The football disruptor is causing headaches for authorities, not least around FC Groningen. The House of Representatives will consider curbing football violence on Wednesday. Do you do that with stricter punishments or more hospitality?
Is a football supporter, or whatever title he or she may bear, who sings along with chants and has been spotted on camera images punishable? Yes. But what if that same fan/hooligan/rioter says in the police interrogation that he is only miming? No, there will be no punishment.
How to deal with the football disruptor is what the House of Representatives is all about on Wednesday. From the Public Prosecution Service to the KNVB, from the Supporters’ Collective to the police chief – they can provide the input that politicians ultimately have to bring in.
What’s at stake? The safety in football stadiums and beyond, and the enjoyment of those thousands of supporters who come for a great game of football.
Football violence is back with a vengeance
Because it should not be called news that something is wrong. From chants to fireworks and attacking stewards and supporters of the opponent, it is more often about fighting outside the lines than on the field. FC Groningen almost seemed to perish.
For years, things seemed to be going well with football violence. The police were able to reduce their deployment because there were fewer and fewer incidents. But, researchers concluded in the report last September Learn from football riots, the violence shifted. From inside the stadiums to outside, from within sight to outside the cameras.
The corona years – and empty stadiums – disguised what we saw in the years that followed: football violence has never gone away. After the reopening of the stadium, the number of incidents increased. With fireworks, chants and throwing things on the playing field.
The researchers spoke of “an upswing” in violence. They see a few causes: there is ‘a new growth’, of young people who manifest themselves within supporter groups. Violence no longer only occurs on match days. It is more unpredictable and extreme. Moreover, the groups have become larger and therefore more powerful.
The researchers see ultras who “shit” about everything and everyone, the use of drugs and violence is encouraged, resulting in subversion. “Too many professional football organizations are often no longer in charge at home and are therefore no longer able to guarantee safety in the stadium.”
The authorities are looking at each other
The question now is: where does the responsibility lie? At the clubs, who are formally bosses in their own house. With the police, who also target the troublemakers outside football stadiums? It is known that ultras also show up at demonstrations, for example about corona policy or Zwarte Piet.
Or in politics? It provides laws and regulations regarding investigation, punishment and prevention. Most authorities point fingers at each other. Police chief Frank Paauw will argue in the conversation with the House of Representatives on Wednesday that clubs and municipalities are primarily responsible for “good organization and safe conduct” of matches. The KNVB and the municipalities must “enforce improvement measures through licenses and permits.”
What is it about?
What is this week all about?
The House of Representatives is looking for a way out of the increasing violence in football stadiums. But, what way out? This week they will collect the net from those involved.
Where are we?
In the home section, in the bus combination bus, on the supporters’ square – everywhere where real fans and society are confronted with misconduct by football disruptors.
Why do I need to know this?
The violence has a major impact on the capacity and effectiveness of the police, and has a major influence on the conduct of football matches, now and in the future.
Where else is this happening?
Where there is football, there is fighting. So not only in the Netherlands, but also in Poland, Italy, Turkey and England.
The KNVB then? It points to “joint efforts” that “all those involved” have made in recent years: better training for stewards, longer stadium bans, more camera surveillance, making face-covering clothing a punishable offense.
Now the KNVB wants to “impose more stadium bans based on criminal law”, “deployment of specialists around matches”, the establishment of “special football investigation teams”, a “rapid introduction and broad rollout of digital reporting obligations”. To this end, the association looks at politics, the police and the Public Prosecution Service.
‘Freedom for supporters, punishment for offenders’
The Public Prosecution Service wants to adjust the “scope” of the Criminal Code in order to have more options “to actually prosecute” in the event of open violence in association. The Public Prosecution Service points to those ‘playbackers’, whom it would like to prosecute, even if they declare that they ‘did not actually participate’.
The Public Prosecution Service advocates a more personal approach to prevent the “collective” from suffering, such as when matches are abandoned or when away fans are refused.
It is exactly how the Netherlands Supporters Collective sees it: Freedom for supporters, punishment for offenders is the name of their discussion paper that they will submit on Wednesday. The collective advocates a more hospitable approach in stadiums. Because, “freedom is also a good reason not to cross the line,” because otherwise you forfeit that freedom, they will say on Wednesday.
They specifically mention the strict separation between two groups of supporters that people are “no longer used to seeing supporters of another club ‘in the wild’.” The collective calls for “a different approach”, preventive rather than repression , hospitality over stricter punishments.
‘Reward good behavior’
What stands out about the report Learn from football riots is that they point to hospitality as one of the causes of the increasing violence. Hosting has “too often resulted in a lack of norms.” As the number of incidents dropped, clubs cut back on safety and focused on hospitality. “This has led to a certain neglect of security policy.”
What they are strongly in favor of: “Reward good behavior.” If things go wrong, ensure strict punishments, such as a ban on alcohol sales, nets for the stands or more security guards, the report says. By linking season tickets or entrance tickets to ID cards, they want to achieve faster detections in the event of disorder.
Where is the final word? For everyone who has to contribute to safety, the researchers say. So a mayor must decide when a match is played – and not a TV provider. “You can’t bargain with safety.”