Is banning away fans really the solution to violence outside stadiums?

Is banning away fans really the solution to violence outside stadiums?

[ad_1]

After shifting the responsibilities to Liverpool fans, UEFA admits that the riots before the Paris final were caused by its own inadequacy in the organisation. Meanwhile, the repressive approach continues: Eintracht fans are banned from traveling to Naples, restrictions for Freiburg fans in Turin

It’s easy to say “hooligans” and, saying so, to hide behind easy rhetoric. Then, every now and then, the facts take on the task of belying the words. And it turns out that the riots that took place in Paris, on the occasion of the Champions League final between Real Madrid and Liverpool, were not caused by the usual violent Englishmen, but by UEFA’s inability to guarantee adequate organization.

On that occasion, on May 28, 2022, thousands of Reds fans were forced to enter the stadium late – the kick-off was postponed several times – if not outright abandon the game. There were tensions with the police, tear gas and pepper spray to disperse the crowd, which six months later turns out to be innocent. Then UEFA defended itself by speaking of a large number of supporters without tickets. The report published these days denies this thesis, also supported by the French police, and defines the attempt to dissociate oneself from responsibility as “reprehensible”.

The investigation – it should be emphasized – was commissioned by UEFA itself, in a sort of proceeding against itself. And this, if on the one hand it is meritorious and will allow the unfortunates to be reimbursed, on the other it once again dismantles that cliché about troublesome fans, necessarily responsible, which accompanied the news of that evening. A cultural background that has often made it possible to justify restrictive and preventive measures. Rather than guaranteeing the possibility for everyone to attend an event, we take refuge in the ban. It is undeniable that some attitudes must be punished even harshly – this is the case for example in January, when the fans of Rome and Naples collided on the highway. But equally so is the fact that the sanctions cannot be indistinct.

It is probably going through this scheme that Viminale will ban EintrachtFrankfurt fans from traveling away, expected in Naples next week for the return of the round of 16 of the Champions League. Clashes had occurred in the first leg, the solution identified was the most drastic possible. “It is as if the Italian state were admitting that it is unable to organize a match,” he attacked Axel Hellmann, club spokesman and managing director of the German Football League. The manager also asked UEFA to intervene, in the face of “a serious and unacceptable interference by the Italian authorities”. He who knows what they will think of Nyon.

In the meantime, another decision has arrived, more limited, but which fits into the same vein. This time, the Freiburg fans who were preparing for the away match in Turin on Thursday in the Europa League will pay the price. Tickets bought through Juventus channels have been cancelled. However, those sold directly by the German club remain valid, which has taken it out on the black and whites and with the institutions of our house. “We looked for a solution to guarantee safety by making proposals which, however, were not accepted”. The security paradigm was preferred.

There are teams that have tried in some way to relate to the fans, setting up managerial figures in charge of relations with the fans, at various levels. The results weren’t great. By the way, there is a case that concerns Juve, portrayed in some media as almost in business with the ‘Ndrangheta, only to be the injured party during the Alto Piemonte trial which investigated scalping and the relationship between managers and fans.

A story that highlights all the difficulties of certain dynamics, the media implications that may derive from them. And, returning to today, it calls the institutions into question again. Can smoke-free stadiums be considered an answer? Also prevent fans from accessing the stands? The questions are not new, of course. But the only approach, which keeps being revived, is the repressive one. The question is, in many ways, also a question of freedom and the only solution cannot be that of forbidding. The only solution cannot be a non-solution. It may be trivial but, as we saw for other reasons during the Covid emergency, football without fans is much less, it’s another sport.

[ad_2]

Source link