Alcohol and Football

[Sergeant Wilson]

You all just follow the wrong teams. I can drink whenever I like.

[Steve McQueen]

I dont think there should be drinking during the game but pre/post game when people may choose to have a drink anyway.

Get people in the ground early & take their money that they're already spending into the club. I know not every club would be able to do this due to space etc.

Cut down on congestion when everyone tuns up at 10 minutes before ko too.

[Ric]

40 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

I'm afraid "the beer would be shite anyway" is not even a remotely valid excuse for banning its sale and it baffles me that multiple people on this thread think it is. People know what they're paying for and it's their choice.

If that's a response to my comment, it was posted directly after so maybe it is maybe it isn't, then you are missing the point of my post quite comprehensively. The fact that the beer would be poor quality and that it would be expensive is hardly up for debate as we know it most definitely will be both of those things. You are right, it's not a reason to ban it though, however I wasn't suggesting it was.

My point is that the bottle throwing from OF fans will facilitate the argument that alcohol should be sold in grounds because it will placate the bottle throwers by letting them have alcohol but in paper cups. This will be the narrative put forward, that having regulated alcohol in grounds will somehow alleviate the problem. When in reality we know that's not going to be the case and the people who throw bottles are just as disposed to throwing lighters, coins or just rocks they find lying about. All the while the clubs will claim "it's just a few people", at the same time reaping the reward for overcharging for a cup of piss.

 

As I say, your point, in isolation, is correct. Price/quality shouldn't determine availability, it does however hint towards financial gain rather than a focus on fan/player safety.

 

Edited April 4, 2022 by Ric

[RandomGuy.]

If fans stop launching things onto the pitch, or putting themselves on the pitch, we'd maybe stand more of a chance, but I don't see any reason the rules will change while that's happening.

[Dons_1988]

Quite amazing the number of people who are happy for Scottish football to be treated as the pariah of the sporting world in the uk because ‘folk might go to the toilet’.

Is there any other professional sport where it is banned?

anyone citing incidents like yesterday as a reason not to allow it has to ask themselves if it’s the ban on alcohol at stadiums that is standing between yesterday and a full on bloodbath at football? Of course it’s not. 

You can’t expect blanket legislation to eradicate societal issues. In fact I think it’s much more likely that booze in grounds would reduce the amount of ‘tanking up’ done pre match that sees guys off their face by lunchtime and downright violent by Saturday night. 

[Ric]

8 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

Anyone citing incidents like yesterday as a reason not to allow it has to ask themselves if it’s the ban on alcohol at stadiums that is standing between yesterday and a full on bloodbath at football? Of course it’s not. 

You can’t expect blanket legislation to eradicate societal issues.

Two things. The first part is poor stewarding by Rangers. There already is a ban, it's the enforcement that failed. Claiming the ban doesn't stop things when the ban is not being properly enforced is perhaps throwing the baby out with the bath water. Enforce the ban properly and only then can you judge whether it is the thing that stands between "a full on bloodbath" or not.

The second, regarding societal issues. That's far too generous. It's been pointed out, you don't get bottles thrown at darts, horse racing or rugby. Throwing bottles at players is not a societal issue, it's a very narrow specific one.

In regard to the problem that people just go to the pub early and get steaming, you are right, but again it's enforcement. I believe, although I could be wrong, that the legislation forbids not just drinking but being intoxicated in the ground. I'll need to check that out, but if that is the case then those who are steaming should be denied entry.

Edited April 4, 2022 by Ric

[Valentino Bolognese]

51 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

I'm afraid "the beer would be shite anyway" is not even a remotely valid excuse for banning its sale and it baffles me that multiple people on this thread think it is. People know what they're paying for and it's their choice.

I'm sure the pies and other food at most grounds would hardly meet Michelin Star standards either but folk still consume them.

^ never had a McDairmid steak & chorizo.

The prohibitionist argument around this hinges on public order vs free choice. I have no idea what the evidence is, but going on attending games in other countries, and other sports and events, I personally don't think that serving drinks in the stadium would lead to more behaviour / violence issues. Although football is a bit 'different'. 

Where I do see a problem is that games are inadequately policed and stewarded. Irrespective of drink (or drugs which is another huge and growing issue at games), we've all seen the behaviour that fans get away with. Yeah drunk arseholes are probably worse than sober arseholes, but folk are going to get pished up anyway. On balance I'd  probably rather have booze served to those that want it in a more controlled way via licencing than have it smuggled in. 

There's another thread on this but antisocial behaviour at games is definitely getting worse. One side would say that selling drink would only fuel this, the other would say the ban is part of the problem. I don't think it is but would like to see some proper evidence. 

 

Edited April 4, 2022 by Valentino Bolognese

[big al]

13 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

Quite amazing the number of people who are happy for Scottish football to be treated as the pariah of the sporting world in the uk because ‘folk might go to the toilet’.

Is there any other professional sport where it is banned?

anyone citing incidents like yesterday as a reason not to allow it has to ask themselves if it’s the ban on alcohol at stadiums that is standing between yesterday and a full on bloodbath at football? Of course it’s not. 

You can’t expect blanket legislation to eradicate societal issues. In fact I think it’s much more likely that booze in grounds would reduce the amount of ‘tanking up’ done pre match that sees guys off their face by lunchtime and downright violent by Saturday night. 

I highly doubt the type of person who throws glass bottles at a football pitch, is the type to go into the ground 1/2 hours before a game for couple of pints in the social club.

More likely getting wasted before the game in some shitehole (pub or house) on Buckie and drugs. 

[Bairnardo]

Anti social behaviour of the type we seen yesterday will continue until there is a cost to the clubs.

Rangers, for example, should absolutely be playing behind closed doors for a period after that.

A pre emptive banning of alcohol because no one has the appetite to punish those who misuse it and become abusive/violent is no way to run a society.

[big al]

2 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Anti social behaviour of the type we seen yesterday will continue until there is a cost to the clubs.

Rangers, for example, should absolutely be playing behind closed doors for a period after that.

You would think so, but nobody has the balls to do this because it’s them.

[Handsome_Devil]

3 minutes ago, big al said:

You would think so, but nobody has the balls to do this because it’s them.

That's not really true....one of the only things Scottish football is united on is a refusal to take collective responsibility for fans. 

What would be interesting would be if the Scottish government said it was willing to reconsider the alcohol ban (which it should) but only if the clubs agreed to collective responsibility.

 

[Dons_1988]

15 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Rangers, for example, should absolutely be playing behind closed doors for a period after that.
 

The irony being it won’t happen because ‘you shouldn’t punish everyone for minority actions’ when the vast majority of us have been banned from a drink at games for 40 years over once incident. 

[big al]

4 minutes ago, Handsome_Devil said:

That's not really true....one of the only things Scottish football is united on is a refusal to take collective responsibility for fans. 

What would be interesting would be if the Scottish government said it was willing to reconsider the alcohol ban (which it should) but only if the clubs agreed to collective responsibility.

 

If it’s not really true, will fans be banned from ibrox short term?

Nope

[Handsome_Devil]

5 minutes ago, big al said:

If it’s not really true, will fans be banned from ibrox short term?

Nope

I'm sure Rangers will ban the individual(s) if they can be identified. 

But the stand or stadium won't be shut because - afaik - there's not a single top-flight club willing to accept collective responsibility in any circumstances so the league/SFA will never impose that punishment on anyone, ever. It's got nothing to do with it being Rangers this time.

[big al]

27 minutes ago, Handsome_Devil said:

I'm sure Rangers will ban the individual(s) if they can be identified. 

But the stand or stadium won't be shut because - afaik - there's not a single top-flight club willing to accept collective responsibility in any circumstances so the league/SFA will never impose that punishment on anyone, ever. It's got nothing to do with it being Rangers this time.

But it does. It’s their responsibility to stop goons getting in the stadium with glass bottles.

A 1 fan ban doesn’t stop anything. When will it be taken seriously, once somebody is killed?

[Derry Alli]

1 hour ago, craigkillie said:

I'm afraid "the beer would be shite anyway" 

It's a classic. From people who are regularly ripped off financially for what is an absolute humdinger of a standard if football. 

[AJF]

1 hour ago, Ric said:

The second, regarding societal issues. That's far too generous. It's been pointed out, you don't get bottles thrown at darts, horse racing or rugby. Throwing bottles at players is not a societal issue, it's a very narrow specific one.

Are you serious? There is quite regularly fights breaking out at horse racing where bottles, tables and chairs all get lobbed about. A quick youtube search will give you numerous examples.

Edited April 4, 2022 by AJF

[Bonksy+HisChristianParade]

I enjoyed a nice Innis & Gunn whilst watching ‘The Battle of the Saints’ at the ‘SMISA’ Stadium earlier this year. It was the only thing that made the experience remotely bearable tbh.

[Handsome_Devil]

11 minutes ago, big al said:

But it does. It’s their responsibility to stop goons getting in the stadium with glass bottles.

A 1 fan ban doesn’t stop anything. When will it be taken seriously, once somebody is killed?

Yes and they will no doubt say 'tut tut', launch an investigation and a few token bans will be handed out if they can find who did it.

I agree completely a one fan ban won't stop anything.

I'm disagreeing with your statement "nobody has the balls to do this because it’s them." It's nothing at all to do with not having the balls to take on Rangers, it could be Rangers, Celtic, Motherwell or Albion Rovers and nobody would do anything because nobody in Scottish football wants collective responsibility.

There are obviously arguments for and against it, if you think it should be changed lobby your club to push for it. But complaining about inaction over any one incident is pointless - it's the logical conclusion of a decision which all clubs support. 

 

[coprolite]

I got arrested and later fined for drinking a can on the way to hampden many years ago. 

My boss (in Wales) could have had me sacked but instead said "what! That's ridiculous. I'd get arrested all the time if that was the law here." 

As with all forms of prohibition, it criminalises people who cause no harm.