Press journalist Dave Flett beats ban at Kenilworth Road

York City reporter Dave Flett at Kenilworth Road

York City reporter Dave Flett at Kenilworth Road

First published in Sport by

Luton Town failed in their attempt to ban the Press’ York City reporter Dave Flett from covering last night’s game.

City’s Blue Square Bet Premier rivals told Flett on Monday he would not be welcome because of the tone of his report following last month’s clash between the two teams, which had to be abandoned because of heavy snow.

Flett argued the game should have been called off earlier to save York fans the misery of a wasted journey. It took many of them more than 12 hours to get home.

Luton deemed his report to be inflammatory and refused to grant him a press pass. Undeterred, Flett sat with the York fans in the away end at Kenilworth Road and filed his report anyway.

He said: “I was very disappointed to be declined admission into the press box at Kenilworth Road, especially having worked there on so many occasions in the past as one of the local press pack.

“I stand by the sentiment in my article on the original game and still believe, considering the severe weather warnings in place, more could and should have been done by Luton Town and the referee to consider an early postponement.”

Steve Hughes, editor of The Press, said: “I was very surprised at Luton’s stance on this.

“Dave is a well respected sports reporter and he gave his honestly held opinion after it took York fans 12 hours to return from a game that many felt should have been called off hours earlier due to the atrocious weather.

“Luton said they would be happy for another reporter to cover last night’s game, but that misses the point. We have a duty to York City fans and it is not for football clubs to decide who covers their matches.

“They have every right to disagree with Dave’s opinion but trying to ban him from the ground smacks of censorship and that’s not acceptable. I am delighted he managed to file his reports anyway.”

Comments (35)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:43pm Wed 19 Jan 11

YorkCityLuke says...

Banning a journalist for writing a critical article... Luton Town really are scum. Although in retrospect he probably shouldn't have wasted his time sneaking in.
Banning a journalist for writing a critical article... Luton Town really are scum. Although in retrospect he probably shouldn't have wasted his time sneaking in. YorkCityLuke
  • Score: 0

12:53pm Wed 19 Jan 11

Head of Bomber Command says...

You would think we were living in China.

"You shall agree with the establishment, and have no right to express free speech or publish any thoughts of your own free will"
You would think we were living in China. "You shall agree with the establishment, and have no right to express free speech or publish any thoughts of your own free will" Head of Bomber Command
  • Score: 0

12:53pm Wed 19 Jan 11

sb72 says...

Luton's actions are surprising, but understandable. The match report in question was unnecessarily hostile to Luton, when in reality they would have had little input into a decision which was made by the referee. After all we have had a couple of matches at York that have been called off at the last minute, which in a way is more frustrating for supporters than at least trying to make a start and then having to abandon

Given the problems that occurred in matches between the two teams last season writing such an inflammatory match report is pretty irresponsible.
Luton's actions are surprising, but understandable. The match report in question was unnecessarily hostile to Luton, when in reality they would have had little input into a decision which was made by the referee. After all we have had a couple of matches at York that have been called off at the last minute, which in a way is more frustrating for supporters than at least trying to make a start and then having to abandon Given the problems that occurred in matches between the two teams last season writing such an inflammatory match report is pretty irresponsible. sb72
  • Score: 0

12:58pm Wed 19 Jan 11

duffy says...

sb72 wrote:
Luton's actions are surprising, but understandable. The match report in question was unnecessarily hostile to Luton, when in reality they would have had little input into a decision which was made by the referee. After all we have had a couple of matches at York that have been called off at the last minute, which in a way is more frustrating for supporters than at least trying to make a start and then having to abandon Given the problems that occurred in matches between the two teams last season writing such an inflammatory match report is pretty irresponsible.
Are you for real,that's the type of crap they are still spouting in China dna North korea.
Even Luton fans who can't see anything their club do as wrong will see past this one.
Pathetic Luton
[quote][p][bold]sb72[/bold] wrote: Luton's actions are surprising, but understandable. The match report in question was unnecessarily hostile to Luton, when in reality they would have had little input into a decision which was made by the referee. After all we have had a couple of matches at York that have been called off at the last minute, which in a way is more frustrating for supporters than at least trying to make a start and then having to abandon Given the problems that occurred in matches between the two teams last season writing such an inflammatory match report is pretty irresponsible.[/p][/quote]Are you for real,that's the type of crap they are still spouting in China dna North korea. Even Luton fans who can't see anything their club do as wrong will see past this one. Pathetic Luton duffy
  • Score: 0

1:00pm Wed 19 Jan 11

Rimpole says...

This article just keeps the issue rolling on.

All a bit pointless IMO.

DF went to the game, sent a report and then felt the need to submit this?

Or is just because he had to pay to get in?
This article just keeps the issue rolling on. All a bit pointless IMO. DF went to the game, sent a report and then felt the need to submit this? Or is just because he had to pay to get in? Rimpole
  • Score: 0

1:04pm Wed 19 Jan 11

duffy says...

Rimpole wrote:
This article just keeps the issue rolling on. All a bit pointless IMO. DF went to the game, sent a report and then felt the need to submit this? Or is just because he had to pay to get in?
Sorry but Luton banning away reporters if they don't like whats written is a very justified article.
[quote][p][bold]Rimpole[/bold] wrote: This article just keeps the issue rolling on. All a bit pointless IMO. DF went to the game, sent a report and then felt the need to submit this? Or is just because he had to pay to get in?[/p][/quote]Sorry but Luton banning away reporters if they don't like whats written is a very justified article. duffy
  • Score: 0

1:07pm Wed 19 Jan 11

Rimpole says...

duffy wrote:
Rimpole wrote: This article just keeps the issue rolling on. All a bit pointless IMO. DF went to the game, sent a report and then felt the need to submit this? Or is just because he had to pay to get in?
Sorry but Luton banning away reporters if they don't like whats written is a very justified article.
They didn't ban him tho' did they? He was refused a press pass and he sat with the away fans anyway...
[quote][p][bold]duffy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rimpole[/bold] wrote: This article just keeps the issue rolling on. All a bit pointless IMO. DF went to the game, sent a report and then felt the need to submit this? Or is just because he had to pay to get in?[/p][/quote]Sorry but Luton banning away reporters if they don't like whats written is a very justified article.[/p][/quote]They didn't ban him tho' did they? He was refused a press pass and he sat with the away fans anyway... Rimpole
  • Score: 0

1:12pm Wed 19 Jan 11

YorkCityLuke says...

Rimpole wrote:
duffy wrote:
Rimpole wrote: This article just keeps the issue rolling on. All a bit pointless IMO. DF went to the game, sent a report and then felt the need to submit this? Or is just because he had to pay to get in?
Sorry but Luton banning away reporters if they don't like whats written is a very justified article.
They didn't ban him tho' did they? He was refused a press pass and he sat with the away fans anyway...
Pretty academic difference - they didnt want him reporting on the game and made it as difficult as they could for him to do so. As far as I'm concerned this is as close to actual journalism as the Press has ever come.
[quote][p][bold]Rimpole[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]duffy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rimpole[/bold] wrote: This article just keeps the issue rolling on. All a bit pointless IMO. DF went to the game, sent a report and then felt the need to submit this? Or is just because he had to pay to get in?[/p][/quote]Sorry but Luton banning away reporters if they don't like whats written is a very justified article.[/p][/quote]They didn't ban him tho' did they? He was refused a press pass and he sat with the away fans anyway...[/p][/quote]Pretty academic difference - they didnt want him reporting on the game and made it as difficult as they could for him to do so. As far as I'm concerned this is as close to actual journalism as the Press has ever come. YorkCityLuke
  • Score: 0

1:14pm Wed 19 Jan 11

Luton Barry says...

Come on now it wasn't that fact that Luton didn't like what he wrote but the fact that it was inflammatory, read it again and you'll see. We the fans had moved on from the playoff saga back in May onlt for Flett's to drag it up again and also give Sophie Hicks another opportunity to add petrol to the fire.

Good picture of him mind, put a carlsberg super strength in his hand and he'd be at home on any park bench.
Come on now it wasn't that fact that Luton didn't like what he wrote but the fact that it was inflammatory, read it again and you'll see. We the fans had moved on from the playoff saga back in May onlt for Flett's to drag it up again and also give Sophie Hicks another opportunity to add petrol to the fire. Good picture of him mind, put a carlsberg super strength in his hand and he'd be at home on any park bench. Luton Barry
  • Score: 0

1:16pm Wed 19 Jan 11

hatter nick says...

He wasnt banned - he just had to pay to get in. I would imagne Ms Hicks would have been delighted by this as its more oney for her pocket. Mr Fletts original article was at best irresponsible journalism, and worst tadwdy tabloid reporting, and an effort to stoke up past trouble. If Mr Flett was a proper journalist, surely he should be asking when the york fans who made the first trip will get the share of the compensation the york board promised to fight for on their behalf?
He wasnt banned - he just had to pay to get in. I would imagne Ms Hicks would have been delighted by this as its more oney for her pocket. Mr Fletts original article was at best irresponsible journalism, and worst tadwdy tabloid reporting, and an effort to stoke up past trouble. If Mr Flett was a proper journalist, surely he should be asking when the york fans who made the first trip will get the share of the compensation the york board promised to fight for on their behalf? hatter nick
  • Score: 0

1:20pm Wed 19 Jan 11

duffy says...

hatter nick wrote:
He wasnt banned - he just had to pay to get in. I would imagne Ms Hicks would have been delighted by this as its more oney for her pocket. Mr Fletts original article was at best irresponsible journalism, and worst tadwdy tabloid reporting, and an effort to stoke up past trouble. If Mr Flett was a proper journalist, surely he should be asking when the york fans who made the first trip will get the share of the compensation the york board promised to fight for on their behalf?
As usual Luton fans are quick to blame other clubs for everything yet can't see their club is ever in the wrong.
To say he was not banned because he still got in the York end is ridiculous, he was refused a press pass which is banning him from doing his job as a reporter.
This is Pathetic Luton, maybe their board should move to North Korea where I'm sure they would be made most welcome.
[quote][p][bold]hatter nick[/bold] wrote: He wasnt banned - he just had to pay to get in. I would imagne Ms Hicks would have been delighted by this as its more oney for her pocket. Mr Fletts original article was at best irresponsible journalism, and worst tadwdy tabloid reporting, and an effort to stoke up past trouble. If Mr Flett was a proper journalist, surely he should be asking when the york fans who made the first trip will get the share of the compensation the york board promised to fight for on their behalf?[/p][/quote]As usual Luton fans are quick to blame other clubs for everything yet can't see their club is ever in the wrong. To say he was not banned because he still got in the York end is ridiculous, he was refused a press pass which is banning him from doing his job as a reporter. This is Pathetic Luton, maybe their board should move to North Korea where I'm sure they would be made most welcome. duffy
  • Score: 0

1:20pm Wed 19 Jan 11

A Luton Fan says...

Ha ha "Respected Sports Journalist" . . . respected by who exactly?

He wasn't banned just told he wasn't going to get a free pass into the game.

It serves him right in many ways for that appalling attempt at stirring.

That said, I would rather the Luton hierarchy had risen above it and given him the press pass. It just adds fuel to the fire.

Everyone just needs to move on but for Mr Flett and this rag having a feud to report on is exactly what they want. Gutter press never seemed more apt.
Ha ha "Respected Sports Journalist" . . . respected by who exactly? He wasn't banned just told he wasn't going to get a free pass into the game. It serves him right in many ways for that appalling attempt at stirring. That said, I would rather the Luton hierarchy had risen above it and given him the press pass. It just adds fuel to the fire. Everyone just needs to move on but for Mr Flett and this rag having a feud to report on is exactly what they want. Gutter press never seemed more apt. A Luton Fan
  • Score: 0

1:32pm Wed 19 Jan 11

Rimpole says...

A Luton Fan wrote:
Ha ha "Respected Sports Journalist" . . . respected by who exactly? He wasn't banned just told he wasn't going to get a free pass into the game. It serves him right in many ways for that appalling attempt at stirring. That said, I would rather the Luton hierarchy had risen above it and given him the press pass. It just adds fuel to the fire. Everyone just needs to move on but for Mr Flett and this rag having a feud to report on is exactly what they want. Gutter press never seemed more apt.
As with Luton fans, we have (mostly) moved on from the events in May.

If, as you say, he wasn't banned, then the headline is at best misleading and at worse...

Perhaps it should read "Journo refused pass and buys own ticket to report on game"

Anyway, I still think it's a load of nonsense when taken in the great scheme of things.

Perhaps Luton or City could re-imburse the cost of his admission then hopefully this story dies on its @rse.
[quote][p][bold]A Luton Fan[/bold] wrote: Ha ha "Respected Sports Journalist" . . . respected by who exactly? He wasn't banned just told he wasn't going to get a free pass into the game. It serves him right in many ways for that appalling attempt at stirring. That said, I would rather the Luton hierarchy had risen above it and given him the press pass. It just adds fuel to the fire. Everyone just needs to move on but for Mr Flett and this rag having a feud to report on is exactly what they want. Gutter press never seemed more apt.[/p][/quote]As with Luton fans, we have (mostly) moved on from the events in May. If, as you say, he wasn't banned, then the headline is at best misleading and at worse... Perhaps it should read "Journo refused pass and buys own ticket to report on game" Anyway, I still think it's a load of nonsense when taken in the great scheme of things. Perhaps Luton or City could re-imburse the cost of his admission then hopefully this story dies on its @rse. Rimpole
  • Score: 0

1:33pm Wed 19 Jan 11

hatter nick says...

duffy wrote:
hatter nick wrote: He wasnt banned - he just had to pay to get in. I would imagne Ms Hicks would have been delighted by this as its more oney for her pocket. Mr Fletts original article was at best irresponsible journalism, and worst tadwdy tabloid reporting, and an effort to stoke up past trouble. If Mr Flett was a proper journalist, surely he should be asking when the york fans who made the first trip will get the share of the compensation the york board promised to fight for on their behalf?
As usual Luton fans are quick to blame other clubs for everything yet can't see their club is ever in the wrong. To say he was not banned because he still got in the York end is ridiculous, he was refused a press pass which is banning him from doing his job as a reporter. This is Pathetic Luton, maybe their board should move to North Korea where I'm sure they would be made most welcome.
If Flett had reported that in North korea, he`d have actually been shot ..with that sort of over reaction are you sure you arent Sophie Hicks. And if you are..any chance of yuo reimbursing your fans as your promised?
[quote][p][bold]duffy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hatter nick[/bold] wrote: He wasnt banned - he just had to pay to get in. I would imagne Ms Hicks would have been delighted by this as its more oney for her pocket. Mr Fletts original article was at best irresponsible journalism, and worst tadwdy tabloid reporting, and an effort to stoke up past trouble. If Mr Flett was a proper journalist, surely he should be asking when the york fans who made the first trip will get the share of the compensation the york board promised to fight for on their behalf?[/p][/quote]As usual Luton fans are quick to blame other clubs for everything yet can't see their club is ever in the wrong. To say he was not banned because he still got in the York end is ridiculous, he was refused a press pass which is banning him from doing his job as a reporter. This is Pathetic Luton, maybe their board should move to North Korea where I'm sure they would be made most welcome.[/p][/quote]If Flett had reported that in North korea, he`d have actually been shot ..with that sort of over reaction are you sure you arent Sophie Hicks. And if you are..any chance of yuo reimbursing your fans as your promised? hatter nick
  • Score: 0

1:39pm Wed 19 Jan 11

Tug job says...

Another non-story to perpetuate this issue; I am aware of the irnoy that by adding a comment I am merely adding to the problem but hope that by spelling this out other will refuse to give it futher mileage.
Another non-story to perpetuate this issue; I am aware of the irnoy that by adding a comment I am merely adding to the problem but hope that by spelling this out other will refuse to give it futher mileage. Tug job
  • Score: 0

1:47pm Wed 19 Jan 11

ycfcAl says...

Who really cares? Why waste time worrying about nonsense like this? Its pathetic. Lets look towards hopefully sneaking into the play-offs. Both teams belong in the football league. Both teams are trying to get back there. Don't get me wrong I love a good healthy rivalry, but to be fair these b!tching comments are just pathetic.
Who really cares? Why waste time worrying about nonsense like this? Its pathetic. Lets look towards hopefully sneaking into the play-offs. Both teams belong in the football league. Both teams are trying to get back there. Don't get me wrong I love a good healthy rivalry, but to be fair these b!tching comments are just pathetic. ycfcAl
  • Score: 0

1:54pm Wed 19 Jan 11

Phantom1974 says...

Good to see it's not just York being petty and pathetic over this game, a few halos have slipped in Bedfordshire methinks. Anyway, at least Help The Heroes will get a nice cheque from the Hatters, which is really good of them.
Good to see it's not just York being petty and pathetic over this game, a few halos have slipped in Bedfordshire methinks. Anyway, at least Help The Heroes will get a nice cheque from the Hatters, which is really good of them. Phantom1974
  • Score: 0

2:22pm Wed 19 Jan 11

Hatter35 says...

Local paper in non story report shocker !
Readers indulge in over exaggerated anger and condemnation etc etc

Get a grip people seriously, he wasn`t banned, the paper wasn`t banned from sending someone else, he wasn`t threatened with a good beating if he showed up ( as he would be in china, .......actually they`d probably just take him out back and shoot him, which considering the asinine effort he posted on Dec 18 could be considered improving local journalism )

Move on, we had, your fans had, our board had, your board obviously hadn`t , but its done now.

Just one question though...if last night was a ' cup tie ' do we get promoted to L2 now ?
Local paper in non story report shocker ! Readers indulge in over exaggerated anger and condemnation etc etc Get a grip people seriously, he wasn`t banned, the paper wasn`t banned from sending someone else, he wasn`t threatened with a good beating if he showed up ( as he would be in china, .......actually they`d probably just take him out back and shoot him, which considering the asinine effort he posted on Dec 18 could be considered improving local journalism ) Move on, we had, your fans had, our board had, your board obviously hadn`t , but its done now. Just one question though...if last night was a ' cup tie ' do we get promoted to L2 now ? Hatter35
  • Score: 0

2:35pm Wed 19 Jan 11

duffy says...

Hatter35 wrote:
Local paper in non story report shocker !
Readers indulge in over exaggerated anger and condemnation etc etc

Get a grip people seriously, he wasn`t banned, the paper wasn`t banned from sending someone else, he wasn`t threatened with a good beating if he showed up ( as he would be in china, .......actually they`d probably just take him out back and shoot him, which considering the asinine effort he posted on Dec 18 could be considered improving local journalism )

Move on, we had, your fans had, our board had, your board obviously hadn`t , but its done now.

Just one question though...if last night was a ' cup tie ' do we get promoted to L2 now ?
Serious question, are Luton ever at fault for anything ?

Just when you use the line" over exaggerated anger and condemnation" it sums up perfectly the Luton forum of late.
[quote][p][bold]Hatter35[/bold] wrote: Local paper in non story report shocker ! Readers indulge in over exaggerated anger and condemnation etc etc Get a grip people seriously, he wasn`t banned, the paper wasn`t banned from sending someone else, he wasn`t threatened with a good beating if he showed up ( as he would be in china, .......actually they`d probably just take him out back and shoot him, which considering the asinine effort he posted on Dec 18 could be considered improving local journalism ) Move on, we had, your fans had, our board had, your board obviously hadn`t , but its done now. Just one question though...if last night was a ' cup tie ' do we get promoted to L2 now ?[/p][/quote]Serious question, are Luton ever at fault for anything ? Just when you use the line" over exaggerated anger and condemnation" it sums up perfectly the Luton forum of late. duffy
  • Score: 0

2:42pm Wed 19 Jan 11

marksf says...

The original Flett piece was a genuine hatchet job that re-hashed the play-off story and tried to make some bizarre connection between that match and the abandoned one.

It is no coincidence that Hicks has taken up that very argument and now justifies trying to rip off Luton for cash by saying that York will need to pay increased policing costs when Luton visit.

It is supposed to be a match report, not an opinion piece littered with speculation and leaps of the imagination.

Luton did not ban him; with a little over 100 travelling fans it would have been easy enough to have shown him the door. It's just that the club decided not to invite him in as a non-paying guest. Given the grief he's dished up then I am not surprised.

People comparing this to China should be ashamed of themsleves.
The original Flett piece was a genuine hatchet job that re-hashed the play-off story and tried to make some bizarre connection between that match and the abandoned one. It is no coincidence that Hicks has taken up that very argument and now justifies trying to rip off Luton for cash by saying that York will need to pay increased policing costs when Luton visit. It is supposed to be a match report, not an opinion piece littered with speculation and leaps of the imagination. Luton did not ban him; with a little over 100 travelling fans it would have been easy enough to have shown him the door. It's just that the club decided not to invite him in as a non-paying guest. Given the grief he's dished up then I am not surprised. People comparing this to China should be ashamed of themsleves. marksf
  • Score: 0

3:20pm Wed 19 Jan 11

THEBLURISBAD says...

is this war then.?lol
is this war then.?lol THEBLURISBAD
  • Score: 0

3:24pm Wed 19 Jan 11

YorkCityLuke says...

marksf wrote:
The original Flett piece was a genuine hatchet job that re-hashed the play-off story and tried to make some bizarre connection between that match and the abandoned one. It is no coincidence that Hicks has taken up that very argument and now justifies trying to rip off Luton for cash by saying that York will need to pay increased policing costs when Luton visit. It is supposed to be a match report, not an opinion piece littered with speculation and leaps of the imagination. Luton did not ban him; with a little over 100 travelling fans it would have been easy enough to have shown him the door. It's just that the club decided not to invite him in as a non-paying guest. Given the grief he's dished up then I am not surprised. People comparing this to China should be ashamed of themsleves.
All you ever do is come on this site and try to make Luton Town look like innocent little victims in a big York City conspiracy - is your life such a damned waste that you have nothing better to do?
[quote][p][bold]marksf[/bold] wrote: The original Flett piece was a genuine hatchet job that re-hashed the play-off story and tried to make some bizarre connection between that match and the abandoned one. It is no coincidence that Hicks has taken up that very argument and now justifies trying to rip off Luton for cash by saying that York will need to pay increased policing costs when Luton visit. It is supposed to be a match report, not an opinion piece littered with speculation and leaps of the imagination. Luton did not ban him; with a little over 100 travelling fans it would have been easy enough to have shown him the door. It's just that the club decided not to invite him in as a non-paying guest. Given the grief he's dished up then I am not surprised. People comparing this to China should be ashamed of themsleves.[/p][/quote]All you ever do is come on this site and try to make Luton Town look like innocent little victims in a big York City conspiracy - is your life such a damned waste that you have nothing better to do? YorkCityLuke
  • Score: 0

3:33pm Wed 19 Jan 11

yorkonafork says...

Hatter35 wrote:
Local paper in non story report shocker ! Readers indulge in over exaggerated anger and condemnation etc etc Get a grip people seriously, he wasn`t banned, the paper wasn`t banned from sending someone else, he wasn`t threatened with a good beating if he showed up ( as he would be in china, .......actually they`d probably just take him out back and shoot him, which considering the asinine effort he posted on Dec 18 could be considered improving local journalism ) Move on, we had, your fans had, our board had, your board obviously hadn`t , but its done now. Just one question though...if last night was a ' cup tie ' do we get promoted to L2 now ?
"Local paper in non-story shock" just here you are posting online about a non-story from a paper that's not even your local one and you're trying to take the high horse..... The word FAIL springs to mind.
Lonely life, is it?
[quote][p][bold]Hatter35[/bold] wrote: Local paper in non story report shocker ! Readers indulge in over exaggerated anger and condemnation etc etc Get a grip people seriously, he wasn`t banned, the paper wasn`t banned from sending someone else, he wasn`t threatened with a good beating if he showed up ( as he would be in china, .......actually they`d probably just take him out back and shoot him, which considering the asinine effort he posted on Dec 18 could be considered improving local journalism ) Move on, we had, your fans had, our board had, your board obviously hadn`t , but its done now. Just one question though...if last night was a ' cup tie ' do we get promoted to L2 now ?[/p][/quote]"Local paper in non-story shock" just here you are posting online about a non-story from a paper that's not even your local one and you're trying to take the high horse..... The word FAIL springs to mind. Lonely life, is it? yorkonafork
  • Score: 0

3:45pm Wed 19 Jan 11

duffy says...

Ok I've been winding up to a certain degree but come on not one Luton fan has come on here and admitted what we all know.
Luton have been daft and should have just ignored it and moved on. You can't beat the press by getting all huffy and indignant just because they write something you don't like.
What's next closing down the Luton fans forums if they don't like what's written on there. We lived in a democracy the last time I looked and have a free press.
Huge own goal by Luton given they have been giving it the high and mighty the last few days.
Ok I've been winding up to a certain degree but come on not one Luton fan has come on here and admitted what we all know. Luton have been daft and should have just ignored it and moved on. You can't beat the press by getting all huffy and indignant just because they write something you don't like. What's next closing down the Luton fans forums if they don't like what's written on there. We lived in a democracy the last time I looked and have a free press. Huge own goal by Luton given they have been giving it the high and mighty the last few days. duffy
  • Score: 0

3:46pm Wed 19 Jan 11

born&breed says...

Whilst leaving the stand I was called a money grabbing **** - and offer a fiver from two Luton spectators.
Nice people in Luton - not.
Whilst leaving the stand I was called a money grabbing **** - and offer a fiver from two Luton spectators. Nice people in Luton - not. born&breed
  • Score: 0

3:56pm Wed 19 Jan 11

duffy says...

born&breed wrote:
Whilst leaving the stand I was called a money grabbing **** - and offer a fiver from two Luton spectators. Nice people in Luton - not.
Hope you took the fiver.
[quote][p][bold]born&breed[/bold] wrote: Whilst leaving the stand I was called a money grabbing **** - and offer a fiver from two Luton spectators. Nice people in Luton - not.[/p][/quote]Hope you took the fiver. duffy
  • Score: 0

4:33pm Wed 19 Jan 11

tomwillo1 says...

LUTON TOWN ARE JUST A BUNCH OF FOOTBALL HOOLIGANS WHO ALL NEED LOCKING UP OR SHOOTING!!!
LUTON TOWN ARE JUST A BUNCH OF FOOTBALL HOOLIGANS WHO ALL NEED LOCKING UP OR SHOOTING!!! tomwillo1
  • Score: 0

5:40pm Wed 19 Jan 11

Dave_YCFC5 says...

Someone buy Dave a notebook PC or an Iphone. Writing notes on paper is very tinpot ;-)
Someone buy Dave a notebook PC or an Iphone. Writing notes on paper is very tinpot ;-) Dave_YCFC5
  • Score: 0

5:47pm Wed 19 Jan 11

Sir Alex says...

Where are Dave's City scarf and hat??
Where are Dave's City scarf and hat?? Sir Alex
  • Score: 0

6:48pm Wed 19 Jan 11

goreds says...

People who use the phrase ' move on' , or ' get over it' in an attempt to show they are superior or to take the moral high ground usually have some bile that they wish to spew out and make a nasty point about somebody or something they don't like.
Tw ats I call them.
People who use the phrase ' move on' , or ' get over it' in an attempt to show they are superior or to take the moral high ground usually have some bile that they wish to spew out and make a nasty point about somebody or something they don't like. Tw ats I call them. goreds
  • Score: 0

10:26pm Wed 19 Jan 11

Hatter Mick says...

Have to say this decision by Luton makes us look as small-minded and petty as the YCFC Board. Bad form. I hope Mr Flett enjoyed the game, no doubt he was sucking lemons all the way home to sweeten his mood.

And a message to YorkCityLuke - calling other people "scum" proves that you are exactly that.
Have to say this decision by Luton makes us look as small-minded and petty as the YCFC Board. Bad form. I hope Mr Flett enjoyed the game, no doubt he was sucking lemons all the way home to sweeten his mood. And a message to YorkCityLuke - calling other people "scum" proves that you are exactly that. Hatter Mick
  • Score: 0

12:44am Thu 20 Jan 11

jcyorkie says...

says...
2:22pm Wed 19 Jan 11

Local paper in non story report shocker !
Readers indulge in over exaggerated anger and condemnation etc etc

Get a grip people seriously, he wasn`t banned, the paper wasn`t banned from sending someone else, he wasn`t threatened with a good beating if he showed up ( as he would be in china, .......actually they`d probably just take him out back and shoot him, which considering the asinine effort he posted on Dec 18 could be considered improving local journalism )

Move on, we had, your fans had, our board had, your board obviously hadn`t , but its done now.

Just one question though...if last night was a ' cup tie ' do we get promoted to L2 now ?

got to be Luton, when did a team get promoted via a cup tie ?????
says... 2:22pm Wed 19 Jan 11 Local paper in non story report shocker ! Readers indulge in over exaggerated anger and condemnation etc etc Get a grip people seriously, he wasn`t banned, the paper wasn`t banned from sending someone else, he wasn`t threatened with a good beating if he showed up ( as he would be in china, .......actually they`d probably just take him out back and shoot him, which considering the asinine effort he posted on Dec 18 could be considered improving local journalism ) Move on, we had, your fans had, our board had, your board obviously hadn`t , but its done now. Just one question though...if last night was a ' cup tie ' do we get promoted to L2 now ? got to be Luton, when did a team get promoted via a cup tie ????? jcyorkie
  • Score: 0

1:06am Thu 20 Jan 11

Head of Bomber Command says...

Duffy the 'Fiver' down in Luton would have been Rupee's. :-)
Duffy the 'Fiver' down in Luton would have been Rupee's. :-) Head of Bomber Command
  • Score: 0

8:21am Thu 20 Jan 11

Phil, Leeds says...

Hatter35 wrote:
Local paper in non story report shocker ! Readers indulge in over exaggerated anger and condemnation etc etc Get a grip people seriously, he wasn`t banned, the paper wasn`t banned from sending someone else, he wasn`t threatened with a good beating if he showed up ( as he would be in china, .......actually they`d probably just take him out back and shoot him, which considering the asinine effort he posted on Dec 18 could be considered improving local journalism ) Move on, we had, your fans had, our board had, your board obviously hadn`t , but its done now. Just one question though...if last night was a ' cup tie ' do we get promoted to L2 now ?
No, if it was a cup tie you would progress to the next round. Winning cup ties has nothing to do with getting promotion to another league. You should know that.
[quote][p][bold]Hatter35[/bold] wrote: Local paper in non story report shocker ! Readers indulge in over exaggerated anger and condemnation etc etc Get a grip people seriously, he wasn`t banned, the paper wasn`t banned from sending someone else, he wasn`t threatened with a good beating if he showed up ( as he would be in china, .......actually they`d probably just take him out back and shoot him, which considering the asinine effort he posted on Dec 18 could be considered improving local journalism ) Move on, we had, your fans had, our board had, your board obviously hadn`t , but its done now. Just one question though...if last night was a ' cup tie ' do we get promoted to L2 now ?[/p][/quote]No, if it was a cup tie you would progress to the next round. Winning cup ties has nothing to do with getting promotion to another league. You should know that. Phil, Leeds
  • Score: 0

12:51pm Fri 21 Jan 11

jaybazza says...

Jesus christ what is it with people?
What happened last year happened last year. How about rather than looking back and trying to spark up old news, we try getting behind our club York City! Dont worry about what Luton or anyone else are doing, worry about our results and how we are doing!
There is no need to keep dragging stories like this up trying to inflame the rivalry between the two clubs.
I am looking forward to the Luton game at BC as there will be a fantastic atmosphere and the gmae will be good either way.
Jesus christ what is it with people? What happened last year happened last year. How about rather than looking back and trying to spark up old news, we try getting behind our club York City! Dont worry about what Luton or anyone else are doing, worry about our results and how we are doing! There is no need to keep dragging stories like this up trying to inflame the rivalry between the two clubs. I am looking forward to the Luton game at BC as there will be a fantastic atmosphere and the gmae will be good either way. jaybazza
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree