ReportWire

Tag: League Two

  • ‘It was 10 seconds of stupidity’: Inside the education course for football’s banned fans

    ‘It was 10 seconds of stupidity’: Inside the education course for football’s banned fans

    [ad_1]

    His team were drawing 1-1 at the time. It was late in the game, under the floodlights, when they missed a chance to take the lead.

    And that was the moment, Tony, a Sheffield United fan, lost his temper and shouted something at Matt Turner, the Nottingham Forest goalkeeper, that he would never be able to take back.

    “We’d just had a shot that had gone wide. The goalkeeper went to pick up the ball from behind the goal and he made a little gesture to the away fans. Nothing bad, nothing that should have upset me, but I lost my cool for 10 seconds. I started shouting, ‘Get on with it, you f—–.’

    “It was 10 seconds of stupidity. There were two people in front of me who turned round straight away and said, ‘You shouldn’t be shouting that, you shouldn’t be saying that.’ I knew they were right. ‘I know,’ I said, ‘I’m sorry.’ I knew it was wrong and that I could end up in trouble for it.”

    The next day, Tony, who is in his 50s, was reported by his fellow Sheffield United fans. They had the number of his seat at Forest’s City Ground that day and a description of what he looked like. The club got in touch and he accepted straight away that he was guilty of homophobic abuse.

    A letter arrived to inform him he was banned from Bramall Lane, pending an investigation, and he was summoned to a police station to determine whether he should face a criminal charge — or if there was another way to deal with it.

    All of this brought Tony to the attention of Kick It Out, English football’s largest anti-discrimination organisation, and led to him being referred to a fan education workshop as a form of out-of-court restorative justice.


    Matt Turner was the target of ‘Tony’s’ homophobic insult. (Michael Regan / Getty Images)

    Tony is not the fan’s real name. He does not want to be identified because of the impact the publicity would have on his family but he has agreed to become the first perpetrator from Kick it Out’s anti-discrimination programme to speak about how it works, what he learnt and the importance of educating offenders that their actions have consequences.

    “I didn’t realise Kick It Out had been running since the 1990s,” he says. “I thought it was a new thing and dealt only with racism. Until now, I’d never really thought about other kinds of discrimination. I was never wise to it. But I realise now that I needed to be educated. I’ve learnt my lesson, but I’ve also learnt a lot more.”


    We are meeting in Sheffield and, early on, Tony bends down to show something to Alan Bush, Kick It Out’s fan education and engagement manager.

    “Have a look at this,” he says, in a broad Sheffield accent.

    He pulls up his trouser leg and reveals he is wearing a pair of rainbow socks.

    “They were a present. That is one of the daftest things about what I did. My daughter is gay. My stepdaughter, too. They got me the socks for Christmas.”

    He met Bush for the first time last September, four weeks after the game at Forest that led to the police becoming involved.

    It was a two-hour workshop at the City Ground, Forest’s stadium, and Tony made it clear from the start that he was there to listen and learn.

    Bush took him through the various forms of discrimination that pollute the game and talked, in detail, about the impact a hate crime can have on victims.

    Bush explained the story about a Tottenham Hotspur supporter who was predominantly involved with the Proud Lilywhites LGBTQ fan group and stopped going to matches because of the homophobic chants.

    Using a slide show, he and Tony talked about the racist abuse suffered by England internationals Jadon Sancho, Bukayo Saka and Marcus Rashford, as well as the experiences of Blackpool’s Jake Daniels and the late Justin Fashanu as gay footballers. They talked about the Rainbow Blades (Sheffield United’s LGBTQ group), why it needed to exist and how its members would feel if they heard one of the club’s supporters shouting homophobic abuse.


    Sheffield United captain Oliver Norwood wearing a rainbow armband against Burnley this season. (Matt McNulty / Getty Images)

    Then Bush explained the consequences for offenders, with the threat of court cases, prison sentences and travel bans.

    “Throughout the session, (Tony) became more and more aware of his wrongdoing,” says Bush. “When we arrived at the hate crime legislation and consequences, he looked shocked at what could have been a different outcome for him, and how it could have changed his life.”

    This is Bush’s specialist subject. Kick It Out’s referrals come from either the police or the football clubs and it is Bush’s job to meet offenders, one-on-one, and pass on his recommendations to the relevant clubs. In the last three years, he has delivered more than 200 sessions.

    go-deeper

    “The important thing to remember,” he tells Tony, “is that even though you’re calling it a moment of madness, it’s still a hate crime. It caused harassment, alarm or distress. As a result, you could end up in court and be banned from football. You could lose your job and all sorts of other consequences.”

    It helps, undoubtedly, that Bush is deeply ingrained in football culture. He dresses like a fan, because that is exactly what he is. He has been going to Newcastle United, home and away, since the days of open terraces at St James’ Park. He is a big guy — cropped hair, Fred Perry shirt, old-school Adidas trainers — and it is easy to understand why your average man on the street would identify with him more easily than, say, a suited Premier League executive.

    Nor does it require a long stay in Bush’s company to realise he cares deeply about his work. He has been trained in hate crime procedures and worked as an anti-social behaviour officer in London.


    Alan Bush, who runs Kick It Out’s education course for banned fans. (Kick It Out)

    “At the end of the session, he asked me what I was going to do when I was allowed to go to matches again,” says Tony. “I told him, ‘I will just sit there quietly and jump up when we score, which isn’t very often as a Sheffield United fan’.

    “But Alan said, ‘I don’t want you to be like that, it’s OK to jump up and shout as much as you like, as long as it’s not racism, it’s not against disabled people, gender reassignment or religion and belief’. You realise that football isn’t just for white, straight men. It’s for everyone.”

    Of all the people to go on Kick It Out’s rehabilitation workshop, Bush can recall only one occasion when he has found it difficult to get the message through to somebody — a man who had shouted an anti-Muslim term at an opposing player.

    Only one person, a member of the England Supporters Travel Club, has reoffended. That person was banned from football for three years and, when that expires, Bush is likely to see him again. The vast majority of people, however, react more positively. Many offenders cannot explain why they have done what they have done.

    In Tony’s case, it did not seem to matter on the night that the player he was abusing was straight. The slur was just an unthinking insult that he could have applied to any opponent at that moment. He had not been drinking and did not consider himself to be homophobic.

    “He couldn’t give a specific answer for his actions,” says Bush. “He kept stating that it was stupidity, that he didn’t think and that maybe it was ‘banter.’ But he couldn’t settle on any real reason that sat comfortably with him. His main response was that his behaviour was wrong and he wished he could turn the clock back.”

    He also got lucky, in one respect. The people who reported Tony did not want to go to court. “I had all that worry hanging over me,” he says. “Your name’s in the newspaper, your address is in the newspaper, you are banned from football (by the court) … you’re publicly humiliated.”

    Instead, it is possible to find a shred of positivity from Tony’s story. If Kick It Out’s intention is to educate people and make football a better place, Tony shows it can be done.

    Tony talks about passing on what he has learnt to the friends who sit beside him on Sheffield United’s Kop. He admitted what he had done and told them to make sure they never repeated his mistakes. This goes beyond football, too. “I work with gay people,” he says. “Before I went on this course, I would probably have said something to them as a bit of banter, but now I don’t. Because it’s not banter, is it? So I’ve taken it into my workplace, too.”

    Bush’s conclusion was that the person sitting in front of him “didn’t need any prompting to show what appeared to be genuine remorse, understanding and empathy while undergoing his learning journey.”

    “I sensed that (Tony) was honest with us when he spoke about how ashamed he was of his behaviour,” Bush says. “My gut feeling, from having looked into his eyes for just over two hours, was that he was really sorry for the hurt his words may have caused. On this occasion, the community resolution and out-of-court restorative approach was the right solution.”


    Sheffield United fans fill out Bramall Lane. (Darren Staples / AFP via Getty Images)

    The sport, as a whole, could probably do with more specially trained experts who, like Bush, can pass on their knowledge in this area. This is, after all, a time when more and more people are heeding Kick It Out’s message to report discriminatory acts. Last season, there was a record number of 1,007 reports. The figures are still going up, which makes the role even more vital.

    Tragedy chanting has also started to come under Bush’s remit and, though he is acutely aware of the need for punishment, his firmly held belief for all the different types of offending is that clubs should not issue lifetime bans. “I hate that term,” he says, “because there is no coming back from it.”

    For the relevant people at Kick It Out, it is much better to educate offenders and make sure that, when those people are allowed back into stadiums, they have changed their mindset and have a much better understanding of what is acceptable and what is not.

    Tony is the perfect example: a man who describes himself as “old-school” but also now says he is “appreciative of the underrepresented groups in today’s society and why it is important to be respectful”.

    He has been allowed back into Bramall Lane after signing an ‘ABC’ — an Acceptable Behaviour Contract — and says he would like to meet the fans who reported him. He wants to apologise properly.

    He also did something that nobody on the relevant Kick It Out course had done before: he emailed Bush the following day to ask if he could go back to see him again. And that, for Bush, has to be the sign of a job well done.

    “Thank you for inviting me to the Kick It Out session,” it read. “I was keen to learn as much as possible from subject-matter experts such as yourself. I found the course very informative and a real eye-opener.

    “I learnt a whole range of things, from the differences between misogyny and sexism to what is and what is not socially acceptable to say, shout or chant.

    “I have taken away vast amounts of information and I am significantly more aware of the impact that comments can have on other people. I am, again, deeply apologetic for my ignorant words.”

    (Top photo: Catherine Ivill / Getty Images)

    [ad_2]

    The New York Times

    Source link

  • Wrexham are a good story, yes, but they are no footballing fairytale

    Wrexham are a good story, yes, but they are no footballing fairytale

    [ad_1]

    Accrington Stanley owner Andy Holt’s tweet was dripping with Lancastrian sarcasm.

    “Congratulations Ryan, I honestly don’t know how you do it! Fabulous achievement. Best of luck with the treble,” it read.

    He was replying to Wrexham co-owner Ryan Reynolds’ celebratory post following his side’s second successive promotion.

    Holt is one of English football’s most intriguing characters and is about as divisive as the team on the receiving end of his post. Wrexham are the British game’s Marmite club — other teams’ fans love or hate them — and following their promotion to League One along with Stockport County last weekend, the debate is back with fresh fervour.

    You can forgive Holt, a local businessman who made his fortune in the plastics industry and has invested heavily in his hometown club since assuming control in 2015, for his tongue-in-cheek reply to Reynolds. It was congratulatory while pulling off an exquisite ironic dig at Wrexham’s achievements given their sizeable budget for a fourth-tier club.

    There is also the fact Holt has history with Reynolds and Wrexham’s other Hollywood star co-owner Rob McElhenney. They have not always seen eye to eye on matters such as streaming income and ticket prices. Maybe there is something to be said for staking out the moral high ground, for taking a deep breath in times like these and rising above. But this is football — an industry that thrives on petty grudges.


    Reynolds and McElhenney celebrating promotion to the National League a year ago (Jan Kruger/Getty Images)

    Most neutrals are self-aware enough to acknowledge a degree of jealousy when looking at what Wrexham have achieved since Reynolds and McElhenney took over in 2021.

    Aside from the investment, the international exposure and the obvious respect both have for the north Wales club and the town they represent, the actors are annoyingly difficult to dislike. Their self-aware japes, like when they tried to learn Welsh in the Welcome To Wrexham documentary series, and their witty social media posts make it far more difficult to be cynical about their intentions.

    They are public-facing in a way that allows accountability, going against the tide of too many absent or elusive owners in the EFL. They have shown touches of class around memorials to the Gresford Colliery mining disaster, surprise charity donations and fan engagement. New big-name international sponsors including Expedia, TikTok and United Airlines have arrived, along with grand plans for new stands at the Racecourse ground. And on-pitch, they have had clear success. Manager Phil Parkinson oversaw a record-breaking points tally on the way to winning the National League title last season to pull Wrexham out of the fifth tier of the English football pyramid after 15 years.


    Fan culture in Europe and the U.S. on The Athletic


    And they have now done it again, achieving back-to-back promotions for the first time in the club’s 160-year history, once again with the Welcome To Wrexham cameras in tow. The series has brought new fans and attention to the EFL, particularly from the U.S. And this has, in part, led to record domestic and international TV deals — worth £935million ($1.2bn) over five years and £148m over four respectively to the EFL.

    So what is not to like? What harm is the Wrexham story doing to football?

    If you ask most other fans in England and Wales, quite a lot. Here is where the bubble bursts if you believe Wrexham to be an against-all-odds tale.

    Wrexham are not underdogs, at least not in the league. There is a case to be made for underdog status in their FA Cup runs which saw them play Blackburn Rovers, Sheffield United and Coventry City, three sides much higher up the domestic football pyramid in the last two seasons. But when a team have the most money in the division, they have an advantage over the rest. Wrexham are not the first club to use their financial muscle to progress up the leagues. They will not be the last.

    Stockport have been on a similar journey up from the National League and carry one of the highest wage bills in League Two this season. Fleetwood Town, now an established league club, did the same in 2012 and 2014. This season’s National League champions, Chesterfield, have spent plenty to get back into the EFL.

    go-deeper

    GO DEEPER

    Chesterfield are heading back to the EFL and have no intention of standing still

    The latest set of Wrexham accounts, covering the 2022-23 season, show their wage bill was £6.9million, with losses of £5.1m. Both figures were 1) records for the National League, and 2) higher than all League Two teams that season and most of League One, too. It is an unprecedented amount of money to spend in the lower leagues and as a point of comparison, Accrington lost £785,000 in the same period, when they were a third-tier side.


    Stockport also celebrated promotion this weekend (Jess Hornby/Getty Images)

    There is no shame in spending big, especially when it works and when your revenue is as big as Wrexham’s was last year (£10.5million — again, more than any other side in the fifth-tier National League or League Two). More money helps attract better players and so the league table often reflects each team’s spending. Only when a club endure a bad season or feel the constraints of the EFL’s financial fair play rules (usually once they reach the second-tier Championship) is there reason to worry.

    Where Wrexham have done lots of good for football, the gradual hiking-up of salaries in the lower divisions has been a serious concern to clubs constrained by much smaller margins but trying to compete.

    Wrexham’s financial clout and subsequent easy progress straight through League Two was to be expected and it probably will not be until they reach the Championship — or their owners run out of cash or enthusiasm for the project — that we will see what this sort of growth really means. The accounts are hard proof: Wrexham are a good story, yes, but they are no fairytale. This clip on CBS, and the replies, sums it all up perfectly of just how divisive they have become.

    What rankles so many League One and Two and National League fans is that while the story of a post-industrial town that has fallen on hard times with an underperforming/downtrodden football club has captured global attention, it is a story that applies to swathes of the EFL. You could swap out Wrexham for Grimsby Town, Wigan Athletic, Hartlepool United, Newport County or Accrington. None of those clubs means any less to their community just because there are no TV cameras to show it.

    Maybe all this says more about fan culture in the UK than we care to admit.

    The healthy position in all this is to sit somewhere in the middle. For every moment of admiration for what Wrexham are doing, a sprinkling of awareness of their wage bill or a dash of cynicism around the narrative that they are ‘the only club like it in the world’ should provide a perfectly seasoned outlook.

    But balance? A healthy attitude to what other teams in your division are doing? Anything other than disdain for new ideas, new fans and a barrage of media attention for a club other than your own? You will not find that in the EFL. You’re better off trying Disney+ for it instead.

    go-deeper

    GO DEEPER

    Welcome to Wrexham… in League One: What happens next?

    (Top photo: Charlotte Tattersall/Getty Images)

    [ad_2]

    The New York Times

    Source link

  • The football stadiums that never were

    The football stadiums that never were

    [ad_1]

    Peter Storrie can remember visiting the London studio of Herzog & de Meuron, the renowned Swiss architects, and being shown a striking vision of Portsmouth’s future.

    “It was something else,” he tells The Athletic. “They put it up on the screen for us and it certainly had the wow factor.”

    This was 2007 and the ambitious plans were for a new 36,000-capacity stadium on the city’s docks. Storrie, then chief executive, had accepted that Portsmouth would need to leave Fratton Park, the club’s home since 1899, and a proposed relocation could hardly have been more impressive.

    Located in between the Spinnaker Tower and the historic naval base, a £600million waterfront project that would include apartments and restaurants promised a transformational impact.

    “This will be the most spectacular stadium, set against the backdrop of the harbour and the English Channel befitting the club’s history,“ said Storrie back in 2007, when Portsmouth were a top-half Premier League club.

    They would win the FA Cup a year later when beating Cardiff City, too, but by that time plans for a new stadium had been all but scrapped. Opposition had come from local councillors and the British Royal Navy, who had “operational and security concerns” after choosing to base two super aircraft carriers nearby.

    Portsmouth pivoted from the dockyards to another waterfront site nearby at Horsea Island, again designed by Herzog & de Meuron with little expense spared. Again it collapsed, this time against the backdrop of the global financial crisis of 2008. As such, Fratton Park, boisterous but limited, remains the club’s home.


    Portsmouth’s plans at Horsea Island (Herzog & de Meuron)

    “The stadium on the docks was a fantastic design, really stunning,” Storrie says. “It would’ve been perfect. It was there on the waterfront. It would’ve been an iconic venue. One of the great stadiums if it had been built.

    “Would it ever have got through planning? Probably not — but who knows? It was one of the great designs that never happened.”

    And it is a crowded field. For every impressive stadium built by English clubs in the last 30 years, there has been another that failed to get beyond the architects’ drawings or the fantasies of an owner.

    Like Chelsea’s vision for Battersea Power Station and the Gothic re-imagining of Stamford Bridge. Or Liverpool’s proposed move to a futuristic new home in Stanley Park. Everton lived out three different projects at Kings Dock, Kirkby and Walton Hall Park before finally planting a spade in the ground at Bramley-Moore Dock, site of their long-awaited new home from the 2025-26 season.

    Tottenham Hotspur had their own plans to knock down and rebuild the Olympic Stadium before West Ham United became tenants in 2016, while once upon a time Birmingham City had plans for a 55,000-seater stadium that would form part of the Birmingham Sports Village. Karren Brady, Birmingham’s managing director back in 2006, called it “a once-in-a-lifetime regeneration project.” Or, as it turned out, not-in-this-lifetime.

    That is typical of the well-versed big sell, especially when supporters are being asked to leave a historic home. Project what the future might look like in all its animated glory and hope it marks the first step on the journey.

    Actions do not always accompany the words. Whether through funding problems or supporter opposition, sometimes both, English football has a long list of projects that have gone to the great drawing board in the sky.


    Leeds United were riding the crest of a wave back in the spring of 2001. A run to the Champions League semi-finals, where they were beaten 3-0 by Valencia, had emboldened the belief that Leeds could establish themselves among English football’s elite and part of the grand plan was a move away from Elland Road.

    A wasteland site was picked near junction 45 of the A1(M) at Skelton and a new £40million, 50,000-capacity ground was proposed. Elland Road, meanwhile, would be sold to the local council for an estimated £20million to help fund it.

    Peter Ridsdale, Leeds’ chairman, had a blunt message as they attempted to keep pace with those at the top of the Premier League. “Doing nothing is not an option,” he warned in a letter to fans.

    All supporters were asked if they would back a renovation of Elland Road or a move to a new stadium during a consultation process. “On the one hand there is the history and the memories that we all share, and on the other hand is the need to ensure that we offer future generations a world-class team and a world-class stadium,” said Ridsdale.

    Three months later it was announced that 87.6 per cent of the votes cast had been in favour of leaving Elland Road. “An overwhelming endorsement,” concluded Ridsdale, who outlined plans to find sponsorship for the club’s new home.


    Elland Road has been largely untouched for years (Serena Taylor/Newcastle United via Getty Images)

    The push to move was not as universally popular as Ridsdale had claimed after less than half of ballot papers were returned but those in opposition, the traditionalists keen to stay at Elland Road, need not have worried.

    Leeds’ outlay of £77million on players inside the previous three lavish years caught up with them and within three years of Ridsdale championing a move, it was a Championship club once more. Skelton was quietly brushed under the carpet and two decades later, with no meaningful restoration work completed, Elland Road and its limitations remain a headache for others to inherit.

    Funding — or a lack of it — typically becomes the insurmountable obstacle in these grand stadium designs.

    Constructing a new home from scratch or rebuilding an existing ground is the biggest possible expenditure any club can face and, as such, is reliant on huge borrowings. The biggest and best are now £1billion projects.

    Liverpool did not have to find that much back in 2007 but even the touted £400million needed to build a 60,000-seater stadium in Stanley Park proved beyond former owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett.

    Leaving Anfield behind had been a key thread to the promises of the U.S. businessmen, with Gillett pledging at his opening press conference that “the shovel needs to be in the ground in the next 60 days.”

    The previous five years, before the arrival of Hicks and Gillett, had seen a range of plans put forward, with outline planning permission approved for a Stanley Park stadium as far back as 2003.

    Original plans were redesigned by Hicks and Gillett and revised again after a target to begin work in the summer of 2007 was missed, before any tangible hope of a new stadium began to recede in 2008.

    Like Portsmouth, the credit crunch and owners with limited resources brought the project to a standstill.

    “Our commitment to building a new world-class Liverpool Football Club stadium is undiminished,” said Liverpool in a statement. “Like many other major development projects in the UK and overseas we are affected by global market conditions. We will use this period productively and revisit the plans for the stadium to increase its capacity to 73,000 seats.”

    The vision failed to materialise, though. Year after year there was no meaningful progress until Hicks and Gillett were replaced by Fenway Sports Group, who confirmed their intention to instead redevelop Anfield in 2012.

    “It could have been brilliant but we have probably set ourselves back several years,” former chief executive Ian Ayre said in 2011. Liverpool will finally get the 60,000-capacity stadium they have spent 20 years waiting for when the new Anfield Road Stand is fully opened by the end of January.

    Those years of uncertainty at the start of this century would regularly see a contentious plan proposed. With Everton accepting the need to leave Goodison Park for two decades or more, a ground share between the two Merseyside clubs was touted on more than one occasion.

    As much as £30million was promised from public funds in 2003 for a new super-stadium in the city. The North West Development Agency proposed that Liverpool and Everton should share in a bid to regenerate the wider Anfield area and six years later, as England gathered together its push to host the 2018 World Cup. Meetings were even held with the then sports minister Richard Caborn.


    Goodison and Anfield is separated by Stanley Park – plans to build one stadium to house them both did not go down well (Simon Stacpoole/Offside/Offside via Getty Images)

    The plans, though, were consistently met with opposition from the two rivals, both in the boardroom and among fan groups. Everton described it as “utter nonsense” the clubs should groundshare in 2009.

    That was because they had other ideas. Big ones. Unperturbed by the failed attempt to build a new 50,000-seater stadium on the King’s Dock, now site of the Liverpool Echo Arena, by 2007 they were pushing ahead with a move to a site in Kirkby, eight miles out of the city centre on Liverpool’s northern edge.

    It would form part of an enormous retail park headed up by Tesco and the capacity increases were forecast to generate £6million more per season. Selling the naming rights for the stadium would earn the same amount again.

    Not that it ever went to plan. An opposition group, the Keep Everton In Our City Campaign, was formed, while Liverpool City Council, who felt Everton should not leave their boundaries, were strongly against the move. Leader Warren Bradley called the proposed stadium in Kirkby “a cow shed in a small town”. They got their wish by 2009, a period of economic stress that hurt the construction industry, when the UK government blocked the proposed £400million joint development.

    Good things are coming to those who have waited, though. After all the false dawns and stadium designs that never were across 20 years, Everton will relocate to Bramley Moore-Dock in 18 months, a wonderful new stadium that will be one of 10 hosts for Euro 2028.


    If Everton will soon join Liverpool in having the bigger home they always wanted, others are not so fortunate. Chelsea supporters continue to wait on proposals that would see Stamford Bridge redeveloped or a long association with their home ground ended by a move. The capacity of 40,000 ceased to be sufficient long ago.

    History tells us that. Chelsea’s previous owner, Roman Abramovich, was eager to increase matchday revenues as far back as 2012 when the club submitted a formal offer to buy Battersea Power Station on the south bank of the Thames. The site alone was valued at £500million and given the Grade II listed status of the former electricity station, plans were unveiled that would see its four iconic chimneys incorporated into a design.


    Chelsea wanted to redevelop Battersea Power Station (Vittorio Zunino Celotto/Getty Images)

    Designs were made public after Chelsea had been outbid by Malaysian property developers SP Setia and Sime Darby Property, regarded at the time as a means of applying diplomatic pressure.

    “We firmly believe our proposals could address the unique challenges presented by the site,” said Chelsea in a statement. “The design would integrate the stadium with the power station in a sensitive, unique and powerful way, with all significant historical aspects of the Power Station to be retained.”

    Not that it made much difference. The impressive restored site is now home to apartments, shops, bars and restaurants.

    Chelsea did not stand still and, three years after their failed attempt to buy Battersea Power Station, had revealed stunning designs for a new Stamford Bridge. Like Portsmouth’s docklands plans, Herzog & de Meuron were behind the drawings that would see Chelsea rehoused in a 60,000-capacity stadium by 2020. The striking images were said to be “inspired by the design of Westminster Abbey” and quoted, at the time, as costing anywhere between £500million and £1billion. Cathedrals, as it was likened to, did not come cheap in a heavily populated area of the capital.

    There were objections but broad support for the project. Inside a year, though, Abramovich had called a halt to it all. The crux of the problem? A visa.

    chelsea planned stadium


    This was a design for Chelsea’s new home to be opened in 2023 (Herzog & de Meuron)

    Abramovich, back in the summer of 2018, encountered delays over a UK visa after seeing his previous one expire and a statement released by Chelsea said it was the “current unfavourable investment climate” that had been the trigger to postponing a Stamford Bridge redevelopment that would never be revived. The rest is an inglorious history for Abramovich, who was forced to sell Chelsea in 2021 when sanctioned by the UK government following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

    The dream of a new home has not died for Chelsea as new owner Todd Boehly prepares to share new plans in 2024 but there will be regrets that a stadium build did not come sooner. Chelsea must make do with a stadium that houses 20,000 fewer supporters than the homes of London rivals, Tottenham, Arsenal and West Ham. Matchday revenues have flatlined at Stamford Bridge and, as of last season, meant Tottenham had a £37million annual advantage through the turnstiles.

    Another club with sudden regrets are Newcastle United, who are going through their own consultation process on where to go next. St James’ Park, capped at 52,000, has been sold out every week since the takeover led by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund was completed in 2021.

    Oh for something bigger, like the plans hatched in 1997. A planning application for a £90 million, 55,000-seater stadium on Castle Leazes, half a mile from St James’ Park, was submitted. They included a retractable roof and the option for capacity to be increased to 70,000.


    A young fan checks out the new stadium plans in 1997 (Tim McGuinness/Mirrorpix/Getty Images)

    “St James’ Park simply wasn’t big enough to cope with demand and the site itself had severe limitations,” says Sir John Hall, the former owner of Newcastle. “We needed a world-class stadium to offer us the best chance of sustained success.”

    The plans, put on public display, were dubbed the “San Siro of the North” in a nod to the shared home of AC Milan and Inter Milan, and included a plan to convert St James’ Park into an indoor arena.

    Fans backed the idea but others did not. A petition included 36,000 names opposed building on the Town Moor and a public inquiry causing lengthy delays became unavoidable once English Heritage took an interest in Newcastle’s plans. By November 1997, the focus had instead been turned to extending the capacity of St James’ Park from 36,000 to its 52,000, as it is today.

    Fifteen or so miles to the south, rivals Sunderland had been through their collapsed bid by that point. They had proposed building a “Wembley of the North” close to the Nissan car manufacturing plant in 1992 and even incorporated twin towers in the designs included in a postal referendum. “That was intentional on my part; I wanted it to look like Wembley,” said former chairman Bob Murray.

    The complex was due to cost £75million and include a 40,000-capacity stadium, 12,000-seater indoor arena and retail park. Such was their confidence, Sunderland even submitted a bid for it to be one of eight venues for Euro ’96. Then bang… EU funding they had lobbied for in Brussels had been pulled.

    “Just before the Euro ’96 venues were announced, I received a phone call, out of the blue, to inform me that Nissan had suddenly turned hostile towards the new stadium,” wrote Murray in his autobiography I’d Do it All Again. “A call was made to 10 Downing Street and everything changed. Suddenly it was made abundantly clear it wasn’t going to happen.”

    Sunderland instead went with the Stadium of Light as their next home after Roker Park, moving in 1997. Others have not been so fortunate.

    Like Luton Town, who hope to be seeing out their final years at Kenilworth Road. It is almost 30 years since former owner David Kohler shared his wacky plans for a 20,000 indoor arena dubbed the Kohlerdome. Alas, he found neither the funding nor the site, which tends to be a problem.

    There are countless others, too. Bristol Rovers have spent 20 years searching for a modern new home, as have Queens Park Rangers, who have hoped to build a new stadium at nearby Wormwood Scrubs. Blackpool (Whyndyke Farm), Carlisle United (Kingmoor Park), Southend United (Fossetts Farm) and Grimsby Town (Peaks Parkway) are among the countless other clubs who have devised ambitious plans yet still have not moved.

    Just like Portsmouth. “It was very difficult to convert Fratton Park into a state-of-the-art stadium and that’s something the club needed to progress,” says Storrie, the former chief executive. “We had the fans pretty much onside but sadly it just didn’t happen.”

    It was not the first stadium project to remain an architect’s vision and will not be the last.

    Top image: Portsmouth’s plans for a new stadium on the waterfront were unveiled in 2007 (Herzog & de Meuron)

    [ad_2]

    The New York Times

    Source link

  • Are we entering a 'golden age' of the football conspiracy theory?

    Are we entering a 'golden age' of the football conspiracy theory?

    [ad_1]

    One of the most eye-catching bios on X, or Twitter as we all know it, belonged to a sports writer with one of the UK’s biggest national newspapers. It was plain and simple and boiled down to five words: “Biased against your football club.”

    Which is true. If you’ve followed football for any length of time, then you know that every arm of the media is out to get the club you support. You should see The Athletic’s morning meetings where we plot against the teams we most want to stitch up (all of them, obviously). Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean we aren’t trying to get Mikel Arteta banned from the touchline. Or perpetuating bias in favour of London. Or scheming for more points deductions at Everton. It’s All the President’s Men meets 24.

    Truthfully, more attention is paid to the subsidised croissants, but let’s not allow the truth to spoil the fun. Conspiracy theories are everywhere in football and why wouldn’t they be? This is an environment with the right climate to make conspiracies thrive: tribalism, partisan attitudes, anger and mistrust. They are not merely for supporters either. Players and ex-players are on the bandwagon, some in ways which are not altogether comical or healthy. Rickie Lambert on climate change, Matt Le Tissier on Covid-19; like the first time Arnold Schwarzenegger told anyone he was giving up Skynet and entering politics.

    But admit it. If you follow a certain club, from time to time you’ve been seduced by the suspicion that something or someone is deliberately hindering it. And those suspicions are clearly founded in fact. They’re all true. Even those that entirely contradict each other.

    For example, and as a starter for 10, this comment from a Chelsea message board last year: “Can this guy not referee another Chelsea match again? Too many times at this point.” We’re onto Anthony Taylor here and referees are a good place to kick off because even journalists are not as rampant in their favouritism as match officials. Leeds United, the club I write about, have several referees pinned to their dartboard: Ray Tinkler, Michel Kitabdjian, Christos Michas. Has any team ever had it so bad? Michas, who handled (questionably) Leeds’ 1973 European Cup Winners’ Cup defeat to AC Milan, was banned from refereeing any future UEFA games amid allegations of corruption. Which makes you think.

    Taylor, evidently, has been doing Chelsea over and we can’t be having that. But he’s a busy man because at other intervals, he’s mugging off Manchester City (perhaps why City and Chelsea drew 4-4 in November; the impossible decision of who to nobble). And Everton, too, apparently. Which begs the question — if Taylor is biased against everyone, isn’t he actually 100 per cent fair? But naturally, none of this is down to Taylor having off days or being a Select Group official with flaws. It’s because, as everyone knows, he has Manchester United bed sheets. Get onto the Blue Moon forum and all becomes clear — that is, until Dzeko’s Right Boot puts a spoke in the wheel: “Right, so: the United-supporting ref was trying to make Liverpool win?” Fair point. Someone else backs him up by daring to say it might be a dull matter of incompetence. Don’t let that stop you.


    Antony Taylor – may or may not have it in for your club (Rich Linley – CameraSport via Getty Images)

    What do the numbers actually say about Taylor, though? Since the start of the 2020-21 season, City have won six of 15 games officiated by him and lost five; a mixed record for such a dominant team, admittedly, but not a smoking gun. Chelsea have lost one of 13 matches. Scandal. Manchester United have four wins in 14, primarily because they are not very good. And Liverpool? Sixteen games with Taylor in the middle, one defeat and in amongst it all, a 5-0 rout of Manchester United at Old Trafford. Presumably a good way of Taylor throwing a shroud over his loyalties. As for Everton, it is going some to describe their crises as everyone else’s fault, even if the Premier League blatantly had it in for them on the financial fair play front.

    We could go round and round with referees all day. In Spain, supporters of the smaller clubs think the 50-50s invariably go the way of Barcelona and Real Madrid. Scotland has long been regarded as Glasgow-centric, where everything favours the Old Firm and the Old Firm think everything favours each other. Rangers have not conceded a penalty for more than 70 league games running. Celtic are taking that statistic well. Their chief executive, Peter Lawwell, said at their recent AGM that the last time a penalty was awarded against Rangers, “John Greig handled the ball”. Greig’s distinguished career at Ibrox finished in 1978, not long after the end of Celtic’s first nine-in-a-row. They’ve both been feeding on scraps of success ever since.

    At Liverpool, there’s niggling discomfort about the 12.30pm Saturday kick-off — the cross they have to bear so often after international breaks. Here is the Premier League’s way of purposely handicapping them when their players are jet-lagged and leggy because in the corridors of power at the Premier League, they would rather someone else won the title. But then the Premier League hate Newcastle United, as shown by the delay in allowing Newcastle’s Saudi takeover to go through. Though not as much as City, which is why City are facing all of those charges.

    Meanwhile, VAR = blatant cheating, which has only given conspiracy theories more oxygen. A study done after the 2018 World Cup found a surge in theories related to VAR calls made during that tournament, particularly after African nations were eliminated. One of its conclusions was that the belief in conspiracies appeared to be encouraged by perceived threats to the poster’s identity. And therein lies the rub.

    Karen Douglas is a professor of social psychology at the University of Kent. Presently, she is also the director of a project, funded by the European Research Council, which is looking into the rise and effects of conspiracy theories; why they develop, why they persist, when and how they tend to be influential. Football, she says, is prone to conspiracies because of its tribal “group-against-group type of feeling” and the strong emotional investment it encourages. The irony is that within football, no strain of bias is more pronounced than that held by supporters themselves. And it has to be said that football discourse has never been more furious either.

    Down in the EFL, “the Football League’s corrupt” is a familiar chant at Elland Road, partly because of what happened in 2007 when Leeds became insolvent and were, to the bemusement of many, sold back by administrators to the people who had taken them into insolvency in the first place. A 15-point deduction ensued. Round here you will find people who genuinely think that referees, the authorities, absolutely everyone, will do anything to stop Leeds escaping the EFL because the club are a meaty cash cow at this level, not least for TV rights contracts. They drive the sort of audience figures most EFL sides cannot, hence why Sky Sports are forever disrupting their schedule. But that’s another story.

    As a rule, the pettier or more obscure the conspiracies the better. The BBC can’t be arsed with Crystal Palace, which is why Palace get dumped in Match of the Day’s graveyard slot time and again. Dull, boring, get in the bin after 30 seconds.


    Palace fans are sick of staying up late for the last few minutes of Match of the Day (Sebastian Frej/MB Media/Getty Images)

    Palace, over the years, have also felt like a lab rat when it comes to new rules or changes of circumstances. The 1990-91 season is the only time Palace finished in the top flight’s top three. A month before it finished, UEFA decided to re-admit Liverpool to European competitions after their post-Heysel ban, meaning no European adventure at Palace. UEFA is brave enough to do that to a club like them. No one cares. But Arsenal in the same position? Or Chelsea? Certainly not. Then came 1995 when the Premier League reduced its numbers from 22 clubs to 20. Palace finished fourth bottom and went down; at least saving Match of the Day from going through the motions.

    Joking aside, what is it about football that generates grievances that then become full-blown conspiracies? What is it about the sport that takes inevitable kicks in the teeth and turns them into a bigger, dark-arts picture? Certain Tottenham supporters have it in their heads that whenever a negative, generic football story requires an image to go with it, editorial staff automatically use Spurs to depict it. Depressing stuff, so let’s go with Tottenham. Is that how it is? Or are people vocalising their own irrationality, often in response to underlying annoyance at the performance of their club?

    “Research suggests that people are attracted to conspiracy theories when one or more of their psychological needs are frustrated,” Douglas says. “The first of these needs is epistemic, related to the need to know the truth and have clarity and certainty. The other needs are existential, related to the need to feel safe and have some control over things that are happening around us, and social, related to the need to maintain our self-esteem and feel positive about the groups we belong to. People might be attracted to conspiracy theories to try to satisfy these needs.

    “This essentially means anyone can seek out conspiracy theories if they have psychological needs which are not being met at any particular time. It’s perhaps one explanation why we tend to see a lot of conspiracy theories when things happen like sudden deaths of celebrities or during pandemics. People are looking for ways to understand what’s going on and looking for ways to cope with difficult situations — worry, fear, social isolation. A simple explanation is also often not very appealing. People assume that a big event must also have a big or more sinister cause. (Conspiracy theories) can turn people away from mainstream politics and science, in favour of more radical ideas and actions.” Or away from the bland possibility that your team were to blame.

    Certain conspiracy theories, experts say, can be founded on grains of facts or reality. Those facts then get exaggerated or distorted to the point where they get out of hand. Football, unfortunately, does not have a record of being squeaky clean or free from corruption and as such, it cannot always tell those who follow it that their paranoia is simply that. But there has rarely been a time when the simple explanation struggles more to make itself heard.

    Take Leeds again. First, there was a gypsy curse, supposedly placed on Elland Road many decades ago. Then, during the Don Revie era of the 1960s and 70s, there were claims and counter-claims about bent refs, alleged bribes and a southern media who resented their success and tried to prevent it. On and on until last month when the FA Cup draw sent Leeds to Peterborough United, their 13th away tie in succession. The odds of that? Not far off 9,000 to one, or so my father — a mathematician by trade — tells me. But as someone put it to me the other day, there’s no conspiracy here. It’s just very, very Leeds.

    (Top photos: Getty; Richard Sellers/Allstar, Shaun Botterill, Robbie Jay Barratt/AMA; design: John Bradford)

    [ad_2]

    The New York Times

    Source link

  • Why football fears tramadol: ‘It’s an evil drug – it nearly killed me’

    Why football fears tramadol: ‘It’s an evil drug – it nearly killed me’

    [ad_1]

    Last week, every footballer in England and Wales received an email warning them about a painkiller that, until now, they might never have realised could put them at risk.

    The warning came from the Professional Footballers’ Association and, to put it into context, the drug in question, tramadol, is described as “evil” by one of the players who has found out the hard way how dangerous it can be.

    “The concern we have is there is an explicit acknowledgement that it is an addictive substance,” says Ben Wright, the PFA’s director of external affairs. “It’s habit-forming, it’s an opiate and it’s often referred to as being in the same family as heroin. It can sound like an extreme comparison, but it is fairly well accepted.”

    Tramadol is a strong, prescription-only painkiller that has been cited by Chris Kirkland, the former Liverpool and England international goalkeeper, as the source of an addiction that came close to destroying him.

    On January 1, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) will add tramadol to its prohibited list and, from that point onwards, anybody caught with it in their system will face a lengthy ban.

    That, however, is causing concerns among the football authorities when there is considerable evidence that an indeterminable number of players are either using it, or reliant upon it, as a perfectly legal part of their routine.

    “Somebody is going to get caught,” says Kirkland. “I’m glad this ban is happening because it’s a dangerous, dangerous drug. But you’re not going to eradicate it and somebody will fail a test, it’s inevitable. It’s going to be extremely tough for a lot of players because there will be many who rely on it.”

    The Athletic has spent weeks looking at the scale of tramadol use within the sport and, though the secrecy around its use makes it difficult to establish all the facts, there are several key issues our investigation has highlighted:

    • WADA has delayed the ban to take into account the addictiveness of tramadol and give users more time to wean themselves off it
    • There is a strong possibility that some, or many, users are taking it in secret, without their clubs’ knowledge
    • Players who have become dependent talk about it wrecking their lives. In Kirkland’s case, it left him suicidal
    • Footballers buying supplies off the internet as “pain pills” without knowing the dangers or that it will soon be banned

    This is why the PFA, as the players’ union, has taken the unusual step of emailing its members, including 5,000 current footballers, to highlight the risks and make it clear there is a deadline approaching, beyond which there will be serious consequences.

    “We wanted to force a recognition among players that this is coming down the line and if they need support, now is the time to start doing it rather than it becoming, with the deadline looming, an anti-doping issue,” says Wright.

    Do the relevant authorities agree with Kirkland that it is “inevitable” there will be footballers banned for having it in their system?

    All that can be said for certain is that the Football Association, the Premier League, the English Football League and the Women’s Super League are acutely aware of the risks. The clubs are, too, which is no surprise because the punishments are likely to be severe.

    “Ultimately, if you fail a test, you risk a significant ban,” says Wright. “From our understanding, the risk is a two to four-year ban.”


    Ryan Cresswell, a Sheffield United academy graduate who went on to play for Bury, Rotherham United, Southend United and Northampton Town, started taking painkillers after suffering a knee injury.

    “Tramadol is strong stuff,” he says. “Have I had it? Yeah. Did it knock me sick? Yeah. Would I attempt to train on tramadol? No. I wouldn’t attempt to get behind the wheel of a car on tramadol. If you’re playing football… I’m not being funny, but you can’t. It knocks you off your feet.”

    Cresswell spiralled into addiction issues involving sleeping pills and alcohol and was admitted into the Sporting Chance clinic, the rehabilitation centre set up by former England defender Tony Adams, before managing to turn his life around.


    Ryan Cresswell became addicted to Tramadol (Pete Norton/Getty Images)

    “I had my first knee operation the day before my 17th birthday when I was a scholar. It was cartilage that needed repairing and that lasted for nine years. But once that went again, I was in pain. I took anti-inflammatories and painkillers to manage it. Not just paracetamol, but codeine, co-codamol and tramadol. It just completely numbed me.

    “It’s not a good feeling to have. You don’t feel anything. It’s scary. It’s not normal to be taking eight or nine tablets a day and I realised I needed help.”

    At 35, Cresswell is the manager of Sheffield FC — recognised by FIFA as the world’s oldest extant football club — in the Northern Premier League. His view is that there are other painkillers that, as far as he is aware, are used more commonly than tramadol. On that basis, he would be “highly surprised” if any footballers are caught out by the change in legislation.

    “Banning tramadol is a positive step, but will it make a huge difference in the world of football? I highly doubt it. I don’t think tramadol will be found in too many players’ systems, whereas codeine, diclofenac and naproxen — things that rot your stomach — are rife.”

    What this tells us is that there are contrasting views, even among former tramadol users, about the scale of risk and the likelihood, or not, of players falling foul of the WADA rule change.

    But it is easy to understand why the PFA is operating a better-safe-than-sorry policy when it has already been contacted by players who have their own concerns.

    In 2019, Tyrone Kirk went public about his dependency leading him into a destructive path of crime and homelessness. Kirk, who had spells with Scunthorpe United, Macclesfield Town and several non-League teams, ended up living on the streets, taking up to 30 tablets a day.

    “I went from being a professional footballer to homeless in just a few years,” he said. “I wanted to get help from a professional but I was ashamed. I was embarrassed. Being a professional footballer at a young age, I have pride in myself, you know?”

    Kirkland’s story is a stark reminder — along with Dele Alli’s recent disclosure about being addicted to sleeping pills — that playing at the highest level does not make you immune.

    “I found out when I went into rehab that I was taking the equivalent of six shots of heroin a day,” says Kirkland. “It is an evil, evil drug. It nearly killed me, and should have killed me.


    Chris Kirkland has spoken openly about his addiction issues (Tom Jenkins/Getty Images)

    “At the start, it gives you a good feeling. It makes you feel happy, if you have anxiety or anything like that. I was using it for pain, yes, but I was using it for anxiety more than anything. But it messes you up mentally. I knew after three months that I was in trouble, that I’d become reliant on it.

    “In the end, you build up such a tolerance to it, it doesn’t really do anything. It’s just that your body needs it, because you’re addicted.”

    go-deeper

    GO DEEPER

    Football’s addiction to sleeping pills – ‘a disease spreading quietly across the game’

    Now 42, Kirkland’s career included spells at Sheffield Wednesday, Wigan Athletic and Coventry City. He first went public last year and says that, since then, he has had “lots of phone calls, lots of messages from inside and outside football, as well as other sports, even celebrities. It’s a massive problem. A lot of people in football are on it. It’s huge in rugby, which speaks for itself with the hits they take”.

    Kirkland credits his recovery to the support he had from family and friends. His wife, he says, keeps a drugs-testing kit to act as “the biggest deterrent” for him not to lapse again.

    “April 17, 2022, was the last time I took tramadol. The next 10 days were horrendous. I was cramped up in a room, I was feeling sick, I was vomiting, I couldn’t eat anything, I was having hallucinations. I’d got to the point where I didn’t want to put another tablet in my mouth. I got through it, but it wasn’t pleasant at all and I wouldn’t wish it on anyone.

    “It was a 10-year period for me and for eight and a half years of that, I was on tramadol. For the other year and a half, I had come off it and gone into rehab. Even then, I went back on it three times. I tried to get off it many times. If you are trying on your own, it’s almost impossible.”


    Michael Bennett, who made more than 150 league appearances for clubs including Brighton & Hove Albion, Brentford and Charlton Athletic, is now the PFA’s director of player wellbeing. In that role, he has seen, close up, the effect tramadol can have on people in the sport.

    Now 54, he also knows from his own experiences, having suffered a serious knee injury during his playing career, how easy it is for footballers to become reliant on painkillers.

    “I took them before training and before matches,” he says. “You get two to three tablets to take every day and, even when the issue is not there any more, you’re still taking the medication, or storing it in case you need it again. It’s quite easy to get sucked in and become dependent.”

    In Bennett’s case, it was never tramadol. His understanding, however, is that it is “on the scene” at most, if not all, professional clubs.

    “We’re in an industry where your body is put on the line every day. There can be only 11 places. So players are going to do what they have to do, to play, to earn their contracts, to sustain their careers. You can see how easy it is for players to be caught up in this. Some might not even realise they have an issue.”

    As well as writing to its members, the PFA has publicised the issue — “Don’t wait to seek help” — on its website.

    “When Chris came forward, it made other players and former players look at their use of tramadol,” says Bennett. “Chris was using it for back pain. Then he left the game and was still using tramadol because it was part and parcel of everyday life.

    “That’s the issue we have with some players at the moment. They have used it for helping with injuries and, rather than stopping when their bodies are in a better place, it has become second nature.”

    Usually, WADA would enforce a ban within two to three months of announcing it. With tramadol, however, there was an understanding that its addictive nature meant more time was necessary. The announcement came in October last year, meaning users had 14 months to wean themselves off it.


    WADA’s president, Witold Banka, has placed tramadol on the banned list from January (Luke Walker/Getty Images)

    “There is an acknowledgement that it is an addictive substance and that people are going to need a little while to come off it,” says Wright. “It needs to be done in a managed way rather than a ban being announced in October, starting the clock and having three months to withdraw from something you might not even realise you are addicted to.”

    That clock is ticking down, though. “Regular users often do not realise they have developed a reliance on it,” says the email sent by the PFA to its members. “If you use tramadol, you should urgently speak to your club and medical staff about how this will need to be managed, and what the new rules mean.”

    In the same email, however, there is an acceptance that some footballers might be “concerned” about letting their clubs know. In those circumstances, players are asked to contact Bennett and his colleagues in the PFA’s wellbeing department. But the obvious response is: will they?

    “There will be players who won’t go anywhere near the PFA and won’t want to tell their clubs,” says Kirkland, who makes the point that he does not regard tramadol as a performance-enhancing drug.

    “You try to hide it, you’re sneaky. You think you will never get caught and that you will get away with it. Because this is what addiction does to you. It tricks your mind. It makes you think what you are doing is good, when it is completely the opposite.”

    Kirkland knows from his own struggles how far footballers will go to cover it up. Many, he suspects, will be getting prescriptions from their own doctors.

    “My advice to those players is, ‘Listen, get in touch with me, I will try to advise you the best I can, the PFA will too — get in touch with people who have been through what you are going through’. It’s not easy getting off tramadol. But the upside is that, when you do get off it, you are a much better person, in a much better place.”


    Whatever you’re going through, you can call the Samaritans in the UK free any time, from any phone, on 116 123.

    FRANK provides a confidential service in the UK to anyone wanting information, advice or support about any aspect of drugs. You can call free in the UK, from any phone, on 0300 123 6600.

    (Additional material: Tom Burrows)

    (Top photo: iStock; design: Samuel Richardson)

    [ad_2]

    The New York Times

    Source link

  • Rickie Lambert, conspiracy theories – and why footballers are vulnerable

    Rickie Lambert, conspiracy theories – and why footballers are vulnerable

    [ad_1]

    Just after clocking off time at the edge of Liverpool’s business district on Wednesday afternoon, a small but striking man with a tattoo stretching across his neck joined a crowd of 200 or so protestors outside the city’s most significant civic building.

    Chris Sky is an optimistic-sounding name. His aviator glasses, gleaming white teeth and peroxide hair gave him the appearance of a Las Vegas timeshare salesman; instead, he was flogging a story to other famous men like Rickie Lambert, the former Liverpool and England forward, who had advertised this rally in advance without mentioning its special guest.

    On the opposite side of the road was another group, making a stand against fascism. For a good half-hour, two men holding megaphones used the busy thoroughfare as a barrier between ideologies as cars went past and bemused commuters tried to get home.

    While the anti-fascists screamed about Nazis and the real problems Liverpool’s residents should campaign against, the “freedom” movement stood behind yellow placards that advised readers to “question everything” and to “lose the denial”. There was also another warning: “15-minute neighbourhoods will be your prison.”


    The 15-minute city protest in Liverpool (Simon Hughes)

    That, ultimately, was what Lambert was here for: to raise awareness of the supposed threat of Liverpool becoming a “15-minute city”, where the local government stands accused of planning to essentially segregate districts in the name of climate change.

    Sky emerged as an online agitator at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic by railing against restrictions at a series of “freedom rallies”. To his followers, he is a precious purveyor of truth in a world of sinister forces trying to exercise control; to many more, he is a dangerous conspiracy theorist.

    There was, however, no denying he was the star attraction on Wednesday. After another “freedom” spokesman with the megaphone denied the event’s links to the far right — “This has nothing to do with racism,” he claimed — Sky and his followers ambled towards the space in front of the crown court. Then, after the rally’s organiser described those mainly middle-class-looking older women and students handing out socialist newsletters on the other side of the street as “satanic” communists trying to “steal our souls”, Sky was invited to talk.

    “Hello Liverpool,” he shouted into the mic, only for his voice to disappear in a violent gust blowing in from the Irish Sea.

    Sky announced that he was on a tour to change the world courtesy of speeches like this one, which included unsubstantiated claims about the return of Covid-19, the weaponising of climate change by governments in an attempt to control freedoms, and a hidden LGBT agenda that the audience needed to be aware of because according to the Bible, “pride” was one of the seven deadly sins.

    Lambert, who did not speak despite his role in promoting the event, stood by, taking it all in. Most people did, but for one Liverpudlian in a vest, who piped up from the back of the crowd: “Why the f*** are we listening to some American talk about our city?”

    It was at that point that someone informed him that Sky, whose surname is really Saccoccia, was in fact from Canada.


    In his book, Red Pill Blue Pill, David Newert describes a conspiracy theory as “a hypothetical explanation of historical or ongoing new events comprised of secret plots, usually of a nefarious nature, whose existence may or may not be factual”.

    In recent years, Newert adds that it has also become a “kind of dismissive epithet”. The majority of people, he explains, do not have the time for conspiracist beliefs and, therefore, it is easier to banish those who do as “cartoonish scam peddlers”.

    A psychologist based in Merseyside, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of his working contracts, makes comparisons between conspiracy theorists and his experiences in the drug services when survivors discover salvation, prompting them to want to impart their knowledge to others by working in recovery.

    “When conspiracy theorists discover something, they never keep it to themselves,” he concludes. “They have to pass it on to someone else. Now they know their place in the world, they see themselves as crusaders.”

    Conspiracy theories can take root in every sector of society and yet there are compelling reasons why sportspeople — including footballers — could be particularly susceptible.

    Lambert has used his social media platforms to perpetrate a variety of outlandish theories, including calling for doctors and nurses who vaccinated children against Covid-19 to be arrested, sharing posts that erroneously claim vaccine shots contain ‘cancer virus’, and saying that anyone who is “in on the globalist plan, the new world order, needs to be brought down”.

    Yet he is by no means the only high-profile example. Matt Le Tissier, one of his predecessors in a Southampton and England shirt, has used social media to augment arguments among conspiracy theorists that include the denial of the war in Ukraine and actors being used to fake what is happening in front of Western cameras.


    Le Tissier has sparked controversy with his views (Robin Jones/Getty Images)

    Le Tissier claims he has been pushed to the fringes by mainstream media companies because of his views. Support has come from Lambert but also from other ex-footballers, such as David Cotterill, the former Swansea City and Wales midfielder, who has used his Instagram account to make wild accusations over the existence of a network of celebrity paedophiles, climate change, Covid restrictions and that a Texas school shooting was a ‘false flag’ event.

    Another former Liverpool player, Dejan Lovren, appeared to endorse the conspiracy theory that the Covid-19 pandemic was devised as a ploy to force vaccinations on the world’s population. In 2020, he responded to a social media post thanking health workers by Bill Gates, the billionaire who helped fund vaccine research, by saying: “Game over Bill. People are not blind.” He has repeatedly promoted links to talks by David Icke, the former Coventry goalkeeper, who has long held a belief that the British Royal Family are a group of shape-shifting lizards.

    On a similar theme, the former Spain goalkeeper Iker Casillas revealed in 2018 that he did not believe the Moon landings were real.

    The key word in any cognitive reaction to conspiracy theories, according to the psychologist, is ‘threat’. They explain the brain like this: the threat part of the brain is the most potent, telling the drive system to do something about it. But the drive system is also the part of the brain that deals with reward, which makes people feel like they are eliminating a threat. This, therefore, makes people feel like they are achieving something. When that happens, it releases chemicals like serotonin and dopamine, making them feel better.

    “It gives people a purpose,” he says. “The problem is, it becomes cyclical. The threat system says, ‘You’ve done something about it this time — what about next time? You feel good now but there’s another threat around the corner.’ This means the brain jumps back into drive.

    “This isn’t a million miles away from the life of a Premier League football player, who has to push themselves to avoid being dropped or heckled by 60,000 spectators who revel in telling you that you’re crap at your job. In a sporting life, that’s the threat. You’ve done well in one game, but there’s always another to follow.”

    Sportspeople are susceptible to this world because of how carefully they need to manage their bodies in order to perform.

    “Clean eating became a fad 10 years ago or so,” the psychologist says when asked to explain what can happen when sportspeople embrace alternative thinking. “That quickly becomes, ‘Don’t trust the professionals — take charge of what you put into your body.’ This then becomes, ‘Don’t trust the professionals — they are in the pockets of ‘big pharma’’. You throw in a pandemic in the middle of all this, along with various high-profile political scandals, and suddenly it manifests into not trusting anyone, claims about who controls the planet, and extreme views such as antisemitism.”

    These are big jumps, but look at the leap Le Tissier has made in a relatively short space of time, from small city champion and legendary Southampton No 7 to a war-denier in Ukraine, who in July, without providing evidence, suggested on Twitter a “communist takeover is slyly being implemented”.

    The psychologist suggests retired footballers can find life difficult without the routine of training and matches. This can lead to them seeking a lost dressing room culture that can be found initially in a chat room or a forum.

    “Given golf courses were closed during the pandemic and there was nothing else to do, there was a sanctuary of sorts on the internet, where people seeking explanations for questions that had no answers seemed to find them. Such groups offer the illusion of certainty and safeness.”


    Golf courses closed during the Covid-19 pandemic (Glyn Kirk/AFP via Getty Images)

    The problem, as Newert points out, is that real conspiracies do exist and have done through most of civilised history.

    In Liverpool, particularly, you only need to remind people of the 1980s, when “managed decline” was suspected as a strategy of the United Kingdom’s Conservative government, before official papers were released under the 30-year rule in 2011 revealing that Chancellor Geoffrey Howe had, at the very least, proposed the policy to then Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher.

    Many people who lived in the city through this period would agree that there is enough evidence to believe the policy was, in fact, carried out. The decade finished with Hillsborough, the worst football disaster in British history, when the authorities aligned to blame fans. It would take more than a quarter of a century for a cover-up to be exposed in a courtroom and only in the past few years have some police forces started paying out damages to victims.

    In some parts of Liverpool, it is still believed that the heroin epidemic of the same era was another strategy, aimed at doping the city up as the rot set in — preventing people in the haze from standing their ground.

    Only a few hundred at most turned up outside Liverpool’s town hall on Wednesday, but the psychologist believes the city is fertile ground for conspiracists because of its history and a wariness towards authority.

    Though it has not manifested into demonstrations, the current Conservative government’s decision to send in commissioners to run an area that hasn’t had a Tory councillor since 1997 has heightened suspicion amongst those with long memories.

    This month, Icke hosted a talk in Liverpool’s Greenbank Conference Centre and he wouldn’t have organised that if he didn’t think at least some people from the surrounding area would turn up.

    Super conspiracies, the psychologist thinks, are intoxicating because they have no answers, which helps maintain an interest over a long period of time.

    “The awakening always feels just around the corner; that Scooby Doo moment, where the villain’s sack is removed from his head,” he says. “First, there was 5G to consider. Then there were lockdowns and masks. Now there are 15-minute cities. It’s a never-ending threat and that’s why it’s so difficult to escape from.”


    Lambert, whose football career ended in 2017 following 241 goals in 701 games for nine clubs across all levels of professional football in England, perhaps stands as testament to that.

    On September 11, the 41-year-old used his Twitter page to start promoting the rally with a poster that could easily have been an advert for a ghost tour, where the town hall faded into the background of a ghoulish blue light.

    “People of Liverpool, start researching 15 minute city’s (sic),” Lambert wrote, “because they are coming our way very shortly if we allow it.”

    Then, in capital letters, he added: “WE DO NOT CONSENT!!”

    A video from a garden followed three days later, was aimed at “you Scousers”.

    According to Lambert, Liverpool’s council was planning on “dividing” the city into 13 zones in an attempt to create greener and safer spaces for “us, the people”.

    “It is not, it is not,” Lambert insisted. “It is a controlled tactic being implemented across this country as we speak. These are initial movements for 15-minute cities, all under the guise of climate change.”

    Liverpool would be under the surveillance of cameras and, eventually, permanent barriers, according to Lambert. “This is unacceptable,” he said. “Us, the people, will not stand for this control tactic.”


    Lambert making his way to the 15-minute city protest in Liverpool (Simon Hughes)

    While Lambert did not provide evidence for these claims, the city council is adamant that such plans have never been discussed at any committee meeting and it does not form a part of its planning or policy.

    The 15-minute city, an urban design concept which could be perceived as a fairly mundane strategy that has been moderately successful in other parts of the world for more than a decade, aims to provide everything that a resident supposedly needs within a 15-minute walk or bike ride.

    Since the start of 2023, however, it has been targeted by conspiracy theorists, who believe it to be a part of a malign international plot to control people’s movement in the name of climate change. According to the protestors standing beside Sky, new cameras in bus lanes were evidence that this process had started in Liverpool.

    Not every person’s life can be viewed through their social media output, but Lambert’s might be revealing in terms of what it does not include over the first three years.

    His Instagram page has been active since 2017 and until 2020, nearly all of his posts related to his family and football. If he was interested in politics, medicine, or social freedoms, he did not show it.

    The nature of those posts began to change six months into the Covid-19 pandemic, specifically when Rishi Sunak told musicians they should retrain and find new jobs.

    Lambert, like a lot of people, pushed back at this radical suggestion by the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, who has since become the British prime minister.

    By March 2021, he was posting about lockdowns, writing: “No new variant or blaming the unvaccinated!! NO MORE!!!”

    Lambert only joined Twitter in June 2023, attracting 10,000 followers since. His bio suggests he is “fighting for my children’s future”, as an ex-footballer-turned-coach, though he does not mention he is employed by Wigan Athletic. It includes the hashtag #greatawakening.

    In his first video post, he described himself as a “critical thinker” before having a stab at explaining what he thought this phenomenon was.

    “No one has ever told us what the great awakening is,” Lambert admitted.

    A month later, he released another, more succinct video, where he “withdrew his consent to be governed by any corrupt, compromised, belligerent parliament of government”.

    “I will not comply,” he added.

    I had asked Lambert for an interview in July, to speak about his views, challenge them, and to see where they were rooted. Initially, he agreed, but the night before we were due to meet, he cancelled without any initial indication he wanted to reschedule. After being pressed on another date and promising to come back with a suggestion, he did not.

    It became apparent on his Instagram page that two days before our original interview, he had attended a gathering with at least four other people, including Andrew Bridgen, the Member of Parliament who, earlier this year, was expelled from the Conservative Party for comparing Covid-19 vaccines to the Holocaust. He had also been found to have breached lobbying rules.


    Bridgen has been an outspoken critic of lockdown policy (Leon Neal/Getty Images)

    At the start of September, Hope Not Hate, the largest anti-fascist organisation in the United Kingdom, distributed a picture of Bridgen in Copenhagen with Tommy Robinson, arguably the most notorious far-right activist in the United Kingdom.

    The organisers of the rally Lambert promoted and attended in Liverpool were the British Lions, a group which was spawned out of the Covid conspiracy “freedom” movement.

    Despite using ancient law and sovereign language, Hope Not Hate says the organisation is not explicitly far-right, but says that some of its members have been seen at other far-right events.

    A leaflet handed out by the British Lions on Wednesday outlined, rather chaotically, all of the things they are challenging the government on. Some were rooted in reality, such as the attempt to criminalise rights to protest; others were unsubstantiated claims apparently designed to offer the impression of a super conspiracy.

    So many of the origin stories for these groups and beliefs can be traced back to the pandemic, which Joe Mulhall, from Hope Not Hate, describes as an “unprecedented opportunity for engagement with the conspiracy world”.

    Mulhall says conspiracists will ignore any differences when they meet believers of their secretive world. “The nuances seem tiny when they feel like they are conquering an external force. The enormity of the perceived threat means they will put aside political distinctions that traditionally might be a problem.”


    Nine summers ago, I watched Lambert cry tears of joy as he completed his dream move. He was at Melwood, Liverpool’s old training ground, having just signed for the club.

    When I spoke to him briefly in July, he described it as the best moment of his life. I remember being delighted for him, as so many Liverpool supporters were. His story until this point had been one of crushing rejection and extraordinary revival, heaving himself from the floor of his release from the club he loved as a teenager to working his way back a couple of decades later. “I can’t believe this has happened,” he told me.


    Lambert fulfilled a boyhood dream by playing for Liverpool (Michael Regan/Getty Images)

    On much colder reflection, his path might offer clues as to why he thinks the way he does now. Lambert was born in Kirkby, an overspill town seven miles inland from Liverpool’s city centre, living in a maisonette opposite the old Kirkby Stadium, which for junior teams in the area was the equivalent of Wembley. With a notoriously hard shot, he was spotted by Liverpool scouts aged 10 and he spent five years in the junior ranks, rejecting opportunities to join Everton and Manchester United.

    It was not a shock to him when he was told by Steve Heighway, Liverpool’s academy director, that he was being released because of his lack of pace. Over the next few years, he had to adapt his game and this led to him playing in a variety of positions. He joined Blackpool as a right-back, but by the last year of his apprenticeship, he was a central midfielder. Two of those years had been under Nigel Worthington, but when Steve McMahon, the former Liverpool midfielder, took over, his fortunes changed. McMahon had been his father’s hero, but within six months of his appointment as manager, Lambert was allowed to leave the club — unable to even get a game for the reserves. McMahon had seen ability but did not think Lambert’s body would allow him to regularly play for 90 minutes.

    On trial at Macclesfield Town, he was not being paid and this led to him getting a job at a beetroot factory. Aged 19, he was contemplating a career in the semi-professional ranks because he did not have a car and could not even afford the cost of the travel expenses to make it to training. Yet six months later, he was sold to Stockport County for what remains a club record fee of £300,000.

    Lambert believes he was entitled to earn 10 per cent of that fee, but when he tried to buy a house, he learned that the money had disappeared into an agent’s account. By the age of 19, it would be understandable if he had trust issues given he might feel let down by the club he loved, his father’s hero, and the person supposedly representing him in this cruel, unforgiving sport.

    At Stockport, Lambert found it hard to adapt to a deep-lying midfield role. The team was struggling and the fans turned on the players. As the most expensive signing, he bore the brunt and this led to him dropping a division to join League Two Rochdale, where he rediscovered a sense of purpose while playing as a centre-forward. He maintained his scoring habit after moving to Bristol Rovers and when Southampton were relegated into League One, new owners, with new money, enticed him to the south coast. There, the manager Alan Pardew asked him to lift his top up. Looking at his belly, he told him he was a “disgrace”.

    Despite scoring the goals that helped Southampton accelerate back up the leagues and making friends with Le Tissier along the way, Lambert says the club wanted to sell him every summer.

    He was desperate to prove them wrong and when he finally made it into the Premier League, aged 30, he had played almost 400 games across each of the divisions in the English football league. Yet in the opening game of that season, at champions Manchester City, he was left on the bench. The decision by manager Nigel Adkins suggested he didn’t truly believe in him.


    Lambert always felt the need to prove himself (Glyn Kirk/AFP via Getty Images)

    Listening to Lambert, you begin to realise how lonely football can be. He could only ever really trust himself: his talent and resilience. Regularly, those making decisions about the direction of his career did not. Even after proving himself in the Premier League, he felt as though international recognition with England only came out of respect for his record rather than his ability.

    On his debut against Scotland, he was in “dreamland” after scoring the winner. He made it into England’s squad for the 2014 World Cup squad but felt like a “mascot” after just three minutes of playing time. The lack of action meant he felt he needed less of a summer holiday as he began his Liverpool career. Despite being given five weeks off, he returned to Melwood after a fortnight, vowing to become the fittest he had ever been.

    It proved to be a mistake because he needed the break. Aged 32, Lambert had never played a full season extending into a summer tournament before. Back on Merseyside, he felt heavy — like he didn’t have any energy. On the club’s pre-season tour of the United States, he struggled with the routine of training, playing and travelling.

    Liverpool’s manager, Brendan Rodgers, had told Lambert that he was bringing in Alexis Sanchez to replace the outgoing Luis Suarez. Sanchez, however, never arrived. In the 2014-15 season, Liverpool missed Suarez terribly. In Sanchez’s place, Rodgers bought Mario Balotelli despite vowing not to, and Balotelli’s signing was a failure.

    Lambert was under more pressure to deliver. His first Liverpool goal at Crystal Palace coincided with what turned into a bad team performance and a defeat. After just five months at the club, Rodgers wanted to move him on, but Lambert rejected the opportunity to join Palace before he almost went to Aston Villa. He never fulfilled that boyhood dream of scoring for Liverpool at Anfield.

    Out of the starting XI, his fitness got worse. He was less likely to affect a game if his chance did come. Spells at West Bromwich Albion and Cardiff City followed, but within six weeks, Lambert was told by Neil Warnock that he wanted him off the wage bill. One of the offers came from Scunthorpe United, but he couldn’t face lowering himself to a level of football which he had tried so hard to get away from.

    Listening to him on the Straight From The Off podcast in 2021, it seemed as though he was still searching for answers as to why his career unravelled the way it did. Certainly, had he listened to any supposed “expert” at crucial points in his career, then he may have not even made it to Blackpool.

    Across the Liverpool fanbase, he has become a figure of fun, but not because his time at the club ended in the way it did. In another podcast this year, he spoke enthusiastically about scientists conducting an experiment where they spent time speaking positively to a glass of water, which allegedly responded by dazzling them with the clarity of their crystals.

    When a friend saw that clip, he messaged me straight away, asking: “What next, Rickie Lambert taking mortgage advice from a can of Fanta?”

    (Top photo: Getty Images; design: Eamonn Dalton)

    [ad_2]

    The New York Times

    Source link