Pitch Invasions

A lot of chat round here about the presentation on pitch invasions, looking like they will be stopped completely from this year on.

Good while they lasted but just way too dangerous to continue to allow them in my book.

Views?

I love them but without sounding like a miserable sod there is a genuine safety risk in all fairness.

Would hate to see them stopped - there's nothing like the sight of thousands of ecstatic fans pouring onto the pitch on the final whistle.

At a AFL game asked about pitch invasions etc was informed, go ahead and do it and make sure you have $20k in the bank. A good deterant if ever I hear one

JimWexford wrote:At a AFL game asked about pitch invasions etc was informed, go ahead and do it and make sure you have $20k in the bank. A good deterant if ever I hear one

Jim if you had 30,000 fans running onto the field after a final i'd like to see the gardai arresting them all or even trying to take their details

may be a deterant in theory but as useful as a chocolate fireguard. Plus how do you take knickers of a bare ass - i'd like to see them trying to fine me $20k they'd be a long time waiting for it.

Personally speaking i dont have a problem with them the pitch is big enough for all of us and Croker only have to put a disclaimer up to say the accept no responsibility for any injuries etc and then people cant sue them.

I know damage to the pitch is a factor, but a small one i think all things considered.

bocerty wrote:

JimWexford wrote:At a AFL game asked about pitch invasions etc was informed, go ahead and do it and make sure you have $20k in the bank. A good deterant if ever I hear one

Jim if you had 30,000 fans running onto the field after a final i'd like to see the gardai arresting them all or even trying to take their details

may be a deterant in theory but as useful as a chocolate fireguard. Plus how do you take knickers of a bare ass - i'd like to see them trying to fine me $20k they'd be a long time waiting for it.

Personally speaking i dont have a problem with them the pitch is big enough for all of us and Croker only have to put a disclaimer up to say the accept no responsibility for any injuries etc and then people cant sue them.

I know damage to the pitch is a factor, but a small one i think all things considered.

i aint a lawyer,but as far as i know,they arent able to do that,because it is their property,and they are responsible for people on their property.

wouldnt be too sure about Dougal to be honest you could be right. Though i do know for example if a hotel carpark during the frost is not gritted and you crash your car you can do feck all about it but if they grit it and you still crash your car then you can sue the bollox of them -

any solicitors on here could clear this one up?????

Dougal wrote:

bocerty wrote:

JimWexford wrote:At a AFL game asked about pitch invasions etc was informed, go ahead and do it and make sure you have $20k in the bank. A good deterant if ever I hear one

Jim if you had 30,000 fans running onto the field after a final i'd like to see the gardai arresting them all or even trying to take their details

may be a deterant in theory but as useful as a chocolate fireguard. Plus how do you take knickers of a bare ass - i'd like to see them trying to fine me $20k they'd be a long time waiting for it.

Personally speaking i dont have a problem with them the pitch is big enough for all of us and Croker only have to put a disclaimer up to say the accept no responsibility for any injuries etc and then people cant sue them.

I know damage to the pitch is a factor, but a small one i think all things considered.

i aint a lawyer,but as far as i know,they arent able to do that,because it is their property,and they are responsible for people on their property.

Hate it but I have to agree with a cavan poster.
Seriously they can't do that as per what dougal said they have a certain responsibility, on the other side a lot of time those notices aren't worth the paper hey are written on

JimWexford wrote:

Dougal wrote:

bocerty wrote:

JimWexford wrote:At a AFL game asked about pitch invasions etc was informed, go ahead and do it and make sure you have $20k in the bank. A good deterant if ever I hear one

Jim if you had 30,000 fans running onto the field after a final i'd like to see the gardai arresting them all or even trying to take their details

may be a deterant in theory but as useful as a chocolate fireguard. Plus how do you take knickers of a bare ass - i'd like to see them trying to fine me $20k they'd be a long time waiting for it.

Personally speaking i dont have a problem with them the pitch is big enough for all of us and Croker only have to put a disclaimer up to say the accept no responsibility for any injuries etc and then people cant sue them.

I know damage to the pitch is a factor, but a small one i think all things considered.

i aint a lawyer,but as far as i know,they arent able to do that,because it is their property,and they are responsible for people on their property.

Hate it but I have to agree with a cavan poster.
Seriously they can't do that as per what dougal said they have a certain responsibility, on the other side a lot of time those notices aren't worth the paper hey are written on

but surely Jim if the guys at croker put up a disclaimer saying you enter the pitch at your own risk then you havent a leg to stand on if you do get hurt while invading the pitch

bocerty wrote:

JimWexford wrote:At a AFL game asked about pitch invasions etc was informed, go ahead and do it and make sure you have $20k in the bank. A good deterant if ever I hear one

Jim if you had 30,000 fans running onto the field after a final i'd like to see the gardai arresting them all or even trying to take their details

may be a deterant in theory but as useful as a chocolate fireguard. Plus how do you take knickers of a bare ass - i'd like to see them trying to fine me $20k they'd be a long time waiting for it.

Personally speaking i dont have a problem with them the pitch is big enough for all of us and Croker only have to put a disclaimer up to say the accept no responsibility for any injuries etc and then people cant sue them.

I know damage to the pitch is a factor, but a small one i think all things considered.

LOL. Line of the week right there!

From what I know the courts aren't a big fan of the exemption clauses at all so I doubt they would even try it.. The best they could do would be to exclude liability for damage sustained while you're on the pitch which you shouldn't be but then i'm sure there would be issues about being swept along in the crowd. Generally though Dougal is right if someone is injured on your property it's your baby..

It's a sign of the times really, I remember being on Holidays in Prague and there was a work pipe uncovered along a footpath. Passers by were just warning each other about it and stepping around it, a couple from Cork happened to be walking beside me and the guy turned around and said "Christ boy if we seen something like that on a street in Ireland we'd be queuing up to fall into it"

bocerty wrote:any solicitors on here could clear this one up?????

Yaw- you got €500 for an hour and I'll explain ....

bocerty wrote:wouldnt be too sure about Dougal to be honest you could be right. Though i do know for example if a hotel carpark during the frost is not gritted and you crash your car you can do feck all about it but if they grit it and you still crash your car then you can sue the bollox of them -

any solicitors on here could clear this one up?????

Not a solicitor, but have dealt with enough "contingent liabilities" arising from similar cases to have picked up a bit of knowledge around it.

The owner of property the ".......... at own risk" signs are of very little legal value. If there are lots of signs prominently displayed then judges may knock a little bit off the compo award, but by and large they aren't worth the metal/cardboard they are written on.
To discharge liability, the GAA would have to demonstrate that they had taken every reasonable step possible to prevent people from entering the pitch in a dangerous fashion.
The current situation where they try to stop people until it becomes more dangerous to let them on could be argued to constitute all reasonable steps, but all it takes is a suggestion of something extra that they could do, and they would need to do it so as to be seen to do all in their power.

My personal opinion on this is that the legal situation is utter bollocks. The courts seem to have taken a position that you have no responsibility to look after your own safety, that people are too stupid to take responsibility for themselves.
I say if you run out on to the pitch you choose to take the risk of injury, but the courts seem to think it's the GAA's responsibility.
It's a damning indictment of a society where so people try to pass the buck of responsibility to others at the first opportunity, refuse to acknowledge that their own actions could ever contribute to their problems or to even countenance the notion that their could be repercussions from their own decisions.

What if the GAA counter claimed for tresspass?

And anyway has Croke Park released figures showing us the amount of claims and how much they have paid out?!

Jonsmith wrote:What if the GAA counter claimed for tresspass?

And anyway has Croke Park released figures showing us the amount of claims and how much they have paid out?!

Irish law doesn't do punitive damages. They would have to demonstrate that damage was done to GAA property, and compo would be limited to the value of the property + loss of earnings.

For some reason the owner of the property is seen as liable for injuries, the trespasser isn't... doesn't make sense, but the case law is there.

As for the cost of claims, they cost the GAA nothing directly, but their insurers have to pay out, and the more measures the GAA take, the lower the public liability insurance premiums are

Yes but the tresspass laws state that the duty of care owed to a trespasser is a lot less owed to a visitor and a recreational user and your only duty is to not intentionally put a trespasser in harms way.

Thats what the theory says but of course but my practical experience is lacking i'm sure the courts have taken a warped view as you say..

I would have imagined Croke Park would release the amount of claims, if it was big enough, to justify the steps taken to prevent pitch invasion.

Jonsmith wrote:Yes but the tresspass laws state that the duty of care owed to a trespasser is a lot less owed to a visitor and a recreational user and your only duty is to not intentionally put a trespasser in harms way.

Thats what the theory says but of course but my practical experience is lacking i'm sure the courts have taken a warped view as you say..

I would have imagined Croke Park would release the amount of claims, if it was big enough, to justify the steps taken to prevent pitch invasion.

The courts take the tresspass element into account when awarding damages, but they usually apportion between 20-30% responsibility to the tresspasser, which means they still get 70% of the claim.

If the letter of the law was applied we'd be fine, but the courts seem to take the view that the property owners need to hold everybody by the hand and think for them

Tresspass Laws or no Tresspass Laws, who foots the bill for the damage to the pitch caused by these invasions when the GAA are seen to willfully allow thousands of people to invade the pitch, before any injury claims are made?

It would only be a matter of time before someone is seriously injured during an invasion and it really had to be stamped out. I strongly doubt that the GAA will put a massive bounty on invaders like the one pointed out by Jim that the AFL have, maybe some like £5000, i think they should as the prospect of a massive fine for invading the playing field should serve as a good enough deterant. It would have to be backed by the courts though and this is made difficult by the way the country is divided betwen 2 different law systems. You may not be able to take feathers off a frog, but would a fine of say £5000, backed by a court order be enough to put you off running onto the pitch after a game?

The chances of you being caught would be slim in a crowd of 40,000 but there is always that chance and the video system in croke park is second to none with retrospective fines being enough to cool anyones jets!

Pitch invasions were good while they lasted, but times have to change and they had to go. If a county wins their first All Ireland, or their 41st, not being able to run onto the pitch will hardly ruin the day for the spectators or the players! Tradition? Celtic used to have no number on the back of their shirts, having it on their shorts instead, that was tradition too and that changed! Invading a pitch after an All Ireland Final is hardly tradition!