Southend Pier's first wedding descends into brawl (From Southend Standard)

TOWIE?

the photo of all the smokers clutching a fag (inc the blushing bride) at the seafront end of the pier in Wednesdays Echo was funny.

Chavtastic!

2 squaddies in punch up. Hold the front page.

Think people should get all the facts straight before they publish it, all I can say is haha how wrong you are and the newspapers make things 10 times worse and dramatise everything, very pathetic!

That'll be 12 months in the Glass House at Colli,,, for the soldiers, theres no escape, when it kicks off, at the end of the pier, unless your an icelandic swimmer..

I think it's pretty mean of the Echo to make so much of this, very insensitive to embarrass the bride and groom like that. Ok, most people would not want an altercation at their wedding but to have it broadcast in the paper is pretty rotten. It's not the first wedding with a punch up and it won't be the last!

The Echo headline in my opinion should focus much more on how ridiculous it is of the Council to spend a small fortune on a "Cultural Centre" that they keep banging on about advertising more heavily - and then there's a little one-liner in the middle of the article to say in a "matter of fact" way that anyone who hires it for a function (presumably it's the same for concerts/exhibitions etc?) has to get the train for a mile and a third each way to have a fag! Now that really is the stuff of sitcoms - I can just imagine people making it back to the shore end and finding they've left their lighter behind etc. Why on earth wasn't the building put at the shore end of the pier? I cant imagine anyone wanting to hire the place with the smoking ban and having to tell all their guests they have to wait for trains, possiby in pouring rain and gusting winds, to go to the shore! You really couldn't make it up!!

'Cultural' centre indeed.

heartbeat wrote:
I think it's pretty mean of the Echo to make so much of this, very insensitive to embarrass the bride and groom like that. Ok, most people would not want an altercation at their wedding but to have it broadcast in the paper is pretty rotten. It's not the first wedding with a punch up and it won't be the last!

The Echo headline in my opinion should focus much more on how ridiculous it is of the Council to spend a small fortune on a "Cultural Centre" that they keep banging on about advertising more heavily - and then there's a little one-liner in the middle of the article to say in a "matter of fact" way that anyone who hires it for a function (presumably it's the same for concerts/exhibitions etc?) has to get the train for a mile and a third each way to have a fag! Now that really is the stuff of sitcoms - I can just imagine people making it back to the shore end and finding they've left their lighter behind etc. Why on earth wasn't the building put at the shore end of the pier? I cant imagine anyone wanting to hire the place with the smoking ban and having to tell all their guests they have to wait for trains, possiby in pouring rain and gusting winds, to go to the shore! You really couldn't make it up!!

Quite a lot of people don't smoke.

Carnabackable wrote:
That'll be 12 months in the Glass House at Colli,,, for the soldiers, theres no escape, when it kicks off, at the end of the pier, unless your an icelandic swimmer..

I will give you the benefit of the doubt & believe you have no knowledge of MCTC Colchester & it's use, hence your ridiculous comment. Thankfully, I never went there, although I served with some did, & others who worked there.
As regards this incident, is it really necessary to publicise this, especially as it appears to have been a very minor incident in all respects.
Based on this, I await the Echo publicising details of every altercation, alcohol-related or not that takes place at any venue within it's coverage area.
Please, just be happy for the young couple who got married last weekend & wish them every happiness.

i got married to my wife whilst still in the army. we had a great time. Fights at military weddings are common place and usually occur between the pimm's and the first speech. soldiers are colourful characters and are the best people you could ever meet. despite displaying behaviour that everyone displays when they have had a tank full...

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

heartbeat wrote: I think it's pretty mean of the Echo to make so much of this, very insensitive to embarrass the bride and groom like that. Ok, most people would not want an altercation at their wedding but to have it broadcast in the paper is pretty rotten. It's not the first wedding with a punch up and it won't be the last! The Echo headline in my opinion should focus much more on how ridiculous it is of the Council to spend a small fortune on a "Cultural Centre" that they keep banging on about advertising more heavily - and then there's a little one-liner in the middle of the article to say in a "matter of fact" way that anyone who hires it for a function (presumably it's the same for concerts/exhibitions etc?) has to get the train for a mile and a third each way to have a fag! Now that really is the stuff of sitcoms - I can just imagine people making it back to the shore end and finding they've left their lighter behind etc. Why on earth wasn't the building put at the shore end of the pier? I cant imagine anyone wanting to hire the place with the smoking ban and having to tell all their guests they have to wait for trains, possiby in pouring rain and gusting winds, to go to the shore! You really couldn't make it up!!

Quite a lot of people don't smoke.

Is this for real ? "why wasn't the cultural centre put on the shore end" !!!!! What just to accomodate people so hopelessly addicted to nicotine that they can't go a couple of hours without a fag !! You really couldn't make it up !!!!

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

heartbeat wrote:
I think it's pretty mean of the Echo to make so much of this, very insensitive to embarrass the bride and groom like that. Ok, most people would not want an altercation at their wedding but to have it broadcast in the paper is pretty rotten. It's not the first wedding with a punch up and it won't be the last!

The Echo headline in my opinion should focus much more on how ridiculous it is of the Council to spend a small fortune on a "Cultural Centre" that they keep banging on about advertising more heavily - and then there's a little one-liner in the middle of the article to say in a "matter of fact" way that anyone who hires it for a function (presumably it's the same for concerts/exhibitions etc?) has to get the train for a mile and a third each way to have a fag! Now that really is the stuff of sitcoms - I can just imagine people making it back to the shore end and finding they've left their lighter behind etc. Why on earth wasn't the building put at the shore end of the pier? I cant imagine anyone wanting to hire the place with the smoking ban and having to tell all their guests they have to wait for trains, possiby in pouring rain and gusting winds, to go to the shore! You really couldn't make it up!!

Quite a lot of people don't smoke.

Smokers are weak of mind, anyone who thinks it's "cool" or "fashionable" or they have a "right" to smoke proves smokers are stupid, anyone who willfully pumps toxic crap into their lungs and pays for it needs thier heads read, as for a "right" to smoke no it's a privilege as you buy the cancer sticks.

Why bring smoking into this when the story is about the punch-up? Or am I missing something? Did the fight break out over a packet of Rothmans in the loo?
And smoking "a privilege"? Do leave off.

Grumpy, filling in the rather large gaps and on the face of it two completely unrelated things you can only assume that the punch up started because someone was smoking in the toilet and someone else didn't like it?

Smoking is not illegal, it would seem these idiotic rants against smokers are as bad as rants against gays or religions.
I am not a smoker, but respect the rights of those who are, the council policy seems barmy.

wagger wrote:
Smoking is not illegal, it would seem these idiotic rants against smokers are as bad as rants against gays or religions.
I am not a smoker, but respect the rights of those who are, the council policy seems barmy.

The pier has been burned down three times. It's perfectly sensible to ban smoking on the pier.

GrumpyofLeigh wrote:
Why bring smoking into this when the story is about the punch-up? Or am I missing something? Did the fight break out over a packet of Rothmans in the loo?
And smoking "a privilege"? Do leave off.

Yes - it was rather odd for the Echo to include that in a piece on a punch up, but it is par for the course I guess.

Banning smoking completely will just drive people to find a quiet spot, thus making the possibility of a fire breaking out as a result of a hastily discarded cigarette even more likely.

Far better to provide safe, secure facilities fit for the purpose, in my opinion.

The stats on the gas poll suggest that there are some mischief-makers among us.

It also means that *none* of the polls (past or present) mean jot!

its a war zone

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

wagger wrote: Smoking is not illegal, it would seem these idiotic rants against smokers are as bad as rants against gays or religions. I am not a smoker, but respect the rights of those who are, the council policy seems barmy.

The pier has been burned down three times. It's perfectly sensible to ban smoking on the pier.

I think you'll find it probably is in certain public places.

Can't believe I'm writing this but I agree with everything old SC has written.

Off for a lie down.

Who in their right mind would get married on SouthEnd pier.
There must be much better places to get married,likeCavey Island

Audioman wrote:
Who in their right mind would get married on SouthEnd pier.
There must be much better places to get married,likeCavey Island

LoL, though smoking is a filthy and disgusting habit, as for Bosniavets comments, I will give you the benefit of much doubt, when I say the Military Corrective Training Centre, would probably be easier these days, than your average P company course. that is assuming you are, who you say you are.

wagger wrote:
Smoking is not illegal, it would seem these idiotic rants against smokers are as bad as rants against gays or religions.
I am not a smoker, but respect the rights of those who are, the council policy seems barmy.

Barmy? smoking has no fit place in society, you want a smoke - get the train, or try running, if the tar hasn't already filled your lungs.
I expect the Regiment, those youngsters belong to, are really proud, there's nothing worse, than drunkards who can't hold their beer, brawling in public, not fit for purpose, Jobseekers I fear, for those involved.

Rochford Rob wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

wagger wrote: Smoking is not illegal, it would seem these idiotic rants against smokers are as bad as rants against gays or religions. I am not a smoker, but respect the rights of those who are, the council policy seems barmy.

The pier has been burned down three times. It's perfectly sensible to ban smoking on the pier.

I think you'll find it probably is in certain public places.

Can't believe I'm writing this but I agree with everything old SC has written.

Off for a lie down.

I agree too, to allow smoking on a wooden pier would be folly. But the council has to accept that the potential for private bookings will decrease because of this ban.

Nebs wrote:

Rochford Rob wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

wagger wrote: Smoking is not illegal, it would seem these idiotic rants against smokers are as bad as rants against gays or religions. I am not a smoker, but respect the rights of those who are, the council policy seems barmy.

The pier has been burned down three times. It's perfectly sensible to ban smoking on the pier.

I think you'll find it probably is in certain public places.

Can't believe I'm writing this but I agree with everything old SC has written.

Off for a lie down.

I agree too, to allow smoking on a wooden pier would be folly. But the council has to accept that the potential for private bookings will decrease because of this ban.

Good job too, who in their Right mind, wants to be anywhere near to smokers, the stench lingers on and on and on....

Carnabackable wrote:

wagger wrote:
Smoking is not illegal, it would seem these idiotic rants against smokers are as bad as rants against gays or religions.
I am not a smoker, but respect the rights of those who are, the council policy seems barmy.

Barmy? smoking has no fit place in society, you want a smoke - get the train, or try running, if the tar hasn't already filled your lungs.
I expect the Regiment, those youngsters belong to, are really proud, there's nothing worse, than drunkards who can't hold their beer, brawling in public, not fit for purpose, Jobseekers I fear, for those involved.

you clearly have no concept of military life..

why Jobseekers?

in short. What the hell are you talking about man?

Carnabackable wrote:

Nebs wrote:

Rochford Rob wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

wagger wrote: Smoking is not illegal, it would seem these idiotic rants against smokers are as bad as rants against gays or religions. I am not a smoker, but respect the rights of those who are, the council policy seems barmy.

The pier has been burned down three times. It's perfectly sensible to ban smoking on the pier.

I think you'll find it probably is in certain public places.

Can't believe I'm writing this but I agree with everything old SC has written.

Off for a lie down.

I agree too, to allow smoking on a wooden pier would be folly. But the council has to accept that the potential for private bookings will decrease because of this ban.

Good job too, who in their Right mind, wants to be anywhere near to smokers, the stench lingers on and on and on....

what would you tax? how else would you generate the billions of pounds that tobacco duty brings to the exchequer?

jayman wrote:

Carnabackable wrote:

wagger wrote:
Smoking is not illegal, it would seem these idiotic rants against smokers are as bad as rants against gays or religions.
I am not a smoker, but respect the rights of those who are, the council policy seems barmy.

Barmy? smoking has no fit place in society, you want a smoke - get the train, or try running, if the tar hasn't already filled your lungs.
I expect the Regiment, those youngsters belong to, are really proud, there's nothing worse, than drunkards who can't hold their beer, brawling in public, not fit for purpose, Jobseekers I fear, for those involved.

you clearly have no concept of military life..

why Jobseekers?

in short. What the hell are you talking about man?

OK to make it simple, the army are looking at massive cuts, those who have broken both civil and military law, and are serving, go to the top of the list, for ousting, they might well find themselves holding a jobseekers allowance card, instead of an army ID card

Carnabackable wrote:

jayman wrote:

Carnabackable wrote:

wagger wrote:
Smoking is not illegal, it would seem these idiotic rants against smokers are as bad as rants against gays or religions.
I am not a smoker, but respect the rights of those who are, the council policy seems barmy.

Barmy? smoking has no fit place in society, you want a smoke - get the train, or try running, if the tar hasn't already filled your lungs.
I expect the Regiment, those youngsters belong to, are really proud, there's nothing worse, than drunkards who can't hold their beer, brawling in public, not fit for purpose, Jobseekers I fear, for those involved.

you clearly have no concept of military life..

why Jobseekers?

in short. What the hell are you talking about man?

OK to make it simple, the army are looking at massive cuts, those who have broken both civil and military law, and are serving, go to the top of the list, for ousting, they might well find themselves holding a jobseekers allowance card, instead of an army ID card

i doubt a punch up will have any bearing on army redundancies.. if that where the case we would have no army at all.

also. who said it was military. it could have been two civvies having an altercation over a dead goldfish for all we know..

jayman wrote:

Carnabackable wrote:

jayman wrote:

Carnabackable wrote:

wagger wrote:
Smoking is not illegal, it would seem these idiotic rants against smokers are as bad as rants against gays or religions.
I am not a smoker, but respect the rights of those who are, the council policy seems barmy.

Barmy? smoking has no fit place in society, you want a smoke - get the train, or try running, if the tar hasn't already filled your lungs.
I expect the Regiment, those youngsters belong to, are really proud, there's nothing worse, than drunkards who can't hold their beer, brawling in public, not fit for purpose, Jobseekers I fear, for those involved.

you clearly have no concept of military life..

why Jobseekers?

in short. What the hell are you talking about man?

OK to make it simple, the army are looking at massive cuts, those who have broken both civil and military law, and are serving, go to the top of the list, for ousting, they might well find themselves holding a jobseekers allowance card, instead of an army ID card

i doubt a punch up will have any bearing on army redundancies.. if that where the case we would have no army at all.

also. who said it was military. it could have been two civvies having an altercation over a dead goldfish for all we know..

I think where your concerned, I'd stick with the goldfish idea, saves on the agony of explaining yet again, the obvious.

Why not make use of the area where the bowling alley was? Ideal for a restaurant with great sea views. A hotel on top? Wouldnt be beyond engineers to use concrete and reinforce would it. If the council used some imagination with the pier it would be a much more worthwhile attraction. If it was in America it would be huge attraction and they unlike the boring idiots of Southend Coucil would make it a profitable tourist attraction.

Seasider90 wrote:
Why not make use of the area where the bowling alley was? Ideal for a restaurant with great sea views. A hotel on top? Wouldnt be beyond engineers to use concrete and reinforce would it. If the council used some imagination with the pier it would be a much more worthwhile attraction. If it was in America it would be huge attraction and they unlike the boring idiots of Southend Coucil would make it a profitable tourist attraction.

Great sea views - when the tides in, otherwise get out the binoculars, as for yet another grand restaurant idea, I think there are enough already, why not just remember this is Southend, not the Florida Keys, candy floss and kiss me quick

A squaddie went to the loo & read a sign on the door 'Beware Homosexuals'. He then went to wash his hands & read a sign above the mirror 'Beware Homosexuals'. He then went to dry his hands are saw some writing on the skirting board. He bent over and it read ' Brace yourself, you were warned twice'. And that's how the fight started.

Born & bread wrote:
A squaddie went to the loo & read a sign on the door 'Beware Homosexuals'. He then went to wash his hands & read a sign above the mirror 'Beware Homosexuals'. He then went to dry his hands are saw some writing on the skirting board. He bent over and it read ' Brace yourself, you were warned twice'. And that's how the fight started.

I take it you were in the Navy, writing homophobic comments, like that would now put you in the shyte.

Seasider90 wrote:
Why not make use of the area where the bowling alley was? Ideal for a restaurant with great sea views. A hotel on top? Wouldnt be beyond engineers to use concrete and reinforce would it. If the council used some imagination with the pier it would be a much more worthwhile attraction. If it was in America it would be huge attraction and they unlike the boring idiots of Southend Coucil would make it a profitable tourist attraction.

Precisely what I think would have been far more sensible. I am not a smoker myself, in fact I can't stand the smell of smoke BUT the fact is that a lot of people still do smoke, and the "Cultural Centre" needs to be financially viable. However much I dislike smoking myself it doesn't mean that I disassociate myself from every relative, colleague or even friend that smokes, so if I was to consider having a party or some such event I wouldn't even consider the CC due to the smoking situation. I am sure a lot of other people probably feel the same, and this is likely to affect the decision of bands/festivals/what
ever to hire the place.

Given that smoking is still legal and a lot of people still do it, then surely it would have made more sense to have the CC walking distance from the seafront end, to keep all parties satisfied and most importantly earning more dosh towards our Council tax?

Oooohh, a Fag in the Loo.

I thought that only happened in Rochford :)

LMAO......

LMAO......

Seasider90 wrote:
Why not make use of the area where the bowling alley was? Ideal for a restaurant with great sea views. A hotel on top? Wouldnt be beyond engineers to use concrete and reinforce would it. If the council used some imagination with the pier it would be a much more worthwhile attraction. If it was in America it would be huge attraction and they unlike the boring idiots of Southend Coucil would make it a profitable tourist attraction.

You don't have to go as far as the Us to see a pier with real entertainment. Just go to Brighton. Theirs has a fun fair on it, including rollercoaster.

Such a pity the wedding photos of the bride and groom were spoiled by the hideous so called cultural centre building behind them. What on earth has this council done to this world famous Pier?
They should be ashamed of themselves.

boytrev wrote:
Such a pity the wedding photos of the bride and groom were spoiled by the hideous so called cultural centre building behind them. What on earth has this council done to this world famous Pier?
They should be ashamed of themselves.

Such a pity, that the first wedding to take place in the cultural centre, ended with Drunken soldiers beating each other.

Seasider90 wrote:
Why not make use of the area where the bowling alley was? Ideal for a restaurant with great sea views. A hotel on top? Wouldnt be beyond engineers to use concrete and reinforce would it. If the council used some imagination with the pier it would be a much more worthwhile attraction. If it was in America it would be huge attraction and they unlike the boring idiots of Southend Coucil would make it a profitable tourist attraction.

I don't see any huge investment in the foreseeable future.
It is going to take a company with a lot of money to spend, or friendly bankers to fund any major projects on the pier.

As soon as anyone shows an interest, the council start laying the law down regarding what they will allow, and the cut they want from it.

Then the investors walk away.

Carnabackable wrote:

wagger wrote:
Smoking is not illegal, it would seem these idiotic rants against smokers are as bad as rants against gays or religions.
I am not a smoker, but respect the rights of those who are, the council policy seems barmy.

Barmy? smoking has no fit place in society, you want a smoke - get the train, or try running, if the tar hasn't already filled your lungs.
I expect the Regiment, those youngsters belong to, are really proud, there's nothing worse, than drunkards who can't hold their beer, brawling in public, not fit for purpose, Jobseekers I fear, for those involved.

You do, use, rather a lot, of commas, inappropriately. Are you, out of, breath?

Must be, hanging around, with, those dirty, smokers!

Trouble in Southend............
..Where is the surprise...........I
t's full of absolute scumbags regardless of where these wedding guests are from......Southend attracts it !!!