Management of a sports facility is often meant to help in precautious handling and preparedness for disasters that can arise during the football games. The World over, many notable disasters have hit football stadia that acted as an eye opener to the football governing body to enact appropriate legislation that will prevent any element of risk to the fans (Percio 2015, p.223–235). In the UK, there are infamous disasters that hit the game of football leading to loss of lives and numerous injuries to the victims. One of such incidences was the Hillsborough disaster that struck on 15th of April 1989 when the English champions, Liverpool FC was meeting Nottingham Forest for a repeat match in the FA Cup semi-final. In an unprecedented fashion, 96 Liverpool FC supporters lost their and score were seriously injured in the process. However, investigations direct the safety responsibility to the police who are said to have failed to control the crowd to prevent the stampede. As a benchmark for referential concerning future safety precautions, the disaster served as a wake-up call for the Football Association to act to protect the security in future as well as prevent the reoccurrence of the same (Au et al. 2011, p.663–674). According to reports, the disaster was due to overcrowding of pens 3 and four which had been filled beyond their capacity. Due to the slow response of the stadium management authority, many people died without receiving any much help. It is mainly because there was a reported crowd trouble that prevented the authorities from accessing the pens that had been affected by the problem. The aftermath left many sores throats and heartbreaks among the Liverpool FC fans.
The findings were considered equally to be aimed at concealing the truth of what transpired. It drew the interest of the media and the general public who to date still want certain individuals charged with manslaughter or murder, something the jury has turned down on some occasions thereby letting the fight to continue. However, the disaster was used by the football governing body to make improvement in the stadium facilities to ensure such acts do not repeat. A few decades ago, the game was marred by several cases of pitch invasions that were considered a significant impediment towards realizing adequate safety and security of all fans since many did not have the capacity to sustain violent conducts (Street et al. 2013).
Since, there have been some ground rules that have been laid by the FA to help manage disasters when they happen and more to help minimize them as much as possible. To a greater extent, these legislations have been able to help successfully manage the stadia across the United Kingdom because a similar incident has not ensued again. While the inquest into the disaster still continues, we take a preview of certain health and safety regulations that have been instrumental in ensuring security and health of the lovers of the game while they are using the stadia facilities (Street et al. 2013).
The stadium personnel accord the chance to enter or stay in the stadium-the regulation stipulates that it is only the authority that can allow someone to enter the stadium and decide when it is time for someone to leave. The law outlines that the stadium affairs are the discretion of the stadium personnel. It also states that upon demonstration of the valid game ticket. The authority can decide to ban an individual from accessing the facility when they deem it fit or when the person becomes a threat to the security and safety of others using the facility (Street et al. 2013). During the period, the person will not be permitted to access and use the facility under any circumstance. The major strength of the regulation is that it fosters the culture of discipline and responsible behavior within the stadium thereby preventing cases of misdemeanor. It is imperative to observe restraint and appropriate mannerism while using a shared facility since it’s a container of diverse personalities who are also inclined towards varied interest. It is thus paramount only to enjoy what spells safety to the common interest of the fans and not pursue individual interest at the expense of football. However, it must be understood that any legislation has certain weaknesses that can be detrimental to the well-being of stakeholders.
In the context of this rule, it is clear that the fate of fans rests solely on stadium personnel. The main shortcoming of the regulation is that most fans are always under the influence of alcohol, and thus it can be difficult to exercise restraint under the influence of alcohol. The constitutional confines exempt any action taken under the influence of alcohol as unintentional undertaken with without knowledge. About the exemption, it is not fair when certain harsh measures are taken to punish them or banish them from accessing the stadium due to their behavior when they were drunk or under the influence of a substance (Patsantaras 2014). Therefore, it is important that certain considerations be made before harsh penalties are laid against the offenders. However, extremities must be dealt with perpendicularly.
Another safety precaution has been banning the consumption of alcohol within the stadium premises. While on the site of the football pitch, it is illegal to drink alcohol. The offense is punishable within the provisions of stadium usage regulations. It is because supporters are always unruly when drunk thus can lead to misbehavior (Akindes 2008).
Another major legislation that was put in place in the wake of football stadium disasters was The Football Spectators Act 1989. During the periods before the 90s, the game of football was characterized by heinous acts of hooliganism and overcrowding in the stadiums. It was mainly due to lack of sufficient legislation to manage the usage of the facilities. Following the fire at Bradford City in the mid-80s and the Heysel disaster in the year 1985, the Act was brought in place to deal with hooliganisms by identifying hooligans so that they are ear-marked for future behavioral observations. The Act made it mandatory for every sports fan attending matches in the stadium to have identification cards so that it could make it easy to identify them. The purpose of the legislation was to give penalties and take stun action against hooligans who were always causing trouble during matches (Akindes 2008). The system made it possible to identify clearly those who caused trouble and prevented them from entering the stadium. It is considered a good security step when potential threats to security can be identified and dealt with as an individual without letting them suffer the collective judgment and punishment (Patsantaras 2014). Before, it was difficult to identify individuals who committed heinous acts during games and most of them camouflaged and disappeared in crowds when they had committed certain misdemeanors. As a result, many suffered umbrella judgment when the real culprits could not be identified.
In a more surprising fashion, the Act was not implemented by many clubs with less than 20% of the 92 clubs in the football league the only to apply the law (Patsantaras 2014, p. 23–40). The shortcoming of the law was the fact that it was very expensive to for the clubs to provide identification to all the fans. Moreover, it was not going to be an easy task to convince the fans that they needed the identification cards when they intended to enjoy themselves by going extremes such as invading the pitch in excitement. The fear of being held responsible would imply skepticism and reluctance by fans to heed to the demands of the law. In protest, many would abandon the matches, and the result was the loss of revenue by the respective clubs. Such opposition meant that the law did not last for long and had to be amended and eventually replaced by the Football Offences and Disorder Act 1999. The Act introduced the penalty of banning as part of the punishment for committing certain acts considered inappropriate by the football body (Cappiello 2012). The ban has been implemented on several supporters who fail to abide by the rules of the stadium safety management. Supporters found guilty to have committed acts that violate the rights of other fans, and the security of the facility users is investigated and after that slapped with fines and bans in which the magnitude of the punishment depends on the nature of the offense committed (Eisenhauer et al. 2010). The law has been able to instill the sense of good behavior among fans in the stadium. Cases of pitch invasions have become minimal and mostly happen when the game has ended thus does not interfere with the flow of the matches. The supporters can hold their breath and excitement for certain periods of time until the game comes to an end after which they can express their excitement in their reasonable fashion. The main challenge of the legislation is that it can be difficult to punish people when so many commit the act. For instance, fans can invade the field en mass, it becomes helpless as it's hard to hold more than half the fans responsible even if it is against the wish of the management of stadium.
Smoke-free regulation- As a health precaution, smoking has been banned by the law. The ordinance prohibits smoking in all the areas of the football stadium (Gul & Catbas 2013). Cigarette smoking is often considered harmful to the health of both smokers and non-smokers (Vacalis & Blewett 2010, p.145–147). Therefore, is salient to exercise control over the smokers to ensure that they do not put the health of other supporters at stake. The regulation has been critical preventing smoke-related diseases like cancer which a dangerous to human health (Thomas & Lewis 2012, p. 145–152). When the supporters are allowed to smoke freely within the football premises, it is hazardous to the health of everybody accessing the premise. Therefore, the regulation has been fundamental in ensuring the health security in the stadium. The stadium has designed smoking zones for the lovers of cigars thus allowing them to be isolated when they have time with what they love without interfering with others. The enforcement of the regulation has been made possible by the authorities who bring to book those who contravene the rules of the stadium use. They are often charged and fined. Therefore, it becomes too expensive to smoke anyhow.
Bibliography
Akindes, G. (2008). From Stadium to Bars: Safety of Football Fans in Stadiums. Identity And Nation in African Football.
Au, S., Gilroy, J., & Haslam, R. (2011). Assessing Crowd Dynamics and Spectator Safety in Seated Area at a Football Stadium. Pedestrian And Evacuation Dynamics, 663–674.
Cappiello, G. (2012). Professional Football, Stadium and Global Markets. Symphonya. Emerging Issues In Management, 5(2).
Eisenhauer, S., Adair, D., & Taylor, T. (2010). Beyond the Stadium. Managing The Football World Cup.
Gul, M., & Catbas, F. N. (2013). A Review of Structural Health Monitoring of a Football Stadium for Human Comfort and Structural Performance. Structures Congress 2013.
Patsantaras, N. (2014). Rethinking the issue of stadium football violence in Greece: A theoretical- empirical approach. Jbe Journal Biology of Exercise, 23–40.
Percio, A. D. (2015). New speakers on lost ground in the football stadium. Applied Linguistics Review, 6(2) 223-235.
Street, L., Frawley, S., & Cobourn, S. (2013). World Cup Stadium Development and Sustainability. Managing The Football World Cup.
Thomas, S., & Lewis, S. (2012). Sports betting marketing during sporting events: a stadium and broadcast census of Australian Football League matches. Australian And New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 36(2), 145–152.
Vacalis, T. D., & Blewett, J. (2010). An Advanced Emergency Medical Care System at the University of Texas Football Stadium. Journal Of American College Health Association, 30(3), 145–147.
