This feels very wrong, police action

[Elysium]

AJS- said:

Elysium said:

I lost interest in his tale of persecution after reading the bit where he had to protest in a balaclava because there was a warrant out for his arrest.

Poor little lamb.

He's no poor little lamb at all and he's done some stupid stuff. But he is still apparently being targeted for who hr2is and what he says and thinks, not what he has done. That's dangerous for a supposedly free and democratic country whether you agree with him or not.

He is being moved on from the area of an 'away' football match because of the things he has done before and may do again.

i get that he wanted a nice family day out at the football, but did he forget the banning order?

Knowing that it was illegal for him to attend the match why take children along?

Why take those children to watch another match at a sports pub near the ground after that?

looks like a deliberate set up to me. Are we seriously supposed to accept that he genuinely believed the police would ignore a banning order because he was in a day out with the kids?

Biggest question here, what caused the pub security team to call the police in the first place?

[///ajd]

Many quick here to condemn the police on the back of a brietbart article relating to a convicted thug known for racist football hooliganism.

[Lucas CAV]

Elysium said:

AJS- said:

Elysium said:

I lost interest in his tale of persecution after reading the bit where he had to protest in a balaclava because there was a warrant out for his arrest.

Poor little lamb.

He's no poor little lamb at all and he's done some stupid stuff. But he is still apparently being targeted for who hr2is and what he says and thinks, not what he has done. That's dangerous for a supposedly free and democratic country whether you agree with him or not.

He is being moved on from the area of an 'away' football match because of the things he has done before and may do again.

i get that he wanted a nice family day out at the football, but did he forget the banning order?

Knowing that it was illegal for him to attend the match why take children along?

Why take those children to watch another match at a sports pub near the ground after that?

looks like a deliberate set up to me. Are we seriously supposed to accept that he genuinely believed the police would ignore a banning order because he was in a day out with the kids?

Biggest question here, what caused the pub security team to call the police in the first place?

He is a st stirrer - there were a thousand other things that he could've done as his family day out -

Those people defending him - look at what he's been involved in - he's shallow pond life out to stir up the hard of thinking -

[AJS-]

Elysium said:

He is being moved on from the area of an 'away' football match because of the things he has done before and may do again.

i get that he wanted a nice family day out at the football, but did he forget the banning order?

Knowing that it was illegal for him to attend the match why take children along?

Why take those children to watch another match at a sports pub near the ground after that?

looks like a deliberate set up to me. Are we seriously supposed to accept that he genuinely believed the police would ignore a banning order because he was in a day out with the kids?

Biggest question here, what caused the pub security team to call the police in the first place?

It seems strange that he was allowed to attend a match despite this, then ordered to leave the entire city. Is that a normal way to operate such an order?

Also the police didn't seem (unless I missed something? Sound is not great) to mention any football related banning order, just Section 35 dispersal powers. Is that how they would normally do this?

If there is a genuine reason then fair enough. I don't think Robinson is any angel at all but it does seem to have a nasty whiff of politicised policing to me.

[bitchstewie]

Perhaps they didn't know he was at the match whilst he was at the match, and by the time they realised he was in the pub?

There are any number of reasons, none of which Brietbart will bother to list as it doesn't suit their narrative of poor oppressed Tommy.

[Greendubber]

Bigends said:

Greendubber said:

Quite, I deal with lots of football 'risk' fans and all of the ones on banning orders get locked up if they breach. I have never seen a dispersal used to get rid of them if there is an offence they can be arrested for... such as breaching a banning order.

Cambs exec clearly werent happy having him in town so wanted him out.

Edited by Bigends on Sunday 28th August 23:54

Obviously but if he's breached a banning order he should have been arrested rather than dispersed.

[turbobloke]

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

Greendubber said:

Quite, I deal with lots of football 'risk' fans and all of the ones on banning orders get locked up if they breach. I have never seen a dispersal used to get rid of them if there is an offence they can be arrested for... such as breaching a banning order.

Cambs exec clearly werent happy having him in town so wanted him out.

Edited by Bigends on Sunday 28th August 23:54

Obviously but if he's breached a banning order he should have been arrested rather than dispersed.

As there is at least one link earlier in the thread regarding a ban, do you as BiB have any thoughts on how this individual got to watch the game - intel failure followed by realisation and a face saving exercise in the pub? This is nothing more than a question! After all if he was clocked in videos at the match, arrest would still be possible surely?

[voyds9]

Bigends said:

Why not simply arrest him for breaching th order then. Theres no point of the order being in placeif theyre not going to enforce it. What are the conditions of the order hes had imposed on him - it may only relate to home games

Perhaps because its under appeal.

And you may feel it was a stretch applying for it in the first place after reading the following

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/tommy-robinson-ex-edl-lea...

He seems to generally sail very close to breaking the law but staying defensibly on the lawful side. He appears to be a reasonably clever man (or his team) and I would imagine most of his actions are done with an awful lot of planning.

[Elysium]

AJS- said:

Elysium said:

He is being moved on from the area of an 'away' football match because of the things he has done before and may do again.

i get that he wanted a nice family day out at the football, but did he forget the banning order?

Knowing that it was illegal for him to attend the match why take children along?

Why take those children to watch another match at a sports pub near the ground after that?

looks like a deliberate set up to me. Are we seriously supposed to accept that he genuinely believed the police would ignore a banning order because he was in a day out with the kids?

Biggest question here, what caused the pub security team to call the police in the first place?

It seems strange that he was allowed to attend a match despite this, then ordered to leave the entire city. Is that a normal way to operate such an order?

Also the police didn't seem (unless I missed something? Sound is not great) to mention any football related banning order, just Section 35 dispersal powers. Is that how they would normally do this?

If there is a genuine reason then fair enough. I don't think Robinson is any angel at all but it does seem to have a nasty whiff of politicised policing to me.

Perhaps the police did not realise he was in Cambridge until the security staff at the pub reported it?

Once they did, particularly given his attitude, it seems that they simply wanted him to leave the town with minimal fuss. It's fairly clear that the police thought he was making political capital out of the incident and one of them states several times 'this is not an interview'.

Robinson's tone is emotional and potentially aggressive throughout the discussion, so I entirely understand why they just wanted to put him on a train out of town where he could be somebody elses problem. To that extent, I think it is almost the opposite of 'politicised policing'.

[Greendubber]

turbobloke said:

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

Greendubber said:

Quite, I deal with lots of football 'risk' fans and all of the ones on banning orders get locked up if they breach. I have never seen a dispersal used to get rid of them if there is an offence they can be arrested for... such as breaching a banning order.

Cambs exec clearly werent happy having him in town so wanted him out.

Edited by Bigends on Sunday 28th August 23:54

Obviously but if he's breached a banning order he should have been arrested rather than dispersed.

As there is at least one link earlier in the thread regarding a ban, do you as BiB have any thoughts on how this individual got to watch the game - intel failure followed by realisation and a face saving exercise in the pub? This is nothing more than a question! After all if he was clocked in videos at the match, arrest would still be possible surely?

I have no idea to be honest. Its not unheard of for banned fans to get in as the ground stewards might not know who's banned, police spotters can only be in one place at a time or he managed to dodge past them in a crowd.

If he was seen in the ground and he is on a banning order then he should have been arrested. You dont need to be caught committing when it comes to breaching a banning order.

[Bigends]

turbobloke said:

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

Greendubber said:

Quite, I deal with lots of football 'risk' fans and all of the ones on banning orders get locked up if they breach. I have never seen a dispersal used to get rid of them if there is an offence they can be arrested for... such as breaching a banning order.

Cambs exec clearly werent happy having him in town so wanted him out.

Edited by Bigends on Sunday 28th August 23:54

Obviously but if he's breached a banning order he should have been arrested rather than dispersed.

As there is at least one link earlier in the thread regarding a ban, do you as BiB have any thoughts on how this individual got to watch the game - intel failure followed by realisation and a face saving exercise in the pub? This is nothing more than a question! After all if he was clocked in videos at the match, arrest would still be possible surely?

It'll all depend on the conditions of the ban imposed. It could just be for home games at Luton. The Police have known he was in Cambridge as soon as football spotters picked him up pre match. If not - he'd have been picked up on CCTV in the ground. Being such a high profile target theyd have been looking for him. He'd have been followed to the pub - how would they have know he was in there otherwise. Therefore it seems they had ample opportunity to deal with him during the day and should have arrested him and not merely moved him out quoting the act that they did as some spurious reason. He didnt dare not comply -the first cross word from him would have seen him arrested for a public order offence. Probably lucky for him the the incident was filmed.

[Elysium]

voyds9 said:

Bigends said:

Why not simply arrest him for breaching th order then. Theres no point of the order being in placeif theyre not going to enforce it. What are the conditions of the order hes had imposed on him - it may only relate to home games

Perhaps because its under appeal.

And you may feel it was a stretch applying for it in the first place after reading the following

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/tommy-robinson-ex-edl-lea...

He seems to generally sail very close to breaking the law but staying defensibly on the lawful side. He appears to be a reasonably clever man (or his team) and I would imagine most of his actions are done with an awful lot of planning.

I have no problem with a banning order for that. We should all be able to watch football safely. Anyone with political flags, slogans etc are a problem in that context, particularly given his background.

He does seem to be reasonably bright, but he has essentially wasted his life on this nonsense and achieved nothing useful for anyone.

[Marvtec]

Am I missing something here? This guy was given a football banning order on his return to the UK after being pictured in France during the Euros with an anti ISIS flag and t-shirt?

He seems to have become active in response to the disgusting muslim protests at the return of UK troops from Afghanistan. The police truly have their heads up their arses to have allowed those protests yet persecute someone for anti ISIS sentiment?

[Greendubber]

Bigends said:

turbobloke said:

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

Greendubber said:

Quite, I deal with lots of football 'risk' fans and all of the ones on banning orders get locked up if they breach. I have never seen a dispersal used to get rid of them if there is an offence they can be arrested for... such as breaching a banning order.

Cambs exec clearly werent happy having him in town so wanted him out.

Edited by Bigends on Sunday 28th August 23:54

Obviously but if he's breached a banning order he should have been arrested rather than dispersed.

As there is at least one link earlier in the thread regarding a ban, do you as BiB have any thoughts on how this individual got to watch the game - intel failure followed by realisation and a face saving exercise in the pub? This is nothing more than a question! After all if he was clocked in videos at the match, arrest would still be possible surely?

It'll all depend on the conditions of the ban imposed. It could just be for home games at Luton. The Police have known he was in Cambridge as soon as football spotters picked him up pre match. If not - he'd have been picked up on CCTV in the ground. Being such a high profile target theyd have been looking for him. He'd have been followed to the pub - how would they have know he was in there otherwise. Therefore it seems they had ample opportunity to deal with him during the day and should have arrested him and not merely moved him out quoting the act that they did as some spurious reason. He didnt dare not comply -the first cross word from him would have seen him arrested for a public order offence. Probably lucky for him the the incident was filmed.

I doubt he was followed around, followed to the pub or that they would have been looking for him in the ground via CCTV. Chances are someone in the boozer phoned 999 because 'that EDL blokes here' so they've sent a serial to have a look.

To be able to use a Sec 35 there needs to be authority in place, a bobby cant just tip up and use it to get rid of someone without the conditions being set by the authorising officer such as start and end time and the exclusion area etc. If there was an authority in place there must have been something happening or intel to suggest it might as the dispersals are not used at every match. Maybe they wanted him gone due to a load of fans/E E EDL morons planning to tip up at the pub for a racist drink with him, who knows. Get rid of him and its problem solved, he is a total st magnet.

[AJS-]

Elysium said:

Perhaps the police did not realise he was in Cambridge until the security staff at the pub reported it?

Once they did, particularly given his attitude, it seems that they simply wanted him to leave the town with minimal fuss. It's fairly clear that the police thought he was making political capital out of the incident and one of them states several times 'this is not an interview'.

Robinson's tone is emotional and potentially aggressive throughout the discussion, so I entirely understand why they just wanted to put him on a train out of town where he could be somebody elses problem. To that extent, I think it is almost the opposite of 'politicised policing'.

Maybe. I would have thought that having already breached a banning order and been difficult about being moved on from the pub would be worth simply arresting him for? The fact that they didn't seems strange.

(Incidentally the security staff at the pub actually intervened to say he was not causing any problems and that they were happy for him to stay, so presumably they didn't report his presence?)

[Bigends]

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

turbobloke said:

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

Greendubber said:

Quite, I deal with lots of football 'risk' fans and all of the ones on banning orders get locked up if they breach. I have never seen a dispersal used to get rid of them if there is an offence they can be arrested for... such as breaching a banning order.

Cambs exec clearly werent happy having him in town so wanted him out.

Edited by Bigends on Sunday 28th August 23:54

Obviously but if he's breached a banning order he should have been arrested rather than dispersed.

As there is at least one link earlier in the thread regarding a ban, do you as BiB have any thoughts on how this individual got to watch the game - intel failure followed by realisation and a face saving exercise in the pub? This is nothing more than a question! After all if he was clocked in videos at the match, arrest would still be possible surely?

It'll all depend on the conditions of the ban imposed. It could just be for home games at Luton. The Police have known he was in Cambridge as soon as football spotters picked him up pre match. If not - he'd have been picked up on CCTV in the ground. Being such a high profile target theyd have been looking for him. He'd have been followed to the pub - how would they have know he was in there otherwise. Therefore it seems they had ample opportunity to deal with him during the day and should have arrested him and not merely moved him out quoting the act that they did as some spurious reason. He didnt dare not comply -the first cross word from him would have seen him arrested for a public order offence. Probably lucky for him the the incident was filmed.

I doubt he was followed around, followed to the pub or that they would have been looking for him in the ground via CCTV. Chances are someone in the boozer phoned 999 because 'that EDL blokes here' so they've sent a serial to have a look.

To be able to use a Sec 35 there needs to be authority in place, a bobby cant just tip up and use it to get rid of someone without the conditions being set by the authorising officer such as start and end time and the exclusion area etc. If there was an authority in place there must have been something happening or intel to suggest it might as the dispersals are not used at every match. Maybe they wanted him gone due to a load of fans/E E EDL morons planning to tip up at the pub for a racist drink with him, who knows. Get rid of him and its problem solved, he is a total st magnet.

Believe me- - theyd have known exactly where he was - I was a football spotter with a league club for over 12yrs (Spotters course attended at Sedgely park GMP in Jan 1991). He'd have been picked up during the course of the day, then followed to the pub. Theyd have had intel from Luton that hes travelling to the Cambs game and the Luton spotters would have picked him up early in the day That serial wasnt 'just having a look' they knew exactly what they were going to and would have been briefed what to do.

Edited by Bigends on Monday 29th August 10:16

[Greendubber]

Bigends said:

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

turbobloke said:

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

Greendubber said:

Quite, I deal with lots of football 'risk' fans and all of the ones on banning orders get locked up if they breach. I have never seen a dispersal used to get rid of them if there is an offence they can be arrested for... such as breaching a banning order.

Cambs exec clearly werent happy having him in town so wanted him out.

Edited by Bigends on Sunday 28th August 23:54

Obviously but if he's breached a banning order he should have been arrested rather than dispersed.

As there is at least one link earlier in the thread regarding a ban, do you as BiB have any thoughts on how this individual got to watch the game - intel failure followed by realisation and a face saving exercise in the pub? This is nothing more than a question! After all if he was clocked in videos at the match, arrest would still be possible surely?

It'll all depend on the conditions of the ban imposed. It could just be for home games at Luton. The Police have known he was in Cambridge as soon as football spotters picked him up pre match. If not - he'd have been picked up on CCTV in the ground. Being such a high profile target theyd have been looking for him. He'd have been followed to the pub - how would they have know he was in there otherwise. Therefore it seems they had ample opportunity to deal with him during the day and should have arrested him and not merely moved him out quoting the act that they did as some spurious reason. He didnt dare not comply -the first cross word from him would have seen him arrested for a public order offence. Probably lucky for him the the incident was filmed.

I doubt he was followed around, followed to the pub or that they would have been looking for him in the ground via CCTV. Chances are someone in the boozer phoned 999 because 'that EDL blokes here' so they've sent a serial to have a look.

To be able to use a Sec 35 there needs to be authority in place, a bobby cant just tip up and use it to get rid of someone without the conditions being set by the authorising officer such as start and end time and the exclusion area etc. If there was an authority in place there must have been something happening or intel to suggest it might as the dispersals are not used at every match. Maybe they wanted him gone due to a load of fans/E E EDL morons planning to tip up at the pub for a racist drink with him, who knows. Get rid of him and its problem solved, he is a total st magnet.

Believe me- - theyd have known exactly where he was - I was a football spotter with a league club for over 12yrs (Spotters course attended at Sedgely park GMP in Jan 1991). He'd have been picked up during the course of the day, then followed to the pub. Theyd have had intel from Luton that hes travelling to the Cambs game and the Luton spotters would have picked him up early in the day That serial wasnt 'just having a look' they knew exactly what they were going to and would have been briefed what to do.

Edited by Bigends on Monday 29th August 10:16

Possibly but being as we're talking about spotting I'm a current premier league club spotter, trained 4 years ago.

I mentioned someone might have phoned up and said he was there hence the serial going. I'd imagine the bronze would have told them what to do if they find him but we dont know whats been fed into the match day commander about Robinson do we? Most likely in town to perform in the latest Tommy 'I need some publicity' Robinson show, push a few peoples buttons and to cause a scene, even if thats by having a beer with his kids there.

I still think that if he had breached in any way he'd have been locked up. I'm sure he'll go to court over the dispersal and it'll all come out in the wash. I know there are legal challenges currently over dispersals issued by some forces last season by gaffers who didnt know how to use them properly so it'll maybe go the way of the old Sec 27's. Sec 35 is more aimed at kids outside chippys causing bother to locals but it seems to be getting used for footy fans which I'm not entirely sure is the ideal use....

[Bigends]

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

turbobloke said:

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

Greendubber said:

Quite, I deal with lots of football 'risk' fans and all of the ones on banning orders get locked up if they breach. I have never seen a dispersal used to get rid of them if there is an offence they can be arrested for... such as breaching a banning order.

Cambs exec clearly werent happy having him in town so wanted him out.

Edited by Bigends on Sunday 28th August 23:54

Obviously but if he's breached a banning order he should have been arrested rather than dispersed.

As there is at least one link earlier in the thread regarding a ban, do you as BiB have any thoughts on how this individual got to watch the game - intel failure followed by realisation and a face saving exercise in the pub? This is nothing more than a question! After all if he was clocked in videos at the match, arrest would still be possible surely?

It'll all depend on the conditions of the ban imposed. It could just be for home games at Luton. The Police have known he was in Cambridge as soon as football spotters picked him up pre match. If not - he'd have been picked up on CCTV in the ground. Being such a high profile target theyd have been looking for him. He'd have been followed to the pub - how would they have know he was in there otherwise. Therefore it seems they had ample opportunity to deal with him during the day and should have arrested him and not merely moved him out quoting the act that they did as some spurious reason. He didnt dare not comply -the first cross word from him would have seen him arrested for a public order offence. Probably lucky for him the the incident was filmed.

I doubt he was followed around, followed to the pub or that they would have been looking for him in the ground via CCTV. Chances are someone in the boozer phoned 999 because 'that EDL blokes here' so they've sent a serial to have a look.

To be able to use a Sec 35 there needs to be authority in place, a bobby cant just tip up and use it to get rid of someone without the conditions being set by the authorising officer such as start and end time and the exclusion area etc. If there was an authority in place there must have been something happening or intel to suggest it might as the dispersals are not used at every match. Maybe they wanted him gone due to a load of fans/E E EDL morons planning to tip up at the pub for a racist drink with him, who knows. Get rid of him and its problem solved, he is a total st magnet.

Believe me- - theyd have known exactly where he was - I was a football spotter with a league club for over 12yrs (Spotters course attended at Sedgely park GMP in Jan 1991). He'd have been picked up during the course of the day, then followed to the pub. Theyd have had intel from Luton that hes travelling to the Cambs game and the Luton spotters would have picked him up early in the day That serial wasnt 'just having a look' they knew exactly what they were going to and would have been briefed what to do.

Edited by Bigends on Monday 29th August 10:16

Possibly but being as we're talking about spotting I'm a current premier league club spotter, trained 4 years ago.

I mentioned someone might have phoned up and said he was there hence the serial going. I'd imagine the bronze would have told them what to do if they find him but we dont know whats been fed into the match day commander about Robinson do we? Most likely in town to perform in the latest Tommy 'I need some publicity' Robinson show, push a few peoples buttons and to cause a scene, even if thats by having a beer with his kids there.

I still think that if he had breached in any way he'd have been locked up. I'm sure he'll go to court over the dispersal and it'll all come out in the wash. I know there are legal challenges currently over dispersals issued by some forces last season by gaffers who didnt know how to use them properly so it'll maybe go the way of the old Sec 27's. Sec 35 is more aimed at kids outside chippys causing bother to locals but it seems to be getting used for footy fans which I'm not entirely sure is the ideal use....

Agreed - but with the crowd sizes attracted by Luton and Cambridge - I policed both when my lot got into the lower divisions - its quite simple to pick individuals up on matchdays. Do you really think most of the cops there would actually know what a dispersal order was - let alone quote the regs without being briefed to do so?

[Greendubber]

Bigends said:

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

turbobloke said:

Greendubber said:

Bigends said:

Greendubber said:

Quite, I deal with lots of football 'risk' fans and all of the ones on banning orders get locked up if they breach. I have never seen a dispersal used to get rid of them if there is an offence they can be arrested for... such as breaching a banning order.

Cambs exec clearly werent happy having him in town so wanted him out.

Edited by Bigends on Sunday 28th August 23:54

Obviously but if he's breached a banning order he should have been arrested rather than dispersed.

As there is at least one link earlier in the thread regarding a ban, do you as BiB have any thoughts on how this individual got to watch the game - intel failure followed by realisation and a face saving exercise in the pub? This is nothing more than a question! After all if he was clocked in videos at the match, arrest would still be possible surely?

It'll all depend on the conditions of the ban imposed. It could just be for home games at Luton. The Police have known he was in Cambridge as soon as football spotters picked him up pre match. If not - he'd have been picked up on CCTV in the ground. Being such a high profile target theyd have been looking for him. He'd have been followed to the pub - how would they have know he was in there otherwise. Therefore it seems they had ample opportunity to deal with him during the day and should have arrested him and not merely moved him out quoting the act that they did as some spurious reason. He didnt dare not comply -the first cross word from him would have seen him arrested for a public order offence. Probably lucky for him the the incident was filmed.

I doubt he was followed around, followed to the pub or that they would have been looking for him in the ground via CCTV. Chances are someone in the boozer phoned 999 because 'that EDL blokes here' so they've sent a serial to have a look.

To be able to use a Sec 35 there needs to be authority in place, a bobby cant just tip up and use it to get rid of someone without the conditions being set by the authorising officer such as start and end time and the exclusion area etc. If there was an authority in place there must have been something happening or intel to suggest it might as the dispersals are not used at every match. Maybe they wanted him gone due to a load of fans/E E EDL morons planning to tip up at the pub for a racist drink with him, who knows. Get rid of him and its problem solved, he is a total st magnet.

Believe me- - theyd have known exactly where he was - I was a football spotter with a league club for over 12yrs (Spotters course attended at Sedgely park GMP in Jan 1991). He'd have been picked up during the course of the day, then followed to the pub. Theyd have had intel from Luton that hes travelling to the Cambs game and the Luton spotters would have picked him up early in the day That serial wasnt 'just having a look' they knew exactly what they were going to and would have been briefed what to do.

Edited by Bigends on Monday 29th August 10:16

Possibly but being as we're talking about spotting I'm a current premier league club spotter, trained 4 years ago.

I mentioned someone might have phoned up and said he was there hence the serial going. I'd imagine the bronze would have told them what to do if they find him but we dont know whats been fed into the match day commander about Robinson do we? Most likely in town to perform in the latest Tommy 'I need some publicity' Robinson show, push a few peoples buttons and to cause a scene, even if thats by having a beer with his kids there.

I still think that if he had breached in any way he'd have been locked up. I'm sure he'll go to court over the dispersal and it'll all come out in the wash. I know there are legal challenges currently over dispersals issued by some forces last season by gaffers who didnt know how to use them properly so it'll maybe go the way of the old Sec 27's. Sec 35 is more aimed at kids outside chippys causing bother to locals but it seems to be getting used for footy fans which I'm not entirely sure is the ideal use....

Agreed - but with the crowd sizes attracted by Luton and Cambridge - I policed both when my lot got into the lower divisions - its quite simple to pick individuals up on matchdays. Do you really think most of the cops there would actually know what a dispersal order was - let alone quote the regs without being briefed to do so?

Yes I do, I know officers in my force are pretty familiar with it so it should be no different to this lot as they look to be level 2 PO trained.

[768]

Elysium said:

Biggest question here, what caused the pub security team to call the police in the first place?

Did they?

They seemed to turn up to support his presence. Not sure I'd be happy with the Police clearing customers not causing any problems out of my business either.