You're basing this credit on what exactly?Originally Posted by jloome
We've seen the man in action. Smarts has nothing to do with it. Laziness & advertising (with some 2017 nostalgia) FOREVER!!!
You're basing this credit on what exactly?
We've seen the man in action. Smarts has nothing to do with it. Laziness & advertising (with some 2017 nostalgia) FOREVER!!!
Vanney coming back would be absurdly on brand. Manning's like a movie/tv show writer who only knows fan service, "Just reboot that old franchise and constantly shove references to the other movies they enjoyed in there, that'll work" except it's "Did they play for us when we were good? Are they Canadian? Are they Italian? If one of these three, sign them and it'll keep people happy"
Also did they ever play for or manage the USMNT.
Boilerplate response from TFC
Check out this tweet at https://twitter.com/TorontoFC/status/1656361656912343040
Lets see how long it takes for word to get out about a few bans - cause there are going to be a few. People don't realise how much stuff is on camera in that stadium.
Which is what makes last nights fights in the stadium so weird - any TFC fan from 5 years ago or more knows there are cameras everywhere and perpetrators will get found out and banned. Either some people don't remember, don't care or think the bans won't stick.
Well MLSE let back in most of the idiots once, after stupid behaviour and being banned for a bit.
so is anyone really surprised
A few may get banned and we’ll have another “justice for ———-“ banner in the south end for a few seasons.
MLSE knows the element that they are dealing with. Honestly, they should have isolated that group in the North End, bunched together the other supporters in the south.
Guess bans and silent protests are back on the table this season
Good news then! I suppose they won't need a loudspeaker anyhow.
If they are really worried about fan safety they can start their investigation with the away supporter section by looking at why they themselves did not have security and police there already. So stupid. Not like we don't have a history with some fans of each team acting the ass in each other's stadium.
I sit in section 126 and didn’t see the normal amount of security/police throughout the game. Typically, they are situated on the field level in front of me. I wonder if they scaled back knowing the attendance would be low?
But is BMO security really going to step in? This isn’t the same as you see at NFL games, or that you will see at World Cup games. Our security is mostly part time students.
Yeah, I totally agree. Unfortunately, I’m not sure that MLSE has a sense of corporate identity that is hugely unlike most large American companies. Or maybe it’s that most Canadian companies of this size look to the US for their models rather than having any well defined Canadian nationalist notions. I think they’re comfortable with Americans and it fulfills some sort of positive business psychology for them. Too, MLS is an American franchise league, and Canada doesn’t have a prominent history of football or winning football. Americans are the easy, obvious thing to do all around.
Klopas again, that’s hilarious! Difficult to imagine but I guess that tells you a lot of what you need to know about why Chicago is perennially bad.
The guy can just buy a ticket from Ticketmaster under a friends name. Put a hat and a fake moustache on to get in. What do you think this is homeland security at the gate??
Nobody's disguising themselves to sneak into a facility when being caught will land them criminal trespass charges. I mean, in a movie, maybe. In real life, the prospect of a criminal record and fines in the thousands generally deters.
Oh that’s serious. Are you sure about that
That seems pretty extreme for going to a soccer game
It's pretty standard procedure for bans at sport facilities in Canada to warn the banned person that skirting it will result in trespassing charges.
They have civil liability insurance to consider, among other things. If they let in someone who has been violent in the past and they injure someone, the facility operator could be held liable.
If the banned person was determined to be violent -- either in the earlier fight or for throwing something at a player -- they will likely ban him for life.
How far they stretch "violent" will probably depend on how much of a message they want to send.
A life-ban might be a bit harsh, as I don't think it was thrown to hit the player. Though there were others working nearby ...
But I expect the days of megaphones and capo stands are gone - for any section. Hopefully they don't target long flagpoles.
It's a shame that this garbage impacts so many more than the idiots behind it. I'd like to be able to again go to games in Montreal, without risking retaliation.
I would think you would have to prove it was said person that committed the offence
How are you going to do that?
For one you have to take the guy to court
How are you going to prove it was said person
If he pleads not guilty
That would take a long time to get a court date a jury etc. I think what your talking about is tv fiction
Judge to mlse lawyer: what are you charging this person wirh?
Mlse lawyer: said individual threw a megaphone onto the field
Judge: you wasting my time and the courts time wirh this frivolous lawsuit? Get the fuck out of my courtroom
Last edited by stevep; 05-10-2023 at 07:08 PM.
You could always google something before posting.
The law on trespass of private property is pretty darn straightforward. If someone is duly warned that they are banned from a private property, then they are banned (whether its fair or not), and if they violate the ban, the law of trespassing is very simple.
“What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.”
Let’s say it was me that threw the megaphone
How are you going to find me if you are mlse and how you going to prove it to as me that threw the megaphone? I don’t know the law I’m not a lawyer I am simply asking logical questions that you are no one is answering.
Don’t you need to prove something in a court of law before accusing someone of a crime
What about innocent until proven guilty?
It's private property. They can ban whoever they want. And anybody can accuse anyone of anything, it's part of free speech. Civil redress, if it's found to be harmful, is to sue for slander. But I think banning an individual from a football stadium would be very difficult to directly link to loss of reputation. It hasn't been publicized, his face isn't being circulated to other attendees. The only way anyone else knows about it is if he tells them (MLSE staff don't count as public, as the corporate entity itself in this case would be the 'individual' banning him).
And people can be found online via task aggregation very quickly. A group of coders in Toronto found a dude in Texas wanted for some crime last year. They id'd the fan who bothered a TV reporter and banned him temporarily a few years back, and that was literally within hours.
Facial recognition software and the fact that people put their lives online makes it a lot easier than it used to be. Someone could probably match that video to a person pretty quickly, even with that partial view.
Last edited by jloome; 05-10-2023 at 07:57 PM.
Agree. Also with jloome. Though, if it is a life-time ban, then the possible faint hope/very slight wiggle room in such a situation is to respect the ban while exploring the possibility of legally trying to fight their decision; to go to court. To challenge MLS's/MLSE's judgment by arguing any mitigating circumstances of the incident, as well as, the punishment scope of any past comparative incidents/decisions and particularly any discretion involved for those. Of course, you would need to find an enterprising lawyer. Moreover, if at all viable, the problem with this route is the cost and time involved; an individual David facing a corporate Goliath. Worse, and if truly cynical, one could envision an attempt at a Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario decision.
Video from the facility and individuals' cameras/posts? Identification methods and technology. Perhaps witness confirmation, if you are relatively known; as I suspect in this case a 'Capo' or fill-in would be? For me it's simple, if you get banned, and you are innocent, believe there are mitigating circumstances or disagree with the punishment or any length, then you must fight/argue that decision by pleaing directly with them, better with/through representation or ultimately judicially; in the courts, to try to overturn it
Same type of security 4 years ago called in the cops in my section within 5 minutes of an altercation. Its the training.
MLSE also makes sure a notice is read before games about behaviour and is posted around the stadium. They ban people periodically without anybody knowing. Its not a civil action.
As a manager of a private facility that people thought was public, I've had this discussion with people & its pretty clear - unruly behaviour gets a ban - no judge involved. As long as the ban is not based on discrimination, you can ban from your facility whomever you want. I was running a federally funded facility & the person involved went to the local MP. Got a call from their office inquiring & I just said "Banned for unruly behaviour - if you want the incident report, I can send it over" - the mention of documentation was enough in that case.
Last edited by OgtheDim; 05-10-2023 at 09:10 PM.
I’ve been researching this sports ban stuff
It’s usually a guy running on the field.
In this case they know who it is
This megaphone incident is different he probably left the stadium not detained
A lot more difficult situation for mlse to enforce in my opinion.
If I was that guy I wouldn’t answer my phone for any number I didn’t know. I wouldn’t go to tfc games for a few games. Then when I deciddd to go back I would buy a ticket in another section far away from the south end. Maybe wear a Covid mask. But heck that’s not even necessary they would never notice you or recognize you.
What they’ll do is issue a fake statement saying they found the guy and he has been banned.
Good enough to scare anyone from doing this action in the future
Last edited by stevep; 05-10-2023 at 09:26 PM.
Basically you’re counting on one guy playing lame school-boy tricks outsmarting a large organization.
Last time this played out, the ultras got hammered and the club thought nothing of shooting first and asking questions later.
Doubt this would be any different.
On another note: most people when they first saw this TFC notice on Instagram their initial reaction was it was an announcement of BB being fired. Nobody gives a shit about this incident. Everyone wants an investigation for tfc shitty play this year
If you want to read some funny comments go to tfc Instagram. These people know the score
They know who he is, he was the capo for dam shake. Anyone should remember the witch hunt for Ken Pagan who threw the beer can on the field at the Jays game 2016. The turned into a witch hunt. He left the stadium after throwing and the search was on. A lot of effort was put in to determine did he actually throw it and video proved he did and he was charged, lost his job as a member of the media and eventually plead guilty. It had only been a year before when the field had been littered with garbage including lots of cans in game five of the ALDS after Russell Martin hit the batter on the throw back.
I honestly think if Ken had stayed around and security found him, he would have simply been ejected and that would have been the end of it. The moment he bolted the witch hunt was on.
Blue Jays Fan Ken Pagan Banned from MLB Parks for 1 Year After Throwing Beer Can | News, Scores, Highlights, Stats, and Rumors | Bleacher Report
Ken Pagan pleads guilty to throwing beer can at Blue Jays game | The Star
Remember The Man, The Legend, The Goal 5-12-07 and All That #9 Left On The Pitch, Thanks For The Memories !!!
If I understand correctly BMO Field is owned by the City of Toronto where Scotiabank Arena and Rogers Centre are privately owned. I believe during the pandemic this came to light when the subject of measures came up, BMO Field was treated differently because it is publicly owned? Maybe I am missing something In some cases a tress pass only happens if you been asked to leave and in other cases the moment you step onto said property you can be. I have always wondered what is the difference in the law when someone runs across the field at the Rogers Centre/ Jumps on the ice at Scotiabank than if a person does the same thing say during a double A GTHL game at North Toronto? Does the law actually differ on that? Technically BMO Field and North Toronto Arena are both owned by the City of Toronto.
Remember The Man, The Legend, The Goal 5-12-07 and All That #9 Left On The Pitch, Thanks For The Memories !!!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote