45 replies to this topic

[MacGregor]

Taxpayer cost of policing football is 'substantial'

England's most senior football policing officer has said he believes clubs should be paying millions more towards the cost of staging games.

Andy Holt, the lead on football for the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), told the Today programme's James Naughtie that the taxpayer picks up a "substantial proportion" of the cost of policing football matches.

He was speaking after Acpo-commissioned research found a significant rise in crime and disorder away from stadiums on match days.

Dr Geoff Pearson, expert in football crowd disorder at the University of Liverpool, said the findings were not surprising given the sheer number of people that travel to football matches.

"The fans that are travelling to games are putting money into the local economy," he pointed out, but welcomed looking at policing, not just at football matches but also at other sporting and music events.

Andy Holt said that the wider public will look at some of the costs around football and "scratch their heads in wonder" given the high wages of football players and managers.

http://news.bbc.co.u...000/9712040.stm

Interesting little audio clip to listen to. Should clubs be paying more?

[Jon_b]

Couldn't agree more, they've got enough of it! Why shouldn't they be paying?

Or pull the police out and let them use their own security.

Edited by Jon_b, 10 April 2012 - 11:50 AM.

[Sam Vimes]

I think clubs should meet the entire cost.

I've seen the clubs argue that people are being asked to pay for their policing twice - I assume by that they mean once through their tax and again through increased ticket prices.

Only a small minority of the public attend football matches and attendance is optional. If its costing a lot of money why should someone who doesn't even like football foot the bill?

Putting the game on, attendance, and partaking in the disorder than often follows is all optional. Football is a luxury in life, the clubs should foot the bill and if they have to pass it onto ticket prices, so be it.

[Adamski]

50/50.

The clubs dont want the trouble, but the public want to see a decent game. The public are responsible for their actions that may require policing, not the clubs!

[CmdKeen]

It seems to be that clubs should contribute to the costs of the violence / disorder away from the actual ground. Which treads into weird territory. There are things clubs should be doing, Ranger and Celtic are probably the key examples of clubs working against sectarianism* - the number of domestics and other crimes around Old Firm games increases markedly.

But then you get into all sorts of cause and effect things. How much can the clubs actually influence "fans" using a game as an excuse to drink heavily (usually the cause) and have a barny? If the club does do things like stoke tension against other groups, or not crack down on "supporter" organisations then punish them through the existing frameworks.
Because there are plenty of other major events that lead to mass drinking and crime - are they going to have to pay not only to police the event but for any uptick in criminality at the same time.

Because if so any police strike is going to have a mahosive bill... (Dear God please don't leap on this throwaway example)

People use football as an excuse in many instance - they need an "other" to dislike and have conflict with. Taking this too far would just penalise the clubs for a social construct. And disincentivise the police from trying to tackle the underlying cause because the costs of the problem are now borne by the clubs.

* Or if you support one of those, one club working against sectarianism, the others being terrible institutions that should be punished heavily for their failure to do so...

[Onlyme2008]

The club should pay the whole bill.

[Prae]

The club should pay for it all, they're hardly short of a few quid.

[andrew1979]

I think clubs should only have to pay for the policing of the ground and immediate vicinity (as it is at the moment). If this proposal went forward then do we bill all organisations who have big meetings that may have the risk of disorder? Licensed premises, political party conferences, marches, parades, events? Policing is supposed to be fully funded through taxation to ensure that everyone gets the same level of service.

[Jeebs]

The burden should lie with the clubs and only the clubs. Why should my tax go towards policing a bunch of over paid nancy boys kicking a ball around and their idiotic fans

[andrew1979]

The burden should lie with the clubs and only the clubs. Why should my tax go towards policing a bunch of over paid nancy boys kicking a ball around and their idiotic fans

Why should my taxes go towards policing a bunch of people that can't handle their drink? Why should my taxes go towards policing a student march? Why should my taxes go towards recycling plastic bottles? Why should my taxes go towards resurfacing roads I don't even drive down?

Football is a tradition in this country and I don't see why clubs should be expected to pay more than they already are, especially when the vast majority of clubs have a very low "risk" element.

[KTC]

The evident problem with a lot of the comments on this thread are that they are made thinking of just the biggest and richest clubs in the country. No considerations seem to be given to those clubs in lower divisions who are struggling to survive as it is. If their liability for policing cost were to sigificantly increase, they wouldn't stand a chance.

[Seandesy1]

The clubs want the fans at the game, the fans are responsible for any trouble, therefore the clubs should pay. If the clubs aren't worried about the safety of their fans they can always play behind closed doors!

[Dave SYP]

I'm with andrew1979 on this one. To make clubs pay for the whole policing operation would open the floodgates for charging other less wealthy institutions. I think the police should ALWAYS have a presence inside and outside football stadiums to deter riotous behaviour and keep order.

[KTC]

The clubs want the fans at the game, the fans are responsible for any trouble, therefore the clubs should pay. If the clubs aren't worried about the safety of their fans they can always play behind closed doors!

They already pay for policing cost at the stadium and its immediately surrounding areas don't they? The suggestion here are for other cost such as policing city centre for those in the pub watching.

[Ares]

Licensed premises, political party conferences, marches, parades, events? Policing is supposed to be fully funded through taxation to ensure that everyone gets the same level of service.

Because people at such events are far less likely to engage in that despicable antisocial behaviour that so-called football "fans" frequently display.
I live close to two sporting grounds, and I dread the weekends & the drunken idiots that they bring.

[David]

In principle I've always been against having to pay for policing what amounts to twice. Policing is funded by general taxation of which football, whatever its finances, pays their part - as do you and I. So in all honesty I think it's a bit steep to expect football clubs to have to pay for a police presence when needed.

To me there's also hints of 'if you can afford it you can have it': does that open the way for richer institutions to pay for police presence under other circumstances?

[wanabe]

What if they refuse to pay? Do the police refuse to be called upon?

[Police Constable 1]

What if they refuse to pay? Do the police refuse to be called upon?

Yes, they will refuse to police it however if called to an incident they have a duty to attend

[Dave SYP]

Yes, they will refuse to police it however if called to an incident they have a duty to attend

However, the local police commander can have the match cancelled if they deem there is likely to be public disorder.

[wanabe]

So then I'm a tax payer and a football fan. When I go to the football I expect a police presence. I already pay for it so why shouldn't I get it? (just thought I would throw this into the mix)

[Jeebs]

Why should my taxes go towards policing a bunch of people that can't handle their drink? Why should my taxes go towards policing a student march? Why should my taxes go towards recycling plastic bottles? Why should my taxes go towards resurfacing roads I don't even drive down?

Football is a tradition in this country and I don't see why clubs should be expected to pay more than they already are, especially when the vast majority of clubs have a very low "risk" element.

You are free to use the roads and town centres you pay for, however I am not free to just wander into the grounds and watch the match despite the fact I contribute towards the Policing costs, I would have to buy a ticket and pay for the pleasure!

I appreciate that is like 0.01% of my tax, but the bill shouldn't fall to the public, the clubs, who are stupidly wealthy should foot the bill! Lower division teams should also pay.

[Sam Vimes]

So then I'm a tax payer and a football fan. When I go to the football I expect a police presence. I already pay for it so why shouldn't I get it? (just thought I would throw this into the mix)

You pay for Police when you need them to respond to your calls and be involved in your community, yada yada yada... Would you not agree that policing events such as football matches are in fact extra? That Officers have shifts changed, days off cancelled, resources dealing with domestic jobs running thin because more units are tied up with the football.

Mrs Miggins is a tax-payer and has no interest in football and she receives less of a service on match day, and that's a fact. So she's paying the same tax as you and getting less of a service. Why shouldn't this additional burden be put upon the fans utilising it?

Yes, they will refuse to police it however if called to an incident they have a duty to attend

If Police refused to attend the match it would just be cancelled, an event like a large league game wouldn't run with no bobbies to police it. Police allowance for teams does also depend on what league they're in... When a team goes from The Championship into the Premier League for example, they have to pay more to the local Constabulary and the Constabulary in turn provide more resources because it's assumed it'll be higher profile with more fans attending. Quite how much truth there is in that I don't know.

[mdon]

The fans should pay for it with loaded ticket prices, that want to act like animals and cause trouble so they should pay for it.

[wanabe]

You pay for Police when you need them to respond to your calls and be involved in your community, yada yada yada... Would you not agree that policing events such as football matches are in fact extra? That Officers have shifts changed, days off cancelled, resources dealing with domestic jobs running thin because more units are tied up with the football.

Mrs Miggins is a tax-payer and has no interest in football and she receives less of a service on match day, and that's a fact. So she's paying the same tax as you and getting less of a service.

I was under the impression that football is mainly done on overtime and specials. Dont think Mrs Miggins would be affected as I'm sure stations would not be allowed to drop below minimum staffing levels.
Mrs Miggins doesn't go into town on a Fri/Sat night, drinks so much she goes unconscious and needs an officer to look after her so why should she recieve less service on a Fri/Sat night?

Edited by wanabe, 10 April 2012 - 07:06 PM.

[Wills7]

The fans should pay for it with loaded ticket prices, that want to act like animals and cause trouble so they should pay for it.

Not all fans are hooligans, so that would be punishing the civilised supporters for the behaviour of a minority. Football matches are already a great expense for families that like to take their children, so their attendance would become more of a rarity. Going to football games is a luxury that not everyone can afford, but putting the burden on fans would just make it unaffordable to more people.

Maybe the fines those causing trouble have to pay should be increased, this would act as a further deterrant and contribute a bit more towards the costs of policing.

Edited by Wills7, 10 April 2012 - 07:24 PM.