Pros and Cons - Debbie Newman, Ben Woolgar 2014

Sports teams punished for the behaviour of fans
Section F. Culture, education and sport

Many football matches have been marred in recent years by the violent or abusive behaviour of the fans. This has included mass rioting as in the Juventus v. Liverpool European Cup Final in 1985. More often the behaviour manifests itself in the throwing of objects at players, or insulting players because of their racial/ethnic background. Nowadays, CCTV may bring the perpetrators to justice, but there is a feeling that since the club is a community, the team should also face the consequences.

Pros

[1] There is a problem in some sports (especially soccer) in that racism and violence are rife. The crowd situation makes it hard to target individuals. This means there are few consequences for offending and if some perpetrators are caught, plenty are left to continue making trouble. It is essential to find a solution that tackles the group nature of the issue and this proposal does just that.

[2] This action would be effective. Fans love their teams and do not want them to suffer, therefore this will act as a powerful deterrent. This deterrent will act on an individual level, but also especially at a group level where peer pressure will act to stamp out anti-social behaviour to protect a team’s success. It also incentivises teams to promote the good behaviour of their fans. They know they need their fans to behave for their own self-interest and so will get involved more in policing and setting a good example.

[3] This policy carries a strong message that racism and violence are not acceptable and will not be tolerated. This is good for the sport and for the whole of society. Many young people are obsessive about sport and they can learn lessons through this arena about values and about the consequences of their actions.

[4] This punishment is consistent with other policies. For example, in Premiership football, a club can be penalised for its financial mismanagement, which is not the fault of the players. Games can also be held in private which affects all fans even if only a minority have engaged in hooliganism. This is accepted as fair, as a club is seen as more than just the players.

Cons

[1] If there is a problem with the behaviour of fans, then it is better to tackle the fans themselves. It is possible to identify and strongly punish offenders. If necessary, hold games with no spectators so that it is the fans who suffer and not the team.

[2] This policy will not be effective as a combination of alcohol and the high emotion of matches mean that bad behaviour is not a rational decision, but an out-of-control response to stimulus. Deterrents only work when people are thinking logically about consequences.

[3] Sport already works hard to send strong messages on values and behaviour; for example, through the UEFA Respect campaign. We should work with not against teams to stamp out problems.

[4] This is exceptionally unfair. A team cannot control their fans’ behaviour and yet their hard work is overturned by the actions of others. Sporting results should be based on sporting skill and nothing else. It is also open to abuse. How do you know if someone is really a fan or trying to sabotage a team?

Possible motions

This House would punish sports teams for the behaviour of their fans.

This House would penalise football clubs for the hooliganism of their fans.

Related topics

Zero tolerance

Sport, regretting the commercialisation of

Parents, responsibility for the criminal acts of their children