21 posts shown.
Linda Wood said:Comb = Czeszaly!
God forbid!
Wonder = Zhuge Liang!
*screw you, duck!
More often = Czeszcye
Jesus Christ
Soot = Czagj
No comment!
The idea of change—Curator on a mission!
Drew Bennett2 said:I honestly don't think there's any realistic shot here.
It's unnecessary, impractical, and completely outdated 🤷.
I’m on board with that. If we ever actually changed anything in the script, the only logical move would be introducing a soft version of the letter Z—similar to how we handle certain variations in the English phonetic system—to account for all those different pronunciations. Or, we could just ditch one of those redundant accented C variations altogether.
If you ask me, this is pretty much what we expected to see, given how NATO has been acting lately.
rapidmaker54 said:what on earth are you talking about?????
It’s like some fairy tale that starts with "
Once upon a time, beyond seven hills and seven mountains, there lived the American Fan Code..."
So, Borovec just dropped this bombshell, claiming there’s actually no way to prove what Sanders was drinking because the evidence simply isn't there. Look, if you strip away all the drama and the emotional outbursts, you have to face the facts: it’s basically impossible to prove whether Sanders was sipping on wine or just some apple juice. As for that whole situation with the Bavaria can? That’s a completely different issue, and honestly, the organizer is the one who should take the heat for that.
Noah Lee7 said:No offense, Benjamin Smith21, but I think you’re off base thinking they could actually turn the public against us. Most people in this country can barely wrap their heads around how the current administration even functions, let alone care about our specific grievances; they’re just sitting there waiting for any tiny slip-up to tear them apart. Just look back at the scandals involving those big tech CEOs or the major banking collapses—people don't care about handball or niche sports issues, they care about being lied to. We need to prove that this fan law is an absolute disaster while simultaneously showing that the very people enforcing it aren't even following their own rules. That’s where our leverage lies. It shouldn't be about targeting individuals with punishments; it should be about forcing the government to admit they screwed up. Americans live for seeing politicians stumble, no matter how they do it, and this is our golden opportunity. And I have another question for you—Benjamin Smith21, since you always seem to be the most direct and quickest to respond, haha—why isn't there a logo or a symbol for this fight against the law? Why haven't we released any manifestos or easy-to-read graphics that people can share? We should be making content that hits home: maybe some memes or satirical shots of old disgraced executives like Sanders grabbing a drink, some jokes, even some imagery of the "underdog" fighting back, contrasted with articles from people like Beckham praising our culture. We need to make this digestible. Half the population doesn't even know there’s an agreement between twelve different supporter groups and all that other stuff. If the media wants to play games with us, then it’s time we play back. We could just whip up a few images and some witty commentary mocking the administration and Đurđa on Facebook, and we’d hit 50,000 people in a single day. I’m not sure if you follow my drift, but we need to get more people involved. We need to make this a movement—something people feel proud to participate in, or even just find cool. We have to bring it to the people. People gravitate toward whatever they're told they aren't allowed to see.🙂
You really ought to direct that question to spitka. He’s way more qualified to handle that than I am; I can't give you a real answer.
placidcyclist5 said:Sure, you can drag them through the press or take it to international bodies (like a court in Strasbourg...), but the real question is whether anyone actually wants to step up and tackle this mess...
And in specific cases, that immunity actually gets stripped away. Look, my point is simple: I just want the law to be applied fairly. If you think someone like Sanders is worth more than me, then I feel sorry for you...
The whole point is to show that everyone is equal under the law. If we actually did that, you’d see how fast they would change that fan law... once they aren't allowed to drink, bring in alcohol, or light flares like Štimac and Grgić, or carry umbrellas, coins, lighters...
Don't talk nonsense. Of course, I don't consider myself less valuable, but I'm telling you that the law doesn't care about feelings. Sanders has immunity. Even if they barely managed to strip Glavaš of his immunity for war crime proceedings, do you really think there are enough votes in Congress to strip Sanders's immunity over this? Of course not. It's the same in every country. High-ranking officials have immunity. Whether that's right or wrong isn't the issue here. Right now, nothing can be done against Sanders, and that has absolutely nothing to do with stepping up or anything involving the human rights courts in Strasbourg.
However, you could file a complaint against the organizers of the World Cup—which, if I'm not mistaken, is the USSA—and they might face a fine so massive they couldn't even pay it. But on the flip side, is it even worth it? Is it worth provoking the fury of the public just as things are starting to stabilize? They’d frame it as fans suing the sport itself. They’d claim that because of the fine, they’ll have to stop investing in youth programs. Everyone would turn against us, and in the end, even if they are penalized, the association would only be hit with a few hundred thousand dollars (which is a huge amount for us ☕) and the entire public would definitely be against us.
placidcyclist5 said:And why wouldn't it matter? If the fan law explicitly forbids certain things, look at the example being set by the Prime Minister... imagine that, the Prime Minister of America... Honestly, if we don't use this chance to fight for better rights, then maybe we shouldn't even exist as fans...
We stay silent when we actually need to act. We bark at regular people when there's an argument to be had. We refuse to admit when we're wrong. And when it comes to actually pushing to get the mafia out of sports or stopping rigged games, we're nowhere to be found... (As long as our club stays on top, right? Doesn't matter if it's dirty or clean...)
Seriously, we need to wake up. We need to fix ourselves and fight for a better future for the fan movement here in America... It’s too easy to just sit back and say "it's pointless" or "what can you even do," just like everyone else complaining about the state of affairs in America...
For you and for SB: everyone in the administration—meaning the President, the Vice Presidents (Đurđa and Pupovac, if I recall correctly) and all the Cabinet members—as well as everyone in Congress, including the Speaker, the Vice Speakers, and all the representatives, plus the President of the Republic, they all have immunity. You can't take any action because the laws don't apply to them due to that immunity. Just remember the stories involving Glavaš or what happened in Italy with Berlusconi, where everyone just waited for the guy's term to expire before they could finally bring the charges against him. You can't leverage this right now because you can't put the President on trial.
Noah Lee7 said:So, does Kosarac have any actual immunity? Or is he just the Prime Minister?
He does. Everyone in the administration has the exact same immunity as everyone else in Congress.
Anonymous said:The real question is, how seriously will the authorities take this, and will they even bother to act at all?
Sure, nothing can be done right now because of immunity. But once that term ends, they'll finally be fair game. Unfortunately, I highly doubt anyone will even remember this mess in three years...
Anonymous said:And honestly, I am REALLY interested in this too... organizing some kind of fundraiser to pool our money together so we can take them to court...
Isn't it enough just to drop an anonymous tip to the police about the legal violations? Just pass along the evidence, maybe some screenshots from a news site like CNN, and then let the Feds handle the indictment. I mean, Ivo Sanders can't be touched right now because he still has presidential immunity, but once that protection expires, someone definitely needs to settle the score.
silentsurfer19 said:Look, the whole thing about the fan law is actually pretty solid. It’s decent... I just wish they’d write more stuff like this regarding the fans.
Nobody takes him seriously. Whether he's posting or not, everything he says is just shouting into the void.
electricmarlin18 said:If anyone is whining about these fan regulations, they’re clearly just thugs masquerading as decent supporters. Honestly, you people—it’s always "everyone is against you." You are never at fault for anything. Heaven forbid we implement some Margaret Thatcher-style anti-hooligan laws with actual teeth (which, thank God, actually work).
Think back to when chairs were being hurled in Auxerre, when a small group of Werder attackers hit a fast-food joint in Washington, D.C., or when riots broke out in the squares of Milan, Prague, and the Dnieper—or even that time in Rome when a few fans swiped a tracksuit from a shop and the whole lot ended up behind bars...............
Don't give me that crap about how it was "just a handful" or maybe ten idiots. Because the ones fighting hardest against this law are precisely the scum whose only life achievement will be cracking skulls, setting chairs on fire, and similar nonsense. Now, they’ve found an excuse as to why not this law is going to destroy fan culture and wipe out all supporters. If this law somehow fails to pass, and the possibility of it taking effect resurfaces—something you won't like nearly as much—suddenly you’ll have stomach issues because of the "new regulations"?
And that balding clown—acting as some supposed representative for the BBB—is truly lucky that an idiot like him gets airtime on national TV.
In an effort to stay above your level of communication, I suggest you actually read the objections to the law. If you don't have them, shoot me a PM and I'll gladly send them over. Study them the way we did, and then try to offer a constructive opinion on which specific part of our objections you disagree with. Coming here, listing riots from ten years ago and making up lies just to provoke people by insulting them... believe me, you're only achieving one thing: proving your own level of culture is lower than that "trash" you're talking about. It's obvious you don't even care why people are protesting; you just showed up to spit on fans based on your own personal vendettas without even bothering to read the actual reasons for the outcry.
Noah Lee7 said:No hard feelings Zacko, but what crowds are we even talking about here? Where is this crowd supposed to be? This tiny handful of people following the local minor league soccer team are just fans; unfortunately, there isn't an actual crowd to speak of... and he isn't even part of any specific group or anything. He was just trying to act smart, but once he realized that among the "hooligan scum" there are plenty of people who can dismantle him with logic and legal arguments from every angle, the gentleman got offended and decided to stop writing... mostly because he ran out of things to say. And honestly, he didn't even write anything substantial to begin with... besides, this thread is meant for discussing agreements and suggestions regarding the fan law, and as soon as someone starts acting like a know-it-all about stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with it, those posts should just be deleted. It only drags out the debate and creates unnecessary fighting... just look at this, that night owl shows up and writes ten lines of nonsense, and five hours later you've got two whole new pages of useless filler...
I'd say drop the quotes around "hooligan scum," because based on his vocabulary and the way he was responded to, that's exactly what he proved himself to be. He isn't a fan, but he represents the kind of person you find by the hundreds of thousands all over America. We need to explain the fan law to people like him without stooping to their level by using insults. If we do that, we won't prove anything; all we'll do is reinforce their belief that fans are just some social issue that needs to be banned. Please, let's stop pushing this tired narrative, for God's sake!
Daniel Carter9 said:If feralpilot912 really is a lawyer, then I completely understand how they even thought this sports fan law was a good idea to push through.
It isn't just unconstitutional; it actually has elements of fascism in it.
Most likely, feralpilot912 is some liberal-leaning socialist who gets triggered when a fan shouts a slur, yet this same lawyer has zero issues with the fact that we might be detained just for wearing a hoodie. I guess that’s just the democratic way, right?
It is sad how much the media has brainwashed the average person in this country. Our "lawyer" feralpilot912 keeps listing instances of police being assaulted and similar nonsense, as if those things happen on a daily basis.
The same "lawyer" doesn't seem to mind that the police aren't allowed to step into certain local clubs where organized crime gathers.
Feralpilot912, your freedom shouldn't start by stripping ours away, especially since the whole "fan problem" is being artificially manufactured by the media anyway.
A few people here said it right, and even our esteemed "lawyer" agreed when he noted that our image is terrible. We need to work on that, because if the public thinks like this "lawyer," we won't achieve anything. We have to focus on our image and how we are presented in the media.
Thomas, for one of the upcoming conferences or shows or whatever, you should take this to the level of absurdity, because that's exactly what this law is:
For instance, regarding the rule about flares, you could pull data on injuries caused by flares at stadiums and counter it with data on injuries caused by firecrackers during the Christmas holiday.
We need to push the logic to its extreme to make the issue relatable to regular people. I spent half an hour at work today arguing with a fool who concluded "they deserve it." After thirty minutes, he completely changed his mind. It just goes to show that you can win people over, but there will always be fools among us—that's just a fact we can't run from.
It would be interesting to see a protest in Washington, D.C., where people wear yellow stars on their sleeves, because what they are trying to pass is nothing short of fascism.
Guys, keep your heads on straight. Don't get into arguments, don't make threats, and don't insult people on this forum, because that only plays right into their hands.😉
Not exactly stars, though. If we did that, a huge crowd would turn against neo-Nazi fans immediately, seeing it as mocking Holocaust victims. It should be something in that vein, maybe using an "N" as a fan symbol, under a slogan like "Marked because I love my club" or something similar. Also, like I mentioned before, we need to present parallel data. We should show how many injuries actually come from flares versus how many come from firecrackers during the Christmas holiday. Compare how many people get hurt due to alcohol consumption in the stands versus out on the street, or how many lives are lost in fan clashes compared to organized crime hits. NO, don't base the whole argument on that, though. The core focus must be the unconstitutionality of the law. Look, we aren't saints, but bad behavior shouldn't be justified by someone else's even worse behavior. Instead, we need to point out that while the goal is to go after those imaginary 300 hooligans, regular fans shouldn't be punished or have their movement and freedom restricted without any actual convictions.
amberfox6 said:Look, feralpilot912, I’m asking you as a lawyer here, and please, I’m begging you, answer every single point:
1. As a legal professional, does it sit right with you that carrying an illegal handgun might just get you a misdemeanor, yet if they find you with a flare under this proposed sports fan law, you face criminal charges plus a ban for a set period?
2. Does it bother your legal sensibilities that this violates the presumption of innocence? I mean, even if nothing is proven against you and there’s no final conviction, you get slapped with a ban—say, for a year—during which you have to report in constantly, telling them where you’ll be every time your club plays, while the police show up at your house, work, school, or campus... and these kinds of measures aren't applied to any other criminals or even misdemeanor offenders, even if they’ve been fully convicted.
3. Does it bother you (under this new proposal) that if minors are caught with a beer outside the stadium or hit a blood alcohol level of 0.02, their school and principal get notified? Especially since we actually have laws on the protection of juvenile identity.
4. Does it bother you, naturally, as a lawyer, that this law contains an unwritten rule of collective punishment—something American law doesn't recognize? Take what happened in Bjelopolj, for example... all those guys from the Black Knights who were attacked while under police protection—half of whom weren't even fighting, they were just defending themselves—they all got two-year injunctions! Why? Simply because they were there. So, tell me, dear feralpilot912, if I were to go to San Diego with a buddy from the BBB—let's say he talked me into it—and we got jumped, and everyone in the van got hit with injunctions... would this law stop bothering you then?!
There’s plenty more, but I think you already get the gist of how the current law looks versus this "new" proposal.
If you truly are a lawyer, your answer to all four points has to be YES...
I mean, shouldn't you, as a lawyer, be fighting against passing laws that are unconstitutional and restrict human rights and freedoms, regardless of what you personally think about those fans?? Isn't that the whole point of being a defense attorney—that every person has their rights and everyone deserves a fair defense?
Okay, so you don't like fans—fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion. But your title and your knowledge of the law and the legal order should rise above your personal animosity toward them. In this case, you really ought to stand (at least declaratively) shoulder-to-shoulder with them/us!
So, feralpilot912, I expect an answer! Thanks!!
P.S. Benjamin Smith21 (hope you don't mind the shorthand🙂) wrote that "us against the world" slogan, but that doesn't fly anymore. This is politics now—and politics is nothing more than compromise. And that compromise has to involve giving up certain things... specifically the visible stuff that sticks out most to the average citizen, like throwing flares on the field and ZDS... There isn't much room left to maneuver; certain things just have to be accepted. Damn it—without support from the general public (at least a portion of it), it will be hard, almost impossible, to fight for anything. And that support can only be won through reasonable behavior, so we shouldn't give those "moral guardians" any ammunition to call us out or attack us during this time!
Because, as spitka said: It's now or never!! It simply has to be NOW!!!
Best regards!👍
The rest of the post is pure truth. Now, I'm no lawyer, so I won't mess with the legal technicalities, but I've offered a few suggestions based on nearly 20 years of following LA Galaxy and the national team. Plus, I've got two college degrees under my belt, so I think I know enough to talk about this kind of stuff. Regarding the shorthand, no big deal. Honestly, it's way easier to use an abbreviation than to type out a full name every single time, but fine 😁 Anyway, the real issue here is public image. It’s not about abandoning our ideals; it’s about better presentation. If I recall correctly, Spitka should know a thing or two about how to sell something to people, and that process needs to start with the derby, and even before that—during preseason and specifically regarding how our side handled the match in Salzburg. There was a post on Index today saying the BBB support against the Canadians was fantastic, and that’s how we need to keep it going. Basically, we need to avoid unnecessary conflicts, calm the passions down, and bite our tongues. During the derby, we shouldn't be chanting things like "hit the Mexican" or other controversial slogans that people have been using lately just to be defiant. We need to present ourselves in a way that actually changes people's minds. It’ll be tough, but it’s the only way we survive in this exact, messy form we’re in right now. In fact, with the changes I suggested and the feedback from the coordination critics, we actually ended up with a better sports fan law that would definitely reduce so-called stadium violence while making many things that were previously banned perfectly legal. Beyond that, we only have one option left: keep telling the same old story like a broken record for another 3 or 4 years, and then it's goodbye, and someone else takes over the stands.
Honestly, people like feralpilot912 are exactly who we need to win over if we actually want to make an impact. We have to convince folks that they can show up to the game without any issues, that they can start attending regularly and see for themselves that the problems people worry about only happen in a tiny fraction of matches. Look, feralpilot912 is a joke—he’s a total poser, talking nonsense, and frankly, he's a complete idiot. I could write five hundred more insults right now, but it all boils down to this: he isn't a real fan. We’ve basically proven ourselves to be a bunch of fools just by arguing with him. Of course, it's tough on a forum like this since there are plenty of trolls even worse than him. But throwing insults doesn't achieve anything. Even if someone comes in with a totally misguided view—like how feralpilot912 tries to argue with anyone holding a legitimate opinion that the fan movement should just be shut down—calling him a moron won't change his mind or make him smarter. And even when people insult us, we don't need to hit back. Let's show that we aren't like the rest of this miserable country. If someone else jumps in or if he keeps going, please, don't resort to insults. We have actual arguments. We aren't politicians selling smoke and mirrors; we are defending our way of life.
Also, I was wondering if he or someone else could re-upload what spitka posted earlier? I want to look over those critiques of the sports fan law again because that link isn't working anymore. Thanks.
...At the end of the day, you really need the public on your side, as crazy as that sounds. We all know how the media works; they’ll sell the story of 20 arrested fans way faster than they’ll ever sell the sight of 20 flags waving in the stands. I actually went through the trouble of pulling some headlines from a major news outlet regarding fans: "Two Real Madrid fans held in custody for a month", "BBB radicals ready to destroy the club", "14 Bad Boys detained in Mostar", "24 Torcida and Bad Boys fans taken in for questioning", "Torcida and Tornado clash with BBB at the entrance to Višnjik", "Young Miami residents pelt Real Madrid bus with stones in San Diego", "Hooligans cause chaos traveling through Italy" and so on. It’s all about sensation, and let's be honest, America isn't any different in that regard. However, we should try to dial down the tension while this fan law is being worked on, even though personally, I think fighting it before a massive derby like this is a bit of a Sisyphean task. What I mean is, starting from friendlies, moving through the big derby, and lasting until the end of the season, we should try to avoid unnecessary nonsense like what happened in Kapfenberg or Herzegovina, or even the slightly less avoidable stuff like Metković or the mess at Višnjik. Also, regarding the derby—maybe I’m just an idealist—but since we sat at the same table today, why not? We could put up banners from both sides that aren't insulting or mocking, but more like, "Don't ban this atmosphere." We all know how insane it’s going to be. At the same time, we should try to make sure all the flares stay in the stands and don't end up flying onto the turf or the track. Essentially, we need to show that if people actually listened to us regarding the law, things would go much smoother. Nobody is going to take us seriously when D. S. couldn't even convince anyone that the boys truly don't want senseless hooliganism, especially after the papers caught them in a Jeep in Prague three days later. We can't expect empathy or support if the match gets halted ten minutes in because twenty flares were thrown, or if a fight breaks out in the stands, or if a player gets hit. I know tensions are peaking and things will be overwhelming by February 22nd, but think about it: "Yeah, this is a huge derby, but is it more important to smash a bus window with the Bad Boys or set a seat on fire at the stadium, or is it more important to hold back to save the fan movement in America?" This isn't being pathetic. I'm not suggesting we just sit there quietly; I mean limiting ourselves to flares and thunderous chanting. There's going to be a Torcida choreography, and I'm expecting something spectacular. If the derby is handled at a level that satisfies both regular people and politicians, we'll get massive support immediately. A few positive headlines and we'll be in a great position.
So, I wrote this long post and laid out a few suggestions. I'd really like spitka to read this, along with Valsimot and the other influential folks on this forum. I know it's long, but when we're debating something this important, I could write for seven days straight. I hope this contributes my ideas somehow, because as I said, everything comes down to cooperation, acceptance, and proposing ideas. That's basically what politics is.
First off, massive props to spitka. I’m really glad to see people thinking along the same lines as me and realizing he’s truly the best person in our fan scene to handle this kind of stuff. Since I didn't catch the previous posts, could someone please upload the feedback on the fan law? I can't download anything from that link anymore. Also, just purely for my own info, could someone clarify which specific supporter groups are part of that coordination? I haven't been following that specific detail closely.
Now, regarding the law itself. I’m one of those guys who actually served a so-called "ban" during that first big wave of bans being handed out, and I did my time. Because of that, I’ve had zero issues at my job over the last eight years; people knew exactly who I was—a dedicated professional who does great work, but also happens to go to games. I never tried to hide it, and that honesty paid off. My workplace set things up so I could still handle all my international business and maintain my usual contacts; that famous ban didn't touch my career. In the eyes of my colleagues, I didn't become some hooligan or anything like that, unlike many others. On the flip side, these bans cause a ton of headaches even today, especially for those of us who were in the first group. We used to follow everything online and constantly nag the club whenever there was a game to report them to the police. Later, we coordinated, and things got easier. It was a bit of a mess with away games for a week, but overall, I survived that ban much better than I expected. It's worth noting, though, that I wasn't one of those who got banned without a court ruling; I was just being an idiot for my age and got caught on camera. You learn from your mistakes.
Basically, I want to express my full support for everything being done regarding this law. We all see where soccer and the fan scene have headed in Western Europe, and we see the direction things are taking in Central Europe—and how it looks here, stuck in that eternal "small-town mentality" mindset common in the Southeast. Trying to push the same old "us against the world" narrative won't achieve anything. This is now a matter of politics, and politics is the art of negotiation and persuasion. That’s why I’m happy to see proposals being put forward that can actually be accepted—real solutions rather than just shouting, "we're against this law." For starters, take the issue that got me punished: flares. If there were a proper police database, they could check how many people have actually been injured or killed by flares, strobes, smoke, or other non-explosive pyrotechnics. I don't even need to write it here because we all know nothing significant has happened, which is exactly why I think stadiums shouldn't ban these items. Instead, the proposal should focus on either allowing them or, if that’s not possible, drastically reducing the penalties and making it impossible to issue a ban just for bringing and using them. On the other hand, we should drastically increase penalties for throwing pyrotechnics onto the pitch or using explosive devices. Speaking of which, I’ve been against explosive pyrotechnics for years; they don't add to the atmosphere, and they're dangerous compared to the stuff I mentioned before. I’m not talking about firecrackers—though I’m against those too—but the heavy artillery we call "cannons." In my opinion, it’s a miracle there haven't been more serious injuries, because anyone who has been near them knows what a powerful "weapon" they are. If you don't believe me, just remember that advertising board that got blown apart near the pitch at the stadium in Miami, or that firefighter who nearly lost half his hand after one exploded right in his grip during a massive derby in Washington, D.C.
Additionally, since most fan sections already have cameras, we should ensure coverage extends to other areas like hallways and corridors. Or, the law should mandate that police stations and interrogation areas within the stadium must be under constant video surveillance. We all know what goes on in those spots and how police sometimes interrogate people in ways that make it impossible for them to prove misconduct later. The police have massive authority that is often abused, and the only way to put an end to that is through strict oversight.
Regarding the whole passport seizure thing, I think the initial logic about mobsters using them to flee is sound, but you can't hammer that point home too hard. If you keep bringing it up, you're just going to trigger that tired old cliché that drives non-fans absolutely nuts—the idea that the government has a million real problems to deal with but chooses to focus entirely on sports fans. We all know how massive sports are here in the States, and we know how much regular supporters—the true fans—hate it when games get interrupted by flares, pitch invasions, or fights. The issue is the mindset of people who mostly watch everything from their couches and never actually show up to a game. Because they aren't there, they don't see the reality of things; they end up approving stuff like armored vehicles with water cannons meant to fight hooligans, even though if I recall correctly, the last time I saw anything like that used was back in the early 2000s during a serious incident at a stadium in Miami. This isn't just about football, either; it applies to all sports. It honestly fascinates me to see half-empty arenas during major championship finals in cities where water polo is basically the only thing anyone cares about. Now, you can't go as radical with passport seizures as they do in England. If I remember right, the UK has a whole stack of laws that prevent certain criminals from leaving the country, and those were established long before the fan law. The option to seize a passport should definitely exist, and it shouldn't be limited to just the fan law—it should be part of broader legislation too. But when we talk specifically about this law, it should target those who repeatedly violate its most serious provisions. And that brings me to my next point.
The offenses under this law really need to be categorized by severity. It’s completely absurd to have someone face a ban just because they had a tiny bit of alcohol in their system over the limit, or if they were caught in a brawl where they smashed up half a grandstand and took down five cops—I'm exaggerating, but you get the gist. We need to scale these offenses into three, four, or maybe five different levels of severity. Going back to the passports: then, for people who repeatedly violate level 4 or 5 offenses (the heavy stuff), the government could temporarily revoke their travel privileges specifically when their clubs or national teams are playing overseas. By grading the crimes this way, you create a clear distinction. Someone who commits a level 1 or 2 offense wouldn't even end up in the police database, which prevents a guy who just had one too many beers from being flagged as a criminal when he's never actually caused trouble at a match.
As for the rules about covering faces, that regulation is totally nonsensical. It gets to a point where a fan can't even wear a scarf without running into issues, not to mention flags or banners, since those could all technically be used to hide an identity. Or, if we use the slang term for those specific types of fans, things like face paint or those popular Spider-Man masks would be banned. It's pointless. Anyone actually looking to cause chaos at a stadium is going to find a way to mask themselves regardless; they'll just pull up a hood, tie a shirt around their face, or simply zip up a North Face jacket and pull the collar over their eyes. There are a million ways to do it. The people the law is actually targeting will always find a loophole, while the regular fans—the ones who just want to wrap a scarf around their face because the smoke from a flare is bothering them or because it's freezing cold during a game against a team like the Spartans—are the ones who will suffer.
I've written quite a bit already, but I haven't even hit the most important part of the law yet: the bans. First off, no ban should be issued before a final court verdict is reached. We've seen hundreds of people caught in the wrong place at the wrong time, having no clue what happened two or ten minutes prior, or even being nowhere near the actual incident (like that case out in San Diego), yet they still face preventative measures. Without a trial, let alone a conviction, these people are stripped of a normal life for things they haven't even been proven to do. That flies right in the face of the US Constitution, which states a person is innocent until proven guilty. I know the exact article isn't coming to mind right now, but I'll look it up; I know my rights. On the other hand, the way bans are enforced needs to change because nowhere else in the world is it handled as radically as it is here in America. Having police check people at their homes and forcing them to stay in one spot for six hours is incredibly harsh. My suggestion? Scrap that. Instead, implement much heavier, more drastic penalties for anyone caught at the stadium (or within a 200-yard radius) or involved in a fan clash while under a ban. That would normalize life for people under these restrictions while achieving the same goal. If the penalty was, say, two or three months in jail, I doubt anyone would risk it, but they could live their lives normally outside of those two hours before and after their club's match.