Emergency Services - More of the Same

OhNoYouDidn't

There is a locked thread on the ES forum about the Lawless Ireland series on Tv3.

One of the posters, ERU, made a number of unfounded allegations about a Shamrock Rovers supporters group, the SRFC Ultras. I debated it with him, all was cordial and then I caught him out in a direct lie.
He claimed he had taken membership cards off Ultras involved in violence. On the basis that the Ultras do not issue membership cards, I called him on it. Caught, hook, line and sinker, telling a porkie to strengthen his argument.

Along comes PSNI who closes the thread on the basis that it is a 'soccer' thread.

A thread is allowed remain open for two weeks, a serving Garda is caught lying to incorrectly label a named group as being involved in criminal activity, and the mods swing in to the rescue, leaving the false allegations posted with ERU not being obliged to back up his post. Bearing in mind the Ultras have successfully taken legal action in the past over just these allegations, its doubly farcical.


Yet again, moderation on that forum is heavily skewed in favour of the serving Gardai. If they want an honest and open debate on an issue like hooliganism, they can't close the thread every time a Garda gets his arse touched by a civilian with more knowledge of a subject.

This was discussed at length here recently.

____Edit____

PSNI is reviewing the thread.

DeVore

You jump to several conclusions there including linking the closure of the thread to your argument. Thats something of a stretch .... leave PSNI review the thread and I'll read it as well.

DeV.

DeVore

ok, I am not reading all of that on my holidays. PSNI has though reopened the thread before I even got there so my crystal ball forsee's you owing him an apology shortly. ERU made a comment which I believe you have jumped on without thinking it through as its pretty obvious to me what he meant but I'll let him respond before saying anything.

DeV.

Eru

What the hell? Why is it you have to run here all the time? THe thread was closed, it gives no credence to your argument over mine.

Look, you need to accepot reality. My simple point is that the SR Ultras your talking about have no LEGAL right to use the name over anyone else.

Prove that point wrong or be quiet.

DeVore

He mistook your comment about "taking membership cards" off hooligans as referring to Ultra's Membership cards... (which to be fair, you were not clear about). As such he felt you had been "disingenuous". He's entitled to start a thread here because he felt the mod was not impartial (for which I feel he owes PSNI an apology when clearly he has been impartial subsequently).... that is the purpose of this place.

This thread is not about the points in question being proved or not (thats for the thread in ES), this thread is about the handling of this thread, which I feel has been fine.

ONYD, I feel you owe PSNI an apology but I'm not going to insist on it as I'm only here to enforce the rules, not to insist on a modicum of class.

DeV.

godtabh

DeVore wrote: »

(for which I feel he owes PSNI an apology when clearly he has been impartial subsequently)

Maybe not the best choice of words but if PSNI wasnt impartial at the start why would he deserve an apology?

I know what your getting at but others might not

DeVore

"proved to be impartial subsequently".... my apologies!

DeV.

RoundyMooney

Users should not have to apologise for raising a concern, valid as it was based on moderation actions at the time of posting.

They don't have crystal balls either, and weren't to know that a mod was to reconsider (which although the correct course of action, they are well within their rights to do so).

Accusing them of not having class because they didn't blindly back down forelock in hand is unfair too.

The forum has been skewed in favour of serving members, the dogs in the street know it, and it has been discussed ad nauseum here quite recently.

DeVore

Sorry, I know NOTHING about football and when I read ERU's post I knew he was speaking about the club memberbship cards and I believe ONYD should have known that too, but instead chose to go for the paranoid card and accuse PSNI of something he wasnt guilty of. If that were me, I'd apologise. End of.

DeV.

OhNoYouDidn't

DeVore wrote: »

Sorry, I know NOTHING about football and when I read ERU's post I knew he was speaking about the club memberbship cards and I believe ONYD should have known that too, but instead chose to go for the paranoid card and accuse PSNI of something he wasnt guilty of. If that were me, I'd apologise. End of.

DeV.

Hold on. I most clearly did not know that was what was being referred to. Myself and PSNI discussed this over PM and it was cordial and respectful. He asked very valid questions and reopend the thread, which was all I asked.

Fair play to you both on this. You took a valid complaint about moderation and dealt with it well.

I unreservedly retract any allegation that PSNI behaved in a biased manner. I should have held on before I opened this thread.

The moderation since lunchtime was tip top.

ERU is still lying through his arse, and I think his reaction to being asked to clarify his comments baffling, but I'll deal with that on the thread.

DeVore

Fair enough, though I contend the moderation has been fine all along, your understand of it may have changed since lunchtime

But kudos for recognising that PSNI isnt what you accused him of being.

Good luck with that thread because Eru has every right to ask you to back up your claims too..

DeV.

TheBigLebowski

For me the most disturbing aspect of that thread was the accusation by a serving member of An Garda Siochana (ERU) that the owners of Shamrock Rovers Football Club are involved in hooliganism. Now stuff like this gets bandied around easily enough by rival supporters and certain parts of the media but for a serving member to make the claim on a public forum is different matter altogther. In my opinion, this statement should be retracted immediately if the claim can not be substantiated.

This is the statement I refer to "My evidence is personal interaction with people that I have stopped mid punch or kick and then obtained their membership number from their memberhsip cards" and the poster then goes on to state that these cards are in fact Shamrock Rovers Football Club membership cards who are the owners of the club.

seamus

Are you trying to infer that someone couldn't possibly be a hooligan just because they pay €50/month to support their club?

TheBigLebowski

I'm not trying to "infer" anything. I'm stating the fact that a serving member of An Garda Siochana has made a serious allegation and should substantiate the allegation.

seamus

How can he substantiate it more than, "I was there and I saw it"?

TheBigLebowski

"The owners of boards.ie are involved in a child porn ring and I know because I seen it."

That's a serious allegation too. Now would I have to substantiate the claim with any evidence? I think so.

As I said, it's bad enough that these claims are made by rivals etc. but from a serving member is a different story.

seamus

Not exactly the same comparison. If you said, "I busted a child porn ring and when I went in, boards.ie was open on a few of the machines", you might have something valid. You would of course have to explain what you were doing busting a child porn ring when you're not a Garda

The point being that SRFC membership isn't exactly exclusive or restrictive, so to say that someone who was arrested/stopped was carrying a membership card simply says something about that individual and not about the overall ownership of the football club.

TheBigLebowski

seamus wrote: »

Not exactly the same comparison. If you said, "I busted a child porn ring and when I went in, boards.ie was open on a few of the machines", you might have something valid. You would of course have to explain what you were doing busting a child porn ring when you're not a Garda

You don't have to be a Garda to see a child porn ring.

seamus wrote: »

The point being that SRFC membership isn't exactly exclusive or restrictive, so to say that someone who was arrested/stopped was carrying a membership card simply says something about that individual and not about the overall ownership of the football club.

I never said that it is exclusive or restrictive although they do have an applications procedure. You got my point completely wrong. The point is the the Garda made a serious allegation and never offered any evidence that such an event occured other than to say he was there. Likewise I could make serious allegations such as the above and I would not get away with it.
And coming from a serving member, this information could be quoted by a number of sources "a serving garda alleges he witnessed Shamrock Rovers owners committing acts of hooliganism. This garda witnessed a member in mid-kick towards another person".

stovelid

seamus wrote: »

Are you trying to infer that someone couldn't possibly be a hooligan just because they pay €50/month to support their club?

You're being disingenuous, Seamus. The context is key, here.

Holding a membership for any organization obviously doesn't preclude anything.

How far would I get by saying here that there is always the possibility of somebody taking back-handers or committing crimes even if they're in the AGS. And backing up by saying I witnessed it myself? Technically correct, but barely credible and unreasonable.

If a membership number was taken, was the club informed?

Was the person arrested? Under what charge?

Under what circumstances did the person come to the attention of the Gardai in this instance? Actual wrongdoing? Trying to escape from a melee that they had nothing to do with? Defending themselves against unprovoked attack?

I'm not bashing AGS or the Guard in question, but - like the TV3 'journalism' the other night - it shows a desperate lack of understanding of football matters here, and more sadly, it's helping to obfuscate (and sensationalize/overemphasize) the scale of the problem.

seamus

stovelid wrote: »

like the TV3 'journalism' the other night - it shows a desperate lack of understanding of football matters here, and more sadly, it's helping to obfuscate (and sensationalize/overemphasize) the scale of the problem.

Right, well I think at that point I'll admit that I'm probably wading into things here which I don't understand nor do I want to. And before I go on a rant about what I think of people who take football clubs this seriously, I'll step away from this discussion.

DeV is somewhat involved, so it doesn't need another nose poking in.

Cuddlesworth

seamus wrote: »

Right, well I think at that point I'll admit that I'm probably wading into things here which I don't understand nor do I want to. And before I go on a rant about what I think of people who take football clubs this seriously, I'll step away from this discussion.

DeV is somewhat involved, so it doesn't need another nose poking in.

Either that or you just relised that nobody really has a clue what this is about and the above option is best in those moments. Pass it up the chain. Where's Kharn/Community manager?