Stevenage FC 'force' female fans to show their bras!!

[Keynsham]

I don't see anything remotely amusing about this.  I really don't.

[toshes mate]

I don't see anything remotely amusing about this.  I really don't.

+1

[Berserker]

My immediate thoughts when I first read the article was what a load of opportunist perverts. Still think that and if i had been there i would have told them to get lost and rallied other women in the vicinity to do the same , unity in numbers.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[love4ffc]

I know a few women who most definitely told the steward f**k off and if denied access the club would be facing a lawsuit. 

[daib0]

A follow up from the Guardian to the Stevenage stuff ... really good article too, I think!

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/22/bra-checks-football-fans-criminals-stevenage-fc

The treatment of female Grimsby Town supporters asked to show their bras at Stevenage FC's turnstiles last weekend to check whether they were underwired or not, appalled male and female football fans across the country. Stevenage FC issued a defensive statement in response, effectively blaming the reputation of the entire away contingent of Grimsby Town fans for how they were searched and treated by their stewards.

Although I'm shocked by "bra gate", it's hardly surprising. I've been the caseworker for the Football Supporters' Federation for 10 years now and am all too aware of how poorly football fans can be treated.

Indeed, we have legislation exclusively for football fans, criminalising us for offences that wouldn't exist in other contexts, such as drinking in view of a football pitch, being drunk entering a stadium or drinking alcohol on a coach to or from a match.

Elsewhere this weekend, supporters of Brighton and Hove Albion experienced delays getting into Leicester City's King Power stadium, despite in some cases arriving 40 minutes before kick-off. In a statement Leicester City explained that "late" arrivals of fans heightened the problems. By late it didn't mean after kick-off, it meant before. While the club said it would look at the cause of the problems, it isn't the first time a club has implied blame towards fans for circumstances entirely beyond their control.

In recent years football policing has improved dramatically, although it's not yet consistent around the UK. Football-related arrests remain at historically low levels and incidents of hooliganism are rare. Stadiums are safer and mostly welcoming, and the demographic of supporters is broader than ever.

And yet the legacy of widespread football-related disorder of nearly three decades ago still lingers. It is still easy to stereotype and blame fans for incidents rather than examine other legitimate factors. There is little scrutiny of the draconian legislation directed at fans and, with notable exceptions, even less scrutiny of how they may be policed and stewarded.

For example, there is a wide perception that football banning orders are solely for "hooligans" who have been involved in or who may contribute to violence or disorder. But it's often ignored that among those surrendering their passports to police ahead of their club or country playing overseas, there will be scores of first-time offenders convicted of a "football-related offence" that has nothing whatsoever to do with violence or disorder.

The list of "football-related offences" is a long and nebulous one, yet civil liberty campaigners and commentators are, in the main, silent on the subject. Rightly, there is concern at the Metropolitan police's proposed use of facial recognition technology at the Notting Hill carnival – Liberty says the use of this technology has no basis in law and is discriminatory. And yet barely a whisper was heard about its experimental use at the Champions League finals in Cardiff back in June.

Similarly, recent news that drivers wishing to hire vans could be subject to extra police checks following the terrorist attack in Barcelona was given widespread coverage. But for years now, under traffic commissioner guidelines, coach firms providing services to football fans have passed on the personal details of those booking the coach to police on pain of having their coach-operating licences withdrawn.

On Wednesday evening Blackburn Rovers are at home to Burnley in the Carabao Cup – a fixture with a history of bitter rivalry. I'm not going to shy away from the fact that a very small number of people have used that rivalry as an excuse for violence. However, for nearly 10 years now the response to the risk of disorder has been an insistence that whenever these two sides meet, the away supporters are collected from their home stadium and compulsorily bussed in and then taken back to the same stadium after the game – what's known as a "bubble match".

Of course, nobody is forcing fans to attend the match – they do so entirely of their own free will, surrendering their right to freedom of association. But that isn't really the point.

The point is that all football fans are wrapped up like this, subjected to a huge policing operation, often with a helicopter following the coaches, and it happens without question from those who'd justly be outraged if such restrictions were imposed on others in society. Frankly, it says more about the capability of local police than the behaviour of supporters. The Football Supporters' Federation and other supporter groups across the country will continue to campaign against the criminalisation of all football fans and for fair and equitable treatment. We can only hope that our voice is joined by those who are rightly vocal about other people's rights.

• Amanda Jacks is the caseworker for the Football Supporters' Federation

[RaySmith]

Good post daibo- agree, the  way football fans are treated is disgusting, and they wouldn't get away with it anywhere else.
Imagine if they tried to treat rugby fans like this!

[SP]

Crazy situation.  I wonder how the lady steward posted to patrol the Gents toilet got on?

[Logicalman]

I agree daibo, it's getting too restrictive.

I would say though, the comment regarding the 'capability of local police ' also needs to be taken in the context that the club pays or helps pay for the police operation, and as such, not withstanding resources, the operation set forth is the best that can be accomplished given the fact that if anything goes wrong then the police are blamed, so it's always a case of balancing cost & resources against the possibility of disorder breaking out.

[RaySmith]

But the piece also   speaks of how there are special laws directed at football fans alone - you can end up fined or  banned for something that wouldn't be seen as an offence in 'normal' life.

It's the attitude behind it -the draconian laws, and  that of the police, who seem to regard all football fans , away fans particularly, as potential hooligans.

[Logicalman]

But the piece also   speaks of how there are special laws directed at football fans alone - you can end up fined or  banned for something that wouldn't be seen as an offence in 'normal' life.

It's the attitude behind it -the draconian laws, and  that of the police, who seem to regard all football fans , away fans particularly, as potential hooligans.

Though I do feel there was a definite overreach by the Government in the draconian laws they introduced, the fans themselves are to blame in the main. Not the majority of fans, I grant you, but all rules and laws are often made to address the worst aspects of behaviour, together with the current climate of criminal activity.

Nothing to do with addressing the debacle of what happened at Stevenage, all it takes is for one fan to smuggle in a flare, or glass bottles, or worse, and there is a potential disaster in the making. If a bomb went off at the Cottage, who would we blame? It's all there in the making, and we live with those restrictions.

As I said, I feel the laws introduced in 1985 were both knee-jerk and an overreach by authorities that had little interest in the well-being of the fans, and more interested in making the headlines of 'Look what we've done to address hooliganism'.

[AlexW132]

The rules now state that it must be a female steward doing the 'search'. So perhaps marginally better than some are envisaging. But still.... fp.gif it's a bloody disgrace. Is there any new evidence that we've all missed that makes searching someone's bra acceptable?

I don't see how having a female steward do it solves the problem? Who's to say they aren't perverts as well? Either way it's ridiculous that something like this should happen in this day and age. And as for the affected not doing anything at the time, they probably realised they'd be kicked out if they didn't conform so left it until after the game.

[Logicalman]

The rules now state that it must be a female steward doing the 'search'. So perhaps marginally better than some are envisaging. But still.... fp.gif it's a bloody disgrace. Is there any new evidence that we've all missed that makes searching someone's bra acceptable?

I don't see how having a female steward do it solves the problem? Who's to say they aren't perverts as well? Either way it's ridiculous that something like this should happen in this day and age. And as for the affected not doing anything at the time, they probably realised they'd be kicked out if they didn't conform so left it until after the game.

Exactly.