Football disorder on the rise as police struggle to find resources to crush trouble
A famous picture was taken at Sheffield United's Bramall Lane ground, in which a fan was being escorted around the side of the pitch and out of the ground by police. Buried in the side of his head was a Kung Fu star.
In February 1978 another 'iconic' image was taken - a Manchester United fan at a game against Liverpool being helped by police and a St John Ambulance man with a dart embedded in his face, dangerously close to his eye.
READ MORE: 'It's like two worlds, everyone notices it'
READ MORE: 'I asked Stockport locals what they'd change about town - the answer was unanimous'
The loss of 96 lives at Hillsborough in 1989 rightly warranted a seismic shift in the way we watch the game. The Taylor Report published in its wake resulted in all seat stadia. This diminished the opportunities for violence between fans and crucially increased safety.
But disturbing new figures show an 18 percent increase in reported disorder at football matches across England and Wales last season with 1,583 in 2024/25 compared to 1,341 in 2023/24. This included football-related violence, disorder, anti-social behaviour and harm.
It means at least one incident was reported at more than half of the 3,090 matches played last season from the Premier League down to the National League and games in FA Cup, League Cup, Football League Trophy, Champions League, Europa League, Conference League and international fixtures.
The number of arrests, however, dropped by 11 percent from 2,167 to 1,932 - a first decrease since fans returned to the stadiums after the Covid-19 pandemic.
The National Police Chiefs' Council said the "worrying level of offending at men's football matches across the country" is putting an increased strain on the police.
Cheshire Chief Constable, Mark Roberts, its football policing lead, said the figures show "why it is essential that football clubs need to start paying their fair share towards policing matches."
In April a group of football hooligans were jailed after scenes of chaos broke out at a game between Bolton Wanderers and Wigan Athletic The 'pre-planned' violence erupted in Westhoughton after the match on August 19, 2023, in which Wigan beat Bolton 4-0. At least 50 people were caught up in the brawl, leaving one man in need of hospital treatment. Thirteen men were handed banning orders after the mass fight, with four getting jail sentences.
In December police investigating a huge organised fight between rival hooligans in Salford have arrested ten 'high-risk' Manchester United supporters suspected of being involved in violence with Dutch supporters the day before the Reds took on FC Twente earlier this year.
A fight between a reported 80 men erupted near a pub in Lower Broughton on the afternoon of September 25 but by the time Greater Manchester Police attended the supporters had fled and made their way into Manchester city centre. Pictures later appeared online of what appeared to be masked United hooligans who claimed their Dutch rival ended up running away,
The Home Office figures reveal hate crime incidents increased by six percent and drugs in football stadiums by 25 percent. Police are investigating after an incident towards the end of York City's game with Salford City FC at York's LNER Stadium earlier this month in which racial abuse was directed at Salford players. The game was abandoned.
Meanwhile, there have been decreases in the number of pitch encroachments, down 12 percent, and pyrotechnics offences, reduced by 19 percent as police have worked with the clubs to tackle the issues.
Despite the increase in the number of football-related incidents, the number of arrests has fallen by 11 percent. The National Police Chief's Council says a contributing factor of the decrease is because many police forces have difficulties policing matches as they make hard choices with tightened finances. This is compounded by the inability to fairly recover policing costs.
Despite the decrease in arrests, the number of Football Banning Orders (FBOs) has continued to increase (2,439 in June 2025, compared to 2,172 in August 2024).
The majority of these FBOs are for violent offences such as missile throwing, assaults and public order offences.
Chief Constable Roberts said: "These figures show that we are continuing to see a worrying level of offending at men's football matches across the country at all levels, which is leading to an increasing strain on policing resources and demonstrates why it is essential that football clubs need to start paying their fair share towards policing matches.
"Policing men's football creates significantly more demand than any other event in terms of public order deployments nationally, meaning every week officers are taken away from policing communities to facilitate matches. Given the frequency of the games in the UK, it is a huge drain on our resources and means that we are essentially losing around 800 to 1,200 officers every year to policing football.
"The cost to the public purse for policing football matches is extortionate, with taxpayers now providing £70m of the policing each season - which cannot continue.
"As things stand, football clubs are only required to cover the costs incurred inside their ground or in their property - they do not have to pay a penny towards the policing of surrounding streets, city centres, or towards the increasing marches to stadiums by fans. On top of this, 48 percent of games across all leagues incur no charges for policing, with 95 percent of the National League being police-free so to suggest fair cost recovery would put small clubs out of business is wide of the mark.
"In a nutshell, this means that we as the police are subsidising clubs that quite happily spend up to £1b in a single transfer window. That is why I am continuing to call for the government to speed up the ongoing consultation process into the current legislation."
He added: "The reporting of online hate crime has reduced this year. This is down to us working with social media companies to ensure that action can be taken against those responsible. They have speeded up their processes and many use filters to greater effect, thereby preventing offensive posts being published.
"Further work needs to be done. We know that online abuse is still widely underreported, and we would encourage anyone affected by these despicable crimes to report them.
"Collectively we need to make football a safer space for the overwhelming majority of fans who want to enjoy the game. Anyone who commits a criminal offence outside or inside the ground can expect to face the consequences of their actions."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
28 minutes ago
- New York Times
P27, W0, D1, L26: Why England v Italy offers that rarest of prospects – a ‘big six' Euros upset
There are a couple of paradoxes in international women's football in Europe at the moment. The first is that, while the overall quality of the game is steadily improving year on year, it is difficult to make a case that any individual side has dramatically improved in relation to the others. The accepted hierarchy is still in place. Advertisement In other words, the six favourites going into Euro 2022 were the same six favourites going into Euro 2025: England, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and Sweden. No one has yet evolved from being one of the 'other' nations to being one of the favourites. The second is related. While the outsiders have become better at competing with the favourites — there are no longer any huge thrashings at the European Championship, and the biggest margin of victory at this tournament has been by a fairly respectable five goals — they are not actually managing to defeat them. Or, in actual fact, even get a draw against them. The statistics demonstrate this nicely. At Euro 2022, there were 16 matches between one of the 'big six' and the 'other 10'. Those matches produced 15 victories for the favourites, and a single draw. That draw was recorded with the final kick of the group stage, when Iceland scored a 112th-minute penalty against a France side who were already assured of top spot in Group D, and therefore had made six changes for a game played in 36-degree heat. The equaliser, admitted France manager Corinne Diacre after the game, 'wasn't that important given the situation'. It's fair to suspect that, had France needed to beat Iceland, they would have. It's been a similar story this time around. The 11 matches between one of the favourites and the 'other 11' at Euro 2025 have produced 10 victories for the favourites. And only Denmark have (twice) held the opposition to merely a one-goal victory, losing 1-0 to neighbours Sweden, and 2-1 to Germany, ensuring their elimination after two matches. Denmark, of course, will not be celebrating this as much of an achievement. Indeed, Denmark are the side who inflicted the last genuine shock at the European Championship, in 2017. Going into the quarter-final, they were given little hope against a Germany side who had won eight of the previous nine European Championships. But after the match was postponed by a day due to torrential rain in Rotterdam, Denmark produced a huge upset by coming back from a goal down to win 2-1. It was only the second time since 1989 that Germany had not won the European Championship. Advertisement The Danes subsequently reached the final in 2017, beating relative minnows Austria on penalties in the semi-final, before losing to hosts the Netherlands 4-2 in the final. But that seems a long time ago. And now, the underdogs' record against the 'big six' at the past two tournaments is played 27, won none, drawn one, and lost 26. Which does not make for a particularly appealing competition for viewers hoping for the unexpected. On Tuesday in Geneva, Italy have the final opportunity in this European Championship to provide the Euros' first genuine shock, when they take on holders England. In some ways, it is a shame to be speaking about Italy in such a fashion, considering their period of relative success in the 1990s. As other European nations have put more resources into women's football, Italy stood still and therefore slipped behind. The Italian game remains something of a mystery to many, with almost all the national team players remaining at home, and relatively little Italian involvement in the final stages of the Champions League. It is clear, from speaking to four-time Serie A-winning manager Rita Guarino before the tournament, that English football and the Women's Super League is considered a template for Italy to follow. That includes bidding to host this tournament in four years' time, having witnessed the success of Euro 2022. It might seem patronising to consider Italy underdogs, but then the general pattern from this tournament is players and managers declaring the opposition are favourites. And, after all, Italy are suited to the role. For all the brilliance of playmaker Manuela Giugliano, they probably do not have the guile to dominate the game against England. But they have centre-backs who will relish a physical duel against Alessia Russo (of Italian descent, as it happens), full-backs who have provided a stream of good crosses throughout this tournament, attacking midfielders who make direct runs on the break, and a major penalty-box threat in Cristiana Girelli. Advertisement Andrea Soncin's side showed enough against Spain in their final group game to suggest they will cause England problems, primarily on the counter-attack. An Italian win would be popular across Europe — it would not merely be a victory for themselves, but for everyone outside the established 'big six'.
New York Times
28 minutes ago
- New York Times
Bryan Mbeumo to Manchester United: Everything you need to know
Manchester United have signed Bryan Mbeumo from Brentford for £65million with a further £6m in potential add-ons. The 25-year-old has signed a five-year deal at Old Trafford with the option of a further year. As part of this summer's transfer coverage on The Athletic, in addition to breaking news, tactical analysis and in-depth reads, our Transfers TLDR series (you can read them all here) will bring you a quick guide to each of the key deals. When he was a 14-year-old, Mbeumo, who was born in Avallon, France, a three-hour drive south from Paris, joined Troyes. He would spend the next six years at the now-Ligue 2 side making 42 senior appearances, including four games in Ligue 1. Brentford called in 2019 and it was a perfect fit. Mbeumo contributed 70 goals and 51 assists in 242 games as Thomas Frank's team won promotion to the Premier League via the play-offs in 2021 and have consolidated their place in the top flight since. Advertisement Mbeumo represented France through the age groups before committing to Cameroon, playing for them at the 2022 World Cup. Caoimhe O'Neill Now here is a player who loves being part of a sweeping counter-attacking move. Mbeumo likes pushing the ball past players before finding space for a shot or working a pass for a team-mate. He is a creator. And while he can, has and will score spectacular goals, don't expect each and every one to be so. Mbeumo has got the traditional winger-cutting-in finish on lock. He won't get past his marker every time, but when he does expect a goalscoring opportunity to emerge from a player who played in all 38 Premier League games for Brentford last season scoring 20 goals and completing eight assists. Caoimhe O'Neill In Mbeumo, United are getting a versatile, left-footed forward who is comfortable using his weaker right foot too. He is excellent at driving forward with the ball, using a combination of sprints, pauses and deft touches to outmanoeuvre defenders. Coupled with his awareness and ability to create from the half-spaces and wide areas, Mbeumo fits into the right No 10 role in Ruben Amorim's system and could play as a centre-forward if required. Mbeumo is an efficient operator. Among the 25 players who scored 10 or more Premier League goals last season, his 2.2 shots per 90 ranked 19th. But his 22.7 touches per shot and 24 per cent shot-to-goal conversion rate both ranked third, while his xG overperformance of 7.7 (20 goals from 12.3xG) was the highest. Anantaajith Raghuraman Mbeumo was sidelined for three months from December 2023 to March 2024 with an ankle problem that needed surgery. Other than that, he has been consistently available for Brentford and did not miss a match through injury in 2024-25. Cerys Jones Thomas Frank has said Mbeumo will be impossible to replace given his goal contributions in the past six seasons. 'He's a top player,' Frank said in a September 2024 press conference. 'I'm convinced he will play for a bigger club. I'd buy him if I was at a bigger club.' When Mbeumo joined Brentford for a club-record fee of £5.4million ($6.6m), Pontus Jansson, his former team-mate, remembers speaking about him to then co-director of football Rasmus Ankersen. 'He said, 'We are going to buy a young player from France, and if he is not a world-class player in a couple of years, I'm going to be very disappointed',' Jansson told The Athletic in February. 'He wasn't wrong.' Caoimhe O'Neill Manchester United have spent £65m on bringing Mbeumo to Old Trafford, with a further £6m in potential add-ons. The Cameroon forward has joined on a five-year deal, agreeing terms until June 2030 with an option of a further year. United will pay the initial £65m fee in four instalments. Mbeumo's arrival marks the second £60m-plus signing of the summer at United, after Matheus Cunha's move from Wolves in June. Mbeumo is the sixth most expensive signing in the club's history, trailing Paul Pogba, Antony, Harry Maguire, Jadon Sancho and Romelu Lukaku. Advertisement The sale represents a club record for Brentford, surpassing the £34m received from Al Ahli for Ivan Toney a year ago. Brentford have now generated over £80m in sales this summer, with Mbeumo joining Christian Norgaard and Mark Flekken in leaving. Chris Weatherspoon Assuming agent fees of 10 per cent plus a four per cent transfer levy, Mbeumo's signing adds £14.1m to United's amortisation bill in 2025-26, then £15.0m per season until the end of the 2029-30 season. While United will pay the fee in four instalments, the timing of payments doesn't materially impact their PSR calculation. The full £65m is still spread across Mbeumo's five-year contract. Mbeumo's wage at United has not been confirmed, though reports last month claimed a £250,000 weekly salary was the forward's desire. After employment-related costs, that equates to £15m in annual expenditure. Whatever the true figure, it's clear the cost of signing him will go well beyond the £74.1m in estimated fees; signing and then employing Mbeumo over his five-year contract will cost United well over £100m. For Brentford, the deal results in substantial profit. Mbeumo was signed from French side Troyes for a little under £6m in August 2019 on an initial five-year deal. He signed a four-year extension in January 2022 taking him to the end of June 2026, but his book value has reduced to less than £1m. We estimate his old club will book £64.3m in profit into their 2025-26 financial year. Chris Weatherspoon
New York Times
28 minutes ago
- New York Times
Premier League season tickets assessed: Most expensive? Cheapest? Do price rises affect transfer spend?
The Premier League returns next month and stadiums will be full for another season. Attendances continue to hold up, with waiting lists for season tickets across many clubs, while broadcasting revenues remain lucrative. But for regular matchgoing fans, the cost of watching their team will be difficult to stomach. Advertisement Prices for season tickets have increased markedly since the resumption of matches after the Covid-19 pandemic. This season, there has been a change in attitude, with seven clubs freezing prices for attending their 19 home league matches. However, all but one club — Crystal Palace — raised prices last term. Still, attending football remains an expensive hobby, with nine clubs charging more than £1,000 for their most expensive offerings and several others coming close to that mark. Clubs had previously expressed sympathy with fans and referenced the cost-of-living crisis while simultaneously increasing prices. This year, those reasons are less prominent, with the latest argument being that the increased cost of national insurance employer contributions has necessitated an increase in prices. Season tickets entitle fans to attend all of their club's 19 home fixtures. They are cheaper than purchasing individual match tickets, which in many cases have again been subject to price rises. Ten Premier League clubs have some form of minimum usage policy. Arsenal, Aston Villa, Brentford, Brighton & Hove Albion, Leeds United, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United, Sunderland and Tottenham Hotspur require a certain number of games to either be attended, the ticket to be resold via a ticket exchange, or it be transferred. West Ham United monitor non-attendance. Here, The Athletic looks at clubs' prices. This is based on the cost for a new buyer, or, in the case of clubs where there are no new tickets available, the final renewal phase. For consistency, we have used non-hospitality season ticket pricing that can be purchased via the clubs' ticketing portal. The hefty outlay many fans will have to cope with continues to raise eyebrows. At Fulham, where season tickets have reached general sale and there remains availability, the most expensive season ticket will set you back £3,084 in the Riverside Stand — an increase of £84 from last year. Arsenal (£1,726), Bournemouth (£1,164), Brighton (£1,035), Chelsea (£1,095), Tottenham (£2,223), and West Ham (£1,720) all significantly breach the £1,000 mark. Advertisement Manchester City have a premium, but not hospitality, option at £1,600 in their 93:20 area, similar to Brentford, whose Dugout seating comes in at £815, more than elsewhere in the ground but still general admission. Chelsea's Westview prices come under their 'Club Chelsea' hospitality banner, but are similar to Fulham's Riverside in that it offers the best views and access to superior facilities. These are priced between £1,745 and £4,300 and are only available on a waiting list system. Fulham, again in the Riverside Stand, charge £2,570 for juniors, although their lowest-priced under-18 ticket in the stadium is £154. West Ham's £1,720 junior ticket is also eye-watering, but they have a much cheaper option at £109. There continues to be a blurring of the lines over general admission season tickets, with more premium options being offered by clubs with small added benefits as clubs seek to increase their revenue. Burnley's prices are notable and they have been frozen. Their most expensive adult season ticket costs £525, £70 less than Ipswich Town's equivalent last season. The under-22 age band has been changed to under-21 at Turf Moor, though. Brentford have frozen their prices and outside of their slightly more premium offering of the Dugout, which provides a padded seat and access to a bar and concourse, their highest-priced adult ticket is £605. The Dugout pricing is £815. Newly promoted Sunderland, who have sold all of their season tickets, top out at £780 for their priciest adult ticket, although they have increased prices for renewals by 9.5 per cent. For the cheapest adult tickets, West Ham charge £345, slightly below Burnley (£352), Newcastle United (£362) and Bournemouth (£423). Brentford offer the lowest-priced junior ticket at just £80, Newcastle provide £81 tickets for juniors, and Bournemouth's cheapest comes in at £86. Some clubs have restrictions on where juniors can sit and use a ratio of adults to juniors in their family stands. Last season, Palace were the only club to freeze their prices, but for the new campaign, seven clubs — Brentford, Burnley, Manchester City, Liverpool, Tottenham, West Ham and Wolverhampton Wanderers — have done so. At Everton, supporters have seen prices increase by up to 21 per cent, the highest increase, but with the club moving out of Goodison Park and into the Hill Dickinson Stadium, a rise in costs for supporters was to be expected. Palace's most expensive adult ticket has risen by 9.5 per cent. Chelsea's rises are between 6.9 per cent and 15 per cent, while Brighton have raised prices by between 2.5 and 7.3 per cent for adults. For 82.5 per cent of season ticket holders at Bournemouth, there will be a 6.5 per cent increase. Nottingham Forest's are up by seven per cent. Newcastle, Manchester United and Villa have risen by five per cent. Leeds have increased theirs by four per cent, but their cheapest adult ticket has risen by 14 per cent. Aston Villa, Manchester United, Newcastle and Forest froze junior concessions in all or part of the stadium. Brentford, Burnley, Liverpool, Manchester City, West Ham and Wolves froze prices across all categories. That depends, but outside of the top Premier League clubs, the total income from gate receipts is relatively small when compared with overall turnover. Excluding the promoted clubs, Arsenal's takings from ticketing account for the highest proportion of income at 21.4 per cent. Manchester United are second with 20.7 per cent, Tottenham's is 20.4 per cent, and Chelsea's is 17.1 per cent. Advertisement Unsurprisingly, clubs with smaller stadiums have a lower proportion of their overall income made up by ticket sales. Bournemouth's is just four per cent, Brentford 6.8 per cent, Palace 7.2 per cent, Forest 7.6 per cent, while Wolves (9.1 per cent) are the final non-newly promoted club whose matchday income accounts for less than 10 per cent of their overall turnover. 'Matchday income is still a core revenue function,' Dr Dan Plumley, senior lecturer in sport finance at Sheffield Hallam University, told The Athletic last year. 'If you drop down a little bit into the lower tier of the Premier League, you'll find that broadcasting money makes up probably 60 to 70 per cent of some clubs' income. 'If you're looking at how you can generate a little bit more revenue, then moving the age brackets around, offering fewer concessions and making more people fall into what we might term a 'general bracket' — which is normally the highest priced tickets, depending on where you sit in the stadium — is one way of doing that.' Increasingly, clubs are implementing minimum usage policies for season tickets. This is done by mandating that supporters attend a certain number of games, or if they cannot attend, then sell on a ticket exchange platform. It is a policy first introduced in the Premier League by Brentford for the 2023-24 season and has now been further adopted. The rules and ramifications vary between clubs, with Manchester City's being the strictest. They require season ticket holders to personally attend at least 10 Premier League matches — something their supporters are challenging under the Equality Act. Bournemouth, Burnley, Chelsea, Palace, Everton, Fulham, Forest and Wolves have no such monitoring in place this season. Advertisement At Leeds, existing season-ticket holders were only able to renew online if they met the 80 per cent attendance threshold — 18 or more home league games in the 2024-25 season, having played in the Championship, in which you play 23 home games in a season. Spurs have reduced the senior discount by 5 per cent and the qualifying age was raised to 66, which meant a 10 per cent rise for those affected. Arsenal have introduced a 19-game Premier League season ticket to sit alongside their 23-game option, which automatically includes their four guaranteed home European matches in the Champions League, marking a change from previous years where it was opt-out only. Season-ticket holders at the Emirates who post their tickets on the ticket exchange on the day of the match will only receive their credit if the ticket is sold, but if they do so before the day of the game, they will receive their credit regardless of whether it sells. West Ham, who last year removed concession tickets from bands one to four — those seats closest to the pitch — have now reinstated those options after facing significant fan discontent. Every club is required to offer fans the chance to spread the cost of their ticket over a period of time. Half of the 20 Premier League clubs still partner with external firm V12 Retail Finance, whereas the other 10 have taken this process in-house. Generally, those using this option will end up paying more for their ticket, either by being excluded from early renewal phases or by paying interest on what is effectively a loan. Arsenal, who use V12, offer four or 10 payments with an interest rate of 4.65 per cent and 6.31 per cent; Chelsea's eight-month plan with the same company is at 6.64 per cent; Everton's in-house option for 10 or 12 months has a £55 'facility fee'; Fulham have plans between four and 10 months with an interest rate of between 4.46 per cent and 7.32 per cent. Advertisement Leeds' offering for six or 10 payments with V12 is charged at 5.36 per cent and 7.32 per cent. Liverpool's 10-month plan has a 7.32 per cent interest rate, while Manchester United's is 6.31 per cent — both via V12. Forest's four and 10-month plans with V12 have a 9.80 per cent rate. At West Ham, the same options have a fee of 4.46 per cent and 7.32 per cent. Palace offer a 10 equal payment plan with no administration fees or interest. However, those supporters are only eligible to renew from phase two, where prices are approximately 7.5 per cent higher. But this is not a price hike for those who buy for the first time, as they are only eligible after renewals close. All other Premier League clubs do not charge a fee for their payment plan options. Most clubs have moved to a digital-first or digital-only approach. This is the direction of travel, initiated by the Premier League, which stipulated that it will be mandatory — 70 per cent of all tickets must be delivered digitally — by the start of the 2026-27 season. Newly promoted clubs will have two years to implement its use. Clubs must provide reasonable adjustments for fans who, through disability, are unable to use digital ticketing, meaning a small subset of supporters will still use physical or e-tickets, but many face the hurdle of an application process. Environmental concerns are occasionally cited, but more prominently, the Premier League and its clubs argue the shift to digital ticketing is to better determine who is in the ground and reduce touting. When approached by The Athletic, the Premier League offered no hard evidence that touting has been reduced by digital ticketing. However, it says it is reviewing support for clubs' anti-touting operations. It says physical tickets are easy to sell on, while print-at-home tickets with barcodes can be printed multiple times and sold to people who then can't access a stadium. The Premier League points out rotating or hidden barcodes mean digital tickets can't be screenshotted and sold multiple times, as they must be refreshed before going into the stadium. The direction of travel with season tickets is clear. Clubs continue to find ways to maximise revenue at the cost of matchgoing supporters. Changes to pricing structures this year have been minimal and far less controversial, but more clubs have introduced minimum attendance rules and sought to make their offerings more attractive without pricing supporters out completely. For a small but important section of season ticket holders, digital ticketing is a major concern. Supporters will question whether there is a genuine need to increase prices, but clubs seem destined to keep finding ways to raise more income from match-going supporters.
