Norm v Staffordshire's Finest

[Fosse69]

It seems the police only patrol the hamil end of the ground don't see them a round the family bycars or Lorne street on match days noticed there where about 8 police out side there box in the ground not doing anything as usual if the away fans decided they wanted to storm the pitch there is nothing stopping them

The job of the stewards if they see fans approaching the pitch boundary wall. Don't remember any doing so yesterday. No doubt more stewards would have been present for a above small away following.

[Warren]

There may be an ego problem in the leadership of the policing at Port Vale. Clearly the Doncaster away fans were a normal dedicated and well behaved group of a few hundred. They posed a low risk. The police can know the likely number from tickets sold by Doncaster and past games played and August being a holiday time. So in my view they should be challenged in civil law. But also, frankly, I am concerned there is abuse of office by the police leadership here. And if that is intended to cause a loss to Port Vale by unnecessary policing and there is dishonesty in the representations the police are making about the game's risk level then the police decision makers are committing an offence themselves under the Fraud Act 2006 and they could be open to a complaint, investigation and possible prosecution.

[yoblet]

One for the I.P.C.C to look into cus it was an absolute farce and some easy overtime for Staffordshire police.

[jeffers]

CV

There may be an ego problem in the leadership of the policing at Port Vale. Clearly the Doncaster away fans were a normal dedicated and well behaved group of a few hundred. They posed a low risk. The police can know the likely number from tickets sold by Doncaster and past games played and August being a holiday time. So in my view they should be challenged in civil law. But also, frankly, I am concerned there is abuse of office by the police leadership here. And if that is intended to cause a loss to Port Vale by unnecessary policing and there is dishonesty in the representations the police are making about the game's risk level then the police decision makers are committing an offence themselves under the Fraud Act 2006 and they could be open to a complaint, investigation and possible prosecution.

 

All people in public office are accountable for their actions, whether the intelligence was correct or as seems totally false, then the CC has to take responsibility for her decisions. I am not suggesting wielding an axe, but an apology to Port Vale Football Club and a reduction in charges is the least she can offer. Then she can deal with the issue of false information internally as she sees fit.

Unless of course there is an hidden agenda against Norman or the club, in which case someone in higher authority (PCC) needs to step in and take appropriate action.

[NellyTheValiant]

There were a load of coppers at Stoke station, hope that they were not putting an expenses claim for their Subway lunch. Even the taxi driver commented on how many there were outside the station he thought that Stoke were at home and playing the likes of Chelsea, when I told him it was a Vale home game against Donny he was astounded.

[Warren]

Well if we go at this in terms of public administration reasonableness then the posts on here help the club. As reasonable members of the public who attended the match and witnessed the situation at hand our opinions can support any case made by the club. I have no financial interest in saying this and I don't live in Staffordshire and so no particular interest normally in the Staffordshire Police. I did an internal audit of Staffordshire Police HQ in about 1984!

[Smugsy]

Rocester hosted Hereford yesterday who brought around 250 fans. Surprised that Staffordshire Police managed to cope with two such high profile game on the same day.

[Bald Eagle]

Rocester hosted Hereford yesterday who brought around 250 fans. Surprised that Staffordshire Police managed to cope with two such high profile game on the same day.

 

I assume fans there can also moved around the ground during the game?

[pjg1876]

There were a load of coppers at Stoke station, hope that they were not putting an expenses claim for their Subway lunch. Even the taxi driver commented on how many there were outside the station he thought that Stoke were at home and playing the likes of Chelsea, when I told him it was a Vale home game against Donny he was astounded.

There were also police cars stationed by the A50 at Uttoxeter and Blythe Bridge. Why ?

[Davebrad]

how many Donnie fans were at Vale? and if all on here complain to m.ellis he might, just might be moved to do some thing, but don't hold your breath.

[sandyford_valiant]

There were also police cars stationed by the A50 at Uttoxeter and Blythe Bridge. Why ?

 

Hereford played at rocester so id imagine they took a few hundred which is a lot for that standard.

[Santa]

There may be an ego problem in the leadership of the policing at Port Vale. Clearly the Doncaster away fans were a normal dedicated and well behaved group of a few hundred. They posed a low risk. The police can know the likely number from tickets sold by Doncaster and past games played and August being a holiday time. So in my view they should be challenged in civil law. But also, frankly, I am concerned there is abuse of office by the police leadership here. And if that is intended to cause a loss to Port Vale by unnecessary policing and there is dishonesty in the representations the police are making about the game's risk level then the police decision makers are committing an offence themselves under the Fraud Act 2006 and they could be open to a complaint, investigation and possible prosecution.

Vale can dispute a game's policing category - this was mentioned in the press before the corresponding fixture with Doncaster last February which was a similar balls-up. When the club disputes the category of a game, it automatically triggers a process where SOT CC get involved.

 

In the aftermath of the Wolves debacle, where Vale successfully halved the police bill, it was also announced in the press some new procedures were put into place. The police have to provide the club with written reasons for raising the risk level of a particular game, and they will also meet with the club post-match to review what went on.

 

You would hope that in that lot, there is a framework in place for any disputes to be resolved - but if not then I imagine it's Ellis' job to arbitrate.

 

There are two issues as far as I can see: the first one is whether what the police charge Vale for policing within the stadium footprint are reasonable. This is something that the club has to negotiate with Staffordshire Police and involve Ellis if an agreement cannot be reached within the existing process.

 

The second issue is whether taxpayers' money is being spent properly on the policing outside the stadium. Anyone who is a council taxpayer in Staffordshire (be it SOT, NUL, SMDC, wherever) has a direct interest in this, as does the club as a business ratepayer. Anybody with concerns about how their money is being spent should contact Ellis. He is your elected representative and it's his job to hold the force to account. And then, if you're not satisfied with him then vote him out next May.

[Rudgiesflatcap]

This is what I posted in Memphis' topic thread:

 

"I'm trying to get my head around this overkill policing issue in and around Vale Park.

 

The last 'Australian Rules' football game I attended at the Subiaco Oval, Western Australia there was a near capacity crowd of 43,000.

 

There were police inside the stadium but their visible profile was low key, and with the stadium's CCTV and match stewards, the later having substantial authority to maintain order, ensured a great day out for everyone - more so for those of us on the winning side

 

Outside the stadium, both before and after the game and in and around Subiaco and suburbs, the police profile was very visible providing, in my opinion, quality traffic and pedestrian control.

 

Maybe Mr Ellis could pick-up a few tips from our local 'Boys in Blue'?"

 

Please don't suggest that to Ellis, he'll probably pop across on an all expenses fact finding trip!!!

[pvfcmark]

Great post Santa.

 

People gunning for Ellis need to realise his job. It's not him who decided these things and seems like he has actually brought about a solution. All be it, one Norman isn't happy with really.

[melv]

Great post Santa.

 

People gunning for Ellis need to realise his job. It's not him who decided these things and seems like he has actually brought about a solution. All be it, one Norman isn't happy with really.

 

It's his job to represent us and see that we are not being ripped off though.

 

Is the threat about closing down the ground if that fence wasn't put up before the ground a form of blackmail?

Is the so called intelligence information acceptable?