Don't exclude the fans in the solution, FFA

In this weekend’s Sunday Telegraph opinion piece entitled “Football fans exploit a weak line of defence”, the publication chose to once again put the boot into the FFA and the A-League.

Mick Carroll’s editorial led off with the uncompromising line, “The ongoing battle between A-League fans and Football Federation of Australia has become the greatest farce in sport.”

Carrroll tells the weekend reader, “The question the FFA has to answer is why it is pandering to a group of fans who condone unruly and unsafe behaviour by fans at football games?”

On the other hand, loyal football fan groups are asking the same sort of question: why is the FFA pandering to a group of journalists and football haters from parts of the media who condone baseless and untrue representations of football for their own agenda?

At least Carroll had the courtesy to call the game football and not soccer, even though over the years Australian journalists have effectively used soccer as the suffix of the word hooligan.

Australian football fans don’t “condone unsafe and unruly behaviour at football games”, Mick.

The vast majority of Australian football fans don’t even bring flares to football games.

I remember a nice piece from renowned Australian football professor Craig Foster referring to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis when used in the context of an expanding A-League universe and non-football anti-matter.

What is that you ask?

Edward Sapir and Benjamin Whorf hypothesised the notion that an individual’s thoughts and actions are determined by the language or languages that individuals or collectives speak to them and the way that the language is used to communicate to them in their society.

I’m certain Carroll and News Limited understand the importance of choice of language and how it can influence the perception of reality of its readers, without necessarily at the same time being genuinely truthful with its readers. As Rebecca Wilson continues to prove; don’t let the truth get in the way of a good story.

The main reason that the FFA finds itself between a rock and a hard place is not just because of the sway and influence of money, big business and sports politics, but more its decision to adopt exclusive policies to get rid of unwanted football supporters.

It has banned them unceremoniously and treats them like they are the enemy, creating division, disharmony and unrest. This has proven incendiary when the right of appeal or a voice that needs to be heard is taken away from them. We all have an opinion that we would like someone to listen to.

The footballing bodies of Europe and South America have matured somewhat over the years to our antipode FFA. They have turned to more inclusive methods of dealing with football troublemakers, with a greater degree of success.

These improvements are directed at all people who follow football from different positions and perspectives. It is the variation of perspectives that creates the wonderful multicultural, passionate flavour of football and leads to the necessity for greater tolerance, not more ignorance and hatred.

The inclusive, rather than exclusive methods recognise that all voices should be treated with respect, but are also open to compromises when challenged by opinions different to their own. The most basic of all inclusive methods is to establish dialogues between groups to earn each other’s respect and come up with solutions.

A great example of this has been made by the Danish Football Association, Danish police, the Danish Railway Company, DSB, and the Danish domestic supporter groups. By introducing regular pre-match meetings, briefings and educated Football Guides on match days, the degree of violence and trashed football supporter trains has decreased significantly.

A similar inclusive program of dialogue was established between different groups of so called violent Swedish supporters, in the form of SFSU (Swedish Football Supporters’ Union). According to a survey presented in Lära för läktarlivet (Learning for the Life of Spectators), the number of regular fights went down about 48 per cent in the first years SFSU was formed.

Football supporter groups had a forum to discuss issues concerning them with the major stakeholders, who had previously been their sworn enemies.

After the tragedy in Kolkata in 1980 where fans reacted violently towards a referee’s decision and began fighting until 16 had died, everybody realised something would have to be done. The tension between the mainly Hindu supporters of Mohun Bagan AC and the mainly Muslim supporters of East Bengal FC escalated until this incident produced a violent low point.

Instead of reacting with brutal force, the supporters came up with a new inclusive method. They started organising Football Lovers’ Day in honourable memory of the ones who died.

On the anniversary of the tragedy, there are annual gatherings of rival supporters who donate blood to the hospitals of Kolkata. As a reward, each donor receives an autographed picture from one of his or her favourite players. It was a way to give blood for their team.

Another way of raising awareness on the issues of football violence has been the English campaign “Justice for the 96”, which began as a response to the Hillsborough tragedy in 1989. The police directed too many supporters into a small section of the stadium where 96 people were crushed to death.

Afterwards, the police and media tried to put the blame on the fans, the “violent hooligans”. The vast majority of the dead were supporters of Liverpool FC, but the success of the “Justice for the 96” campaign lies in the fact that it was never run exclusively for Liverpool supporters.

The campaign was inclusive, reaching out to all football supporter groups and even included an Everton fan branch, Liverpool’s deadly local rivals. For some 23 years now the fans and authorities have been successfully working together to avoid any more blaming and shaming and avoiding any further tragedies. The British prime minister later was able to apologise for the lies of his predecessors, bringing justice to the wrongly accused and bringing the football fans and local communities closer together.

In Argentina, a country which arguably has experienced the most football violence in South America over the years, there is now at least three domestic organisations that work on football fan issues on a daily basis. “Salvemos al Futbol” (Let Us Save Football) has probably had the strongest impact so far. It consists of supporters from all over Argentina working with clubs and authorities to end the trouble and resolve their differences.

The FFA and football fans and followers still have a lot to learn from each other. It does not mean that one group is exclusively to blame. It means we should learn and understand more about each other and others who we have previously chosen to exclude, to gain new perspectives on our unique, passionate, multicultural and global game.

Now is a great time in our developing sport where cards are being laid on the table and opportunities for meaningful dialogue will arise. All parties need to be genuine in their attempts to understand each other’s perspectives and work inclusively to come to a resolution for the benefit of all involved.