Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213
Results 121 to 129 of 129

Thread: Whitehawk

  1. #121
    Quote Originally Posted by Dom Joly's Publicist View Post
    Nothing from Whitehawk other than news of a signing, ironically from Met Police.
    That's because they didn't cause any trouble and it was all Gloucester's fault.

  2. #122
    Yep seems to be what all other fans are saying!

  3. #123
    Is club statement saying 4 City fans have an immediate ban while investigations being undertaken? Or is this 4 Whitehawk fans who were clearly filmed participating in attacking coach?

  4. #124
    I wasn't there but this seems a bit harsh by what I have seen on the video taken at the time. Perhaps you can name and shame those who have been banned.

  5. #125

  6. #126
    Quote Originally Posted by growlithe View Post
    Is club statement saying 4 City fans have an immediate ban while investigations being undertaken? Or is this 4 Whitehawk fans who were clearly filmed participating in attacking coach?
    Yes it is 4 City fans who have been banned and then Whitehawk have banned some of theirs as well although they dont say how many. I think its fair to say I am sure certain people will regret what they did both at the ground and on social media and they only have themselves to blame really. Doesn't excuse what the so called Whitehawk fans did which was clearly way over the top and hopefully they will be dealt with properly as well.

  7. #127
    Quote Originally Posted by Darran View Post
    Yes it is 4 City fans who have been banned and then Whitehawk have banned some of theirs as well although they dont say how many. I think its fair to say I am sure certain people will regret what they did both at the ground and on social media and they only have themselves to blame really. Doesn't excuse what the so called Whitehawk fans did which was clearly way over the top and hopefully they will be dealt with properly as well.

    Well said Darran.

    People in this life need to understand that there are consequences to actions.
    I am not concerned about what Whitehawk FC do with their fans, though I share and welcome their timely statement, which in several ways mirrors our statement. 'The name of the club is most important'

    Whatever position the City have been in on and off the field it has always acted swiftly to protect its good name. I well remember the incidents against Worcester involving player ill discipline and the club issued an unequivocal statement the same evening.

    From my own knowledge in my football duties, the club will now have to prove to the FA what action they are taking to mitigate any likely sanction, which could be financially severe.

    Too many have already used social media to pass comment without knowing the full facts.

    I do not subscribe to know the facts any better but let us allow the club to deal with the fall out from that fixture in the best way they can and support the good name of the club and genuine supporters who travel up and down the country supporting the players and management.

    And unless I am reading the statement incorrectly all the club has done is to suspend certain people from attending matches UNTIL the FA investigation and .......don't forget the police enquiries too, are concluded!

    I think most people will know who the individuals are, so the quicker it is resolved the best for everyone. All will probably get their say behind closed doors either to the club, FA or perhaps the Police.
    Last edited by Brandman; 02-03-18 at 07:27 PM.

  8. #128
    Banning people during an investigation seems quite a strong response, almost presuming their guilt before the work has been done. From the outside it can only be assumed that the evidence they have is so strong that this is an appropriate measure. The vagueness of this and the Whitehawk response in particular is strange. Surely we need clear lines on what people (allegedly) have done which causes a ban. Most of the reporting has been around the bus attack by Whitehawk fans, so we are left in the dark over what has caused the City fans to be banned.

  9. #129
    I have read this thread with great interest, I do'nt know who has been temporarily banned and I was not there having only seen some footage of the coach incident.
    When they came to Evesham apart from being noisy and drinking heavily I did not perceive them as being any threat.it is clear that Whitehawk have undesirables following them. I admire the Clubs stance re any investigation by Police and other interested parties, if they have done silly things esp on social media then lessons have to be learnt and hope City's response is proportionate. Any public disorder whether provoked or not cannot be condoned unless in self defence and that is s different ball game.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •