"Come and have a go..." - Is footy responsible for domestic violence?

First things first; domestic violence is a serious issue. Nobody should ever suffer at the hands (or, indeed, words) of a partner, or other relative. Many lawyers, campaigners, and organisations do a lot of hard work in raising awareness of the issue, and they should be applauded for it.

The BBC has taken it upon itself to look at how football and domestic violence interact. A Freedom of Information request was made to look at reports of domestic violence during England's games in the 2010 World Cup. These were then compared with reported rates for the same dates in 2009. The stats for the four games showed that when England won or lost, there were more reported incidents, however when England drew, figures were about the same.

Pretty conclusive, huh? Well...

Statistics are great, in that they can be used to prove any point that you like. On the face of it, yes, it does look like football does have a significant effect, but I have the following reservations:

• Sample size

The BBC data looked at four games. Yes, four games. Did they look at any other tournaments? No. Considering the number of games England has played over the years, there shouldn't be an absence of relevant date.

What then about other England games? Did rates increase during qualifying games? Or is it just when a tournament is played?

How about domestic football? Are more cases reported after Premier League matches? Or Championship games? Are spouses more at risk during the FA Cup Final?

There is ample data to easily conduct a more thorough study into the cause and effects of football on domestic violence, so why has it not been used? Could it be that it doesn't assist in making such claims?

Further, how many people watched the games, and how do those figures compare with viewing figures? 

The study fails to take into account that there is more interest in the game during a tournament, and people who would not ordinarily watch a football match, will be watching the national side.

• Match results

It would be understandable to see football being directly responsible for domestic violence where teams lost. "Taking it out on the other half", is a compelling argument.

So why did rates increase when England won AND lost games? Why were there no more reported incidents after the draw with the USA, which from memory, was a hugely disappointing performance and result? It certainly felt like a defeat at the time, and there would be plenty of reason for fans to take out their frustrations.

• Comparisons with other sports or events

Games like these are usually watched by large groups, and involve a lot of drinking. Maybe even drug use. Both are a factor in domestic violence. Rather than blaming football, per se, we should be looking at our attitudes to alcohol consumption, and not the game.

One way of seeing if this is the case would be to see if report rates increase at Bank Holidays, where similar large groups congregate to drink. It's regularly reported that rates of domestic violence increase at Christmas; it isn't Christmas that is the cause, it's the increase in drink that is. Data is available, why hasn't football tournaments been compared to those? Could this data show that the increase around football tournaments isn't as significant as, say Christmas?

How do these results compare with rugby or cricket matches? Or Ascot, Cheltenham, or Grand National week?

• Interpretation

What exactly is classed as "domestic violence"? One of the things I have noted from my observations of the criminal justice system is the way in which even the police or the CPS label incidents as "domestic violence" is inconsistent. It would be great to think that offences are dealt with correctly, but they are not.

Further, the BBC has looked at reported incidents. Not all of these matters are taken any further, so it would be helpful to see how many resulted in charges, and ultimately, in convictions. 

As noted above, drink can be a significant factor in domestic violence cases, as well as in any offence against the person. Have incidents been classed as domestic violence, when it is a case of an argument getting out of hand? Neither incident is desirable, but it can be misleading when dealing with the issue of domestic violence itself. In the absence of any statutory guidance into the definition, it is plausible that police forces are interpreting incidents in a different manner.

It is also not known how many incidents occur; many will go unreported. Victims are often too scared, or too forgiving. That's not to say incidents don't increase at certain times of the year, but why are more incidents being reported? Could it be the victim has also had the benefit of drink, and is feeling braver about reporting an incident that he or she would usually let pass?

Given not everybody who watches England games during a tournament would even class themselves as a football fan, it seems unfair that the sport can be blamed. Would any other social group be subjected to such a study? It's highly unlikely. So why has the BBC chosen to do so? 

The overall tone of the report is to yet again demonise football fans. In the absence of any news regarding hooliganism, the BBC looks to have conducted a study designed to blame football for one of society's problems. Rather than proving anything, the report raises more questions. Four matches is not enough to prove anything.

The only positive to come from the story is that maybe there will be the impetus to conduct a full and detailed study into the factors that cause domestic violence, and whether football is, or is not, one of them.

The Baseball Experience; what an English football fan learned.

On holiday, I took the opportunity to see the Miami Marlins take on the Colorado Rockies. The game took place at the newly opened Marlins Park, right in the heart of Miami. It is the 6th baseball stadium to feature a close-able roof, preventing games from being rained off, something that could have been a problem earlier in the day! 

The stadium itself is impressive from the outside, and quite futuristic to look at. It has its own parking garages, which can be pre-booked, located close to the entrances, although there are plenty of businesses, and residents, offering their own spaces to arriving fans. A check on the web beforehand told us that exiting from the official car parks can be a nightmare, so we chose to risk finding alternative parking. We managed to find a great place, within a short walk of our entrance, advertised at $10; sadly, having parked up, the attendant then asked for $20! 

We looked at using public transport to get from Miami Beach to the game; sadly, it's not a practicable option, something that as an English football fan, I have plenty of experience of. A 10 minute car journey would have taken an hour longer to make by bus. The concierge at our hotel informed us that a taxi would cost $20 each way. Back home, transport problems like these usually affect the new, out of town stadia. It seems strange that a stadium in a city like Miami would suffer with the same problems, but it could be more like the American love affair of driving. 

The view from our cheap seats

Entry into the stadium was easy, but that could be down to the fact that we were incredibly early. Our seats were located on the uppermost tier, near to the third base. Unlike football stadia, it's possible to move around the entire ground (legitimately, in any case). There is no fan segregation, although we didn't see any Rockies fans. Travelling a couple of hundred miles to watch an away game is dedication; a couple of thousand miles is amazing. Because of the layout, fans can watch the warm up from any seat, up to about 30 minutes before the start of the game, whee they are expected to make their way to their designated seats. This allows fans to get a closer view of the warm up, or to meet up with friends. The game we went to was not a sell out, and I would suspect fans might have moved to other areas during play itself, as they do at football games. This practice, whilst tolerated more at away games where fans pay the same price for tickets, at home games, it's not permitted, usually because of the difference in price structure between the different areas. This includes before the game. In some stadia, it's not physically possible to move to other areas. The matter is taken so seriously in England, that using the "wrong" toilet can lead to your ejection. Clubs will no doubt say that this is to protect the integrity of their pricing structures, and make it fair on supporters who pay a premium for match tickets, however, should it really matter during the warm up? This is just one reason, another being the need for clubs to control where football fans can congregate before, during, and after games. Allowing fans freedom inside a stadium should not pose problems, yet it seems that clubs and the authorities are too scared to give the benefit of the doubt. 

Fans take advantage of the bar

One other area that differs significantly is in the catering and hospitality. In terms of food, there is a variety on offer at Marlins Park, with traditional far, such as hot dogs, down to pizza, subs, nachos, and sweet treats. Variety at a typical football ground is limited to pie flavours, or if you want cheese on your burger or not. Vegetarian choice in England is even more limited. Whilst the US isn't the most veggie friendly place, there's more choice. It's even possible to have a healthy sub, if you are careful over what you eat!

The main difference is that in England, it is illegal for fans to drink alcohol where the pitch is in view. Again, this is a measure taken to control what fans can or cannot do during a match. Whilst hooliganism and alcohol are linked, this law prevents law abiding fans from enjoying a beer during the game. This law is at odds with a society that is struggling to deal with a binge drinking culture, as fans will try to consume as much booze as they can before a game, and at half time. This in turn leads to more arrests for drink related offences at games. Fans are allowed to drink during baseball games, and whilst many fans took advantage of the sellers who walk around the seated areas selling ice cold lager, or the specially designed bar, I didn't notice fans drinking to excess. This may have been down to the fact the game was being played on a Wednesday night, however plenty of English football fans drink before and after midweek fixtures. that's not to say hooliganism doesn't exist in any form, judging from the huge sign inviting fans to report "fan misconduct".

Shop-A-Fan exists outside the UK

The atmosphere at games differs hugely. There is very little chanting compared with even the less vocal football clubs I've visited in England. Most chanting and clapping is orchestrated by the Hammond organist, who periodically plays little ditties throughout the game. As good as it is to see tradition carrying on inside such a contemporary stadium, the quaintness of it did amuse this cynical, and experienced footy fan! Being told when to show support, and how is an alien concept to me. It was staged, there was no humour, and to be honest, bland. It also means that the club has control over what the fans are doing. No naughty words, no freedom of expression, and in a country that prides itself on such a principle. The absence of any banter was hugely noticeable, with no away fans to chant at.

Having the roof closed also gave the atmosphere a different feel. Miami had been having storms and torrential downpours throughout the day, and so the roof was closed ensuring the game went ahead.. Whilst I'm used to watching sport in cold conditions, an air conditioned stadium is a new experience!

Fancy a dip? A new meaning for corporate hospitality?

The Marlins have clearly thought about making their stadium different. As well as the architecture, they appear to have considered those fans who choose to pay more for tickets. There are executive boxes, similar to back home. There are packages which include "all you can eat and drink", which on reflection would have been a better deal, even for someone with a small appetite like me (I would have had my fair share of beer to make up, but sadly it doesn't include alcoholic drinks). It's not aimed at the Prawn Sandwich Brigade, either. It's available in an ordinary seating area, for ordinary fans. This is one of several types of ticket offers including food and drink. There is also an area with its own pool, which would be great on days when the roof is open.

Whether us fans like it or not, football is changing. It is becoming more corporate, and owners are looking at the match day experience, no doubt looking across the Atlantic at what the Americans are doing. Football has its traditions, which should not be allowed to be slowly eradicated from the game under the banner of progress. However, there is a lot to be learned from American sports that would enhance even the most hardened fans' experiences.

Enjoying a pint. In view of the
pitch!

Clubs, like my own, want to attract fans to the grounds earlier; after all, they could be spending money there, instead of handing it to local pubs and food outlets. Improving the selection and the quality is a start. More offers, like the "all you can eat and drink" deal, would help. Admittedly, Leicester City has tried "Pie and a Pint" deals, but with the lack of choice with flavours, and the variable quality throughout the stadium, it doesn't seem to have been that popular. It isn't as though the club lacks the infrastructure to offer a variety of food styles, or drinks on offer. Not every fan drinks beer, or likes the beer offered, in the same way not every fan wants a greasy burger.

Another factor that stops fans from going into grounds earlier is the lack of mobility inside the ground. If clubs could be more flexible in allowing fans to mingle, certainly before the game, they would be more inclined to go straight to the ground, rather than the pub.

Selling food and drinks in the seated areas would prevent fans from moving about during games, which is an annoyance to some of the other supporters. It could mean a fan who fancies something to eat, but doesn't want to queue for ages, will buy something rather than going without. It may also ease the pressure on kiosk staff at half time, enabling them to deal with customers more efficiently.

More importantly, relaxing the laws on alcohol consumption, in my opinion, needs to be looked at. Fans in Scotland can drink during the game, and doesn't appear to be an issue with regards to hooliganism. Drinking at other sports events does not lead to trouble. Trouble makers can be identified more easily than they could on the terraces of the 1970s and 80s. The laws are there to deal with them. Deal with the crimes when they occur, rather than treating all fans as potential criminals.

Finally, we can learn what not to do. Football clubs are stopping just short of playing music at periodical intervals during the game. Goal music is bad enough, and I'm thankful that we don't have music played over the PA system telling us when to clap and cheer. One of the things that makes the atmosphere at football matches special is the spontaneity. It can lead to amusing and witty exchanges. There's no better experience than the crowd encouraging the team from the stands when up against it. Surely that kind of support is better for the players than had it come about because a club official had "told" the fans to chant, and on top of that, what to chant? In an effort to make the game experience "inclusive", it has created an atmosphere, or lack of, that suffers for losing imagination, spontaneity, and most importantly, humour. 

Football clubs in England should be mindful of creating the right balance between experience and atmosphere to retain fans, and to encourage new supporters. I found my night at the baseball more "interesting" than "enjoyable", which is a shame given how much money has been spent on creating an "experience".