ban would be appropriate.  Not life, but a season would suffice, IF PROVEN.  We all shouted from the rooftops with Brett's problem that allegations are only that, allegations.  Not guilty until proven should be the mantra about all incidents, or the law of who shouts the loudest rules.. 

 

[Dan]

the difference between bretts case and this is both witnesses and victims with clear injuries

 

[DSM5]

Have you ever been in a brawl Dan?  There are always a miriad of witness and injuries.  All pointing the finger at others.  All with different stories about who pushed who, who started it etc..The point is that the presumption of innocence until proven is still important in any case.  And banning people for life is just way over the top.  Sort of reeks of Gallop.

 

[Dan]

Have you ever been in a brawl Dan?  There are always a miriad of witness and injuries.  All pointing the finger at others.  All with different stories about who pushed who, who started it etc..The point is that the presumption of innocence until proven is still important in any case.  And banning people for life is just way over the top.  Sort of reeks of Gallop.

Gladly no, as I may be a smart ass at the best of the times, I rarely act out in anger.

What of the injuries. Where there is smoke there is usually fire and there is plenty of fire.

And so what you are saying, is that you happy to take your children to games where brawls are possibly able to break out around you.......

 

[niccipops]

The passion of sport, the fuel of alcohol, that element of fans with not much between the ears and there's your result. It's not necessarily a who's at fault between Manly fans or Newcastle fans situation. It's yobbos on the grog acting like dickheads. I just wish those wearing Manly colours would refrain from doing this.
Everyone is innocent until proven guilty, but we don't need any more bad press attached to our club.

 

[DSM5]

No Dan, I don't deliberately take my kids to games to be at the brawls, but they do occasionally break out, yes even at Brookie,  and the yobs get ejected by the men in black.  End of story. 

 

[Dan]

No Dan, I don't deliberately take my kids to games to be at the brawls, but they do occasionally break out, yes even at Brookie,  and the yobs get ejected by the men in black.  End of story. 

This is clearly more than the few one on ones you occassionally get on the hill, and they are stamped out long before they turn into anything of the scale being reported here.

I never said you took your children to brookie to get in brawls, I said you are happy to take your children with known offenders still going....

 

[DSM5]

Only if they have it stamped on their foreheads Dan, or wear bright orange overalls. 

 

[Jatz Crackers]

Only if they have it stamped on their foreheads Dan, or wear bright orange overalls. 

Green also.

 

[DSM5]

Why green Jatz?