Xtratime Community banner

1 - 20 of 110 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hooliganism: battling social differences

With less than 50 days left until the World Cup in Japan and Korea, the discussion on hooliganism is more than ever a hot subject. Thousands and thousands of militaries will protect stadiums, and even high-tech aircrafts will be used to protect the fans, officials and players. The Japanese government has already warned the world (and in particular England-home of the world’s most feared hooligans-) that all fans that will make the trip will be intensely screened. Everyone known as a ‘possible hooligan’ will be send back immediately to their country of origin. Zero-tolerance will be the magic word for nearly a month in the Far East.

Although hooliganism has become a word closely related to sporting vents –mainly football- I will show in this research paper that it is in fact a problem of society. By looking at the behaviour of hooligans from a sociological point of view –an interactionist view and conflict-theory view, and to lesser extent a functionalist view- the conclusion one will be able to draw at the end, is that what might seem as a battle between the brainless can actually be explained as ‘regular ’ deviant sociological behaviour, if one looks at it from an objective point of view. We will be able to break down the subject in small sociological categories like gender, deviance, groups, and social stratification, as we get more information on the topic. And that is exactly what a sociologist should do. Take a step back, don’t let personal beliefs affect their studies, and try to get a better inside look into the subject.
Before looking at the parallels between society and hooliganism, I will first try to show why hooliganism is so closely related to sports; in particular football, or as the Americans call it, soccer.
It is clear that some form of deviant behaviour has occurred in virtually every country in which football is played. We can even consider it a cultural universal. Disorder of some kind is seemingly inevitable to the game, whether the game is played in Europe, Southern Asia or the Middle East. Football-related disorder is not, however, necessarily of the same nature, or influenced by the same factors, in all of the cultures in which it occurs.
There is a wide array of cross-cultural variations that might be the sociological background of these disturbances. Football-related violence is influenced by different historical, social, economic, political and cultural factors in different countries. Social class has been a significant factor in England, for example, religion in Scotland and Northern Ireland, sub-nationalist politics in Spain, etc. There are, however, significant similarities in the development of the problem. Most countries experienced an initial stage of sporadic violence directed mainly at referees and players, followed by a second stage involving violence between opposing groups of fans and against police/security officers inside the stadium, and a third -and current- stage involving an increase in violent encounters between these groups outside the stadium.
Another main factor in football’s link to hooliganism brings us directly to our first sociological insight into the subject. The next quote will give see how hooliganism was looked upon at its earliest stages, and it’s links with society.
“Although football hooliganism only became recognised by government and the media as a serious problem in the 1960s, hooligan behaviour at football has a long history. 'Roughs' were regularly reported as causing trouble at matches in the professional game's early years at the end of the nineteenth century. Some clubs which were sited in particularly tough areas, have long records of spectator disorderliness. In the game's earliest days, local 'derby' matches often provoked the worst problems but, in the absence of visiting fans, home 'roughs' on occasions attacked and stoned referees as well as the visiting players, sometimes chasing them out of town!” (Richard Giulianotti, Football, a sociology of the global game, page 64, 1999)

In many ways, football is seen as the right place for aggressive confrontations, partly because of the working class roots and traditions of the game, but also because of the territorial battle and masculine instincts that come along with it. A game of football is like a symbolic struggle between working class male communities. Hooliganism goes beyond this symbolic representation and transforms it into a 'real' struggle between young men who have strong masculine territorial feelings towards their own areas, teams and friends (their own peer group), and a strong desire to defend them in a 'manly' way when confrontations (with an out group) happen.



“Most of the evidence on hooligan offenders suggests that they are generally in their late teens or their 20s (though some 'leaders' are older), that they are mainly in manual or lower clerical occupations or, to a lesser extent, are unemployed or working in the 'grey' economy, and that they come mainly from working class backgrounds.” (University of Leicester, Sir Norman Centre of Football Research, 2001)


The reason that it is mostly males who are involved in hooliganism can also be brought back to a social reason. We teach our boys, from their earliest childhood, to be brave and strong, and fight (in lower classes of society literally) for their rights and beliefs. We don’t want our kids to be pushovers and crybabies. Fights against the police can be seen – by Conflict-theorists- as a small revolution against the standards and rules of society. Hooliganism is most definitely a counter-culture. It is seen as something that mainly occurs between lower-class males with hardly any future opportunities to move up on the social ladder. They only see themselves slip away even further on the social stratification ladder, instead of making upward intergenerational social mobility. Hooliganism is like a drug that helps them escape reality. In their group they are finally someone, those without any valuable ascribed statuses end up seeking for achieved statuses in different – violent- ways. Together they look for an intense, emotional experience not usually found in everyday life. This shared eruption of joy or sadness, adds to a strengthening of a common social identity. They find their satisfaction –their escape from boring and unpleasant reality- in deviant behaviour. Much of the behaviour, which is commonly, described as 'hooliganism' is actually non-violent, and almost like a ritual between two rival tribes. This involves: verbally abusing rival fans, threatening them with attack, and ridiculing the other. Hard-core hooligans, however, do seem more interested in fighting or 'running' rival groups who are, in their eyes, like themselves and who are also on the warpath’. They get a kick out of ‘running opposing fans’, causing all sorts of troubles, and ending up in massive fights. Just as all other counter-cultures they look for some way to get society’s attention.





“On the one hand, we have the `group mind' accounts that stress the occlusion of the individual self and the emergence of `group mind' through processes of 'submergence' within the crowd (Le Bon, 1895, trans. 1947). The `group mind' is understood to occlude the rational control of an individual's behaviour and allow casual influence and the dominance of primitive drives. Thus, the 'riot' is understood as irrational and normless and a natural consequence of gathering in large groups. This account has subsequently been undermined in crowd theory primarily because of its inability to explain the normative limits found in crowd behaviour (McPhail, 1991; Nye, 1975; Reicher, 1984, 1987), normative limits that are evident in football crowd disorder (Armstrong, 1998; Marsh, Rosser, & Harre, 1978; Stott & Reicher, 1998a).” (The British Journal of Social Psychology; Leicester; Sep 2001)





Hooligans look, as so many people in society, towards their instrumental leaders. A fight between rival groups of hooligans can be seen as one between an in-group and an out-group. Just as ‘normal’ people look for political parties, or religion to find support and feel apart of something, hooligans have the same idea about their group. They might be complete outcasts of society, but in there hooligan-group they find people with the same beliefs and interests. Some people, who might not even enjoy violence, but like the camaraderie of a group, find themselves drawn into violence by following their leaders. This is the interactionist part of hooliganism. Groupthink is very common in hooligan-groups. There are a few leaders, and a lot of ‘blind’ followers, who want to be part of something. It is easy to lose self-control in a group. People play roles in social groups. The pressure to come across as tough men who will defend their group with everything they have. The presentation of self and role-playing is these peer groups plays an enormous role in leading to behaviour that most of these hooligans would never even consider if they didn’t feel the pressure of an entire group counting on them. So the group influence works both ways: people feel more freedom to do whatever they want, since they have an entire group backing them up. On the other hand the pressure of the group can be so enormous that it can lead to excessive deviant behaviour on the part of a, normally balanced, individual.

In conclusion we can say that, eventough hooliganism has strong roots in the football world, and will always be attached to it, it is -if one looks at it from a sociological point of view- a completely independent (sub- and counter-) culture. We see all sorts of factors and influences that we also find in our own ‘regular’ society and environment. The way we teach our male children to be tough, together with inequalities in social stratification, lead to deviant –and most of the time violent- countercultures. Interactionism plays a significant role inside the hooligan peer group. Hooliganism has it’s own language, it’s own rules and values, and it’s own group behaviour. Eventough most acts of hooliganism might still have some relationship to football, we have seen that it’s become a mere platform. Hooliganism, and hooligans are very much a creation of society, and form a part of it. Hooliganism might be better considered in the context of the more general rise in juvenile crime and delinquency in many countries and the emergence of new deviant sub-cultures.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26,731 Posts
Man, after such english I'm almost ashamed to reply with my english. :embarassed:

Hooliganism is without a doubt a society phenomenon, and I think the article examines the reasons behind it very well, but I wouldn't go as far as declaring it "independand" from football/sports. Football is the area where hooliganism expands, and gives the main initiatives for troubles to start. Few things can make you see someone you dont know as an opponent more than a football rivalry. Moreover, while other sorts of fanatism (religious, political and national/racial) are usually condemned, football fanatism and rivalries are not only something tolerable but also something to some extent encouraged by the society. If you shout an insulting chant to the "opponent party" during a political speech, you will most probably see people looking at you and disaproving, while in a football stadium not only noone will bother to tell you anything, but you might be joined or receive applause.

Football is the ideal resort for fanatism.

PS. Steef, if you wrote the above article, congrats for a fine piece of work. But if it is written by someone else, you might want to include the source to avoid misunderstandings? ;)
 

·
Canonized
Joined
·
37,734 Posts
I would not say that hooliganism is an independent sub culture from football. It is completely linked, cause even people that only support a club miedly will eventually in a thrilling local derbyt may want to beat someone up from the opposition ( as long as the derby is really thrilling and you lost the game!)

When your in a staidum with your club playing a rival club , is the same as going to war with your rival. The sensation is that you have to defend your own "people" And the weird thing is that you have many friends in the other side, it might even be your cousin or brother, but they in the moment of the game and the stadium atmosphere are all part of the "enemy".

ANd then it becomes even funnier when you get home, and all start talking about different things taht are not related to football and then you become best friendes again!

Btw , some people call it hooliganism violent, i call it passion!:cool: :D ;)
 

·
International
Joined
·
5,629 Posts
Interesting post Steef. Although no where in the article there's proof that Hooligans come from lower economical backgrounds, you do make a nice tie with the sub-culture phenomenon that has always been pervasive in society. I mean if hooligans were poor, how can they afford to travel with their club or country to far and away places and still cause havoc. I think they're more middle class than anything.

Btw unlike Ze, I don't equate hooligans with passionate fans. I equate hooligans with members of the KKK, Al-Quaeda, or any radical/extremist group. Passionate fans are those who celebrate the game, enjoy the game, and know the game. Hooligans do none of the above except to violently rape the game of its essence.
 

·
Community Analyst
Joined
·
32,844 Posts
Steef said:


In conclusion we can say that, eventough hooliganism has strong roots in the football world, and will always be attached to it, it is -if one looks at it from a sociological point of view- a completely independent (sub- and counter-) culture. We see all sorts of factors and influences that we also find in our own ‘regular’ society and environment. The way we teach our male children to be tough, together with inequalities in social stratification, lead to deviant –and most of the time violent- countercultures. Interactionism plays a significant role inside the hooligan peer group. Hooliganism has it’s own language, it’s own rules and values, and it’s own group behaviour. Eventough most acts of hooliganism might still have some relationship to football, we have seen that it’s become a mere platform. Hooliganism, and hooligans are very much a creation of society, and form a part of it. Hooliganism might be better considered in the context of the more general rise in juvenile crime and delinquency in many countries and the emergence of new deviant sub-cultures.
Although the post does do well in pointing out the hooligan profile from an individual character root, as well as our instinctual territorial behavior (for which is the same foundation of any social groupings we participate in) and the psychological influences of groups on individuals, it falls short of substantiating its claims and the actual contributing factors to the social and economical status, as RedEagle pointed out.

Also, as RedEagle stated, passion ends and hooliganism begins when an individual allows himself to turn violent and/or destructive - that's what separates the humans from the animals.
 

·
International
Joined
·
8,545 Posts
Good piece Steef....and I for one am quite convinced it's your own work.

I agree that hooliganism has a certain degree of independence from football although a small one. Football does provide an excellent platform for hooliganism because of the passion the game invokes. I disagree with Ze when he equates the two however I would say that passion indirectly leads to hooliganism.

The issue of lower economical backgrounds leading to hooliganism is true if you consider what constitutes a lower economical background. Perhaps it's not the correct term to use but I take it more in the sense that hooliganism attracts those working in factories or other manual labour positions. Blue collar workers are just that, workers which is quite distinct from white collar professions which are careers rather than jobs. People in blue collar positions often end up there because of a lack of education which often is as a result of a poor background. For those who have resigned themselves to a life of blue collar work don't have a career path to follow, rather they work to make ends meet. As a result, they need something in their life to devote their attention to.

Naturally in countries like England for example, where the game is popular, many people go and support their local team. The next natural step is supporters groups which mostly appeal to those who need to belong to a group because it's missing in their lives. This is where passion gets involved and indirectly leads to hooliganism. It can't be said that passion automatically leads to hooliganism because many people that don't engage in hooliganistic activities are just as passionate as those who do.

Hooliganism is a social problem and football is it's platform as somebody already stated. This what makes hooliganism a somewhat indepenent problem. It isn't only up to the authorities of the game to battle hooliganism, it's also up to the police and the politicians.

I think the quickest way to end hooliganism would be for a larger police prescence and more police surveillance. This will cost more money but I think it's something the government should contribute to. Perhaps they already do, we don't have that problem in Canada so I don't know, but if they do, they need to give more money to it.

The alternative being social programs of assistance to hooligans but it would be difficult to get them in there. It isn't like substance abuse where one becomes addicted to it, it's a way of life and there's no reason to think any given hooligan wants to stop.

Government and club sponsored advertisements used as a means to deter hooliganism might get some postiive results, but I don't believe it will work well.
 

·
International
Joined
·
8,545 Posts
Steef, do you have any numbers we can look at? The issue of the economical background of hooligans is hard to prove unless we have some convincing numbers to look at.
 

·
Community Analyst
Joined
·
32,844 Posts
IVO said:
Good piece Steef....and I for one am quite convinced it's your own work.

I agree that hooliganism has a certain degree of independence from football although a small one. Football does provide an excellent platform for hooliganism because of the passion the game invokes. I disagree with Ze when he equates the two however I would say that passion indirectly leads to hooliganism.

The issue of lower economical backgrounds leading to hooliganism is true if you consider what constitutes a lower economical background. Perhaps it's not the correct term to use but I take it more in the sense that hooliganism attracts those working in factories or other manual labour positions. Blue collar workers are just that, workers which is quite distinct from white collar professions which are careers rather than jobs. People in blue collar positions often end up there because of a lack of education which often is as a result of a poor background. For those who have resigned themselves to a life of blue collar work don't have a career path to follow, rather they work to make ends meet. As a result, they need something in their life to devote their attention to.

Naturally in countries like England for example, where the game is popular, many people go and support their local team. The next natural step is supporters groups which mostly appeal to those who need to belong to a group because it's missing in their lives. This is where passion gets involved and indirectly leads to hooliganism. It can't be said that passion automatically leads to hooliganism because many people that don't engage in hooliganistic activities are just as passionate as those who do.

Hooliganism is a social problem and football is it's platform as somebody already stated. This what makes hooliganism a somewhat indepenent problem. It isn't only up to the authorities of the game to battle hooliganism, it's also up to the police and the politicians.

I think the quickest way to end hooliganism would be for a larger police prescence and more police surveillance. This will cost more money but I think it's something the government should contribute to. Perhaps they already do, we don't have that problem in Canada so I don't know, but if they do, they need to give more money to it.

The alternative being social programs of assistance to hooligans but it would be difficult to get them in there. It isn't like substance abuse where one becomes addicted to it, it's a way of life and there's no reason to think any given hooligan wants to stop.

Government and club sponsored advertisements used as a means to deter hooliganism might get some postiive results, but I don't believe it will work well.
Good post. Sport is just the more available outlet for its behavior, and indeed independent, as it's stated on the post.

BTW, the key to controling hooliganism lies in understanding the essentials of crowd control. Of which, one of its principals is smaller and more manageable seating sections. The other, as IVO pointed out, is a visible authoritive presence.
 

·
International
Joined
·
5,629 Posts
Good Post IVO!

However I am still confused as to the "economical backgrounds" of these fellas. Steef is telling me that they are poor and some are without jobs. And you're telling me that Hooligans are working class blue collar types who don't have the educational background to do much of anything else except work, get drunk, go to footie games with his "organized" local thug pals, and beat the crap of anything that scares him, or he feels is superior to him.

I live in the States. It's a sports mad country. It has all kinds of economical and social spheres amongst its population. And yet I don't see the "Bloods" and the "Crypts" going to a Lakers game and ruining it for everybody else. You know why?

Cause it's uncool. Here in the states that behavior is frowned upon. In Europe it's encouraged and that is the difference. Not the socio-economic backgrounds/lifestyles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26,731 Posts
Perhaps its hard to prove that the economical backround of hooligans is poor or that the education level is low, but not so hard to believe. Fanatism, and above all fanatism expressed with violent behaviour, is usually found to the "poor and uneducated" (sic) rather than people with high educational level. The more educated someone is, the less he needs to resort to "show off", macho and violent behaviour in order to make his opinion known. And this applies to every kind of fanatism, religious, political, racial... and of course sports fanatism, aka hooliganism. Moreover, as pointed out by the article, hooliganistic actions are often started by "leaders", who definitely find it easier to manipulate and lead to use for their purposes someone with low education. Assuming of course that in the vast majority of cases the less the financial means are, the lower the educational level of the individual. So in my opinion, the argument that low education is the main reason behind hooliganism, is correct, though hard to prove with numbers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,811 Posts
Good piece Steef....and I for one am quite convinced it's your own work.
It's an extract from somewhere, can remember where though but i recognise aspects of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26,731 Posts
RedEagle said:
I live in the States. It's a sports mad country. It has all kinds of economical and social spheres amongst its population. And yet I don't see the "Bloods" and the "Crypts" going to a Lakers game and ruining it for everybody else. You know why?

Cause it's uncool. Here in the states that behavior is frowned upon. In Europe it's encouraged and that is the difference. Not the socio-economic backgrounds/lifestyles.
The ingredient you miss in the recipe is passion. Passion for the sports. THAT along with the low educational level as Feet and IVO pointed out leads to hooliganism. In USA passion does not exist, at least not to the same degree as in europe or latin america.

Moreover, hooliganistic behaviour exists only in big groups. You can't be a hooligan on your own cause if you meet the disaproval of the people around you, you realise what you do is wrong. And this is one more argument that proves low education is a basic reason for hooliganism: the failure to realise that something a big group is doing CAN be wrong, or the lack of resistance to "go with the flow".

Moreover, its wrong saying that hooliganism is encouraged in europe. What is encouraged is passion. And there is a very small (yet, easy to see for people like you and me, but not for others -> low education again) line between a passionate fan and a hooligan, sadly.
 

·
Community Analyst
Joined
·
32,844 Posts
AMOROSO! said:
Perhaps its hard to prove that the economical backround of hooligans is poor or that the education level is low, but not so hard to believe. Fanatism, and above all fanatism expressed with violent behaviour, is usually found to the "poor and uneducated" (sic) rather than people with high educational level. The more educated someone is, the less he needs to resort to "show off", macho and violent behaviour in order to make his opinion known. And this applies to every kind of fanatism, religious, political, racial... and of course sports fanatism, aka hooliganism. Moreover, as pointed out by the article, hooliganistic actions are often started by "leaders", who definitely find it easier to manipulate and lead to use for their purposes someone with low education. Assuming of course that in the vast majority of cases the less the financial means are, the lower the educational level of the individual. So in my opinion, the argument that low education is the main reason behind hooliganism, is correct, though hard to prove with numbers.
Though I remain open to the possibility that such behavior can be linked to economical and/or educational statuses, any time we start to accept blame on social groupings for outlandish behavior we risk the possibility of severely clouting our judgement throught the lazy processes of stereotyping. It is important that we, as individuals, be diligent on our requirements for substance and proof, regardless of its diffculty, before we go around spewing it as gospel.
 

·
Community Analyst
Joined
·
32,844 Posts
AMOROSO! said:


The ingredient you miss in the recipe is passion. Passion for the sports. THAT along with the low educational level as Feet and IVO pointed out leads to hooliganism. In USA passion does not exist, at least not to the same degree as in europe or latin america.
Pure assumption on your part. I've had the luxury to experience both, and can safely say based on my experience (being a die hard fan of the Philadelphia Eagles) that Americans are just as passionate as anything I've experienced in Europe.



Moreover, its wrong saying that hooliganism is encouraged in europe. What is encouraged is passion. And there is a very small (yet, easy to see for people like you and me, but not for others -> low education again) line between a passionate fan and a hooligan, sadly.
It is wrong to say it for the same reason that you've stated that passion doesn't exist in the US on the same level - it's an assumption.

However, there is some basis to that statement. Case in point: the most recent episode of destructive fan behavior that I've witnessed in a Portuguese soccer game in which an unpopular ref call resulted in a multitude of destruction of property. Yet, this behavior hardly captures a single line in the Portuguese newspapers the following day. In the US, the media would have had a field day - easily dominating the subject of the game itself.

So, at least from a social acceptance standpoint, there is a significant difference - though I wouldn't go as far as declaring it as "encouraged".
 

·
International
Joined
·
5,629 Posts
AMOROSO! said:


The ingredient you miss in the recipe is passion. Passion for the sports. THAT along with the low educational level as Feet and IVO pointed out leads to hooliganism. In USA passion does not exist, at least not to the same degree as in europe or latin america.
You have completely missed the points of my post, and have added you own ignorant assumptions to it. The above statement is completely ludicrous (AMerican Sports fans are as passionate as any). And not only that, you equate passion with Hooliganism, two completely separate emotional states. Violence is not PASSION. It's an accelerated emotional state, devoid of any logical thought.

AMOROSO! said:


Moreover, hooliganistic behaviour exists only in big groups. You can't be a hooligan on your own cause if you meet the disaproval of the people around you, you realise what you do is wrong. And this is one more argument that proves low education is a basic reason for hooliganism: the failure to realise that something a big group is doing CAN be wrong, or the lack of resistance to "go with the flow".
Once again you missed another one of my points with the "Bloods" and "Crypts" and a LA Lakers game example. Perhaps it's because you don't know what they are. They are "large" LA street gangs that conform perfectly to the socio-economic ills that Steef points out. And yet they do not violently shoot each other at Lakers games. They save that stuff for the drive-bys. And the reason is because violence at sporting events here is just not only not tolerated, the fans frown upon it.

AMOROSO! said:


Moreover, its wrong saying that hooliganism is encouraged in europe. What is encouraged is passion. And there is a very small (yet, easy to see for people like you and me, but not for others -> low education again) line between a passionate fan and a hooligan, sadly.
I'll tell you why it's encouraged in Europe. First the media encourages it. Whenever I watch a European or Latin game on the TV, the camera automatically shows these dumbasses doing what they do best. Secondly, security is so lax in these stadiums, its scary. Thirdly, there is very little negative PR against these groups and some clubs even encourage them. Lastly, Europeans and Latin citizens alike just plain accept the violence as part of the game. And this last one is truely sad and pathetic. They've been so conditioned by it, that it has become acceptable.

I hope that clears things up. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,210 Posts
Agreed. Go to any college football game in the South and you'll see passion rising to absurd levels. Same for baseball towns like Boston and New York and so on. those people are very very passionate.

The difference is passion and violence have nothing to do with each other and it's an idiot's excuse to link the two. I've been around some of the most passionate football fans on earth and they have no interest in fighting. I think Amo hit a lot of it on the when he said education has a lot to do with it. It usually takes the most basic of elements to resort to fighting for entertainment.

And I also get Ze's point about good friends being rival fans and "hating" each other during a big clash. Hell, my wife and I go through that when Duke plays Maryland. However, I have never felt the slightest need to attack and assualt the opposing fans and hurt my friends because they support the "wrong' team. I'm as passionate as teh next guy about my teams and I'm sorry, but passion is not an excuse nor justification to act like a ass.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26,731 Posts
I'd gladly debate and participate in the discussion on this interesting topic, but not when I'm called ignorant. I'll take my ignorant views and shut up then, no need to disturb you.
 

·
International
Joined
·
5,629 Posts
AMOROSO! said:
I'd gladly debate and participate in the discussion on this interesting topic, but not when I'm called ignorant. I'll take my ignorant views and shut up then, no need to disturb you.
No one called you ignorant. I called your assumptions on my post ignorant. If you equate them with you so be it!
 

·
Community Analyst
Joined
·
32,844 Posts
AMOROSO! said:
I'd gladly debate and participate in the discussion on this interesting topic, but not when I'm called ignorant. I'll take my ignorant views and shut up then, no need to disturb you.
The assumption you made about the American fan's passion was ignorant. That doesn't make you an ignorant, nor was RedEagle calling you ignorant - he called the statement ignorant, which it was.

Very little need to get defensive over that.
 

·
Community Analyst
Joined
·
32,844 Posts
RedEagle said:


No one called you ignorant. I called your assumptions on my post ignorant. If you equate them with you so be it!
Had I seen this, I wouldn't have bothered with my own.
 
1 - 20 of 110 Posts
Top