Anyone know why ...

[boris]

Is it just me, or does anyone else think that there is a young girl somewhere in Oxford who spent last night in tears and is facing all kinds of playground taunts this morming....and whose family and her will never come near the stadium again...
I dont know what she actually did, but to lump her in amongst some of the others in this context seems somewhat disproportionate and unnecessary.

How have they managed to get them all to pose for the camera (and why didnt they arrest them then?)

Its just you. Where in the stadium rules or relevant laws about encroaching on the pitch does it say that its OK if you are female and below a certain assumed age?

The article refers to everyone trying to keep things in proportion and differentiating between the more serious offenders and those just caught up in the moment - then picks just 8 people out from the dozens who ran on the pitch as requiring particular attention.
I may be wrong and she might have pulled a knife on one of the players, or attempted to club another with a goalpost, but on the balance of likelihood I'd say this young girl did no more wrong than most and just happened to be sat where the invaders congregated, got caught up in the moment and wandered onto the pitch as those around her were doing, yet has now been labelled among the most wanted from that day - hardly proportionate is it??

I would have thought that a more appropriate response, if she really did do anything beyond crossing the touchline worthy of extra attention compared to the rest, would be to pan round with the CCTV at the next couple of games to spot that smiling face enjoying being part of the OUFC family and a potential future regular, and send someone to take her aside at half time for a quiet word with her/her parents.

But if you think humiliating her and her family and pretty much ensuring that we never see any of them or their friends at the stadium again, while letting many who were more aggressive in their actions get away scott free because it would mean having to go through the various video footage to get a clear shot rather than a handy photo of them from earlier in the afternoon is more appropriate then so be it - perhaps we could string her up from the fence as part of the halftime entertainment at a pre-season friendly?

You're making a lot of unfounded assumptions there Mooro. I wouldn't want you to be my defence brief if that's the best you could do (assuming I was ever to be charged with an offence, that is, which I'm not, as far as I'm aware, you know, whatever).

[Mally]

Is it just me, or does anyone else think that there is a young girl somewhere in Oxford who spent last night in tears and is facing all kinds of playground taunts this morming....and whose family and her will never come near the stadium again...
I dont know what she actually did, but to lump her in amongst some of the others in this context seems somewhat disproportionate and unnecessary.

How have they managed to get them all to pose for the camera (and why didnt they arrest them then?)

Its just you. Where in the stadium rules or relevant laws about encroaching on the pitch does it say that its OK if you are female and below a certain assumed age?

The article refers to everyone trying to keep things in proportion and differentiating between the more serious offenders and those just caught up in the moment - then picks just 8 people out from the dozens who ran on the pitch as requiring particular attention.
I may be wrong and she might have pulled a knife on one of the players, or attempted to club another with a goalpost, but on the balance of likelihood I'd say this young girl did no more wrong than most and just happened to be sat where the invaders congregated, got caught up in the moment and wandered onto the pitch as those around her were doing, yet has now been labelled among the most wanted from that day - hardly proportionate is it??

I would have thought that a more appropriate response, if she really did do anything beyond crossing the touchline worthy of extra attention compared to the rest, would be to pan round with the CCTV at the next couple of games to spot that smiling face enjoying being part of the OUFC family and a potential future regular, and send someone to take her aside at half time for a quiet word with her/her parents.

But if you think humiliating her and her family and pretty much ensuring that we never see any of them or their friends at the stadium again, while letting many who were more aggressive in their actions get away scott free because it would mean having to go through the various video footage to get a clear shot rather than a handy photo of them from earlier in the afternoon is more appropriate then so be it - perhaps we could string her up from the fence as part of the halftime entertainment at a pre-season friendly?

This is all pure speculation. Until we know what they are alleged to have done individually its difficult to comment on whether their photo should be used in this way, but even if it was just running on the pitch then I still don't think you can be selective based on the sex or apparent age of somebody.

[slappy]

The article says that some people have already come forward, so no photos of those needed. I heard some pupils at an Oxford school got suspended too.

Also anyone already known to the police is &quotknown&quot so no photo needed there either.

As for the ringleader in picture 6, wasn't there some furore at the time about a girl and her mother getting in a scrap with some other home fans, or was that a few weeks before?

Rose-pruner is indeed the brown vest man who first ran the length of the pitch
http&#58//www&#46youtube&#46com/watch?v ... re=related

[recordmeister]

Isn't this one:

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/pictures/ox ... wich_Game/

Matt Lucas in a wig?

[Mooro]

but even if it was just running on the pitch then I still don't think you can be selective based on the sex or apparent age of somebody.

First impressions and all that - the implication of the article is that people are being treated differently depending on their offence, so with just 8 pictures released, clearly including one of the principal pitchrunners, the implication is therefore that these are the most wanted.

So, all I am saying is that I hope TVP/OM have some justification for effectively labelling her as a major protagonist in events on that day, rather than just lazily tagging a couple of photos of 'selected' minor offenders on to the main ones, just because they were easy to obtain, because the potential damage is quite great.

What that photo says to me is someone who is enjoying their day out at Oxford United and is innocent enough to smile for a camera while she is doing so, but also innocent/naive enough to get caught up in the moment and join dozens of others on the pitch.
That is exactly the kind of image we should be using to promote OUFC, young people enjoying being at the game, rather than using that naivity to single someone out for ridicule and punishment.

Maybe I'm wrong and they have identified every single person who went onto the pitch apart from these eight or she actually took an axe to one of the players, chopped him into pieces and ate them to hide the evidence, but otherwise I think it was unnecessary to include that photo on the list.

[recordmeister]

Ignorance does not make one innocent.

Going on to the pitch is a criminal activity. You can't let someone off because they look cute / may be an acceptable face of football.

If you let one person off, you might as well let them all off. You'll undermine all the other cases that way.

[Brahma Bull]

Unfortunately, entering the field of play is a Criminal Offence. Thankfully, the TVP and Club seem to be being very reasonable in suggesting that those who got 'caught up in the emotion' will be treated accordingly.

You'd expect regular offenders to be dealt with more severely, it appears the club/TVP have identified those.

I was speaking today with a Chief Steward at another football club who controls his two sets of stewards and co-ordinates with the Police and Chief Steward in the control room.

They ejected several fans at the end of the season and he explained to me that once all the information and evidence is collated, the Cheif Stewards interview the 'offender'. They ask for total honesty and an understanding of why they acted in a way that was deemed to be worthy of ejection.

I was surprised to hear that they try and give every opportunity for the person to show remorse and honesty, which results in a much more lenient punishment or even being exonirated from any wrong-doing.

These people have mountains of evidence, witness statements and other information so denying involvement or trying to pull the wool over people's eyes only antagonises the situation.

So my point being, is that these people are being given an opportunity to own up to their actions and explain the reasons behined what they did, whether that be emotion, my dad/mate did it or I was drunk.

I don't know who seems to be more embarrassed about the photo gallery.

[Ascension Ox]

but even if it was just running on the pitch then I still don't think you can be selective based on the sex or apparent age of somebody.

First impressions and all that - the implication of the article is that people are being treated differently depending on their offence, so with just 8 pictures released, clearly including one of the principal pitchrunners, the implication is therefore that these are the most wanted.

So, all I am saying is that I hope TVP/OM have some justification for effectively labelling her as a major protagonist in events on that day, rather than just lazily tagging a couple of photos of 'selected' minor offenders on to the main ones, just because they were easy to obtain, because the potential damage is quite great.

What that photo says to me is someone who is enjoying their day out at Oxford United and is innocent enough to smile for a camera while she is doing so, but also innocent/naive enough to get caught up in the moment and join dozens of others on the pitch.
That is exactly the kind of image we should be using to promote OUFC, young people enjoying being at the game, rather than using that naivity to single someone out for ridicule and punishment.

Maybe I'm wrong and they have identified every single person who went onto the pitch apart from these eight or she actually took an axe to one of the players, chopped him into pieces and ate them to hide the evidence, but otherwise I think it was unnecessary to include that photo on the list.

Well if the little lady had never gone on the pitch in the first place, she wouldn't have had the problem would she? Honestly, why the bleeding heart liberalism re a law breaker? If nothing else, she's learned a lesson. Perhaps we should give her a grant to compensate her for injured feelings? Boris, what do you think?

[Snake]

It’s fine by me if the OM wants to put the picture of a thug that is repeatedly guilty of premeditated football violence on its front page, but there are plenty worse crimes committed every day in Oxfordshire than a few morons running on the pitch.

In this case the crime and the Oxford Mail’s punishment are simply not compatible.

But it sells papers, and Newsquest are not judge and jury but a powerful commercial organisation who just want to grab your attention and increase its revenue regardless of any moral issues. And if people do have a problem with it, then there is always the Press Complaints Commission to appeal to.

[Baboo]

[quote=&quotAscension Ox
Well if the little lady had never gone on the pitch in the first place, she wouldn't have had the problem would she? [/quote]

How do you know she went on the pitch?
The photo shows her in the stand.
What other evidence do you have?

[Dr Bob]

The original piece in the OM, to my eyes, makes it clear they are at this stage still trying to identify people who went on the pitch. What happens to individuals afterwards depends on their background (reference is made to some people who ran on the pitch already being under football banning orders) and, as already noted by others, whether they 'fess up, show remorse, etc.

But all this seems to miss the bigger point - we appear to have avoided being punished for them getting onto the pitch in the first place. For that I am very grateful - and not a little relieved.

[theox]

but even if it was just running on the pitch then I still don't think you can be selective based on the sex or apparent age of somebody.

First impressions and all that - the implication of the article is that people are being treated differently depending on their offence, so with just 8 pictures released, clearly including one of the principal pitchrunners, the implication is therefore that these are the most wanted.

So, all I am saying is that I hope TVP/OM have some justification for effectively labelling her as a major protagonist in events on that day, rather than just lazily tagging a couple of photos of 'selected' minor offenders on to the main ones, just because they were easy to obtain, because the potential damage is quite great.

What that photo says to me is someone who is enjoying their day out at Oxford United and is innocent enough to smile for a camera while she is doing so, but also innocent/naive enough to get caught up in the moment and join dozens of others on the pitch.
That is exactly the kind of image we should be using to promote OUFC, young people enjoying being at the game, rather than using that naivity to single someone out for ridicule and punishment.

Maybe I'm wrong and they have identified every single person who went onto the pitch apart from these eight or she actually took an axe to one of the players, chopped him into pieces and ate them to hide the evidence, but otherwise I think it was unnecessary to include that photo on the list.

The article states that they have already identified 20 people (presumably previous offenders as the police/stewards recognised them).

It is perfectly reasonable that the Police should wish to speak to others, regardless of sex and age, in relation to a criminal incident.

The argument really, as Snake points out, is whether it is reasonable to splash this across the front of a newspaper.