Basic HTML Version
FOR THE
FANS
BEHAVIOUR
?
Touchline issue 23 | April 2016 | 37
It would appear to be in the best interests of clubs to do as
much as they can to ward off bad behaviour from fans, even
without the threat of collective punishment. The examples from
Turkey show clubs taking a pro-active stance to protect their
assets: which includes their reputations.
Clubs who don’t seem to care about the consequences of their
laxity reap the results. Egyptian club Al-Masry in 2012 was given
a two-year suspension from domestic competition after riots
that cost the lives of over 70 supporters. While the club could
not be held responsible for the riots themselves, unreliable
security measures at the venue meant that fans entered
carrying knives and clubs.
But just what are the pressure points? In the case of Al-Masry,
the club was at fault. But in many cases, it is demonstrably the
actions of the fans that cause the problems. It would seem that
collective punishment is supposed to tie into fan loyalty.
Police groups seem to agree. Faced with impossible odds,
they can see the correlation between fan behaviour and
their love of the club. In Scotland, which has seen major
crowd issues spanning decades, police are insisting that it is
only by hurting the clubs that change will be affected. Chief
Superintendent David O'Connor says that there “is only so
much the police can do and football authorities must do more
before things get worse. The current levels of punishments to
clubs, such as fines, are having no impact on the behaviour of
players or fans.
"We believe that docking points will deter future hooligan
behaviour at games.
"If one offender knows he could be the difference between his
team winning or losing the league, then he will behave.”
This argument would move responsibility away from the clubs
themselves and into the hands of the governing bodies. This is
not always effective. When Adam Goodes was racially abused
in 2015 by a young girl at an Australian Rules Football match in
Sydney, his reaction was justifiable. He alerted the stewards,
who ejected the offender. This clearly required no collective
punishment.
The subsequent grassroots reaction against Goodes caused
controversy throughout Australia, as large sections of the crowd
during each match would abuse and boo Goodes. The governing
body of the AFL has been heavily criticised for its ambivalent
reaction to the booing. Some of the board believed that the
booing was intrinsically racist, while others believe that it was
Goodes’s reaction that spurred the vile reaction. Either way, the
abuse continued until Goodes’ retirement and saw no credible
reactions from club or the AFL itself.
Clubs have a legitimate role to play in curbing fan
misbehaviours. This is slowly being legislated for, and is in
the interest of the clubs as they should be the focus of a
community. But administration should hold clubs accountable
as far as possible, because in some cases clubs cannot or will
not make appropriate changes. In the end, though, it is the fans
themselves who must change. Boorishness and aggression are
no longer acceptable in any society, and just because you are a
face in a crowd does not mean you get a two-hour break from
being a civilized human.
By Timothy Mottram