Numbers of hooliganism were on the decline but there is a concern that the numbers maybe on the rise. The police are worried about the possible emergence of a new teenagers and a new generation of hooligans. They are worried about these teenagers because they are becoming smarter about how and where they are committing hooligan acts. These teenagers are focusing on smaller teams and smaller leagues who have less resources to prevent and punish those who commit these acts. Recently, almost half of the incidents of disorderly conduct in recent seasons in England, Whales, and Ireland involved youth.
Teams and leagues are worried that since the youth are becoming disruptive at a young age and they will be a problem for many many years to come. A trend in the wrong direction as far as teams and leagues are concerned.
They really need to jump the gun and punish these youngsters hard and quickly to set and example and try to control the situation as much as possible. The teams and leagues with less resources have to get creative to help prevent the trend that they are seeing.
If the trend is not changed now, it will be an extreme problem for decades to come. Get creative and find new ways to prevent these acts from happening. Hit them hard with penalties and make examples of the young now to make things safer and more enjoyable for millions of fans to come.
Friday, July 31, 2015
Hooligans in LA
After winning the NBA Finals in 2000, Laker fans wanted to celebrate their first championship in 12 years. They decided to take to the streets. Police on foot and horseback were called in to disperse rioters, using batons and rubber bullets because they were using bottles as projectiles towards police and lit fires on the streets using pedestrians cars and police vehicles. Vandals smashed shop windows, looted stores, and damaged cars at a car dealership nearby the Staples Center. 20,000 fans and members of both teams were trapped inside the Staples Center after the game for their safety.
"This takes away from what happened here tonight," Magic Johnson said of the riots.
"There was glory tonight and there was sadness," Mayor Richard Riodan added.
Are you kidding me? The franchise that has won the second most titles in NBA history has a fan base that acts similar to what Chicago Cubs fans will act like when they win a World Series (in the next few years hopefully). Act like you have been there before people. Be excited about the success of your team but do it responsibly. Peoples' lives were changed because of a basketball game. Childish fans committing childish acts ruin the experience for many people. Thankfully nobody died in the incident. It is barely understandable for fans to act this way if they have waited over an extended period of time for a championship but for this fan bases to commit these acts is unacceptable. The sad thing is, there were multiple reports of the same thing happening during the Lakers 2001, 2002, 2009, and 2010 championship performances.
"This takes away from what happened here tonight," Magic Johnson said of the riots.
"There was glory tonight and there was sadness," Mayor Richard Riodan added.
Are you kidding me? The franchise that has won the second most titles in NBA history has a fan base that acts similar to what Chicago Cubs fans will act like when they win a World Series (in the next few years hopefully). Act like you have been there before people. Be excited about the success of your team but do it responsibly. Peoples' lives were changed because of a basketball game. Childish fans committing childish acts ruin the experience for many people. Thankfully nobody died in the incident. It is barely understandable for fans to act this way if they have waited over an extended period of time for a championship but for this fan bases to commit these acts is unacceptable. The sad thing is, there were multiple reports of the same thing happening during the Lakers 2001, 2002, 2009, and 2010 championship performances.
Thursday, July 30, 2015
Deadliest top 10 hooliganism incidents
This table taken from idrottsforum.org shows how deadly something as great as sports can be. Most of these incidents are caused after a team wins and fans decide to go nuts. Stuff like this gives sports a bad name all over the world. There are thousands of people who have lost their lives to idiots (most likely drunk) who cannot control themselves.
Worst hooligan gangs
Ferencvaros, Hungary
This soccer hooligan gang is among the most violent in Eastern Europe. Their most hated enemies are the supporters of the rival city club Ujpest. Massive clashes of soccer thugs armed with baseball bats, chains or tasers are quite common before and after, sometimes even during these rivalry matches.
Juventus Torino, Italy
One of the most successful Italian soccer team has many fan, ultra and hooligan groups. A fan group called Drughi, for example, used to have over 10 000 members. As for the hooligan firms of Juventus, the Vikings are one of the most active.
Shakhtar Donetsk, Ukraine
Ukraine´s soccer clubs have been also facing significant hooliganism-related problems. Shakhtar is one of the most popular Ukraine´s team but its rowdies are no less famous. Firms like Weekend Team, The Club or Ultras 18 are feared by all other teams´ fans.
Universitario Lima, Peru
This team´s hooligans are the most violent in Peru and some of the most fearsome in whole South America. During Universitario´s matches, several away fans have been killed.
FC Zurich, Switzerland
Even Switzerland, the little elegant country has some hooligan issues. There are two irreconcilable rivals in the capital city – FC Zurich and Grasshoppers Zurich , whose matches are the so called “high risk games” requiring increased police presence in and around the stadium.
This soccer hooligan gang is among the most violent in Eastern Europe. Their most hated enemies are the supporters of the rival city club Ujpest. Massive clashes of soccer thugs armed with baseball bats, chains or tasers are quite common before and after, sometimes even during these rivalry matches.
Juventus Torino, Italy
One of the most successful Italian soccer team has many fan, ultra and hooligan groups. A fan group called Drughi, for example, used to have over 10 000 members. As for the hooligan firms of Juventus, the Vikings are one of the most active.
Shakhtar Donetsk, Ukraine
Ukraine´s soccer clubs have been also facing significant hooliganism-related problems. Shakhtar is one of the most popular Ukraine´s team but its rowdies are no less famous. Firms like Weekend Team, The Club or Ultras 18 are feared by all other teams´ fans.
Universitario Lima, Peru
This team´s hooligans are the most violent in Peru and some of the most fearsome in whole South America. During Universitario´s matches, several away fans have been killed.
FC Zurich, Switzerland
Even Switzerland, the little elegant country has some hooligan issues. There are two irreconcilable rivals in the capital city – FC Zurich and Grasshoppers Zurich , whose matches are the so called “high risk games” requiring increased police presence in and around the stadium.
Creating a European sports police force
Michel Platini has raised the spectre of the Heysel disaster and warned of a growing issue of hooligans and political fanatics taking control in football stadiums in Europe.
The UEFA president, who was on the pitch for Juventus at the European Cup final in Brussels 30 years ago when 39 people - mainly from the Italian club - died after rioting Liverpool fans charged Juve supporters causing a wall to collapse. Platini has called for tougher stadium bans and a European-wide sports police force.
Speaking at the UEFA Congress in Vienna, Platini said: 'Europe is seeing a rise in nationalism and extremism the like of which we have not witnessed for a very long time.
This insidious trend can also be observed in our stadiums, as football is a reflection of society. Given its popularity, our sport is a barometer for the ills of our continent. And that barometer is pointing to some worrying developments.
'I therefore renew my call for greater awareness of this issue among the public authorities, so that we can avoid reliving the dark days of a not-so-distant past - a past where hooligans and all manner of fanatics called the shots in certain European stadiums.
'In recent months, we have all been struck by certain images that I thought were a thing of the past. Some of us experienced that past at first hand. In my case, it was exactly 30 years ago ... Nobody wants a repeat of such events.
We need tougher stadium bans at European level and - I will say it again - the creation of a European sports police force.'
Platini also appeared to have a veiled dig at Sepp Blatter for deciding to run for a fifth term as FIFA president despite having said at the UEFA Congress four years ago that his fourth term would be his last. Blatter then described himself as the 'captain of the ship in troubled waters bringing in back on the right route'. The Italian, who is himself being re-elected unopposed for a third term, told UEFA delegates: 'I regard myself as a simple team-mate - at most your captain. But not the captain of a ship that is being battered by a storm.'
New measure to fight hooiganism
Authorities introduce a new measure to fight hooliganism. Hooligans being banned from football stadiums will now also be prevented from going to hockey matches. Despite a raft of anti-hooligan measures, violence in and around Swiss football and hockey stadiums remains a persistent problem.The reciprocal new measure will affect the 974 hooligans—645 football-related and 329 hockey-related—who are currently on the so-called “Hoogan” database, monitored by the Federal Police Office.
Fernando Martins, the head of security at Neuchâtel’s FC Xamax, felt the move was a “good idea”. “Often the problems in football and hockey are created by the same people,” he told swissinfo.ch. Martins said he was preparing for the start of the season on July 17 “with confidence”, in the knowledge that Xamax was a small club that rarely experienced violence inside its new stadium, equipped with modern video surveillance cameras.
“If we spot anyone [violent] they are reported immediately to the police who do their job,” he noted.
But not all Swiss football clubs are as trouble-free as Xamax. Whereas other European countries appear to have nipped the problem in the bud a long time ago, there have been serious incidents at regular intervals in Switzerland, involving many of the top clubs, despite tougher measures introduced by the Swiss Football League in 2006.
Last season was plagued by a number of incidents. In May FC Basel fans rioted at the Letzigrund stadium of main rival FC Zurich and fans of FC Sion and FC Young Boys clashed in the centre of Bern before and after the Swiss Cup Final. In November around 25 people were injured in hooligan violence during a match in Basel between the hometown club and Zurich.
“If we spot anyone [violent] they are reported immediately to the police who do their job,” he noted.
But not all Swiss football clubs are as trouble-free as Xamax. Whereas other European countries appear to have nipped the problem in the bud a long time ago, there have been serious incidents at regular intervals in Switzerland, involving many of the top clubs, despite tougher measures introduced by the Swiss Football League in 2006.
Last season was plagued by a number of incidents. In May FC Basel fans rioted at the Letzigrund stadium of main rival FC Zurich and fans of FC Sion and FC Young Boys clashed in the centre of Bern before and after the Swiss Cup Final. In November around 25 people were injured in hooligan violence during a match in Basel between the hometown club and Zurich.
Cycling crowd control
World cycling godfather Brian Cookson has warned Tour de France delinquents who spat and threw urine over Chris Froom their “hooliganism” must stop.
As further video footage emerged of Team Sky staff running the gauntlet of hostile fans, Cookson admitted he was worried about behaviour at the roadside spiralling out of control.
Cookson, president of world governing body UCI (Union Cycliste International), condemned the spate of incidents in which Va Va Froome was pelted with beer, sputum and urine on the way to his second Yellow Jersey triumph.
Froome's team-mate Richie Porte revealed he was also punched on stage 10 of Le Tour.
And new video evidence, filmed within a support vehicle on the way up the Alpe d'Huez last Saturday, shows the hostile attitude of fans in the prevailing anti-Team Sky agenda.
Cookson admitted he was disturbed by the catalogue of misbehaviour, saying: “I am worried about the beginnings of an element of hooliganism coming towards our sport which we have largely been able to avoid in recent years.
“I think Chris was subjected to a fairly nasty form of antagonism from a small number of people.
Steps to stop hooliganism
Below are some methods that were tried out to stamp out Hooliganism:
- Sophisticated Policing
- New and more surveillance and monitoring techniques
- Segregation of fans and increased Stewarding
- Restrictions on alcohol before and during games
If alcohol is restricted before and during football matches then the amount of vandilisim and abuse caused by hooligans will be minimised. Hooliganism does not apply to all individuals who consume alcohol but for those who do it makes there intentions a whole lot worse.
- Spotter system assisted by the local Police
- Hooligan Hotlines
Another scheme introduced by local Policing Authorities in the UK and England was known as the Hooligan Hotline. Whereby supporters who had witnessed hooliganism taking place would call the authorities and the perpetrator would be taken from the stadium.
Hooliganism in the US
There's all kinds of talk saying that there is only hooliganism in EU. What about all the riots, terrible fans, fist fights with players. There's not much soul-searching about sports hooliganism within the US - and what little there is tends to focus on the behaviour of African-American basketball players rather than predominantly white football fans. For no matter how many college games end in drunken mob violence (as many do), no matter how many American city centres see running battles between sports fans and riot police, the US sports media continues to present hooliganism as something utterly un-American.
When it comes to hooliganism, the US media really is the pot calling the kettle black. Riots at US sports events occur far more frequently than they do in the UK. And yet, in American popular culture, the "hooligan" is almost without exception portrayed as a soccer fan (and nearly always as English).
In 1997, Veterans stadium - the Eagles' old stomping ground - had a fully functional court inserted into its basement after a game against San Francisco saw an estimated 60 fights. The judge, who actually heard cases during the game, was seldom less than fully employed.
Whenever American football fans riot or ice hockey fans beat the hell out of one another, whenever the supporters of basketball or baseball teams go on a cop-taunting, car-torching, window-smashing victory spree, the violence is invariably treated as a local disturbance or an historical anomaly. And whenever college football fans engage in riotous behaviour that would be considered a national scandal if it happened in Britain (as they frequently do), no one seems terribly inclined to call it hooliganism.
When it comes to hooliganism, the US media really is the pot calling the kettle black. Riots at US sports events occur far more frequently than they do in the UK. And yet, in American popular culture, the "hooligan" is almost without exception portrayed as a soccer fan (and nearly always as English).
In 1997, Veterans stadium - the Eagles' old stomping ground - had a fully functional court inserted into its basement after a game against San Francisco saw an estimated 60 fights. The judge, who actually heard cases during the game, was seldom less than fully employed.
Whenever American football fans riot or ice hockey fans beat the hell out of one another, whenever the supporters of basketball or baseball teams go on a cop-taunting, car-torching, window-smashing victory spree, the violence is invariably treated as a local disturbance or an historical anomaly. And whenever college football fans engage in riotous behaviour that would be considered a national scandal if it happened in Britain (as they frequently do), no one seems terribly inclined to call it hooliganism.
Worst Football (EU) riots
Millwall vs. Luton — 1985
The most memorable (for the wrong reasons) FA Cup quarter final of all time. Fans clash before, during and after the game, tearing up seats and fighting with police.
Rangers vs. Zenit St. Petersburg — 2008
The 2008 UEFA Cup final, held at Manchester City’s Eastlands Stadium, was memorable for Zenit St Petersburg’s impressive win. But also for the behaviour of a number of Rangers fans outside the stadium. Trouble brewed as drunk fans rioted in the centre of Manchester, clashing with police and trashing cars and shops.
Sparta Prague vs. Dinamo Zagreb — 2008
A UEFA Cup tie between Czech side Sparta, and Croatian outfit Dinamo, descended into mayhem. 150 Croat supporters were detained as they rioted with police and home fans in the centre of Prague.
Dinamo Zagreb vs. Red Star Belgrade — 1990
“The match that started a war” according to some experts. Red Star’s “Delije” & Dinamo’s “Bad Blue Boys” clashed at Zagreb’s Maksimir stadium in 1990. This riot is famous for Dinamo’s 21 year old captain Zvonimir Boban, who reacted to seeing one of his side’s fans being beaten by a police officer by launching a roundhouse kick to free the fan. Madness.
Danubio vs. Nacional — 2008
The riot that stopped a season. Nuff said.
Liverpool vs. Juventus — 1985
The most high profile on our list, due to it’s significance, and the tragedy involved. 39 Juventus supporters were killed when a wall collapsed at Brussels’ Heysel Stadium ahead of the 1985 European Cup final.
Catania vs. Palermo — 2007
The Sicilian derby proved to be fatal, as 40 year old police officer Filippo Raciti was killed after a homemade bomb was thrown into his patrol car as rival fans of Catania & Palermo clashed before, during and after their side’s meeting in February 2007. Serie A football was suspended for three weeks as a consequence.
Wroclaw — 2003
Poland is a country plagued by football hooliganism, in 2003 the city of Wroclaw was the setting for an organised brawl between fans from Wroclaw, Poznan, Krakow, Gdynia & Lubin. One person died, whilst 229 were arrested.
FC Zurich vs. Grasshoppers — 2006
Switzerland is another country with football violence issues, here we see why the Zurich/Grasshoppers derby is not known as the friendly derby any longer.
Birmingham vs. Leeds — 1985
1985 was when football reached its lowest point in England. Not so much the standard of play, but the behaviour of its fans. At this second division game, Leeds & Birmingham clashed before, during and after the match, ripping St Andrews apart, and killing a fourteen year old fan when a wall collapsed on top of him. When analysing football’s problems, Lord Justice Popplewell described the scenes as “more like Agincourt than a football match”
Measures taken to prevent.
After World War II, attendance at the top 4 divisions of football in England were around 40 million. In 1985 problems with hooliganism caused attendance to fall dramatically. There was a huge concern and and after English teams were excluded from European competition for 5 years they decided to make some changes.
The football authorities introduced membership-only areas in grounds and the football in the community scheme was started to build bridges between the clubs and their local communities and to promote better behaviour by spectators. However, the Government’s plan was to introduce a 100% identity card system for all football fans wanting to attend matches. This was in the process of being developed when the Hillsborough Stadium Disaster occurred in April 1989; the ensuing Taylor Report persuaded the Government to shelve its plans for an ID card scheme due to concerns raised in the report about possible safety issues arising at the stadium turnstiles. Coming so soon after the Bradford Fire and the Heysel Disaster, the Hillsborough Disaster and the recommendations made in the Taylor Report changed the face of football grounds in this country.
The Government has established a UK Football Policing Unit which is jointly overseen by the Home Office and the Association of Chief Police Officers. It brings together various strands of the football policing infrastructure, including the Football Banning Orders Authority, the former NCIS football intelligence section, UK National Football Information Point and the ACPO football policing support team. The UK Football Policing Unit specialises in the monitoring of football related disorder and the collation of intelligence to help prevent it. Police forces across the country have developed a great deal of expertise in dealing with footballrelated disorder. The Association of Chief Police Officers has produced a best practice document with guidance on the policing of football matches. There are training courses for police match commanders and for football intelligence officers and there is an annual conference of match commanders which helps further to share best practice. Representatives of the football authorities meet regularly with ACPO and attend the annual conference.
The football authorities introduced membership-only areas in grounds and the football in the community scheme was started to build bridges between the clubs and their local communities and to promote better behaviour by spectators. However, the Government’s plan was to introduce a 100% identity card system for all football fans wanting to attend matches. This was in the process of being developed when the Hillsborough Stadium Disaster occurred in April 1989; the ensuing Taylor Report persuaded the Government to shelve its plans for an ID card scheme due to concerns raised in the report about possible safety issues arising at the stadium turnstiles. Coming so soon after the Bradford Fire and the Heysel Disaster, the Hillsborough Disaster and the recommendations made in the Taylor Report changed the face of football grounds in this country.
The Government has established a UK Football Policing Unit which is jointly overseen by the Home Office and the Association of Chief Police Officers. It brings together various strands of the football policing infrastructure, including the Football Banning Orders Authority, the former NCIS football intelligence section, UK National Football Information Point and the ACPO football policing support team. The UK Football Policing Unit specialises in the monitoring of football related disorder and the collation of intelligence to help prevent it. Police forces across the country have developed a great deal of expertise in dealing with footballrelated disorder. The Association of Chief Police Officers has produced a best practice document with guidance on the policing of football matches. There are training courses for police match commanders and for football intelligence officers and there is an annual conference of match commanders which helps further to share best practice. Representatives of the football authorities meet regularly with ACPO and attend the annual conference.
Hooliganism in European Football
Hooliganism in European Football
"Hooliganism" is the term used broadly to describe disorderly, aggressive and often violent behaviour perpetrated by spectators at sporting events. In the UK, hooliganism is almost exclusively confined to football.
"Hooliganism" is the term used broadly to describe disorderly, aggressive and often violent behaviour perpetrated by spectators at sporting events. In the UK, hooliganism is almost exclusively confined to football.
Disorderly behaviour has been common amongst football supporters since the birth of the sport, but it is only really since the 1960s that it began to be perceived as a serious problem.
Although football hooliganism only rose to widespread public attention in the 1960s, it had been with the sport since its earliest development. In the late 19th Century, concerns were frequently voiced about groups of "roughs" causing trouble at matches by attacking not only opposing supporters, but also players and referees. Many sociologists point to football's origins in working class Britain as a factor distinguishing it from the majority of sports popular today, and contributing to its links with aggressive and disorderly behaviour.
Some people claim that hooliganism "causes no harm" or is just fans letting off steam. Hooliganism has declined and has been steadily becoming something that players and organizations have been concerned about. The major incident that brings alarm is in April 2000 C. Loftus and K. Speight were stabbed to death before a UEFA Cup semi final game.
Hooliganism has resulted in many incidents and is a phenominon that has to be kept in check. You will notice that a lot of stadium are now keeping a closer eye on spectators as the enter the stadium.
Hooliganism in Golf
One sport where you will hardly ever find acts of hooliganism is the game of golf, unless of course, you turn on Happy Gilmore. The only time where acts of hooliganism might take place during gold is when fans take a picture with their cell phones, or a drunk fan yells out, or cheers rise above the sound of a polite "golf clap". Many people argue that golf needs more fan involvement, especially because of how slow and quiet of a game it is. How entertaining would it be see fans of Rory and Speith going back and forth about who's the better golfer. Debates about golf and their athletes don't even get heated. Golf just may be one of those sports where no forms of hooliganism will ever be present. It would be entertaining though!
Why Doesn't Soccer Hooliganism Exist in the USA?
Click here to read a interesting article on why Soccer Hooliganism doesn't exist in the USA. This is all opinion based, but there are significant factors that may contribute to the lack of hooliganism in American Soccer. After reading this article I definitely feel the third point made is the most significant, and that is patriotism. The fact that America above all else is is illustrated with the playing of the national anthem, plays a big role. Another factor that wasn't mentioned is the fact that soccer was not created in the United States, it's a sport that other countries had before the United State adopted it. It's homegrown in other countries. In Europe you grew up playing soccer and maybe basketball. In the United States people grew up playing baseball and eventually basketball if they even played sports. Obviously, American Football was adopted here so that's why I feel you see more acts of Hooliganism in the Unites States across those sports than in soccer.
"Dark Days" of football hooliganism
UEFA president Michel Platini has expressed much concern that hooliganism has many dark days ahead in Europe. The reason being is because of a rise in nationalism and extremism. The 1980s were the last times when hooligans and fans called the shots in European stadiums. Platini told UEFA's annual congress in Vienna that "Europe is seeing a rise in nationalism and extremism the like of which we have not witnessed for a very long time." Society and the issues it's having has been a direct correlation of the rise of hooliganism in Europe. Over the past couple years many cases of racism and crowd troubles have been reported, resulting in European governments becoming involved. Platini is really relying on the help of public authorities to so that they don't have to relive the actions that took place decades ago. Platini knows what he's talking about first hand as he was a key player for the football club Juventus during his playing days. He was a part of the outbreak in Heysel stadium where 39 Juventus fans were crushed to death because the mayhem in the crowd. Platini's plans for controlling the outbreak of hooliganism, "We need tougher stadium bans at European level...".
Take a quick look at the event that took place in the Heysel Stadium on May 29, 1985. Click here.
Take a quick look at the event that took place in the Heysel Stadium on May 29, 1985. Click here.
Malice in the Palace
Hooliganism may have never been on display more than it was on November 19, 2004 at the Palace of Auburn Hills in Michigan. On that particular day the historic brawl between the Detroit Pistons, the Indiana Pacers, and the fans took place. So much of the blame was placed on the athletes and the influence that hip-hop had on them, when in reality the hooligan activity of the crowd is what sent the brawl to the next level.
Often times alcohol plays such a huge part in fans and the crowd being erratic. Sporting events in Europe are doing everything that they can to monitor the alcohol consumption of fans at sporting events. Some stadiums even test for drugs and alcohol before entering the venue. More bans need to be placed on fans who decide throw things on the court, at the athletes, and at other fans. There's no place for anyone like that at a sporting, let them throw things at their own tv. I feel that there is some irony with the Malice in the Palace because at the time commissioner David Stern changed the NBA by fining athletes for "hard or unnecessary" fouls, mainly because of the "bad boys" Detroit Piston teams in the 1980s.
In case you can't recall the events that took place in the palace, check them out here.
Often times alcohol plays such a huge part in fans and the crowd being erratic. Sporting events in Europe are doing everything that they can to monitor the alcohol consumption of fans at sporting events. Some stadiums even test for drugs and alcohol before entering the venue. More bans need to be placed on fans who decide throw things on the court, at the athletes, and at other fans. There's no place for anyone like that at a sporting, let them throw things at their own tv. I feel that there is some irony with the Malice in the Palace because at the time commissioner David Stern changed the NBA by fining athletes for "hard or unnecessary" fouls, mainly because of the "bad boys" Detroit Piston teams in the 1980s.
In case you can't recall the events that took place in the palace, check them out here.
Hooliganism in Basketball
So hooliganism only takes place before, during, and after European soccer matches right? That's not the case at all. Hooliganism has expanded from Europe to the United States where hooligan activity has has shown it's ugly head in sports through all ages. An interesting story that I came across while researching hooliganism was the brawl that took place during a wheelchair basketball in Turkey. Yes, I said a wheelchair basketball game in Turkey. The interesting part is that the brawl had nothing to do with basketball, let alone wheelchair basketball. Galatasaray and Besiktas are 2 of Turkey's "big 3" sport clubs, alongside Fenerbache. The rivalries between the two clubs get very heated during soccer matches. So much so that fans of the "big 3" have been banned from attending away games between the clubs during soccer and basketball games. This regulation will more than likely be applied to wheelchair basketball after this event took place. Check out a short video here.
Hooliganism: Rugby vs. Soccer
It's no secret that European soccer fans have been the source of hooligan activity in Europe. Have you ever wondered why such a violent sport like rugby doesn't have more hooligan activity. It's very interesting because rugby fans, like many American sports, are integretaed in the crowd. One teams doesn't sit on side A while the opposing teams sits on side B, like in soccer. So why do more altercations and acts of hooliganism not occur? There are a few theories out there that answer this questions, one of which is the fact that the athletes on the rugby "pitch" are undoubtedly the toughest people in the stadium. Majority of the fans who watch Rugby have been involved in the sports at some point in their lives and understand how tough those athletes are. There's the fact that you can legally use violence to release frustration, and the fact that a couple plays later the opposing team can do the same. The officials of Rugby matches are often not held responsible for the result of a rugby match, often times the bigger, smarter, stronger, faster team will win.
On the flip side soccer is a sport where it is more of a "non-contact" sport, but enough contact is present to hurt people. This may make give off the impression that these athletes are not tough because they can hurt someone by kicking them or shoulder charging them from behind. Soccer is frustrating because of how the game is interrupted because of the smallest amount of contact and how the scoring system is so yes/no without any alternatives meaning that games can be won/lost on the tiniest of margins. Passion turns to rage in soccer and rightfully so because they cannot legally hit someone like in Rugby. The frustration on the field filters over the fans. Fans are denied the opportunity to see the athletes on a soccer field completely annihilate another individual, which may suggest that the fans think they are the toughest ones in the stadium and not the athletes. Often times the fans and the crowd will try and prove this theory to be true
On the flip side soccer is a sport where it is more of a "non-contact" sport, but enough contact is present to hurt people. This may make give off the impression that these athletes are not tough because they can hurt someone by kicking them or shoulder charging them from behind. Soccer is frustrating because of how the game is interrupted because of the smallest amount of contact and how the scoring system is so yes/no without any alternatives meaning that games can be won/lost on the tiniest of margins. Passion turns to rage in soccer and rightfully so because they cannot legally hit someone like in Rugby. The frustration on the field filters over the fans. Fans are denied the opportunity to see the athletes on a soccer field completely annihilate another individual, which may suggest that the fans think they are the toughest ones in the stadium and not the athletes. Often times the fans and the crowd will try and prove this theory to be true
Hooligans of the 1970s: Where are they now?
Hooliganism in Europe was at the height of its existence during the 1960s-1990s. During those decades the men who participated in hooligan acts seemed to be more focused on terrorizing cities and pubs more so than seeing their teams win. Because of the acts of violence, civil wars were declared on many of the notorious crews back then. The question is, what happened to so many of those men who lived for hooligan activity? Well, many of the men finally decided to grow up.
Two of the more infamous figures ( Annis Abraham and Gilroy Shaw) on the hooligan scene were asked to reflect on their time when they led hooligan crews. Annis Abraham was interviewed and asked if he had any regrets where he responded, "Not at all. I didn't mug anyone, I didn't sell drugs. Yes, it was a vice, my vice, but I only ever fought people who were like-minded." Annis experienced his first act of hooliganism at age 12 and it carried over to the next 25-30 years. Annis' whole perspective on things changed when he had his daughter in 2001, saying that it changed his life. He had more to live for than cheering for his football club.
He says that hooliganism had nothing to do with politics, just a grew of guys getting together to have drinks, wreaking havoc, and dressing smart. Fashion apparently had a lot to do with it. When asked why hooliganism doesn't happen now he responded "It doesn’t happen now because of the banning orders, passports being taken away. You used to get a ten-pound fine. Now you get brought before a judge in a civil case, you lose your job. You’ve got to be mad to be involved now.” Gilroy Shaw says that it had a lot to do with women, he states that "The women loved it. It was all part of the scene.” In addition to the women, it had a lot to do with territory according to Shaw.
Check out a couple links below with footage of these guys.
https://youtu.be/xe2_LlA6FEA
https://youtu.be/yl3DRh3dXBQ
Two of the more infamous figures ( Annis Abraham and Gilroy Shaw) on the hooligan scene were asked to reflect on their time when they led hooligan crews. Annis Abraham was interviewed and asked if he had any regrets where he responded, "Not at all. I didn't mug anyone, I didn't sell drugs. Yes, it was a vice, my vice, but I only ever fought people who were like-minded." Annis experienced his first act of hooliganism at age 12 and it carried over to the next 25-30 years. Annis' whole perspective on things changed when he had his daughter in 2001, saying that it changed his life. He had more to live for than cheering for his football club.
He says that hooliganism had nothing to do with politics, just a grew of guys getting together to have drinks, wreaking havoc, and dressing smart. Fashion apparently had a lot to do with it. When asked why hooliganism doesn't happen now he responded "It doesn’t happen now because of the banning orders, passports being taken away. You used to get a ten-pound fine. Now you get brought before a judge in a civil case, you lose your job. You’ve got to be mad to be involved now.” Gilroy Shaw says that it had a lot to do with women, he states that "The women loved it. It was all part of the scene.” In addition to the women, it had a lot to do with territory according to Shaw.
Check out a couple links below with footage of these guys.
https://youtu.be/xe2_LlA6FEA
https://youtu.be/yl3DRh3dXBQ
Tour de France: Hooliganism
One sport that you would never think would have issues with hooliganism is cycling. It seems as if the Tour de France are taking precautions to avoid any acts of hooliganism. There have been issues recently of people vandalizing cars, spitting, and urinating on the athletes as they pass certain points. In a sport where hooliganism didn't exist, the cyclist are now more worried than ever. There has become an increasing fear of people running alongside the riders and the acts of violence they may commit in the process. The riders are the ones who fear that hooliganism may spike, the officials of the UCI (Union Cycliste Internationale) are not sharing the concern. The UCI leader from Great Britain had some strong remarks about this issue stating that it was not his job "to speak up for or defend any individual rider or any individual team."
Find more information about the article here.
Find more information about the article here.
Does Europe really have a bigger hooligan problem than America?
This article by Steven Wells is a very interesting article about Hooliganism in the United States. When you think of Hooliganism one tends to turn their focus to Europe and European soccer. It's no secret that European soccer fans are very passionate about their sports and their teams, however, often times that passion turns into violence. There are cases of hooliganism across other sports in Europe mainly being basketball. Other than that, there aren't too many cases where you hear about things like that in Europe. America, however, is a different story.
Here in the U.S. acts of hooliganism are put on display from youth all the through professional sports. There are many cases of parents getting into altercations with officials, other fans, and coaches at youth league events. Of late there have been issues with football fans outside stadiums violently assaulting other individuals because they don't cheer for the same team. This article refers to many instances that took place in 2008, to let you know that hooliganism has been a problem and will continue to be a problem in the future.
Here in the U.S. acts of hooliganism are put on display from youth all the through professional sports. There are many cases of parents getting into altercations with officials, other fans, and coaches at youth league events. Of late there have been issues with football fans outside stadiums violently assaulting other individuals because they don't cheer for the same team. This article refers to many instances that took place in 2008, to let you know that hooliganism has been a problem and will continue to be a problem in the future.
Wednesday, July 29, 2015
Super Interesting Article on Hooliganism and its Effects on Club Performance
Stefan Szymanski is one of the co-authors of Soccernomics - a brilliant book if you've not read it - and he has an article up on soccernomics-agency.com on the effects of hooliganism on club performance.
I'll spare you a recounting of the methodology and findings as you can read the article here, but Szymanski summarizes the study's findings thusly:
Our results show that in the earlier period hooliganism did have the predicted effects, but in the more recent periods these effects seem to have disappeared. We think this makes sense. From the perspective of crowd control, the clubs and police have intervened more systematically to snuff out incidents as they start, and the advent of all seater stadiums and new investments, including CCTV, have made the job easier. On the demand side, rising ticket prices have priced out a lot of young men who were predominantly (but not exclusively) associated with the unrest. An aging fan profile, and the desire the bring young children to games, has changed the nature of fandom to some extent. As the phenomenon has has diminished, so has its potential to impact club performance.
Of note is Szymanski's suggestion that hooliganism, as suggested in my previous post, is less an independent force acting on society and sporting events in particular, and more a reflection of the societal norms that accompany sports culture. As those attending sporting events have changed demographically and global coverage and sponsorship rights have become more lucrative, hooliganism and those participating in it have largely left the stadia and been consigned to the fringes of sports culture.
I'll spare you a recounting of the methodology and findings as you can read the article here, but Szymanski summarizes the study's findings thusly:
Our results show that in the earlier period hooliganism did have the predicted effects, but in the more recent periods these effects seem to have disappeared. We think this makes sense. From the perspective of crowd control, the clubs and police have intervened more systematically to snuff out incidents as they start, and the advent of all seater stadiums and new investments, including CCTV, have made the job easier. On the demand side, rising ticket prices have priced out a lot of young men who were predominantly (but not exclusively) associated with the unrest. An aging fan profile, and the desire the bring young children to games, has changed the nature of fandom to some extent. As the phenomenon has has diminished, so has its potential to impact club performance.
Of note is Szymanski's suggestion that hooliganism, as suggested in my previous post, is less an independent force acting on society and sporting events in particular, and more a reflection of the societal norms that accompany sports culture. As those attending sporting events have changed demographically and global coverage and sponsorship rights have become more lucrative, hooliganism and those participating in it have largely left the stadia and been consigned to the fringes of sports culture.
Hooliganism as a Reflection of Societal Tension
A lot has been written and opined about how hooliganism affects society as if it were an organic force exiting independently of the societies in which it occurs. Most of the time, these editorials focus on the degrading effects of violence in sport and the damage that said violence does to a society.
However, I would argue that rather than being an actor upon society, hooliganism and violence in sport are symptoms of that society's dysfunction; a reflection of the tensions and frailties therein. Happy, stable, well-adjusted, cared for members of society don't pick up brick bats and knives and fight in the streets after soccer matches. It's only when a person somehow feels left out of the conversation or attacked by it that they seek the sort of release and belonging that tribal violence provides.
If you look at the most famous and violent soccer firms, there is always a political, economic, or sectarian binary at play. If both Rangers and Celtic were Protestant clubs, would they have such a violent past? Everton and Liverpool are famous clubs from the same city in England and they are massive rivals, but their rivalry carries with it almost none of the vitriol of that accompanies, for instance, the rivalry between Boca Juniors and River Plate. With the Liverpool/Everton derby, supporters from both clubs come from the same town, often the same family, and share near identical demographics socially and economically. They support Liverpool and Everton, but first and foremost they're all Liverpudlians. Boca v River is a very much a poor v rich binary. Real Madrid v Barcelona is very much a political/regional binary.
Therefore, it seems logical to suggest that rather than hooliganism having an effect on society, society affects hooliganism. As long as there are people who feel outside of the system or other than their rivals, and the opportunity exists to express that tension, hooliganism will exist.
However, I would argue that rather than being an actor upon society, hooliganism and violence in sport are symptoms of that society's dysfunction; a reflection of the tensions and frailties therein. Happy, stable, well-adjusted, cared for members of society don't pick up brick bats and knives and fight in the streets after soccer matches. It's only when a person somehow feels left out of the conversation or attacked by it that they seek the sort of release and belonging that tribal violence provides.
If you look at the most famous and violent soccer firms, there is always a political, economic, or sectarian binary at play. If both Rangers and Celtic were Protestant clubs, would they have such a violent past? Everton and Liverpool are famous clubs from the same city in England and they are massive rivals, but their rivalry carries with it almost none of the vitriol of that accompanies, for instance, the rivalry between Boca Juniors and River Plate. With the Liverpool/Everton derby, supporters from both clubs come from the same town, often the same family, and share near identical demographics socially and economically. They support Liverpool and Everton, but first and foremost they're all Liverpudlians. Boca v River is a very much a poor v rich binary. Real Madrid v Barcelona is very much a political/regional binary.
Therefore, it seems logical to suggest that rather than hooliganism having an effect on society, society affects hooliganism. As long as there are people who feel outside of the system or other than their rivals, and the opportunity exists to express that tension, hooliganism will exist.
Eric Dunning on Hooliganism and Sport
This is a great read by Eric Dunning on defining the forces, both internal and external, of hooliganism in sports. His article gives a rough framework of the motivations of hooligans (excitement, arousal, respect, etc) as well as the forces acting upon societies that produce the sort of tribal loyalties that become associated with violence in sport (political, social, sectarian, etc).
Essentially what it boils down to is that an exciting, anti-social outlet presents itself to (mostly) young men who can act upon that impulse in opposition to the societal, political, and sectarian forces that they may feel have placed them in a position of disenfranchisement, frustration, or persecution. Pretty powerful cocktail, that.
Essentially what it boils down to is that an exciting, anti-social outlet presents itself to (mostly) young men who can act upon that impulse in opposition to the societal, political, and sectarian forces that they may feel have placed them in a position of disenfranchisement, frustration, or persecution. Pretty powerful cocktail, that.
Why Aren't Championship Riots In the United States and Canada Attributed to Sports Hooliganism?
Everyone has seen the images of rioting in Canada and the United States after a city's team has won (or lost) a championship in any given sport. Most recently, Vancouver experienced massive rioting following the Vancouver Canucks' loss to the Boston Bruins in the 2011 Stanley Cup Final. And in 2014, San Francisco experienced significant rioting after the Giants won the World Series against the Kansas City Royals.
In the media however, these incidents are referred to as "civil unrest" and "riots" rather than sports hooliganism. It's strange that the sporting event that has incited the violence is often separated, at least in terms of causality, from the violent incident. The two are inextricably linked, but in our country - and I'm including Canada here (sorry, Canada!) - we still insist that we do not have a sports hooliganism problem. We have "youthful miscreants" and "violent opportunists", but we don't have hooligans. It's not even a semantic difference as most people would not attribute the sports violence in our countries to hooligans. They are, at least to us, two different things. Never mind that images of sports fans brawling with police in San Francisco are nearly identical to images of sports fans brawling with police in Warsaw, we just don't see ourselves as a society having the same sort of issue with sports and violence that exists in other parts of the world. Is it the sport? Are hooligans, traditionally defined, only a soccer thing?
As I wrote in a previous post, maybe the difference is the social, economic, and political loyalties that tend to accompany soccer violence in Europe and other parts of the world. If that's the case though, couldn't the Montreal Canadiens, as essentially Quebec's national team, fit into that definition? Perhaps the issue is with denial more than it is with any substantive difference between the two cultures of sports violence.
In the media however, these incidents are referred to as "civil unrest" and "riots" rather than sports hooliganism. It's strange that the sporting event that has incited the violence is often separated, at least in terms of causality, from the violent incident. The two are inextricably linked, but in our country - and I'm including Canada here (sorry, Canada!) - we still insist that we do not have a sports hooliganism problem. We have "youthful miscreants" and "violent opportunists", but we don't have hooligans. It's not even a semantic difference as most people would not attribute the sports violence in our countries to hooligans. They are, at least to us, two different things. Never mind that images of sports fans brawling with police in San Francisco are nearly identical to images of sports fans brawling with police in Warsaw, we just don't see ourselves as a society having the same sort of issue with sports and violence that exists in other parts of the world. Is it the sport? Are hooligans, traditionally defined, only a soccer thing?
As I wrote in a previous post, maybe the difference is the social, economic, and political loyalties that tend to accompany soccer violence in Europe and other parts of the world. If that's the case though, couldn't the Montreal Canadiens, as essentially Quebec's national team, fit into that definition? Perhaps the issue is with denial more than it is with any substantive difference between the two cultures of sports violence.
Professional Sports Teams as Business and as Club and Their Relation to Sports Violence
Picking up a theme from an earlier post regarding hooliganism and violence in sports in the United States when compared to a the same issue in sports, specifically soccer, in European countries, there are some notable differences that make US sports violence a little more individualistic.
For one thing, there's a difference in sporting culture. The most popular sports in the United States are often really only wildly popular in the United States. Baseball is a significant outlier here, but even that sport's popularity is on the wane in the United States. In Europe, and the rest of the world, soccer is the sport. This only serves to further nationalize the subset of fanatical soccer fans who engage in hooligan acts in the first place.
There's also the issue of geography. If we take the United Kingdom, and specifically England, as the model, every part of the country is accessible within a day using only ground transportation. This makes traveling to an away match very doable for almost every fan, including the most diehard fans. In the United States, it's very unlikely that the average Raiders fan will be able to travel to Tampa Bay for instance for a Sunday afternoon kick off. The folks who can make that trip are likely from a socioeconomic background not typically inclined to engage in hooligan behavior.
Additionally, and most importantly, there does not exist in the United States the kind of loyalty and identity link with sports franchises that exists in Europe. Every town, no matter how small, has a local club that is run as a club and not a business as is the case in the United States. Also, many clubs have historical social and/or political affiliations that pit groups of people who were already opposed to one another in further conflict. For instance, Barcelona is essentially the Catalan national team and support for that club carries with it all of the political and social injustices associated with Franco's rule of Spain. His club, Real Madrid, was and is supported by Spanish nationalists. There are political and social forces at work in that rivalry that have no equivalent in the United States. In Italy, Lazio is the club of the far rightwing. In Argentina, Boca Juniors is the club of the working class and River Plate is the club of the bourgeoisie.
Those sorts of characterizations occur over and over again at clubs throughout the soccer universe and really have no equal in the American sporting landscape. That's not to say we don't have a problem with sports and violence in this country, but that said violence doesn't occur with the same political, racial, and social vitriol that it does in countries where the economic, social, and political history is tied inextricably to individual clubs.
For one thing, there's a difference in sporting culture. The most popular sports in the United States are often really only wildly popular in the United States. Baseball is a significant outlier here, but even that sport's popularity is on the wane in the United States. In Europe, and the rest of the world, soccer is the sport. This only serves to further nationalize the subset of fanatical soccer fans who engage in hooligan acts in the first place.
There's also the issue of geography. If we take the United Kingdom, and specifically England, as the model, every part of the country is accessible within a day using only ground transportation. This makes traveling to an away match very doable for almost every fan, including the most diehard fans. In the United States, it's very unlikely that the average Raiders fan will be able to travel to Tampa Bay for instance for a Sunday afternoon kick off. The folks who can make that trip are likely from a socioeconomic background not typically inclined to engage in hooligan behavior.
Additionally, and most importantly, there does not exist in the United States the kind of loyalty and identity link with sports franchises that exists in Europe. Every town, no matter how small, has a local club that is run as a club and not a business as is the case in the United States. Also, many clubs have historical social and/or political affiliations that pit groups of people who were already opposed to one another in further conflict. For instance, Barcelona is essentially the Catalan national team and support for that club carries with it all of the political and social injustices associated with Franco's rule of Spain. His club, Real Madrid, was and is supported by Spanish nationalists. There are political and social forces at work in that rivalry that have no equivalent in the United States. In Italy, Lazio is the club of the far rightwing. In Argentina, Boca Juniors is the club of the working class and River Plate is the club of the bourgeoisie.
Those sorts of characterizations occur over and over again at clubs throughout the soccer universe and really have no equal in the American sporting landscape. That's not to say we don't have a problem with sports and violence in this country, but that said violence doesn't occur with the same political, racial, and social vitriol that it does in countries where the economic, social, and political history is tied inextricably to individual clubs.
Social media and hooliganism
Social media is seeming to be taking over the world in many way entertainment, sports, politics, etc. Any and everything has made its way to social media, and hooliganism is no exception. Hooliganism has started to trend towards social media because the old ways of hooliganism are extremely frowned upon. The old ways of violence, fights, and riots have since died down and those extreme football (soccer) fans have since taken to social media.
Social media is now seen as an outlet, because the old ways are seen as an embarrassment. Social media is a great way to public shame individuals of any sport, business, etc. Social media sites like twitter tend to give "a voice to the voiceless, both a wonderful and damaging consequence" (Brosnan, 2015). When it comes to sports football fans are the most likely to "troll and "banter" via social media by mocking, condemning, and harassing football fans. It's viewed as a source of amusement, an outlet, and a distraction which it seems is what football fans wanted all along when resorting to hooliganism.
In 2013-2014 50% of all complaints about football/soccer related hate crimes were related to social media abuse (Brosnan, 2015). Mario Balotelli (a professional soccer player) received 8,000 abusive tweets, 4,000 of which were racist related during the 2014 season (Brosnan, 2015). Social media hooliganism has become such an issue that organizations are now hiring full time employees to take action against offensive posts/tweets. Physically hooliganism may have been taken out of sports but the mental aspect is still present.
Social media is now seen as an outlet, because the old ways are seen as an embarrassment. Social media is a great way to public shame individuals of any sport, business, etc. Social media sites like twitter tend to give "a voice to the voiceless, both a wonderful and damaging consequence" (Brosnan, 2015). When it comes to sports football fans are the most likely to "troll and "banter" via social media by mocking, condemning, and harassing football fans. It's viewed as a source of amusement, an outlet, and a distraction which it seems is what football fans wanted all along when resorting to hooliganism.
In 2013-2014 50% of all complaints about football/soccer related hate crimes were related to social media abuse (Brosnan, 2015). Mario Balotelli (a professional soccer player) received 8,000 abusive tweets, 4,000 of which were racist related during the 2014 season (Brosnan, 2015). Social media hooliganism has become such an issue that organizations are now hiring full time employees to take action against offensive posts/tweets. Physically hooliganism may have been taken out of sports but the mental aspect is still present.
Sports Hooliganism in the United States: It's Not New.
I remember growing up listening to my dad tell me a story about a Baylor v Texas A&M basketball game he went to in Waco in the early 1970s. Long story short, a brawl broke out that put the Malice in the Palace to shame. Fans, players, coaches, chairs...bedlam. In 1929, Baylor students at a football game apparently beat a Texas A&M corps member to death.
The two schools involved are the same mostly because I went to Baylor and I had occasion to hear these stories. Common denominator? No TV cameras or internet. I was reminded again of these stories the other day when I was reading an article about Negro Baseball League legend Oscar Charleston who played for the Indianapolis ABCs and other Negro League teams. At one point in the article, an incident incited by Charleston was recounted wherein an entire town essentially devolved into a riotous maelstrom after a brawl on the field was started. I think the year was also 1929, but I'm probably wrong.
If any of these three incidents, and these are by no means the only three or even the three worst, occurred today there would be 24 hour news coverage and countless breathless editorials about the degradation of American society and the rising problem of sports violence. As was mentioned in a previous post, we love sports because they give us a common cause to love and support. In that way, supporting a sports team is a sort of mini-nationalism that appeals to our communal pride. And just like real nationalism, wars and violence often follow. None of this is new, it's just much more easily consumed.
The two schools involved are the same mostly because I went to Baylor and I had occasion to hear these stories. Common denominator? No TV cameras or internet. I was reminded again of these stories the other day when I was reading an article about Negro Baseball League legend Oscar Charleston who played for the Indianapolis ABCs and other Negro League teams. At one point in the article, an incident incited by Charleston was recounted wherein an entire town essentially devolved into a riotous maelstrom after a brawl on the field was started. I think the year was also 1929, but I'm probably wrong.
If any of these three incidents, and these are by no means the only three or even the three worst, occurred today there would be 24 hour news coverage and countless breathless editorials about the degradation of American society and the rising problem of sports violence. As was mentioned in a previous post, we love sports because they give us a common cause to love and support. In that way, supporting a sports team is a sort of mini-nationalism that appeals to our communal pride. And just like real nationalism, wars and violence often follow. None of this is new, it's just much more easily consumed.
Who Has A Hooligan Problem? (*nudge, nudge*, United States)
Another good one from The Guardian here.
In the United States we tend not to think of ourselves as having a sports hooliganism problem. We also tend to sensationalize what hooliganism looks like, or at least the frequency of hooligan related events, in other parts of the world. The above linked article from The Guardian turns the table on American readers and presents an alarming list of sports related incidents of violence that had occurred in the months before the article's publication.
Full disclosure: I found myself wanting to see a difference between many of the acts of violence listed in the article given the relatively small numbers involved compared to the traditional dust up we all envision when thinking about European soccer violence. The good news is there is a difference. The bad news is that it arguably makes our country's relationship with sports and violence much, much worse than the relationship with sports and violence that exists in Europe.
With concern to football hooliganism as it exists in Europe, we're usually talking about large crowds, essentially gangs, that exist on the fanatical end of the sport fan's spectrum. We've got gangs here too, it's just that our gangs tend not to attach themselves to professional sports franchises. The violence that is listed in The Guardian article is of that hard-to-explain, 1v1, what-the-hell were you thinking variety and much of it centers around what we see as traditional, peaceable American sports like baseball...and youth sports. We tend to separate grotesque acts of violence from the sporting event at which they occur. One Little League dad beats another nearly to death at a game. Is it sports related violence? Or just one maladjusted miscreant snapping at an odd time and place? If we don't have a problem with sports and violence in this country, it has mostly to do with how we define the violence and less to do with the fact that the problem doesn't exist.
In the United States we tend not to think of ourselves as having a sports hooliganism problem. We also tend to sensationalize what hooliganism looks like, or at least the frequency of hooligan related events, in other parts of the world. The above linked article from The Guardian turns the table on American readers and presents an alarming list of sports related incidents of violence that had occurred in the months before the article's publication.
Full disclosure: I found myself wanting to see a difference between many of the acts of violence listed in the article given the relatively small numbers involved compared to the traditional dust up we all envision when thinking about European soccer violence. The good news is there is a difference. The bad news is that it arguably makes our country's relationship with sports and violence much, much worse than the relationship with sports and violence that exists in Europe.
With concern to football hooliganism as it exists in Europe, we're usually talking about large crowds, essentially gangs, that exist on the fanatical end of the sport fan's spectrum. We've got gangs here too, it's just that our gangs tend not to attach themselves to professional sports franchises. The violence that is listed in The Guardian article is of that hard-to-explain, 1v1, what-the-hell were you thinking variety and much of it centers around what we see as traditional, peaceable American sports like baseball...and youth sports. We tend to separate grotesque acts of violence from the sporting event at which they occur. One Little League dad beats another nearly to death at a game. Is it sports related violence? Or just one maladjusted miscreant snapping at an odd time and place? If we don't have a problem with sports and violence in this country, it has mostly to do with how we define the violence and less to do with the fact that the problem doesn't exist.
Coke and the Internet: A Modern Day Hooligan's Tools
Read this article from The Guardian.
It's a somewhat panicked take on the state of the football hooligan in Great Britain, but it does touch a bit on the actual hooligans themselves and why they do what they do. The interesting thing about the article is how almost all of the violence surrounding "football hooligans" takes place well away from football grounds these days. The stepped up police presence and intelligence initiatives along with technology such as CCTV has led rival fan groups to arrange fights in remote areas well before and/or after an actual match. The article also touches on the use of technology by hooligan groups to arrange said fights and exchange intelligence about the police.
Oh, and there's quite a bit about cocaine too. Apparently that's the thing now. What happened to booze?
It's a somewhat panicked take on the state of the football hooligan in Great Britain, but it does touch a bit on the actual hooligans themselves and why they do what they do. The interesting thing about the article is how almost all of the violence surrounding "football hooligans" takes place well away from football grounds these days. The stepped up police presence and intelligence initiatives along with technology such as CCTV has led rival fan groups to arrange fights in remote areas well before and/or after an actual match. The article also touches on the use of technology by hooligan groups to arrange said fights and exchange intelligence about the police.
Oh, and there's quite a bit about cocaine too. Apparently that's the thing now. What happened to booze?
Review: Among The Thugs
Bill Buford is an American journalist who spent who lived in the UK in the 1980s. According to Wikipedia, he became interested in soccer hooligans in 1982 when he witnessed a group of Cardiff supporters commandeer a train on the way home from a match. He spent the following years essentially becoming a football hooligan. Is there such a thing as "method journalism"?!
The book that came out of his experience is called Among the Thugs: The Experience, and the Seduction, of Crowd Violence. I read this book for the first time a number of years ago and it was like watching a car accident. It's a book you almost feel guilty for wanting to devour. It's violent and horrifying and fascinating.
The interesting thing about the book, and this clearly wasn't Buford's intention when he embarked upon writing it, is that it's become something of a must-read in sociology and crowd violence circles. Many of the reasons traditionally given to the question, "Why do crowds turn violent?" are essentially debunked by Buford. For instance, there has long been the notion that a single charismatic leader can incite an otherwise pacific crowd to violence. This is simply not the experience of Buford in his years among the thugs. He writes numerous times in the book about the collective, hard-to-define moment when the crowd - almost as a hive mind - decides to set things off.
In addition, Buford characterizes violence as this particular largely young, largely male group's anti-social behavior; their rebellion agains the status quo. In the same way other peer groups drink too much or use recreational drugs or engage in other high risk rebellions, those involved in hooligan violence see the violence as the drug. During the week, most of them lead very normal lives. The scary part is how honest Buford is about how he comes to love the violence he is witnessing and eventually participating in.
Read it.
The book that came out of his experience is called Among the Thugs: The Experience, and the Seduction, of Crowd Violence. I read this book for the first time a number of years ago and it was like watching a car accident. It's a book you almost feel guilty for wanting to devour. It's violent and horrifying and fascinating.
The interesting thing about the book, and this clearly wasn't Buford's intention when he embarked upon writing it, is that it's become something of a must-read in sociology and crowd violence circles. Many of the reasons traditionally given to the question, "Why do crowds turn violent?" are essentially debunked by Buford. For instance, there has long been the notion that a single charismatic leader can incite an otherwise pacific crowd to violence. This is simply not the experience of Buford in his years among the thugs. He writes numerous times in the book about the collective, hard-to-define moment when the crowd - almost as a hive mind - decides to set things off.
In addition, Buford characterizes violence as this particular largely young, largely male group's anti-social behavior; their rebellion agains the status quo. In the same way other peer groups drink too much or use recreational drugs or engage in other high risk rebellions, those involved in hooligan violence see the violence as the drug. During the week, most of them lead very normal lives. The scary part is how honest Buford is about how he comes to love the violence he is witnessing and eventually participating in.
Read it.
Some Thoughts on Hooliganism
In the 1980s, Margaret Thatcher used hooliganism incidents as evidence of her belief - and to service her political agenda - that modern times were witnessing the moral degradation of the United Kingdom and that real life "A Clockwork Orange" gangs of amoral youths were literal wolves at the door of civilized society. Given some of the high profile hooligan incidents European - and in particular English - soccer experienced in those years, it's understandable how one might adhere to this narrative.
However, if hooliganism in sport is to be relied upon as the barometer for societal degradation, then we hit rock bottom years ago...like thousands of years ago. As long as there have been spectator sports, there has been violence among spectators at sporting events. Part of the reason we love sport is the sense of identity and tribalism that comes from supporting a team, its culture, and its history with a boisterous rabble that has, even momentarily, become comprised of your closest friends. It's like mini-nationalism, and whereas the majority of any given country's citizens only want peace, the armies and invasions and wars that arise from nationalistic fervor are present in sport as well.
The interesting thing about hooliganism is that hooligans don't define themselves as such. Authorities and governing bodies classify these groups and individuals as drunken, ill-behaved buffoons with nihilism their only motivation, but hooligans themselves would more than likely define their actions and motivations in the language of nationalism.
It stands to reason, therefore, that any serious discussion regarding hooliganism in sport would seek to identify the actions and motivations of hooligan groups from the perspective of said groups rather than rely on the same old narrative of block-headed drunks destroying things for destruction's sake.
However, if hooliganism in sport is to be relied upon as the barometer for societal degradation, then we hit rock bottom years ago...like thousands of years ago. As long as there have been spectator sports, there has been violence among spectators at sporting events. Part of the reason we love sport is the sense of identity and tribalism that comes from supporting a team, its culture, and its history with a boisterous rabble that has, even momentarily, become comprised of your closest friends. It's like mini-nationalism, and whereas the majority of any given country's citizens only want peace, the armies and invasions and wars that arise from nationalistic fervor are present in sport as well.
The interesting thing about hooliganism is that hooligans don't define themselves as such. Authorities and governing bodies classify these groups and individuals as drunken, ill-behaved buffoons with nihilism their only motivation, but hooligans themselves would more than likely define their actions and motivations in the language of nationalism.
It stands to reason, therefore, that any serious discussion regarding hooliganism in sport would seek to identify the actions and motivations of hooligan groups from the perspective of said groups rather than rely on the same old narrative of block-headed drunks destroying things for destruction's sake.
Tuesday, July 28, 2015
The Numbers Behind Hooliganism
In the craziness that is hooliganism, there are some positives to take away from the subject in recent years. If you are looking at it from a statistical stand point, hooliganism is on the decline. As I have expressed in previous post, most of Europe has established policies against hooliganism. Although these numbers are from the 2010-2011, they are still encouraging.
- In the 2010-2011 soccer season, total attendance rose to over 37 million. The number of arrest is about 0.01% of those people. 1 out of every 12,249 fans were arrested for hooliganism.
This is great if you are looking at it just from a numbers stand point. But you have to remember of other severe cases of hooliganism where no or few arrest were made during an altercation. An American example of this would be one person getting arrested every Indiana Pacers game last season.
- The total number of arrest in England and Whales during the 2010-2011 season were down by 9% compared to the 2009-2010 numbers.
This is key because these are the two areas that are best known for hooligans getting together and causing mass mayhem. If the numbers are decreasing in the worst parts of Europe then numbers can only be getting better in other areas of Europe.
- 92% of those who were banned from attending games were no longer posing a risk while attending a soccer game after their banning orders became expired.
Those who were acting like hooligans have learned their lesson and are behaving in an acceptable manner now. Missing time from attending the games has caused most hooligans to think before they act now.
I believe that these policies and a new generation of people are the cause of this great trend. The new banning orders and policies put into place are really having an impact on how those who attend a soccer game act before, during, and after the game. They are fans and fans cannot truly enjoy their favorite sport and team if they cannot attend the games. It is impossible to attend games in you are in jail or have a ban where you can't walk into a stadium to watch a game. That has obviously come to mind now when people are making decisions at soccer games.
Another factor is it is a different generation of fans. Those who were hooligans mid to late 1900s are old people now and cannot act the way they once did. Could you imagine if these firms still had some of these guys in the group? Nothing like watching 60 and 70 year olds going at one another fighting. (I just visualized that in my head and that is hilarious) It is a new generation where violence isn't as big as it once was. Kids and young adults are not as ruthless as they once was which has helped the trend decrease as much as it has.
Could the number of arrest and bans be higher than they were? Sure. But the environment in and around soccer games are becoming a lot safer and more enjoyable to fans in most of Europe. The decrease in numbers is a positive but there is still a lot of work to do. It is just good to see that some of the precautions are finally paying off.
- In the 2010-2011 soccer season, total attendance rose to over 37 million. The number of arrest is about 0.01% of those people. 1 out of every 12,249 fans were arrested for hooliganism.
This is great if you are looking at it just from a numbers stand point. But you have to remember of other severe cases of hooliganism where no or few arrest were made during an altercation. An American example of this would be one person getting arrested every Indiana Pacers game last season.
- The total number of arrest in England and Whales during the 2010-2011 season were down by 9% compared to the 2009-2010 numbers.
This is key because these are the two areas that are best known for hooligans getting together and causing mass mayhem. If the numbers are decreasing in the worst parts of Europe then numbers can only be getting better in other areas of Europe.
- 92% of those who were banned from attending games were no longer posing a risk while attending a soccer game after their banning orders became expired.
Those who were acting like hooligans have learned their lesson and are behaving in an acceptable manner now. Missing time from attending the games has caused most hooligans to think before they act now.
I believe that these policies and a new generation of people are the cause of this great trend. The new banning orders and policies put into place are really having an impact on how those who attend a soccer game act before, during, and after the game. They are fans and fans cannot truly enjoy their favorite sport and team if they cannot attend the games. It is impossible to attend games in you are in jail or have a ban where you can't walk into a stadium to watch a game. That has obviously come to mind now when people are making decisions at soccer games.
Another factor is it is a different generation of fans. Those who were hooligans mid to late 1900s are old people now and cannot act the way they once did. Could you imagine if these firms still had some of these guys in the group? Nothing like watching 60 and 70 year olds going at one another fighting. (I just visualized that in my head and that is hilarious) It is a new generation where violence isn't as big as it once was. Kids and young adults are not as ruthless as they once was which has helped the trend decrease as much as it has.
Could the number of arrest and bans be higher than they were? Sure. But the environment in and around soccer games are becoming a lot safer and more enjoyable to fans in most of Europe. The decrease in numbers is a positive but there is still a lot of work to do. It is just good to see that some of the precautions are finally paying off.
Ajax v Feyenoord
When asking my friend from the Netherlands what he knew about hooligans. His eyes got as big as they possibly could without popping out of his eye sockets and said, "look up Ajax and Feyenoord. That was some crazy stuff." The more and more I read about hooliganism, the more I get blown away by the stories that I read.
In the 1990s, there was political and public concern about firms of Ajax and Feyenoord. Neither team has a good feeling for one another and things were brutal. It all started in 1989 when two Feyenoord hooligans threw two homemade bombs on to the field of play. The bomb contained fireworks and bullets. The bombs injured 14 Ajax fans. This resulted in all 500 Feyenoord fans escorted out of the stadium and searched.
This lead to many planned out brawls between the firms of both teams. In 1997, a brawl turned into something much worse. Firms from both teams met in a meadow near A10 motorway. Each brought several hundred men equipped with weapons such as bats, iron bars, knives, and tazzers. After a good amount of time, police arrived at the scene. There were no arrest made but several pieces of evidence were found.
Police also found Carlo Picornie was killed. Carlo was a member of the Ajax firm. He had suffered severe brain injuries during the brawl. How only one person died in a brawl that involved knives, tazzers, and iron bars is beyond me. Only three members of the brawl were sentences to jail time, the longest sentences being five years for murder of Carlo Picornie.
Are you serious? A five year murder sentence. No wonder things like this continue to happen in Europe. I know that laws have since then been made to prevent things like this from happening but c'mon. FIVE YEARS! If the government was serious about ending hooliganism then a major step forward should have been taken. Instead, the man was charged with the equivalent of assault with a deadly weapon here in the US.
The guy should have been given a sentence that included the rest of his life. A strong statement from the government that would have made other hooligans think about their actions before hand. Would it have prevented any other situations from arising? Probably not. But it have helped prevent some as it would have changed the way the some view what they do or their involvement as a whole. Instead, hooliganism lives on. Not as much violence as there once was but there is still violent acts taken out on opposing fan bases.
In the 1990s, there was political and public concern about firms of Ajax and Feyenoord. Neither team has a good feeling for one another and things were brutal. It all started in 1989 when two Feyenoord hooligans threw two homemade bombs on to the field of play. The bomb contained fireworks and bullets. The bombs injured 14 Ajax fans. This resulted in all 500 Feyenoord fans escorted out of the stadium and searched.
This lead to many planned out brawls between the firms of both teams. In 1997, a brawl turned into something much worse. Firms from both teams met in a meadow near A10 motorway. Each brought several hundred men equipped with weapons such as bats, iron bars, knives, and tazzers. After a good amount of time, police arrived at the scene. There were no arrest made but several pieces of evidence were found.
Police also found Carlo Picornie was killed. Carlo was a member of the Ajax firm. He had suffered severe brain injuries during the brawl. How only one person died in a brawl that involved knives, tazzers, and iron bars is beyond me. Only three members of the brawl were sentences to jail time, the longest sentences being five years for murder of Carlo Picornie.
Are you serious? A five year murder sentence. No wonder things like this continue to happen in Europe. I know that laws have since then been made to prevent things like this from happening but c'mon. FIVE YEARS! If the government was serious about ending hooliganism then a major step forward should have been taken. Instead, the man was charged with the equivalent of assault with a deadly weapon here in the US.
The guy should have been given a sentence that included the rest of his life. A strong statement from the government that would have made other hooligans think about their actions before hand. Would it have prevented any other situations from arising? Probably not. But it have helped prevent some as it would have changed the way the some view what they do or their involvement as a whole. Instead, hooliganism lives on. Not as much violence as there once was but there is still violent acts taken out on opposing fan bases.
Hooliganism History
Hooliganism is described as disorderly, aggressive, and violent behavior. This phenomena has been recorded during the late 19th century. Hooliganism was on the decline throughout the early and mid 1900's until the 60's where things took a turn for the worse. During the 60's racial tensions were at a all time high throughout the world and new cultures were being formed because of the baby boomers. Soccer stadiums were labeled as great public areas to express their feelings for many to see. Many fights and ritual displays started taking place before and after matches.
These rituals displays and fights often take place by gangs of people called firms. These firms like to mark their territory in the stadium until the mid 80s when firms would spread around their soccer stadium. One of the worst stories of holliganism was in 1985 when a firm of Liverpool fans charged and caused a wall to collapse which resulted in 39 deaths, most Juventus supporters. Now the territories are widely accepted as those who are not involved want to say away from these areas to avoid confrontation.
As crazy as it sounds, hooliganism is a non issue now compared to the 1960s and 1970s. There were often times where leagues tried to pull their teams out of competitions in other countries because of the potential threat that firms had on their fans. It does not matter what country you are in Europe, it happens everywhere in Europe.
Many different laws have been created to help prevent disasters such as the one that happened 1985. In 1986, the Public Order Act was created to ban supporters from the grounds of opposing teams. In the Football Spectators Act 1989 states that convicted hooligans from attending international matches. The Football Offences Act of 1991 created special laws against throwing anything onto the field. Those who participated in racist chanting or indecent behavior such as running out onto the field were unlawful acts. The Football Disorder Act was created in 2000 to abolish the distinction between domestic and international bans. If you were banned then you were banned everywhere. The newest law that was put into place was the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Act 2012 in Scotland. This is to eliminate religious, racial and other forms of hatred against an opposing fan or team.
Since these laws have been put into place, hooliganism has been on the decline but still presents a problem. In years to come, we can only hope that more will be done to eliminate these dreadful acts against other for no good reason.
These rituals displays and fights often take place by gangs of people called firms. These firms like to mark their territory in the stadium until the mid 80s when firms would spread around their soccer stadium. One of the worst stories of holliganism was in 1985 when a firm of Liverpool fans charged and caused a wall to collapse which resulted in 39 deaths, most Juventus supporters. Now the territories are widely accepted as those who are not involved want to say away from these areas to avoid confrontation.
As crazy as it sounds, hooliganism is a non issue now compared to the 1960s and 1970s. There were often times where leagues tried to pull their teams out of competitions in other countries because of the potential threat that firms had on their fans. It does not matter what country you are in Europe, it happens everywhere in Europe.
Many different laws have been created to help prevent disasters such as the one that happened 1985. In 1986, the Public Order Act was created to ban supporters from the grounds of opposing teams. In the Football Spectators Act 1989 states that convicted hooligans from attending international matches. The Football Offences Act of 1991 created special laws against throwing anything onto the field. Those who participated in racist chanting or indecent behavior such as running out onto the field were unlawful acts. The Football Disorder Act was created in 2000 to abolish the distinction between domestic and international bans. If you were banned then you were banned everywhere. The newest law that was put into place was the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Act 2012 in Scotland. This is to eliminate religious, racial and other forms of hatred against an opposing fan or team.
Since these laws have been put into place, hooliganism has been on the decline but still presents a problem. In years to come, we can only hope that more will be done to eliminate these dreadful acts against other for no good reason.
Monday, July 27, 2015
Is There A Difference Between a Firm and a Ultra?
Many teams throughout Europe have what they call "firms" or "ultras". Although both are linked to hooliganism, both are completely different kinds of groups. Hooliganism can be linked to disorderly, aggressive, and violent behavior in the stands and around the stadium during soccer matches. Many observers see mass chaos when looking in the stands at a soccer game but don't know there is two different kinds of groups that these fans can be classified as.
This is an example of a firm:
A firm is a group of fans that often express disorderly, aggressive, and violent behavior. These groups are the ones who are starting riots and brawls outside the stadium with opposing fans because......... well because they just root for the wrong team. There is no real reason why firms become violent other than they have a disdain for others who don't root for their team. What is wild about firms is that some schedule organized fights before or after games because...... well because they just don't like each other based on who they root for. Crazy and insane, I know. Many of these firms feel that these fights are an important part of the sport. Why do they feel this way? Nobody knows but whatever floats their boat.
This is an example of an ultra:
This is an example of a firm:
This is an example of an ultra:
Ultras are the crazy fanatics that drive opponents crazy because they are just annoying. These fans are wild, disorderly, and aggressive but they do not cause physical harm to anybody. They are pretty much what you look for when you are looking for a student section if you go to a college (minus the flares). Ultras are the type of fan base that have organized chants, sing songs together, have themed games like blueouts or Jimmy Buffet nights. You want to be around ultras. You do not have to worry about your well being when being around ultras.
I would be a fan of attending games with ultras. Attending games with firms.......... man this couch is comfy.
How Can Hooliganism Affect A Sporting Event?
That example maybe on the extreme side but it is something that happens quite frequently. Other examples include fighting in the stands and flares being lit inside the arena or stadium. Now I have never played in an environment like this but I would imagine I would be worried more about my well being rather than a turnover that I may have just committed. The crowd behavior does not have to have a physical affect on myself or someone else to affect the game. In the players mind they are worrying about what is going on in the stands rather than the game which could be detrimental. If the athlete does not perform at a high level then the athlete will not have a spot on the team and will not have a job.
Hooliganism can affect the game directly or indirectly. I guess as a fan that is why you participate in such actions. You want to affect the game in a way that creates an advantage for your team. Is these the best ways to give your team an advantage, absolutely not but I can see why some people do some of the things they do as long as it doesn't put others in harms way. Being disorderly and aggressive in your cheering strategies is a good thing but when you become violent then things need to change. If you want to be violent then join the military. Don't attack those who are at a sporting event trying to earn a living or enjoy a game.
Is It Worth Going To A Soccer Match In Europe?
It blows my mind that people continue to go to soccer matches in Europe with this being a common scene inside and outside the stadium. WHY!?! In some crazy way I am sure others would say that to retaliate against those fans who cheer on the other team. Now I understand that people have their beliefs and it is more than a game over in Europe but is it really something to risk getting beat up and/or going to jail for?
If you ask me these videos look very similar to those that you see when middle schoolers are fighting in the hallway here in America. You see those who are antagonizing and those who are retaliating. Difference is is that the middle schoolers are fighting over something like significant others or being made fun of. These hooligans are fighting over SOCCER GAMES IN WHICH THEY HAVE NO RESULT ON IN THE OUTCOME!!!! I didn't know that sports were so serious across the pond.
Why can't these people go to the game and support their team and let everyone else live their lives? Who do other peoples' lives have to be altered because of the way some bonehead acts at a sporting event? There are always going to be those fans that are loud and obnoxious but is it really worth fighting over? If others feel like it is then is it worth going through the hassle to attend the sporting event? Absolutely not. Let me just enjoy the game on my 65" television with the surround sound and multiple camera angles that make the game more enjoyable. I could pay nothing to watch a sporting event at home or I can pay hundereds in ticket prices, parking, and concessions and run the risk of getting into an altercation and being in the middle of an altercation that puts my safety in jeopardy. It is a no brainer.
Why is Hooliganism so Big in Europe?
There is close to no comparison when you look at hooliganism in Europe and hooliganism in the United States. Why you might ask? Because of two key factors:
Location
Often times in the United States teams do not have a strong following to other cities because most professional sports teams are more than a few hours away from each other. In Europe, often times teams are located within minutes of one other especially in small countries such as Greece, England, or Spain. The close approximation creates tension between the teams and the fans. It is easy for fans to follow their favorite team on the road. Large numbers of oppositing fans can easily travel to cheer on their favorite team and get under the skin of those who are in attendance for a home game. Fans want to support and give their team the extra boost they need and they to be heard or seen. This creates tension between two groups of fans and often leads disorderly and violent behavior.
Politics
In America, teams are forms of entertainment. They do not represent political views or religious views like they do in Europe. Their teams are more than just a form of entertainment for them over in Europe. It is a way of life for the people in Europe. Teams represent live styles from hundreds and hundreds of years ago, especially in soccer. Soccer teams were put together hundreds of years ago when society wasn't so uptight. Others followed those teams more based on the clubs beliefs more than their performance. When you get two groups of people that have different life beliefs then tensions are going to be high.
These are the two reasons why we see events that Americans would classify as riots for regular season match. Two teams. Two different views on life. Tension in the building is extremely high no matter how important the game is when you look at the standings. If the game is important to the standings then you are attending the game while focusing on staying safe rather than enjoying the game. You have to go cautiously or you will be in the middle of an altercation and things could easily get dangerous before, during, or after the game. Sporting events shouldn't be something you have to live cautiously at. In Europe you do. It is more than just a game. It is about life.
Location
Often times in the United States teams do not have a strong following to other cities because most professional sports teams are more than a few hours away from each other. In Europe, often times teams are located within minutes of one other especially in small countries such as Greece, England, or Spain. The close approximation creates tension between the teams and the fans. It is easy for fans to follow their favorite team on the road. Large numbers of oppositing fans can easily travel to cheer on their favorite team and get under the skin of those who are in attendance for a home game. Fans want to support and give their team the extra boost they need and they to be heard or seen. This creates tension between two groups of fans and often leads disorderly and violent behavior.
Politics
In America, teams are forms of entertainment. They do not represent political views or religious views like they do in Europe. Their teams are more than just a form of entertainment for them over in Europe. It is a way of life for the people in Europe. Teams represent live styles from hundreds and hundreds of years ago, especially in soccer. Soccer teams were put together hundreds of years ago when society wasn't so uptight. Others followed those teams more based on the clubs beliefs more than their performance. When you get two groups of people that have different life beliefs then tensions are going to be high.
These are the two reasons why we see events that Americans would classify as riots for regular season match. Two teams. Two different views on life. Tension in the building is extremely high no matter how important the game is when you look at the standings. If the game is important to the standings then you are attending the game while focusing on staying safe rather than enjoying the game. You have to go cautiously or you will be in the middle of an altercation and things could easily get dangerous before, during, or after the game. Sporting events shouldn't be something you have to live cautiously at. In Europe you do. It is more than just a game. It is about life.
Hooliganism In The US
Hooliganism is used to describe disorderly, aggressive and often violent behavior committed by spectators at sporting events. This type of behavior is rarely seen here in America during regular season contest but once the playoffs and tournaments start, that is a different story. Often times once a teams wins a big game or the championship, fans gather out at a popular gathering spot to celebrate. Last month, the Chicago Blackhawks won their third Stanley Cup in the past six seasons. As they did the previous two championship seasons, fans gathered at Clark and Addison to flood the streets and to celebrate. Although the behavior is not all violent, the crowd was reportedly aggressive with their celebration and behavior was described as a disorderly. As you can see in the video, CPD horses were brought in to contain the celebration.
Another example would be in 2008 when the Kansas Jayhawks won the NCAA tournament with their victory over the Memphis Tigers. As you can see in the video, there are students climbing on top of building fixtures, street fixtures, and parked cars. Again, nothing violent about the celebration but disorderly and aggressive.
Often times the most extreme examples of hooliganism happen when two rivals face off head to head. Things often get disorderly, aggressive, and violent during a headed game between two rivals. Many times teams from Chicago have a strong following no matter where they go. I have attended Bulls and Blackhawks games while they were the visitors and the hometown fans absolutely hate it when they are in town because they know there is going to be a lot of Chicago fans in the building. I attended game four in the first round of the NBA playoffs in 2010 when the Bulls played the Pacers in Indianapolis. As a Pacers fan, I was upset to see that close to 75% of the fans in Bankerslife Fieldhouse were wearing black and red. Not only do the fans come over to take over opponents building physically but mentally as well. If you closed your eyes and listened to the chants and cheers, you would of thought that you were at the United Center. Many Pacers fans were upset throughout the game you would look and see fights breaking out between fans. Things only get worse once games are over and fans are outside the building as things tend to get worse. Groups of people start fighting in a disagreement over the game or because they like the wrong team.
These are only a few examples of hooliganism when it comes to United States terms. This is nowhere near the definition of hooliganism if we compare examples from Europe. Hooliganism is ten times worse in Europe than it is in America.
Another example would be in 2008 when the Kansas Jayhawks won the NCAA tournament with their victory over the Memphis Tigers. As you can see in the video, there are students climbing on top of building fixtures, street fixtures, and parked cars. Again, nothing violent about the celebration but disorderly and aggressive.
Often times the most extreme examples of hooliganism happen when two rivals face off head to head. Things often get disorderly, aggressive, and violent during a headed game between two rivals. Many times teams from Chicago have a strong following no matter where they go. I have attended Bulls and Blackhawks games while they were the visitors and the hometown fans absolutely hate it when they are in town because they know there is going to be a lot of Chicago fans in the building. I attended game four in the first round of the NBA playoffs in 2010 when the Bulls played the Pacers in Indianapolis. As a Pacers fan, I was upset to see that close to 75% of the fans in Bankerslife Fieldhouse were wearing black and red. Not only do the fans come over to take over opponents building physically but mentally as well. If you closed your eyes and listened to the chants and cheers, you would of thought that you were at the United Center. Many Pacers fans were upset throughout the game you would look and see fights breaking out between fans. Things only get worse once games are over and fans are outside the building as things tend to get worse. Groups of people start fighting in a disagreement over the game or because they like the wrong team.
These are only a few examples of hooliganism when it comes to United States terms. This is nowhere near the definition of hooliganism if we compare examples from Europe. Hooliganism is ten times worse in Europe than it is in America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)