I think people know what Ian meant with his analogy but as usual it is getting blown out of proportion. Whether people agree with "Agar Out" or "Agar In" each group has the right to let their feelings be known. However if they are being abusive with their protest they should be stopped.
The fact our club are doing everything in their power to remove any visible signs of unrest is creating a divide amongst the supporters and that is not a good thing to be creating. I have been protesting against Agar in my own way for a long time however I always get behind the team come game time. For some reason certain people just assume if you are anti Agar you do not support the team.

The big banner was causing no bother at all. It was placed at the back of the stand and causing no harm to anyone. The steward who took it down explained our club had requested it to be taken down. So nothing to do with public safety, more to do with protecting the clubs image in public.

Ah ok then. If the club have requested it to be taken down and the steward has got that right then that really is pretty poor by Hull FC.

I think at best it was unhelpful hyperbole and at worst tasteless given what's going on in Libya at the moment.

I agree he could have used a better analogy.

Counter-productive move IMO. I'm also quite surprised - and disappointed - that the Quins stewards would go along with it. They should be looking after crowd safety and security, not getting involved in stuff like this.

Given that the players are very firmly behind Agar, I don't think having banners up during the game is helpful and will only cause division between the players and fans.
It's obviously not the majority of fans wish to go about it that way.

It was not the stewards looking onto the crowd as they were quite happy for it to go up (I asked) but the bloke who took it down was the head steward and explained it all to me and I was given a choice of allowing them to take it down and store it at reception or I would be removed. I presume the lads with the tshirts were asked to remove the offending shirts and refused hence the reason for their eviction.

The shear pompousnous of some people on here is outstanding

That's also my personal stance on banners at games, but I don't think it's a good thing for the club to be having those banners removed by stewards on anything other than safety/security grounds. I may not agree with people having banners but they have the right to do so provided they aren't causing bother.

I would hope banners/t-shirts/chants about Agar would not affect professional players. Yes it may cause a division between the crowd, but that division is already there regardless of the protests.

I'd like to know under which regulations those ejections would have been/were handled.

Think the only people who can comment on that are the ones ejected and the stewards who ejected them. I saw Hutchie talking to the 2 ejected after the game so he may have a better insight as to why.