Talk:Hooliganism

Hooliganism

There is no initial "H" in Russian. Adam 05:44, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I happened to be a native russian speaker, and yes there is a initial H in russian. In fact it is fairly common. The letter is called (Ha) and in cyrilic it is written as X or "Х". The words like cold(Holod Холод), bread(Hleb Хлеб), good (Horoshy Хороший), trunk (Hobot Хобот) all start with H or russian Х. the word for hooligan is Хулиган, and russian X is always trunsripted as H. For refernce check rambler.com dictionary [1] you will see that hooligan does indeed start with H(X) in russian.--Hq3473 17:42, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You have missed that "Х" is transliterated as "Kh" when using normal Russian-English transliteration. Thus the saying that there is no initial H in Russian, which is correct, considering the mentioned transliteration. I'll just say Gitler, and you know what I mean. -- Elisson | Talk 19:44, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, Johan, but here you are mistaken. Only the US/UK cartographic, US Library of Congress and the Allworth system use "Kh" for the cyrilic "Х". The Russian GOST standard, ISO 9 and the UN all use "H". S.N. Hillbrand 20:37, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Then the three first systems must then be the most widely used (and the ones used on Wikipedia), just check any Russian name with "Х", for example Хабаровск, Khabarovsk. The spelling "Khabarovsk" gives over 500,000 hits on Google, the spelling "Habarovsk" gives 17,000. Similar results with Хрущёв, Khrushchev (Hrushchev) and Охо́тск, Okhotsk (Ohotsk). The "Х", AFAIK, is also pronounced much more like "k" or "kh", than "h". -- Elisson | Talk 21:28, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I agree it should not be "H" it should be a "Kh", but definitely not "Gh" which threw me off in the first place--Hq3473 00:59, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hooligan, as far as I know is derived from a Russian word, meaning "bandit" or something similar. - User:Olivier

A 19th century english stereotype of the Irish (drunken, violent etc.) I think; a mythical family called the O'Hooligans or the like. Punch magazine in the 19th century even had a song about them... - Malcolm Farmer

Caption: "Innocent hooliganism"?

What is the defintion of "Innocent hooliganism" as made on the caption for the photo? I would have thought no hooliganism was "innocent"... -- Master Of Ninja 20:24, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Innocent or not, labelling it so doesn't strike me as NPOV Jackliddle 02:11, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Crowd violence at Canadian hockey games

I removed the statement about crowd violence being common at Canadian hockey games, which seems completely without support to me. If someone can provide evidence that it is common then the point could be restored with the evidence. I don't know where you'll find the evidence, though.

Certainly there have been incidents of violence by parents at minor (sic) hockey games, but classifying them as crowd violence and describing them as common seem of dubious justifiability (the most notorious also took place in the States). Anyway, at no level of hockey is there anything to match the mass violence so common in football. For example, fans of the two teams do not have to be segregated.

That just reminded me of an account of a Norwich-Ipswich game (the East Anglia derby, of course) which I read in England back in '72 when the Canaries had just returned to the (then) first division. The Eastern Daily Press reported that the game had been a peaceful one, with only three stabbings. John FitzGerald 12:35, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Violence is common in North America following victories or losses in important games. John FitzGerald 13:17, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Super Bowl and World Series violence take the form of burning a few cars in the city center. Hooliganism as seen on Saturdays in England is utterly unknown everywhere in America, I can assure you. --McDogm 00:32, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Addendum

It is perhaps now worth noting that in those extraordinary occasions where fan violence does occur in Canada, we are more than happy to refer to those responsible as "hooligans", as the Saskatchewan Roughriders and the Mayor of Regina have done. I can't think of what word would have been substituted for "hooliganism" had what happened at McCallum's home been related to a hockey game. Rupertslander 04:59, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Photo

Can anyone try to find a better photo, showing actual hooliganism? I might have a few from Panathinaikos-Olympiakos game, but I guess they are copyrighted. \ wolfenSilva / 06:58, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Football hooliganism origins

There's a new bit which changes football hooliganism from starting in England in the 1960s, to Scotland in the 1950s. Anyone actually care to reference this? - Master Of Ninja 08:02, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

300,000 die in riot?

I read in the Wikipedia entry for the Nika riots that "thirty thousand" people were reportedly killed in the chaos, whereas this article for hooliganism cites 300,000. That figure sounds high anyway.

contradictory sentences?

The following 2 sentences from the article contradict:

"The behaviour now known as 'football hooliganism' originated in England in the early 1950s.

In other European countries, similar patterns of behaviour emerged about 10 years later, in the early 1970s."

on focus

I followed up the picture it is of Ultras, which it specifically says do not regularly practice hooliganism.

The Niko riots has a passable page but keep in mind death tolls from ancient sources are usually very sketchy 30,000 is possible but unreliable.

Danish Hooliganism

I have never seen nor heard of domestic danish hooliganism. On the other hand, Eichberg, H. (1992). Crisis and grace: Soccer in Denmark. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports , 2: 119-128., talks specifically about the lack of hooliganism among danish fans. The page lists some fan groups but these groups have policies against hooliganism. Unless someone has other information, I think we should remove the reference to danish hooligan groups. S.N. Hillbrand 14:18, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

As a Swede and a big fan of football, I'm very aware that there are hooligan groups among Danish fans and to believe that they aren't existing is either a sign of naiveness or lack of knowledge. I don't mean to be rude, but if anyone posts here and says that the groups should be removed, I would think that the person would have at least some knowledge on the subject, which it seems you haven't. The four listed are so called firms. A few links of interrest:

• Ultrasworld.com - Articles on Danish hooligans are found at entries on the following dates (on the respective archive news page): 20/03/98, 01/06/98, 25/09/98, 01/04/99, 20/05/99, 16/08/99, 20/09/99, 03/10/99, 12/02/00, 15/03/00, 22/07/00, 27/08/00, 30/10/00, 10/06/01, 01/11/01, 27/09/02 and 02/11/02.
• Danish Police Union (in Danish) - Long article on the police effort around a game.
• Aftonbladet.se (in Swedish) - Article on fight between Danish and Swedish firms.
• Aftonbladet.se (in Swedish) - Short article mentioning Danish hooligans traveling to Sweden to fight in connection with a game between two Swedish teams.
• Casuals.dk (.mpeg format, in Danish) - Short clip of an interview with a hooligan.
• Localeyes.dk (in Danish) - Very short mention of fight between Danish and Swedish firms.
• Southside United (in Danish) - Homepage of one of the firms.
• Copenhagen Casuals - Yet another homepage.
• Odense Fight Club (in Danish) - And another.
• Ultra Fans from Aarhus (in Danish) - And a fourth.

For regular Danish Ultras groups, see for example:

• Odense Casuals (in Danish)
• Casuals.dk (in Danish)
• Suburban Casuals (in Danish)

My opinion is that there is no reason for the removal of the Danish section. From where have you gotten the impression that the groups mentioned have policies against hooliganism? -- Elisson | Talk 16:24, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the links. I withdraw my suggestion. Although personal attacks are far from necessary. S.N. Hillbrand 23:14, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you interpreted it that way, which was certainly not my intention. But I do want to stress what I wrote above, that your suggestion seemed very far from in touch with the reality of hooliganism to me, and that I wanted to point out that similar suggestions only should be made when you have clear evidence to support the suggestion (a book from 1992 does not make good evidence as hooliganism in the form of firms has had an exploding growth the last ten years in Scandinavia). I could suggest the removal of the whole Scottish section based on that I've never heard of Scottish hooliganism (I have, but pretend I haven't, just for this example), but I wouldn't make that suggestion without first thoroughly researching the subject and finding out if I've never heard of it because a) it doesn't exist, or b) I have to little knowledge on the subject. A simple Google search on the matter would have led you to other conclusions than the ones you drew. But as said, I hope there are no hard feelings, and that you will continue to contribute to Wikipedia! Best wishes -- Elisson | Talk 23:49, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hooligans / Ultras

Why are Hooligans and Ultras totally mixed up in here? Ultras are not necessarily hooligans. This must be one of the worst articles I've ever come across. (unsigned post, by ip 212.101.25.147)

I agree, but I don't have the time to fix this right now. I'd like to see the article's content being split in Hooliganism, Ultras and an article dealing with the so called firms, which can't, IMHO, be treated as simple hooliganism, as it is much more complex than that. We've got an article on casuals but that is not always related to firms either. Any good suggestions? -- Elisson | Talk 21:15, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Please just remove the picture. It is simply not relevant to the subject of the article. Ultras are not the same as hooligans, and there is no reason why these two seperate subjects should be dealt with in the one article. There is already an article on Ultras anyway.

82.212.18.194 20:50, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Scottish Hooliganism

In light of Michael Myers' Scottish Hooligan Weekly on Saturday Night Live on NBC in America, what is the relative truth value of the Scottish paragraph as it stands now? The SHW on SNL is very compelling, if you haven't seen it. Michael himself is a second generation European Canadian now residing in Los Angeles, California, in case you are wondering about how reliable he may be vis a vis goings-on in the United Kingdom. I would like to see this resolved. --McDogm 00:28, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

The strange inclusion of Scotland will be rectified. There is no reason for me, a Scot in Scotland, to justify its inclusion. SNL? Ha ha ha.

British Hooliganism

I am rather surprised that there isn't a section on British football hooliganism in this article. I am anything but an expert on the subject, but I know that there's been a lot of it, at both domestic and international fixtures.

I agree. El Gringo 03:46, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

It´s wrong that hooliganism as such has started in Britain in the 1950ies. Millwall FC "supporters" have been constantly rioting since 1931, especially after derbies with Charlton Athletic FC and Chelsea FC.

Major sort out

This article needs a major sort out. Football hooliganism should be treated as a discrete category and sensibly and extensively referenced within this article, however the presumption of this particular article is (almost exclusively) that hooliganism is related to football. Not true, certainly not in this day and age, where hooligan behaviour can be witnessed at places with no connection with football. I am therefore going to move some of this to Football hooliganism and refactor this page appropriately. Sjc 04:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Media citation

This article was today cited by Daily Nation, Kenya's largest newspaper. Their article can be found here (password needed, try bugmenot). This was not the first time when Daily Nation cited Wikipedia (see Talk:Electric shock) Julius Sahara 17:00, 18 March 2006 (UTC)