I have no idea, but I’d suggest it was more down to a lack of physical evidence than because they don’t care. It’s very difficult to prove guilt of rape without physical evidence, unfortunately and so there will always be a lower than average conviction rate for that particular crime.That's not what I said. And again you have taken a post out of context.
But bearing in mind the pitiful arrest/conviction rate for rape do you think they give it 100% ALL the time and for everyone ?
Re your last paragraph. I doubt burglary rape and serious assaults have a detection rate of above 10%. If the police did their jobs properly on the streets then great, now police the football matches.Well it’s clearly not that level of seriousness but when City pay circa £65k policing costs per game and
have the FA and football authorities on their back regarding football offences and pitch invasions you can clearly see why they want positive action to be taken
Is it not serious players being attacked on the pitch ?
The assault on Billy Sharpe was horrendous
If it continues the fences will be back the last couple of weeks of the season did English football no good
Furthermore do you really think the police write off rape and firearms offences
Get realistic
Burglary is a massive issue and is a different debate (police cuts/funding)
The simple solution is behave yourself or face the consequences and if you get caught take your medicine
rag cunts been doing it at ours for yearsGoal posts. Point taken.
Smoke bombs. I didn't see a flare. There's a difference
In that case, City and GMP better be on top of the European Ultras next season in the CL. We can't have 1 rule for City fans and another rule for the European Ultras. Or is it deemed too much of a flash point and security risk to intervene, so City and GMP just tolerate it for 1 match? Basel being just 1 of many examples over the years.
But I think everyone here agrees that, all things equal, we'd prioritize serious assaults over chucking something on a football pitch. But if you commit a crime at a football match there are 1000 stewards, hundreds of police officers, all of whom file some sort of report about whether they saw any crimes or misdemeanors, 1000s of cameras, a multi-million pound company that needs to keep its license, a billion pound league that needs to protect its product, and a wider media environment where journalists and politicians are vocal. It's comparing apples and oranges.Re your last paragraph. I doubt burglary rape and serious assaults have a detection rate of above 10%. If the police did their jobs properly on the streets then great, now police the football matches.
They don't police the streets, as anyone who has suffered a crime will tell you when they do your last paragraph will hold water.
FFS give it a restBut I think everyone here agrees that, all things equal, we'd prioritize serious assaults over chucking something on a football pitch. But if you commit a crime at a football match there are 1000 stewards, hundreds of police officers, all of whom file some sort of report about whether they saw any crimes or misdemeanors, 1000s of cameras, a multi-million pound company that needs to keep its license, a billion pound league that needs to protect its product, and a wider media environment where journalists and politicians are vocal. It's comparing apples and oranges.
The police should be above any pressure from City, the billion pound league or the media environment. They are meant to act independently of political pressure, they are there to serve the public. When you don't even get a visit for a burglary and are told, via the internet, to knock on your neighbours and speak to them because they aren't coming out, then the public have a right to ask why the cops can spend 2 months investigating people running onto a football pitch.But I think everyone here agrees that, all things equal, we'd prioritize serious assaults over chucking something on a football pitch. But if you commit a crime at a football match there are 1000 stewards, hundreds of police officers, all of whom file some sort of report about whether they saw any crimes or misdemeanors, 1000s of cameras, a multi-million pound company that needs to keep its license, a billion pound league that needs to protect its product, and a wider media environment where journalists and politicians are vocal. It's comparing apples and oranges.
It is not political, there was deliberate damage to a £5k assets reducing it to scrap value, and they have the perps on camera.The police should be above any pressure from City, the billion pound league or the media environment. They are meant to act independently of political pressure, they are there to serve the public. When you don't even get a visit for a burglary and are told, via the internet, to knock on your neighbours and speak to them because they aren't coming out, then the public have a right to ask why the cops can spend 2 months investigating people running onto a football pitch.
Since Hillsborough the police, the clubs, the league and the government have worked together to create a safer experience for players and fans. As part of that, they share intel, communications, reports, footage, and presumably work together to prosecute people. I am critical of some aspects of this, but I'd prefer what we have in England than what they have in Spain or Italy. The clubs also pay a fair whack for the policing that takes place in the stadium, which will include written reports, and everyone will have to do some sort of response to in order to keep relevant licenses and the like.The police should be above any pressure from City, the billion pound league or the media environment. They are meant to act independently of political pressure, they are there to serve the public. When you don't even get a visit for a burglary and are told, via the internet, to knock on your neighbours and speak to them because they aren't coming out, then the public have a right to ask why the cops can spend 2 months investigating people running onto a football pitch.