A FOOTBALL thug sentenced to three months in prison for assaulting a police officer will be able to travel to the World Cup, unless airport security forces are sharp eyed enough to spot him.

Paul Edward Gorman, a 34-year-old QPR fan, was convicted after an incident at Vicarage Road in the 2000/2001 season.

But Watford Magistrates did not impose a banning order. This would have stopped him travelling to Japan for the summer competition and enabled police to ensure he stays in this country during the tournament.

The court has acknowledged it made a mistake in not banning Gorman.

Inspector Glyn Evans, the officer in charge of policing at the Watford stadium, said the only thing stopping Gorman getting to Japan if he decided to go, were airport staff.

The inspector said: "If he turns up at an airport and somebody finds out he has a football related conviction for violence or disorder, he can be detained at the point of departure with a view to seeking a banning order."

But Mr Evans said it would be relatively easy for a person to slip through the security net.

He said: "It is a process which would not be necessary if they had been dealt with properly in the first place."

Mr Evans said no information Gorman intended to make the trip to Japan had been passed to him.

The Watford-based officer, who earlier this year criticised magistrates for not using their banning powers more frequently, said there had since been positive meetings between police and the court.

But he added: "We want to make football games safer. Unfortunately the signs are not good.

"Anybody who has a previous history of violence or disorder should not be allowed to travel."

Mr Evans said it was frustrating to police football matches because many of those arrested and charged did not face the courts because the Crown Prosecution Service dropped cases.

He said: "One of the biggest problems and difficulties we have is getting the court to accept intelligence rather than facts. When going for a banning order."

According to the law a ban can be used where police have reason to believe an individual may cause an offence. This is a departure from the firm "facts" usually needed by the court, Mr Evans said.