must end of season report 2015/16a record of ticket allocations and safety issues for manchester...
TRANSCRIPT
A record of ticket allocations and safety
issues for Manchester United supporters
attending away games in the 2015/16
season, compiled by the Manchester
United Supporters Trust
MUST end of
season
report
2015/16
By Dale Haslam, MUST committee member
1
Contents MUST foreword ....................................................................................................................................... 3
FSF foreword ........................................................................................................................................... 4
Ticket prices ............................................................................................................................................ 5
Ticket distribution statistics .................................................................................................................... 6
Aston Villa ............................................................................................................................................... 9
Club Bruges ........................................................................................................................................... 12
Swansea ................................................................................................................................................ 16
PSV Eindhoven ...................................................................................................................................... 18
Southampton ........................................................................................................................................ 20
Arsenal .................................................................................................................................................. 22
Everton .................................................................................................................................................. 24
CSKA Moscow ....................................................................................................................................... 26
Crystal Palace ........................................................................................................................................ 29
Watford ................................................................................................................................................. 33
Leicester ................................................................................................................................................ 34
Wolfsburg .............................................................................................................................................. 36
AFC Bournemouth ................................................................................................................................. 40
Stoke ..................................................................................................................................................... 41
Newcastle .............................................................................................................................................. 45
Liverpool ............................................................................................................................................... 47
Post – .................................................................................................................................................... 49
Derby County ........................................................................................................................................ 51
Chelsea .................................................................................................................................................. 53
Sunderland ............................................................................................................................................ 55
FC Midtjylland ....................................................................................................................................... 57
Shrewsbury ........................................................................................................................................... 60
West Brom ............................................................................................................................................ 61
Liverpool ............................................................................................................................................... 62
Manchester City .................................................................................................................................... 65
Spurs ..................................................................................................................................................... 66
West Ham.............................................................................................................................................. 68
Everton .................................................................................................................................................. 73
Norwich ................................................................................................................................................. 74
2
West Ham.............................................................................................................................................. 75
Crystal Palace ........................................................................................................................................ 81
Changes for 2016/17 ............................................................................................................................. 84
DISCLAIMER: THE VIEWS EXPRESSED WITHIN THIS REPORT ARE OF THE AUTHOR AND ARE EITHER
BASED ON RELEVANT DOCUMENTATION OR FAIR COMMENT. THOSE VIEWS MAY VARY FROM
THOSE OF FOOTBALL CLUBS, POLICE FORCES, LOCAL COUNCILS AND OTHER PUBLIC AUTHORITIES,
MANY OF WHOM HAVE BEEN SENT AN ADVANCED COPY.
3
MUST foreword
From the perspective of someone wanting to represent fans effectively, I ended the 2015/16 more
confident than I have been in years.
MUST continues to be extremely proactive in our dealings with United, and the club are engaging
often and well. The free coaches to several games at the end of last season were a good example of
this, and many others are listed in this report.
We are thankful that practically every club we played worked with us throughout the season, but
there is still some way to go, particularly with supporter liaison officers who, in some cases, are
reluctant to do what they are supposed to.
There were particular concerns with regards to games at Stoke and West Ham and I would like to
see improvements in 2016/17.
Allocations seem to be evening out and, with bigger stadia at some Premier League clubs either
having been built (Manchester City, West Ham) or due to be built (Liverpool, Tottenham, Chelsea),
the number of tickets United get could rise further.
Generally, the feeling among MUST committee members is that we are positively achieving our
objectives and this is breeding confidence among members and supporters.
Two key developments for 2016/17 are the establishment of a supporter sanctions/appeals
procedure, developed in consultation with MUST, and the ‘rolling over’ of Euro away credits,
ensuring that credits built up over several seasons are considered, rather than just the last few
games.
Hopefully, we will have just as much success on the pitch under our new manager.
Thanks for reading this report and any feedback is welcome via [email protected]
Dale Haslam
MUST committee member for away ticketing, safety and related issues
4
Football Supporters Federation foreword
Tremendous credit must go to Dale for the huge amount of time and effort he puts in to trying to ensure meaningful dialogue with the games' stakeholders throughout the season. As we argue in our joint report with the Sports Ground Safety Authority (SGSA)1 there is no doubt that good, constructive liaison with club officials, the police and local authorities can and does result in positive outcomes. We understand that working with the games largest stakeholders - match going supporters - is still a relatively new concept for some and that there are barriers to overcome such as "who do we work with?" "we discuss confidential information" "what can they actually contribute?" and so on. Cllr Ann O'Byrne, the chairman of Merseyside's Safety Advisory Group, which helps set allocations for Everton and Liverpool games, is on record as saying: "We involved a number of fans' groups, which has led to a better understanding of the role of all parties in ensuring the safety of supporters.... there needs to be better engagement with supporters' groups". We hope that this report, the endorsement of meaningful dialogue by the SGSA and Cllr O'Byrne's comments go some way to reassuring those responsible for our safety and match day operations that, while there may be some areas where there is healthy disagreement, in the main, the motives of Dale and MUST are no different to theirs: Quite simply, achieving safety and fair and equitable treatment of fans. We very much hope that next season existing relationships will be renewed and new ones made between MUST and stakeholders of our game. Amanda Jacks Case Worker The Football Supporters' Federation
1 http://www.fsf.org.uk/assets/Downloads/News/2016/FSF-and-SGSA-engaging-with-supporters-2016-web-final.pdf
5
Ticket prices
Column1 Adults Over 65s Over 60s U 21s U 20s U 18s U 16s U 11s U 8s
Arsenal £59 £22.25 £19
Aston Villa £38 £30 £18 £12
Bournemouth £28 £14 £28 £14
Chelsea £51/£54 £20 £20
Crystal Palace £33/£35 £20/£21 £20/£21 £14/£15
Everton £42/£48 £27/£31 £20/£24
Leicester £35 £30 £23
Liverpool £45/£47 £34/£32.50 £45/£47 £10
Manchester City £51/£53 £42/£44 £33/£35 £29/£31
Newcastle £34 £24 £34 £13
Norwich £45 £35 £25
Southampton £37/£37 £30/£32 £18/£20 £9/£11
Stoke £35 £18 £35 £18
Sunderland £29 £18 £7
Swansea £40 £17.50 £17.50
Tottenham £43/£49 £23/£26 £20/£23
Watford £31 £17 £13 £5
West Brom £34 £24 £20 £10
West Ham £55 £30 £30
Arsenal top the adult price list, with Manchester City close behind. Bournemouth offered the
cheapest adult ticket. All away fans will pay a maximum of £30 in 2016/17.
Swansea were the only club to offer an over 60s rate, with the other 18 clubs going for an over 65s
rate.
On a similar note, Aston Villa were the only club to offer an under 8s rate, while Southampton
offered an under 11s rate.
Eleven clubs offered an under 16s rate and, of them, the range of prices was between £5 (Watford)
and £31 (Manchester City).
In 2016/17, it will be interesting to see whether clubs raise concession ticket prices to raise profits
due to the adult ticket cap.
6
Ticket distribution statistics
2015/16 in numbers
163,293 – total number of applications United received for PL away games
50,150 – tickets United got in 19 PL games
52,184 – tickets United were entitled to Under PL rules
51,020 – tickets United got in the previous season. (Most of the reduction is due to
Bouremouth’s stadium capacity)
3,217 – highest allocation of the season, at Leicester
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
Ars
enal
Ast
on
Vill
a
Bo
urn
emo
uth
Ch
els
ea
Cry
stal
Pal
ace
Eve
rto
n
Leic
este
r
Live
rpo
ol
Man
ches
ter
Cit
y
New
cast
le
No
rwic
h
Sou
tham
pto
n
Sto
ke
Sun
der
lan
d
Swan
sea
Tott
en
ham
Wat
ford
We
st B
rom
We
st H
am
No of applications
No of tickets
7
1.919 – number of tickets at West Ham
3,000 – number of tickets United were entitled to at West Ham
Opponent 2015/16 tickets 2016/17 projection
Arsenal 2,990 2,990
Aston Villa/Burnley 3,026 3,856
Bournemouth 1,316 1,318
Chelsea 2,862 2,862
Crystal Palace 2,867 2,867
Everton 2,886 2,886
Leicester 3,217 3,217
Liverpool 2,747 2,747
Manchester City 2,975 2,975
Newcastle/Hull 3,008 2,279
Norwich/M'Brough 2,634 3,000
Southampton 3,142 3,142
Stoke 2,557 2,800
Sunderland 2,500 2,700
Swansea 2,052 2,052
Tottenham 2,732 2,732
Watford 2,104 2,139
West Brom 2,616 2,616
West Ham 1,919 3,000
50,150 52,178
8
When reading police reports in this report, this is the key to match categorisations2:
PF – Police Free – no risks identified that require police officers to be deployed
SO – Spotters Only – no specific risks identified but police spotters deployed in a club
and supporter engagement role
A – low risk of disorder
B – medium risk of disorder
C – high risk of disorder
CIR – increased risk of disorder due to specific concerns.
Definitions of risk and non-risk supporters, according to the European Union:
risk supporter – a person, known or not, who can be regarded as posing a possible risk
to public order or antisocial behaviour, whether planned or spontaneous, at or in connection
with a football event3
non-risk supporter – a person, known or not, who can be regarded as posing no risk to the
cause of or contribution to violence or disorder, whether planned or spontaneous, at or in
connection with a football event.
2 http://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/public-order/policing-football/#definitions-of-risk-and-non-risk-supporters 3 http://library.college.police.uk/docs/APPref/Risk-Supporter-Checklist.pdf
9
Aston Villa
Villa Park
Premier League
Friday August 14, 19:45
Tickets
We got 3,026 tickets, which was 29 up on 2014/15. They cost £38 for adults, £30 for over 60s, £18
for under 18s, £12 for under 8s
While there have been issues at Villa Park, they appear to have been addressed in the last three
seasons, with maximum ticket allocations the norm.
Pre-match issues
The match was moved to a Friday night, creating a bit of confusion as to why.
It had been revealed in December 20144 that, from 2016/17, some matches would be shown live on
Friday nights and this match had been mooted as a ‘dress rehearsal’ for that.
But it turned out to be more straightforward than that: West Midlands Police wanted the match to
take place on a different day to an English Defence League demonstration in Birmingham, which
took place the following day.5 Early clarification from the authorities means a clear and transparent
explanation stops rumours developing.
I had no prior communication with Aston Villa’s SLO as there were no arising issues from the
previous season.
As in previous years, West Midlands Police made contact with MUST to share information via Twitter
about the importance of coaches and minibuses arriving before road closures began and to
recommend pubs to away fans.
They also confirmed no alcohol would be sold in the top tier of the away end “to the confinement of
the concourse.”
Match issues
It is noted that police say our fans blocked the aisles, but added that this “caused no real issues.”
Another point of interest from the police report is that there were just 32,000 people in the ground
by kick off – 10,000 short of the full attendance – due to what police describe as “traffic chaos”. Yet
the police have not detailed any request to the referee to consider delaying kick off.
While doing so is not ideal, as it means people might miss homeward transport, it is a shame that it
doesn’t seem to have been considered.
4 http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/dec/12/premier-league-friday-live-football-matches-tv 5 http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/aston-villa-vs-manchester-united-why-is-the-premier-league-fixture-on-a-friday-night-10453169.html
10
I am encouraged by the last line of the police report, which seems to suggest police will be happy to
stage further Friday night games and, more generally, we should keep our full ticket allocation next
time United play Villa.
11
12
Club Bruges
Jan Breydel Stadium, Bruges
UEFA Champions League play-off round, second leg
Wednesday August 26, 20:45 local time
Tickets
United got 1,675 tickets at £22 for this game, due to the small size of the ground.
MUST has consistently argued to UEFA that concessionary prices should be allowed for European
games.
Tickets were given to those who had attended the most European games in 2013/14 as per the
credit system.
The ticket collection point was fixed for the Congress Centre at Mariastraat 38,which was halfway
between the Eurostar station and the city centre.
Pre-match issues
Pre-match planning went well but, in hindsight, more could have been done to ensure reds reached
the ground in the right way.
Turning to the police report, in regards to the issue with two people arrested on the day before the
game, it prompts several points about GMP’s involvement.
It is important to stress that if an individual is arrested abroad, they should be dealt with in the same
way anyone would.
GMP officers, on foreign soil are private individuals and have no right to ask a person who has been
arrested if they have a match ticket.
Furthermore, whether a private individual, who happens to have just been arrested, has a ticket for
an unrelated football match, is completely irrelevant.
It also begs the question – if they were on the ticket list, what might GMP had done with this
information?
Secondly, while United did send text messages and tweets out warning people that a heavy
downpour was expected on the afternoon of the game, the police still organised an on-foot escort to
the ground. They should have put fans on to buses.
One fan in the escort said: “It was a complete p***take. I remember it taking a lot longer than 45
minutes. I’ve never arrived at a football match wetter than that.”
Thirdly, there was a fight in the city centre, as documented in the police report, though parts are
redacted. It drew press reports at the time.
13
Belgian Police often use the tactic with public order incidents where they apprehend everyone in
sight, take their details and then disperse them. Whether you would call this an ‘arrest’ is debatable,
but nothing resulted in any action in the UK.
There is a reference to an incident on a train in the UK the day after the game mentioned in the
police report.
As unpleasant as the incident sounds, it has no place in this report.
The man is a private individual that happens to have been to a football match the night before.
Where would you draw the line? Two days after the game? Twenty?
Police reports are partly about helping officers learn lessons from past games so they can plan for
the future. That does not include incidents the following day in a different country featuring one
individual. A sense of perspective is needed.
Category C IR (the highest category)
27,058 home fans
1,675 away fans
53 arrests - all home fans
Match Day -1
There were two away arrests in the city for two separate offences of being drunk and disorderly
both resulting in a fine. Neither of these individuals was in possession of Match tickets or on the
Manchester United ticket list.
14
Manchester United ticketing staff and security opened the Ticket collection point officially at
17.00hrs on Match day -1 and a total of 288 tickets were collected before closing at 20.00hrs.
Match Day
Pre Match:
On Match Day the ticket collection point opened at 09.00hrs and there was a steady flow of
collections throughout the day. At the time of collection all supporters were provided information
about the route to the stadium, the time of the planned escorted walk by police and the chances of
heavy rain. This information was also sent out via text by Manchester United
By 12.00 - 613 tickets had been collected
By 15.00 — 1100 tickets had been collected
By 16.15 — 1234 tickets had been collected
As the facility closed 48 tickets remained uncollected.
Within the city centre, United supporters drank heavily but behaved well. There was the usual
display of flags and banners and some anti-social behaviour, but police were tolerant as it did not
affect tourists or locals so they simply monitored the areas in question.
At around 18:00hrs, there were reports of a minor dispute occurring between a small group of
United supporters in a city centre bar, which results in an assault, with one person receiving hospital
treatment. Police arrested (redacted) after the event and found no complaint being made..
At around 18:30hrs, 30 minutes later than planned, there was an escorted walk from the Markt
Square. Around 500 to 600 supporters joined and it took 45 minutes. Unfortunately, on route there
was extremely heavy rain resulting in most who had not come prepared being soaked and some
complaints on arrival at the away ticket checks.
The outer ticket cordon arrangements were excellent.
As kick off approached, significant numbers of away supporters began to arrive at the ticket check
area (150 approx) at which time it was clear a number where intoxicated and ticket less.
This was dealt with firmly by the Belgium Police, who made a number of arrests under Football
Legislation, which prevented supporters attending at the stadium without a ticket.
During match
There was evidence of some infiltration (of the home end) and, during the first half, four Belgian-
based United supporters were arrested in the home areas.
Also during the first half, a supporter walked from the home area in the East Stand making his way
along the side of the pitch and then over onto the corner of the pitch near the United sector,
resulting in him being arrested.
Post match
15
United fans were held back for around 20 minutes before being released and escorted on foot back
to the city centre, whilst those travelling via coach left for the airport.
<REDACTED>
Almost immediately, this group arrived and several flares were thrown towards the public house and
the police deployed with shields to create a cordon between the two groups.
Because of the high number of police on the deployment, there was no opportunity for
confrontation.
A number of the United risk ran towards the police cordon but were unable to breach it and some
United risk were seen to encourage others to come out of the public house to increase the numbers.
Belgium Police then began to make tactical arrests, clearing the public house. A total of 25 United
supporters were arrested.
We were informed that those arrested would be taken to the police station, processed and then
released - very similar to breach of the peace.
This did bring the incident to a close and also prevented anything further happening in the city.
It is believed that there was some level of organisaton between the two groups and that this
disorder was planned.
Match day +1
<REDACTED>...a male who was sat in a reserved seat who refused to move for the victim.
This male stated "let's get out our passports," which the victim construed as being racially
motivated.
The same male was reported to have been abusive to other passengers on board. He was arrested
for racially aggravated public disorder
On the same service between Crewe and Piccadilly, there has been an altercation aboard where a
victim has been kicked by male. On arrival at Piccadilly, this male was arrested for common assault.
16
Swansea
Liberty Stadium
Premier League
Sunday August 30 16:00
Tickets
United said we got 2,052 tickets – the same as the previous season – though the police report says
2,074.
Pre match issues
I emailed Swansea asking for information and offering help in publicising safety information and
received no reply, which was disappointing. The club has responded once to four queries from MUST
in total.
Match issues
Smoke grenades aside, I found the police report to be a little bit naïve. I would be surprised if the
vast majority of the away clubs visiting Swansea do not have an element of fans who enjoy
themselves on the concourse, where the bar is.
The report makes it sound like ‘jumping around’ is a terrible thing to do and that singing a particular
song, which isn’t remotely offensive to anyone, can be judged to be an indication of behaviour.
While the one arrest is regrettable, it puts into context that things weren’t as bad as the report
suggests.
On a more positive note, it is good that the aisles and exits were kept clear and that should lead to a
full allocation next season.
Next season, we need early communication with Swansea’s SLO to ensure a pre and post-match
dialogue.
17
18
PSV Eindhoven
Philips Stadion, Eindhoven
UEFA Champions League group stages
Tuesday September 15, 20:45 local time
Tickets
1,825 tickets including 200 VIP tickets. Priced at £38. VIP ones cost £58.
MUST has consistently argued to UEFA that concessionary prices should be allowed for European
games.
For this game, a slightly tweaked version of the credit system was brought in. From now on, applying
for a European away ticket gets you one credit and successfully applying gets you two credits.
Priority for this game was given to those fans who went to Bruges, then to those who applied but
didn’t go, and was used throughout the season, with almost universal support. (The only criticism
being that ‘tactical applications’ can be a factor).
The ticket collection point was at the Inntel Hotel in the city centre and a five-minute walk to the
ground.
Pre-match issues
MUST had been made aware that many reds were staying in Amsterdam and wanted to get back
there after the game.
MUST made United aware of this and they arranged for a train to take people from the train station
attached to the ground back to Amsterdam for free.
Match issues
None.
The idea of using ‘chartered’ transport seemed to go down well with fans and set the tone for
United repeating this at several away games later on in the season.
19
20
Southampton
St Mary’s
Premier League
Sunday September 20, 16:00
Tickets
3,142 compared with 3,060 the previous year, though the previous season’s allocation only includes
tickets that went in the ballot – not those that went to sponsors etc. Either way, it’s still over the
minimum amount they have to give opposition clubs.
Prices were £37 adults, £32 under 22s and over 65s, £20 under 17s and £11 under 11s.
Pre-match issues
In advance of the game, Southampton’s supporter relations manager Khali Parsons sent MUST
handy visitors’ guide for St Mary’s and the club staff were generally very helpful.
Match issues
None.
It was awfully good of the police to allow United fans to dance by the coaches….
21
22
Arsenal Emirates Stadium
Premier League
Sunday October 4 16:00
Tickets
2,990 tickets (the same as the last three seasons) at £59 over 16s, £22 over 65s and £19 under 16s.
Pre-match issues
Arsenal’s supporter liaison officer Mark Brindle was very helpful and gave details of roadworks
around the game, encouraging people to use the Tube instead.
Match issues
It is interesting to see that the police appeared to have picked up on the behaviour of some reds at a
previous away game, most likely Swansea (see the report above) as they put extra officers in the
concourse.
No other arising issues.
23
24
Everton Goodison Park
Premier League
Saturday October 17, 15:00
Tickets
2,886 at £42 - £48 for adults, £27 - £31 for over 65s and £20 - £24 for under 16s. This was compared
with 2,830 in 2014/15.
Pre-match issues
I received helpful information from both Everton’s supporter liaison officer Christine Prior and the
club’s head of security Dave Lewis.
Everton pointed out that, in previous seasons, Liverpool City Council’s licensing committee had
granted, on an ongoing basis, Everton permission to take some seats off sale near an exit in the
upper tier to ensure the exit is kept clear.
They said even more seats would be removed from sale in that area “after supporters continued to
stand on one of the staircases” at the 2014/15 game.
They also pointed out that, the chances are, the council would send a licensing officer to the game
and, if they saw further exit blocking, there might be more tickets taken off sale in 2016/17.
The top two rows of the upper tier are not sold either.
I shared this information with United, who were able to make suggestions to Everton aimed at
addressing the problem.
This resulted in United stewards being in the away end and leaflets being handed out at the gate to
ask people not to block the exits.
This was an example of good practice – a club working with MUST with the aim of solving a safety
problem and, ultimately, trying to get a rise in ticket allocation.
Match issues
As you can see from the police report, police commented on United fans standing throughout the
game, but not aisle or exit blocking, which is a good sign.
However, we shall have to see what the council’s licensing department observed.
MUST has explained to United that the only way we can get more tickets at Everton (and Liverpool)
is to challenge it through the licensing committee. Fortunately, there is a lot of time to organise as
the Everton away game in 2016/17 is not until early December.
25
26
CSKA Moscow
Khimki Arena, Moscow
UEFA Champions League group stages
Tuesday October 21, 19:45 UK time, 21:45 local time
Tickets
848 tickets at £18.50 and 200 VIP tickets at £30.
MUST has consistently argued to UEFA that concessionary prices should be allowed for European
games.
Pre-match issues
Unlike other European away games, ticket collection did not happen. The reason why is disputed.
United said it was hard to organise a venue, but it is understood local police were not happy on
allowing it, but we don’t know for sure.
So tickets were posted to ticket holders’ addresses (who had to then show their Russian visa at the
ticket office to get their credit) and this was almost trouble free, bar for a handful of fans based in
European countries who either received their ticket hours before setting off or too late.
In one case, MUST liaised with the club to ensure a replacement ticket was handed out to a fan in
Moscow. United sent a member of staff from the centre of the city to an airport hotel to leave the
ticket for the fan. This was a very helpful gesture.
There were also issues with visas. After the draw, it became apparent that fans would have to go to
either London or Moscow to get visas for Russia and then go again to collect the completed visas.
A MUST committee member raised this with United who were able to get hold of a visa-printing
machine and bring it to Old Trafford, for fans to use on the afternoon before a home game.
While this was better than the alternative, it still proved problematic, as the process was slower than
anticipated and some fans had to go back the next day to get their visas.
In Moscow, the local Moscow Manchester United Supporters’ Club organised a bar for fans and
organised buses to the game for a small fee.
United laid on free buses and set up a website allowing people to book in advance, which worked
well.
After the game, United We Stand asked fans for their feedback on the buses.
“They went like clockwork,” said one. “We set off at 6pm as planned. The Moscow traffic is like
nothing I’ve seen before, so the early leave was well justified. We arrived at 8pm and had the choice
of going into the ground or heading off to the local shops.”
He said the coaches were easy to find after the game and praised United for their excellent
organisation “in what would have been a very tricky place to get to without the assistance
provided.”
27
Another fan said: “The number of police and army lining our route from the coach car park to the
turnstiles had to be seen to be believed, but it was good for us.”
Match issues
None.
As for lessons learned, I think United came out of this game looking very positive and proactive but
know that, in future, they would endeavour to assist fans with visas for such countries earlier.
28
29
Crystal Palace
Selhurst Park
Premier League
Saturday October 31, 15:00
Tickets
United got 2,867 at £33 or £35 adults, £20 or £21 over 6s and under 21s and £14 or £15 for under
18s
The allocation was 363 higher than last season. Some of that is down to the fact that the 2015/16
allocation includes complementary tickets and this one doesn’t. I can’t explain the rise, as I wasn’t
aware there was a cut in the first place. League rules mean Crystal Palace must give us 2,630 tickets.
Pre-match issues
Despite emailing Crystal Palace’s supporter liaison officer Karen Alford twice in the weeks before the
game, she did not respond.
Match issues
To read the police report, you would think everything went smoothly, but that was not the
experience of many reds.
One fan said: “The (stewards) had an absolute shocker.
“Predictably, the front areas were overcrowded and stewards started checking tickets and telling
people where their seats where, despite the aisles being jammed so you couldn't get anywhere near
your seat.
“Then you've got people trying to get up behind where it must've been no more than three quarters
full and being told their seats were down the front so to go down there.
“(There was) absolutely no common sense and no doubt we'll get hammered for it next season (with
allocation.”
Another fan put it down to the restricted view (compared to watching the match “through a
letterbox” in the upper part of the stand), which encourages people to go to the front.
Another red who went said: “Watching a section fill up then sending others to it is clearly stupid.”
However, if stewards allowed people whose tickets are for the lower part to go to empty seats in the
upper part if they wish, the problem would not be as big.
Arising issues
I will discuss the stewarding problem with United and Crystal Palace.
From next season, United will have their own stewards in the away end of every game where the
home club requests it, so common sense should prevail.
30
Of course, had Palace got back to me before the game, this issue could have been dealt with in
advance. That is the kind of thing you have supporter liaison officers for.
31
32
33
Watford
Vicarage Road
Premier League
Saturday November 21, 12:45
Tickets
United got 2,104 tickets at £31 adults, £17 over 65s, £13 under 20s and £5 under 16s – very
reasonable concessionary prices, and Watford should be applauded for that.
They were promoted in 2014/15 so there is no comparative allocation. The number given was the
minimum number under league rules.
Pre-match issues
Despite emailing Watford’s supporter liaison officer Joanne Simons twice in the run up to the match,
she did not reply.
Match issues
There didn’t seem to be anything of note to say, but we’re denied an insight because Hertfordshire
Police does not compile reports for games – the only force in the UK not to do so, as far as I am
aware.
I find this unusual, as police forces use these reports to set future policing categories (see page 8)
and also use it to advise other forces on what to expect from a particular club’s fans in terms of
numbers, ‘risk’ fans (see page 8), arrests and ejections.
From MUST’s point of view, police reports have been useful in the past when clubs propose to
reduce allocations based on alleged behaviour at a particular game. When the police report from
that game fails to mention that behaviour, the argument collapses.
It will only become an issue if Watford propose to reduce our allocation in future.
34
Leicester
King Power Stadium
Premier League
Saturday November 28, 17:30
Tickets
3,271 tickets at £35 adults, £30 over 65s and under 21a and £23 for under 18s.
The allocation in 2014/15 was 3,244.
Pre-match issues
It was positive to establish a link with Leicester’s supporter liaison officer Jim Donnelly, who
provided some useful information about the ticket allocation.
Match issues
None
About 2.00pm there was a report of a minor altercation at Yates between opposing fans
although no offenders identified and no complaints made.
By 3.30pm The Counting House had reached capacity but the ground opened early and
was serving alcohol to MUFC fans so this alleviated any potential issues. There was an
antisocial group at The Counting House although they were compliant on arrival at the
35
ground.
Some LCFC risk came down to the ground but an older group remained in the city to
watch the game with the younger risk stopping in the city also. One older LCFC risk was
arrested near to the market place for Sec 5 POA after being abusive to police.
Officers were deployed into the away concourse to monitor fans and although they were
lively they were generally good natured.
There were 7 supporter’s coaches and 8 minibuses.
Just after kick-off one away fan was arrested after being seen to punch another away fan
in the stand, there was no complaint of assault. Following the MUFC goal, one away fan
was arrested as he attempted to get on the pitch. Towards the end of the game, another
MUFC fan was ejected following another minor dispute amongst the away fans. There
were only about 20 identified MUFC risk present on the day.
Post-match as fans left the ground, there was a verbal confrontation between non-risk
fans which was diffused by swift police intervention. The away coaches were escorted
back to the motorway and the city centre quickly returned to normal evening trading with
the operation being stood down about 8.15pm.
36
Wolfsburg
Volkswagen Arena
Champions League group stages
Tuesday December 8, 20:45 local time
Tickets
1,300 standard tickets at £33 and 200 VIP tickets at £58.
MUST has consistently argued to UEFA that concessionary prices should be allowed for European
games.
Pre-match issues
The credit system was used to allocation tickets, so fans who had been to Bruges, Eindhoven and
Moscow were assured of tickets and those with two credits had a 75-per-cent chance of getting a
ticket.
With such a low allocation – and such an important game – some fans were bound to miss out, but
at least a fair system was used.
Some fans contacted MUST to say they were concerned they would miss the last trains back to
Hamburg and Berlin if fans were kept in the ground for long.
MUST liaised with United who, in turn, spoke with German officials, and gave fans a guarantee that
those two trains would not leave until the away end was empty and fans had been given a
reasonable amount of time to walk the 15-minute journey to the station.
In the end, this worked well and there were no issues – a very good example of club/fan group
working.
The ticket collection point was at the Designer Outlets building in Wolfsburg, right near the town
centre. This worked really well.
Match issues
None
37
38
39
40
AFC Bournemouth
Dean Court
Premier League
Saturday December 12, 17:30
Tickets
1,316 tickets at £28 adults and under 18s, £14 over 65s and under 16s
The lowest allocation Bournemouth had to give us under league rules was 1,146
Pre-match issues
It was disappointing that Bournemouth supporter liaison officer Liz Finney did not reply to my email
sent two months before the match. However, we have now established a dialogue ahead of United’s
first away match of the new season.
Match issues
None
A positive police report and the allocation should stay the same for next season.
Police report
Bournemouth
Home attendance = 9989 Away attendance = 1345
Pre-Match
Match due to be shown LIVE on TV – it was expected that large numbers would be seen in
licenced premises beforehand. This was not the case.
Both sets of fans arrived at the ground within plenty of time.
The majority of away fans sat in the appropriate seats.
No pre-match issues whatsoever.
During the Match
Both sets of fans created a good atmosphere.
Half time no issues.
At full time 1 x home fan entered pitch but was returned to seat by steward.
Post-Match
Both sets of fans left peacefully and quickly.
Some Man Utd fans left early but caused no issues.
Away fans behaved well throughout.
No arrests or ejections.
41
Stoke
Britannia Stadium
Premier League
Saturday December 26, 12:45
Tickets
2,557 tickets at £35 adults and £18 for under 16s and over 65s
The 2014/15 allocation was stated at 2,440 but that did not include complementary tickets, whereas
the 2015/17 did.
Pre-match issues
There were several issues surrounding this game, mainly the allocation.
United played Stoke twice in 2013/14 – once in the League Cup and again in the Premier League.
After Stoke claimed reds behaved badly in the League Cup game, they docked our allocation by
about 200 tickets for the league game and the same allocation was in place in 2014/15.
The first problem lies in the fact that Staffordshire Police only provides a numerical post-match
report, so it was very difficult for MUST to assess how the 2014/15 league match went in terms of
behaviour in the away end.
The second problem was that, when I emailed Stoke’s supporter liaison officer (SLO), Anthony
Emmerson, he limited the amount of information he would provide. I'm aware Anthony has an
excellent reputation and is deemed one of the better SLOs by the Football Supporters Federation.
When I asked him if there was any safety information he wanted MUST to publicise to fans, he
replied:
“I have nothing to report at present, but it is very much appreciated.”
Which is strange considering that, as we will go on to see, there were many issues at play. Stoke
went on to say that they only reluctantly froze the allocation so, with that in mind, why did they not
communicate ways of improving behaviour and achieving that?
When asked what the ticket allocation and prices would be, Mr Emmerson replied:
“(This) has not been released yet. I’m sure that (Stoke) will let Manchester United know at the
earliest opportunity.”
When I asked Mr Emmerson to clarify whether the allocation would be set by Stoke or the local
council’s safety advisory group (SAG), he replied:
“You’re correct in thinking it’s the local SAG, safety officer etc…
“As I said, I’m sure that the club will let Manchester United know at the earliest opportunity.”
I wrote back to say
42
“If there is a proposed reduction, both MUST and United should be entitled to an opportunity to
challenge it. Would you be able to ask if a reduction is again proposed and, if so, if it has been
referred to the SAG or will be? If we wait until the decision has been made, it’s too late to influence
it.”
In reply, Mr Emmerson said:
“The simple answer is that the matter will be discussed club to club. Perhaps you’re best getting an
official MUFC employee to liaise with our safety officer directly.”
UEFA describes the SLO as an “advocate of both sides, representing the interests of the club and
those of the supporters.”
Mr Emmerson’s approach did not seem to embrace this during our discussions.
The third problem was that Stoke did not include United in the allocation-setting procedure. They
simply emailed United in mid-November to state the allocation would be frozen, without
explanation.
MUST was able to determine this by getting hold of a series of emails using the Freedom of
Information Act.
On November 12, United staff wrote to Stoke asking why and for a meeting.
Stoke’s head of health, safety and security Ravi Sharma provided a detailed explanation to United
about why the allocation had been cut (see below), but ignored the request for a meeting.
United responded on November 16 to repeat the request for a meeting.
“We would like the opportunity to discuss/attempt to resolve this without us involving the Premier
League,” said the United official in an email.
That prompted an email from a Stoke City employee to Stoke-on-Trent City Council officials, a police
officer and a Sports Grounds Safety Authority official, which reads: “As you can see, [United] are
now objecting [to the allocation] with a veiled attempt at bringing in the Premier League.
“As far as I am concerned, I have provided more than enough information/justification for this
decision.
“If they were to request a meeting [with the Premier League], then I would oppose the Premier
League’s passing decisions on our safety management processes. I would also open out the meeting
to yourselves to attend.”
A council employee responded by indicating he supported Stoke City’s position.
The documents then show how council staff responded to MUST enquiries about the club’s right to
set the allocation without council interference, but at no point attempted to provide information
justifying the frozen allocation.
43
Documents show that, when United played at Stoke in 2014/15, club stewards were faced with
“marauding Manchester United supporters attempting to infiltrate exit gates around the stadium,
resulting in excess of 40 ejections and one arrest of a Manchester United supporter, who assaulted a
child in the Family Stand by attempting an unauthorised entry into the stand,” according Mr Sharma.
He added: “We also had issues with ticket touts and attempts of ticket pass-backs.
“Even more perverse was the situation of over 40 Manchester United fans turning up with no tickets
whatsoever – who even traveled on coaches with the intention of gaining access into the ground.
“Unfortunately, this is a regular occurrence for this fixture and, therefore, the operation has to be
managed appropriately.”
Mr Sharma added that there was “persistent standing, blocking of gangways, vomitories and aisles
and unruly behaviour.
“We also will not be selling alcohol in the concourse and all shelving, signage or anything that cannot
be secured properly will be removed, based on the previous past couple of seasons’ behaviour of
visiting supporters.
“Also, we will be bringing in extra steward resources to assist in the searching operation outside and
also to manage appropriately inside the stadium.”
Mr Sharma added: “We, as a club, considered reducing your allocation further, but we have not
done so and will obviously monitor your supporters’ behaviour this season.
“We take absolutely no pleasure in putting restrictions in place, but we have to maintain a safe
environment.”
When the documents came to light, I put out a statement which read: “Stoke have sound reasons for
freezing the allocation and, while the Boxing Day stewarding operation seems strong, hopefully it
will mean a maximum allocation next season.
“However, we strongly object to the fact that Stoke reached the decision without even listening to
United’s offers to help and that they were not willing to justify the freeze to MUST.
“In an age of supporter liaison officers, this is unacceptable and we would urge Stoke to liaise with
supporters better next season. Every other Premier League club manages it, and so should Stoke.”
Had Mr Emmerson raised these issues in advance of the meeting and had Mr Sharma agreed to
meet with United, some of the problems could have been dealt with using methods suggested by
United (putting United stewards in the away end, etc).
And had the police report included any details of the above, it could have been dealt with earlier.
There was also a failure to properly consider the timing of the game: An early kick off on Boxing Day,
when nobody could travel by public transport and when drinking time was limited meant there was
never likely to be any issues (as there weren’t when United last played at Stoke on Boxing Day in
2008.
44
Match issues
Again, because of the nature of the police report below, it’s hard to judge accurately
The fact that there were no ejections or arrests from the away end is positive, however, and will
allow us to make a strong argument for more tickets in 2016/17.
We have also heard via the Football Supporters’ Federation that Stoke have pledged to handle the
allocation-setting procedure better next season.
45
Newcastle
St James’s Park
Premier League
Wednesday January 13, 19:45
Tickets
3,008 tickets at £34 adults, £24 over 65s and £13 under 18s
Pre-match issues
While I appreciated an email from Newcastle’s supporter liaison officer (SLO) Lee Marshall in
response to my email enquiring about the allocation and prices, and offering to share any safety
advice, the response was similar to Stoke’s.
“I would need to direct your enquiry to your usual contacts at Manchester United.”
There seems to be, in some quarters, a pre-SLO attitude of fans’ groups not being given access to
information that is purely factual.
It is important that clubs embrace the true nature of SLOs and have proper dialogue with fan groups,
as the SLO guidance says they should.
Match issues
The police report doesn’t read well, with two arrests and 13 ejections, including allegations of a
steward being assaulted and claims of aisle blocking.
With the away end being spread out so much, I can’t see the need for aisle blocking and, though it
won’t be a factor for at least 2016/17, it’s something we might need to be aware of in future.
46
47
Liverpool
Anfield
Premier League
Sunday January 17, 14:05
Tickets
2,747 tickets at £45 or £47 adults, £45 or £47 for under 17s, £10 for under 16s and £34 or £32.50 for
over 65s.
The previous season’s allocation was 2,678 but that did not include players’ tickets whereas the
2015/16 allocation did.
Pre-match issues
United are entitled to 3,000 tickets but a decision was taken a few seasons ago to knock 300 off. 180
are the top three rows of the away end, which offer a restricted view and the other 120 are end-of-
row seats nearest exits.
This could only change if Liverpool Licensing Committee grants permission (see the Everton section
above) and it’s possible if the Anfield enlargement removes the restricted view tickets in the next
few years.
Merseyside Police organised a pre-match briefing on January 7 and MUST sent a representative, as
did the Football Supporters’ Federation. More information is on the MUST website.6
United handed out a letter to fans at the turnstiles, signed by Louis van Gaal, asking supporters to be
respectful of stewards.
Match issues
Nothing of note – the police report was mostly positive, apart from the seat being thrown onto the
pitch.
It is good that police put on free buses taking fans back to Lime Street Station after the game.
Police report
Background –
Following consultation with Liverpool Football Club and after a rigorous threat and risk assessment
procedure, this fixture inside the stadium was categorised as Category C I/R.
The week of the match Merseyside Police met with representatives from LFC, MUFC, LFC Supporters
Committee, Spirit of Shankly, MUST and the FSF. The previous seasons meeting at Anfield was
discussed and all agreed it was a successful policing and stewarding operation. Ch Supt Ward invited
the supporter groups to raise any matters for this match. There was no concerns.
6 http://action.joinmust.org/index.php/blog/entry/information-for-mufc-fans-from-liverpoola-police-meeting/
48
The pre match meeting took place the previous Friday at Anfield.
Method –
The Senior Officers’ Briefing took place at 10:00 hrs followed by staggered briefings for the stadium
and outer serials in the H/Q lecture theatre. All police staff were briefed and deployed to their Phase
1 positions on time and in accordance with the event operational order.
Pre-Match (Phase 1) –
City
Approximately 250 Manchester United supporters used the rail network into Liverpool Lime Street
with the first group of supporters arriving at 10:00 hours. Small numbers made their way to the
Weatherspoon Public House on Great Charlotte Street. They sung and chanted inside the premises
which resulted in the DPS telephoning the police. Officers spoke to the group and reminded them
about acceptable standards of behaviour. They remained with the supporters until the group made
their way to the stadium
Again the Brick P.H on County Road was used by away supporters. They arrived from as early as 10:30
hours onwards. The majority of them arrived into Liverpool via Lime Street Train Station. A rapport
was established with those supporters and they stated it was their intention to walk over to Anfield
at 13:00 hours. They were receptive to a police escort.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
EF serials and LESCO monitored the area.
At 13:20 hours the United fans left the Brick and commenced the walk over to the stadium. They
walked past Goodison Park and across Stanley Park. They chanted songs and in general were well
behaved and complied with the instructions of the police officers who walked them across. At its peak,
the procession was approximately 150 persons. The vast majority were non risk and not known XXX
XXXXXXXXXX. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Small numbers of visiting supporters socialised in the Thomas Frost PH on County Road.
Stadium The DPS of the Arkles and Flat Iron Public Houses made the decision not to allow away supporters. The family park on Anfield Road welcomed the United supporters. Small numbers went inside. No problems The United supporters were loud and vociferous at the turnstiles and numerous verbal insults were traded as the opposing supporters crossed each other. At no time was it violent or threatening.
49
A group of trade unionists staged a small and peaceful demonstration on Walton Breck Road. It contained approx 30 – 40 persons who were holding up a banner and placards and handing out leaflets. The protest was against Carillion, the construction workers of the main stand extension. The organiser made the police aware of the event and liaised throughout. Two PLO’s were designated to work alongside the group. The protest was professional and peaceful and lasted approx one and a half hours. Traffic Management – Con 8181 Ruscoe. Bronze Traffic Pre-match City Council had put No Waiting Cones out in good time, however the cones on Utting Avenue where sparse. This resulted in vehicles parking in that area when the TM staff advised them to move this caused confrontation. I intervened and advised the protesting drivers of the parking plan however due to not being able to remove all the cars and the inadequate coning I had to allow them to park. I will address this issue with the City Council to avoid future problems. Both team coaches escorted to stadium by RPD without incident. All fans coaches parked correctly segregated in designated positions. Due to larger numbers than expected of Liverpool coaches it was necessary to overflow parking into Pine Hurst Ave, this stretched the TM staff who left Priory Road unattended allowing Man. U. minibuses x 3 to park on the back of the Liverpool coaches. Fortunately I found these vehicles still with drivers and moved them to Arkles Lane. On arrival at the stadium the drivers of the Corporate Coaches were not aware that they were to park in the St Domingo car park and very few of them knew where the car park was. The promotional double deck bus was not present on WBR, thank you. Post-match Closure of WBR went on in good time. A couple of taxi’s refused to move on when directed to by TM staff, complied with my request. The courtesy buses arrived in good time and waited in Priory Road as instructed and quickly filled up. The courtesy buses were escorted, as planned, by RPD bikes to Lime Street Station. In order to keep the buses moving and together it was necessary to assist them through the very heavy football traffic, this will have caused a considerable inconvenience to other road users and may invite criticism/complaint. During –
Stood throughout. Several unsavoury chants but nothing in respect of XXXXXXXX. Heated insults
across the divide. A broken seat was thrown onto the pitch from the away supporters when they
scored their goal.
The majority were generally well behaved throughout
Post –
Hold back implemented (club operation supported by the police). Announcements given by the club.
Once released the away supporters were encouraged to turn right out of the stadium and left onto
50
Arkles Lane were 4 buses (courtesy of Merseyside Police) were waiting to take them back to
Liverpool Lime Street (approx 250 jct Priory Rd).
The United supporters that socialised in the Brick pre match returned to Lime Street via the free
buses
No overnight graffiti reported
Match Commanders / Safety Officers post match meeting
Supporters meeting worked well and should be repeated
If there is a hold back stewards need to encourage home supporters out of the stadium and not
be facilitating photographs
Buses worked well but probably need one more
Communications –
No issues with comms.
Other Matters –
Post event an e mail has been received from XXXXX who was the organiser for the Carillion Protest.
He has thanked Merseyside Police for their professional assistance throughout
Attendance – 43 865 with 44 home coaches / mini buses.
Visitors – 2699 with 24 coaches / mini bus
No arrests.
Liverpool 0 Man United 1
Comments
Bronze – Chris Gibson. Free buses – the last bus left approx. 30 fans on Priory Rd due to all being at
capacity. Fans were informed that the buses would return and they didn’t. I suggest that in future
we communicate that once they are full they are full with no return trip scheduled. Might be worth
printing a number of flyers with a map back into the city, taxi numbers, bus routes etc. for those that
don’t make the buses
51
Derby County
Pride Park
FA Cup
Friday January 29, 19:55
Tickets
5,405 at £35 adults, £25 over 65s and £18 under 18s.
Pre-match issues
Derby’s supporter liaison officer Jed Buxton was very useful with providing information about ticket
pricing and transport issues.
Derbyshire Police were very useful on the transport issue and published lots of useful information on
Twitter.
The Football Supporters’ Federation were helpful too and sent a representative to observe the
stewarding and policing.
The kick-off time did cause some concerns about fans being able to get home and, privately, United
accepted that they should have been more proactive in terms of ensuring measures were in place to
ensure fans could get home (an acknowledgement that resulted in free coaches being put on for
subsequent away matches that posed the same challenges).
Match issues
Considering the timing of the match and the big allocation, the police report reads well. The
allegations of stealing from a catering till are disappointing, but there is no further information
about whether it went beyond allegations.
Four arrests – and we only know for sure that one of them was in the away end – is not a bad result
with such a big number of travelling fans.
Police report
Derby
Home Resume The intelligence … … … proved to be very accurate and assisted in the match day
operation.
Phase One - Manchester United received an allocation of approximately 5,400, which sold out
shortly after going on general sale.
MUFC supporters began arriving in the City from 3pm, with the majority utilising … … …
Two coaches and a mid-sized coach stopped off at ……… and apart from being boisterous they
52
caused no issues.
A report was received to suggest some coaches had stopped off in … … … and caused some damage
to a Public House.
Police Officers attended and three coaches were escorted from … … … to the ground. … … … coaches
stopped off for pre-match drinks in … … … and again there were no reported issues.
At approximately … … … a member of the public contacted the Police stating they had seen a large
group of males, with bottles and glasses leaving … … … on the outskirts of the City.
Spotters made an area search and located … … …At the same time … … … The … … … but were
eventually corralled in two groups and escorted to the ground without issue.
Phase Two – No major issues during phase two.
There were three ejections of MUFC supporters who were located in the North Stand (Home End) of
the ground.
Some MUFC were warned for drinking in view of the pitch. When Utd scored their third goal, one
supporter ran onto the pitch.
This male was detained by Safety Stewards and later arrested. Some MUFC arrived at the ground
without tickets, so were turned away.
There was also a report that some MUFC fans had taken some money from a till at the away bar.
Post-match also saw no major issues with the majority of fans leaving without issue, … … …, who left
on a coach which was parked at the ground.
52 Coaches & Mini-Coaches were in attendance.
5,460 MUFC supporters in attendance.
4 Arrests & 3 Ejections
53
Chelsea
Stamford Bridge
Premier League
Sunday February 7, 16:00
Tickets
2,862 at £51 & £54 adults and £20 for under 18s and over 65s
This compared with 2,939 the season.
United said: “The reason for the difference in numbers is that Chelsea have had to kill some seats in
the away section to accommodate wheelchair users in the lower section.
“To allow our fans in wheelchairs to access and exit safely they have had to remove a couple of rows
of seats directly in front.
“This is also to ensure that they can view the pitch and that people in front of them who may stand
do not obstruct their views.”
Pre-match issues
None
Match issues
It’s notable that police seem to be proactively searching fans for drugs.
The alleged racist incident during the game is extremely rare among United’s support and I think it
will surprise many.
However, it is also worth noting that the police report doesn’t tell us what happened as a result of
the alleged incident.
54
55
Sunderland
Stadium of Light
Premier League
Saturday February 13, 12:45
Tickets
2,500 at £29 adults, £18 over 65s and £7 under 16s – very reasonable prices overall.
The allocation compared with 2,440 the previous season, though that figure included players’
tickets. I’m told the actual number of tickets in the ballot was the same.
Pre-match issues
There have been a lot of issues around this fixture in recent years. Until a few years ago, the
relationship between MUST and Sunderland wasn’t great, but a great deal of progress has been
made since then and I would say Sunderland are now the best in the Premier League in terms of
transparency with supporter groups.
In particular, the club’s safety officer Paul Weir has been good in communicating pre-match
information and giving MUST an idea after the game of what went right, what went wrong and how
it might impact on the allocation for the following season.
Sunderland have consistently said that, if the general behaviour in the away end improves, our
allocation will rise and they delivered on this in 2014/15 with a slight increase.
By ‘behaviour’, they generally mean keeping aisles and exits clear, which is achievable, and getting
people on the front two rows to sit down for at least part of the game – even if it’s only a two-
minute symbolic gesture. I appreciate that many of our fans still object to this.
That, of course, is harder to achieve. Some fans think it’s good that older people who do not wish to
stand for 90 minutes can get a ticket at the front and sit down.
Others may either disagree with that, or agree with it but maintain that agreeing to sit even in part
would be a slippery slope to everyone sitting, making the away end terrible. It’s a hard balance to
strike.
My submission to Sunderland was that, with an early kick off, there was less drinking time, so they
should increase the allocation.
United also liaised with Sunderland to offer a range of measures aimed at increasing the allocation.
Match issues
It was disappointing to again see allegations of away fans stealing from the tills, though, again, we
do not know if charges were brought.
Taking eggs to a football match is a new one, and the damage to cars is a strange one too.
56
More positively, police said there were no issues in the away end, bar persistent standing, which
stands us in a good position for an allocation increase next season.
After the game, Sunderland told MUST: “There were no real incidents of note before, during or after
our game.
“The usual 3 or 4 arrests for drunkenness, a couple for drugs and a couple who were ejected who
then decided to damage some parked cars.”
57
FC Midtjylland
MCH Arena
UEFA Europa League round of 32
Thursday February 18, 19:00
Tickets
600 tickets at £71 and 200 VIP tickets
Pre-match issues
Unsurprisingly, the ticket price issue annoyed many reds, partly because £71 for any match, let alone
for a second-tier European competition, is a rip off, and partly because the Danes charged
Southampton £22 for adults and £12 for children earlier in the year.
The fact that there was concession price for a £71 adult ticket is nothing short of disgraceful.
One fan pointed out that the price was £5 more than all three of United’s Champions League group
away games combined.
Things weren’t helped when the host’s club’s director Cliff Crown defended the extortionate price7.
Midtjylland didn’t break any rules by setting these prices: UEFA allows clubs to set whatever prices
they like, as long as their fans aren’t paying more for a comparable view.
The problem is, however, that clubs tend to exploit a loophole, which allows them to charge a
heavily discounted price to fans who are members or season ticket holders and, often you find there
aren’t many home fans paying the higher rate.
MUST has campaigned to UEFA on this issue before, but UEFA is not interested – a bit like the issue
of offering concessionary tickets.
UEFA wastes no opportunity to talk about how we need to make football accessible to children, but
rarely acts on it.
The ticket collection point was at a Congress Centre two streets from Herning Train Station.
MUST also worked with United about transportation to the ground and the club agreed to foot the
bill for buses to take reds from Herning to the stadium, and back, for free.
Match issues
None
7 http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-united-ticket-prices-defended-7386036
58
59
60
Shrewsbury Greenhous Meadow
FA Cup
Monday February 22, 19:45
Tickets
United got 1,500 tickets at £20 over 18s, £15 over 65s, £14 over 16s and £10 under 16s.
Pre-match issues
When Shrewsbury entertained Chelsea in a cup game, they installed temporary seats to increase the
size of the away end by 486 tickets.
However, it was decided that this would not happen for this game.
MUST asked the police and Shrewsbury why. Shrewsbury said it was not them who decided it.
However, United disagreed. “Shrewsbury have concerns about our fan behaviour and persistent
standing and subsequently have ruled this option out on safety grounds,” said a club source.
West Mercia Police issued a long and meaningless statement which included the lines: "Each fixture is looked at on a case by case basis and all circumstances are taken into consideration. "We have an excellent relationship with the football club and having jointly discussed the options we support the club’s decision to not provide additional temporary seating." So Shrewsbury blamed the police, the police blamed Shrewsbury and nobody could explain why there were allegations in the press8 about the decision being blamed on reds allegedly breaking 300 seats at Derby (something not in the police report). It is disappointing that Shrewsbury and West Mercia Police did not include fan groups and United in the decision-making progress, though it is fair to say that these were extra seats and the club complied with the rules on ticket numbers. Also, they are a club not used to dealing with such decisions regularly and there was a short period of time between the draw and the game. Overall, Shrewsbury’s level of communication with MUST was better than some Premier League clubs. Match issues None. Police report
West Mercia Police said: “There was no report completed. However, in order to assist, I have been
advised that there were 2 ejections and no arrests.”
8 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3450199/Shrewsbury-Town-not-add-extra-seats-New-Meadow-ahead-FA-Cup-fifth-round-clash-Manchester-United.html
61
West Brom The Hawthorns
Premier League
Sunday March 6 16:00
Tickets
2,616 at £34 adults, £24 over 65s, £20 under 21s and £10 under 16s.
The previous season’s allocation was 2,596, though that included tickets not in the ballot.
Pre-match issues
None
Match issues
It’s concerning that the police report says aisles and exits were blocked, but there is no information
about whether this was in part of the away end or all of it, or how long it lasted.
Still, it could result in us losing tickets and it something to keep an eye on.
62
Liverpool
Anfield
UEFA Europa League Round of 16
Thursday March 10, 20:05
Tickets
Liverpool had originally wanted to charge £56 for tickets to home and away fans but Liverpool fan
groups quite rightly challenged on the basis that Liverpool were prepared to charge much less if they
had not have drawn United.
Liverpool backtracked and lowered the prices.
Tickets ended up costing £36 and £38. It was good to see Liverpool also offering young adults and
junior prices – a rare occurrence in European games - but they should also have sold over 60s tickets
too.
United ended up with 2,685. This was made up of 2,485 standard tickets and 200 tickets that
normally would have been classed as VIP tickets, but were added to the normal away end due to
safety issues.
Given that Liverpool only had to give United 2,150 tickets under competition rules, United did well
to persuade Liverpool and, to a greater extent, Liverpool City Council, to allow this allocation.
Another positive aspect was that Thomas Cook Sport got no tickets.
Pre-match issues
United asked UEFA to change the kick off time from 18:00 to 20:05 and this happened.
There was a lot of discussion over whether ticket collection would happen and, if so, where tickets
would be collected from. In the end, United decided to post tickets out instead.
The fact that people had to fill out a travel report was strange, though United have long cited it as a
UEFA requirement. I’ve written on the subject before9.
Merseyside Police proactively asked MUST for input on any aspects of the police operation. They
also arranged a supporter engagement meeting before the game. MUST and the Football
Supporters’ Federation attended. Examples of issues raised include making sure there was no
lengthy holdback given that people had to get home after the game.
The FSF also sent a rep to the match to monitor the police operation. Her post-match report was
positive in terms of policing overall and stewarding of away turnstiles.
With regard to the Hillsborough chants, she noted a minority taking part but by no means anything
approaching the majority.
9 http://redsaway.com/2012/06/protecting-your-data-a-reds-away-investigation/
63
Separately, MUST asked Greater Manchester Police, on behalf of fans, if free buses would be laid on
after the game to get fans back to Lime Street station.
GMP originally replied to say no decision had been made and, despite me sending a follow-up email
later, I never got a reply, which was disappointing, especially as free buses were laid on in the end,
and we missed a good opportunity to be able to tell fans of this, so they could make plans to get
trains home.
Match issues
It is a concern that a fan allegedly assaulted a steward, though there are no details in the police
report about what became of this arrest.
The Hillsborough chants are also an issue of concern (though see the FSF note above).
As an aside, UEFA launched investigation into the conduct of both sets of fans at the second leg of
this tie and United were fined e20,000 for “illicit chanting”. And e18,000 for blocking stairways,
throwing objects and crowd disturbances10.
10 http://www.uefa.org/disciplinary/#post_186644
64
65
Manchester City
City of Manchester Stadium
Premier League
Sunday March 20, 16:00
Tickets
2,975 at £51/£53 adults, £42/£44 over 65s and under 21s, £33/£35 under 18s and £29/£31 under
16s. However, City claim the allocation was 3,000.
For many years, MUST has been campaigning for reds to get a proper allocation at City. It was
originally around the 2,800 mark as City blamed the layout of the ground and then it dropped by
almost 200 due to police needing to create a bigger buffer on the segregation lines because of coin
throwing (police reports acknowledge this has been, in the main, a case of coins coming from the
City end).
When City extended their ground, the case for an allocation in line with the rules, i.e. 3,000, was
much stronger and we were content that it turned out to be the case this season.
Greater Manchester Police organised a supporter-engagement meeting with MUST and other parties
before the game and relevant issues were discussed.
Match issues
Staggeringly, GMP has still not been able to supply MUST with a police report from this game,
despite me making an FOI request a few days after the game.
Originally, staff said the report had not been written. I waited a while and made the request again
and, by May, it still had not been written.
Due to this strange situation, I requested a review of the decision not to disclose the report and
should have received the outcome by the end of June and heard nothing.
As a result, I have asked GMP for the outcome of the review and written to both GMP chief
constable Ian Hopkins and the county’s police and crime commissioner Tony Lloyd to make them
aware of what is a long and unnecessary delay.
Given the Football Supporters Federations’ glowing reports of the efforts that GMP take to have
meaningful dialogue with supporter groups, this is particularly disappointing.
Without the document, it is hard to get a grasp of how police and stewards viewed behaviour and
what the allocation is likely to be in 2016/17.
I’ve written to City’s supporter liaison officer to raise this issue and see if she is able to give MUST an
idea of the likely allocation.
66
Spurs
White Hart Lane
Premier League
Sunday April 10, 16:00
Tickets
2,732 tickets at £43/£49 adults, £23/£26 over 65s and £20/£23 under 18s.
This compares with 2,631 in the previous season.
Pre-match issues
In December, United wrote to MUST with the following: “Good news – we have had a slight increase
again for the Spurs away match due to the work we put in and supporter behaviour last season.
“We are getting an extra 85 tickets in row 2 of the upper section which takes the allocation to
approximately 2,732 tickets.
“We have once again committed to having our own stewards on hand to assist on the day.
“We will probably do a turnstile flyer once again just to re-iterate the point that although we have
had a slight increase again that we are still not at full allocation and that everyone will be monitored
specifically in the upper section.
“Although it is not a massive gain, at least we are moving in the right direction and Spurs seem
willing to work with us and help in any way they can.”
It is great to see United working with Spurs on these issues, and also a big help that Tottenham’s
own supporters’ trust have represented MUST at meetings in past seasons and have successfully got
us extra tickets at this match.
Match issues
The assault and the racist abuse are negative, but we do not know if any formal action was taken.
Pleasingly, there was no specific mention in the police report of problems with the upper tier, which
will hopefully mean we have a good chance of preserving the allocation next season.
Police report
Attendance: 35,761
Away fans: 2,750
Category: B
3-0.
Total arrests: 4
Pre-match
67
Previous fixtures have seen incidents of anti-social behaviour and with the late kick off this was
policed at a Category B level.
The public houses were monitored with a good mix of supporters in most pubs, there were a small
number of Tottenham risk supporters present but this did not cause any issues.
A late walk up to the turnstiles was expected, this was due to the Sunderland v Leicester fixture
being shown live.
The Manchester United team coach was contacted and at 14 .10 were just passing Finsbury park due
to an accident involving a police vehicle (not involved in the football operation) Seven Sisters Road
had been closed and traffic was at a standstill.
A number of alternative routes were suggested but due to the size of the team coach they were not
an option.
As kick off approached a decision was made by the referee to delay kick off by 30 minutes until
16.30hrs.
The team coach was directed by officers on an alternative route and this eventually saw them arrive
at the ground by 15.45hrs.
The message of the delay saw a large number of supporters remain inside the pubs around the
ground and continue drinking. All supporters were inside of the ground by kick off with no issues.
During the match
An away supporter was ejected by the club (reason not known at this stage) he appeared to be
drunk and was monitored on CCTV cameras
After a short period he approached two males and a fight occurred officers were quickly on scene
and three males were arrested for affray.
A male was identified by stewards who had used racist language towards a steward (details not
known) and was detained by officers at the exit to the stadium . He was arrested and taken to
custody.
No other incident of note during the game.
Post match
There were some minor exchanges as both sets of supporters left the stadium. Some police
intervention was required but this did not see any further arrests.
No other issue of note at this fixture
68
West Ham
Upton Park
FA Cup Quarter Final replay
Wednesday April 13, kick off 19:00
Tickets
4,905 tickets at £30 adults, £20 over 65s and under 18s and £15 under 16s
There were many issues associated with this match.
The allocation was 347 tickets fewer than competition rules allow – and 1,085 fewer than Liverpool
got at West Ham in an FA Cup fourth round replay earlier in the season.
On March 13, the two teams drew at Old Trafford, necessitating a replay.
United contacted West Ham around March 14 to enquire about the replay ticket allocation and to
state that, if a safety advisory group (SAG) meeting was going to take place to discuss the allocation,
a United representative would like to ask Newham Council if they could attend. (It is protocol for
clubs to deal with clubs in the first instance).
The benefit of this is that United officials can suggest safety measures that nobody else can. For
example, putting United stewards in the away end.
At the time, a United source told MUST that West Ham gave United “radio silence for four days, only
to be told that the SAG meeting had taken place and the 4,906 allocation was decided.”
It turned out that the SAG meeting had taken place on March 15 – and, it seems, no effort was made
to include United in the process, despite their apparent request for involvement to West Ham. West
Ham did not respond to these points at the time.
Newham Council said: ““The issue of the seat allocation for the forthcoming cup tie
between West Ham United and Manchester United was discussed at a meeting of the Safety
Advisory Group (SAG) on Tuesday 15 March.
“This group includes representatives of the West Ham United and the emergency services
“Measures to help ensure the safety of those attending the match were agreed which the club are
now taking forward.”
The key questions arising were – why did they think an allocation cut was needed and why did they
judge the behaviour of Liverpool fans to be so much ‘better’ than United fans that they deserved so
many more tickets?
MUST made several Freedom of Information requests.
First, we asked Newham Council for all emails their relevant staff had sent and received in the run up
to the Liverpool game. The response was: None (compared with plenty in the run up to the United
game).
69
The clear implication is that council officials believe the behaviour of Liverpool fans to be superior to
ours. MUST would argue it’s probably on a par, in that all fans stand throughout the game and police
categorisation is about the same.
Second, we asked the council for the minutes of SAG meeting at which the decision was made.
The minutes showed the council was concerned about fans arriving late and allege that “at the FA
Cup match with Derby, United fans arrived late, drunk and blocked vomitories. There were also a
number of ticket touts.”
As you can see in the Derby section above, there was absolutely no mention of any of those
allegations in the police report.
It’s possible that they have relied on anecdotal evidence from Derby FC officials, but we will never
know as they have not said where it come from.
I am not sure what the relevance of ticket touts is. That is a police matter and certainly not an issue
United’s support should be blamed for.
The minutes continue: “At the Sunderland fixture, again there were late arrivals and some were
aggressive to stewards.”
Not only is that not included in the police report, it also contradicts what Sunderland staff think.
I asked the head of safety, Paul Weir, if this tallied with his experience of the game.
He replied: “I’m not sure where the evidence regarding late arrivals has come from? Certainly I
didn’t witness any.”
So, to recap, the decision was made at a meeting based on unreliable anecdotes and in the absence
of the very people who could implement safety measures.
It does not seem a satisfactory way to manage the safety of tens of thousands of people.
Pre-match issues
West Ham’s supporter liaison officer Sacha Gustard-Brown was unhelpful.
When the issue of United not being able to discuss an invite to the SAG was raised, she replied:
“Whilst I can appreciate your stance on this matter, I have to point out that this particular meeting is
organised and chaired by the local council, one to which we are invited to. It is not a meeting we
lead on, or ‘own’ and as such we do not have any control over who is / is not invited."
She misses the point: West Ham, who had representatives at the SAG meeting, could have told
United when the meeting was or relayed United’s communication onto the council but, according to
United, they did neither.
When I made these points to her, she spent a week considering her response before saying: “I have
been advised to pass your queries on to my colleague, so that they can be sent directly to the SAG
for their attention.”
70
Quite why she – or someone at West Ham – could not respond to a valid issue relating directly to
West Ham and not Newham Council is not clear.
Newham Council staff were unhelpful. When I wrote to SAG chairman Sheila Roberts to express
concern about the allocation and, in particular, about the issue relating to United not being able to
attend the meeting, she replied a week later, she said she had no record of United requesting to
attend the meeting.
Again, this misses the point for the same reasons as above, and I wrote to Ms Roberts to make these
points.
At no point did she acknowledge the potential benefits of having United representatives at the
meeting.
---
Before the game, discussions took place between MUST and United about transport.
Because of engineering works, there were no trains back to Manchester after the game (especially
considering the possibility of extra time and penalties).
In an extremely positive step, United agreed to the general rule that fans should not have to suffer
because of the team’s failure to win the original tie, and they agreed to lay on free coach travel to
and from the game, at considerable cost to the club – a gesture to be repeated later on in the
season.
Match issues
A lot of fans fed back to MUST that there were issues with accessing the away end.
Most fans are used to the entrance to the lower tier, which is fairly straightforward. But getting to
the upper tier requires walking round a set of flats.
There was also some fighting between fans by the coaches at the end of the game. United fans said
West Ham fans provoked it, after they had lost to a late goal.
Some of this is detailed in the police report.
We shall return to the issue of West Ham shortly.
71
72
73
Everton Wembley
FA Cup semi-final
Saturday April 23, 17:15
Tickets
31,606 tickets at £30, £40, £50 or £60 adults and a £10 discount for concessions
Pre-match issues
Greater Manchester Police and the Metropolitan Police tried to arrange a conference call to discuss
issues around the two semi-finals.
However, they cancelled it claiming nobody from the other three clubs had expressed an interest.
Instead, we had informal discussions about issues such as the police approach to the match, the split
of pubs, the use of police dogs and horses, matchday communications and other issues.
The responses were all helpful and MUST was able to communicate them to fans.
Match issues
None
Police report
This fixture was a 1715 kick off at Wembley Stadium.
The late kick offs gave time for extended drinking for the supporters.
There were no issues in Central London and fans from both sides drank along the Kilburn corridor
and the environs of the stadium itself and also pubs to the north of Wembley.
Nearing kick off Olympic way was busy with both sets of fans making their way to the stadium.
This saw minor altercations along the route and up onto the concourse itself.
Fans from both sides were held outside of the stadium until after kick off due to a ticketing issue at
the turnstiles.
During the match there were a variety of arrests from both sets of fans . 14 in total .
After the final whistle both sets of fans exited the stadium at the same time.
This saw confrontations around the concourse and along Olympic Way . Police intervention stopped
this from escalating further.
There were also confrontations in the coach parks between both sets of fans.
Despite this it was a fairly quick dispersal due to train times back to the North of the country.
74
Norwich
Carrow Road
Premier League
Saturday May 7, 12:45
Tickets
2,636 tickets at £45 for adults, £35 for over 65s and £25 for under 16s.
This compares with 2,492 at the previous game in December 2013.
However, it was still 90 fewer tickets than the entitlement under competition rules.
Norwich said this was “unfortunately due to our stadium configuration and segregation area. The
Premier League are already aware of this.”
Pre-match issues
After that game in 2013, which saw a 17:30 kick off, Norfolk Police described the behaviour of
United fans as “disgraceful” and said a late kick off in future seasons might result in a request for a
reduced allocation, so the early kick off worked to our advantage.
Norwich’s supporter liaison officer Stephen Graham did not reply to my email offering to publicise
any useful information for away fans.
Match issues
Apart from two pitch invaders, it seems a fairly positive police report.
75
West Ham
Upton Park
Premier League
Tuesday May 10, 19:45
Tickets
1,919 tickets at £55 adults and £30 over 65s and under 21s
That compares with 2,400 the previous season.
MUST’s stance on this is that the allocation is way too low and that the way it was decided upon was
wholly unsatisfactory.
So how did we get there?
Continuing on from the West Ham FA Cup, the safety advisory group (SAG) had indicated it would
set the league game allocation based on how reds behaved at the cup game.
In advance of the cup game, MUST wrote to the SAG chairman Sheila Roberts staying this was unfair.
The letter said: “I would hope that, at this meeting, the main item of consideration will be any safety issues arising from last season's Premier League game - not the FA Cup game. “As SAG members will be aware, the cup game will be a higher allocation and will be played at a different time of day. It would be like comparing apples with oranges. “The police report from last season's league game was quite positive and should be given due consideration.” I am pleased that Ms Roberts mentioned this letter – and specifically this point – at the SAG meeting and that a representative of the Sports Ground Safety Authority agreed with the point. However, that did not seem to influence the decision makers, given the severe cut in tickets. We also asked for United officials to be invited to the second SAG meeting. MUST also wrote to the Premier League to update its officials on the situation. The Premier League spoke to United about the issue and West Ham. One Premier League official told MUST: “It doesn’t make sense for visiting clubs to be excluded (from the SAG meeting) at all. In spite of all this, the minutes show a United staff member did not attend. Of course, it could be that United were invited and did not accept the invitation but, given United’s enthusiasm to attend, this is highly unlikely. At the time, a United source told MUST: “We have now asked our club secretary to ask if (a staff member) can be invited to the SAG meeting following the exclusion last time, so hopefully this will actually be taken seriously now.
76
“I also believe that the word that you put the Premier League has got back to West Ham also which is good as it gives us some more leverage for invitation.” To date, nobody from Newham Council or West Ham has explained the absence of the United official at the meeting. When you consider that they viewed the potential for problems so bad that they thought a cut of 1,081 tickets was necessary, the fact that they did not seek the help of United, who would have been in a unique position to address those problems, it is disappointing. What it makes it stranger still is that, before the game, Greater Manchester Police gave United a report into their view of behaviour at the FA Cup game. After the FA Cup, a United source said the report “highlighted a lot of issues regarding fan behaviour.” Because the SAG meeting minutes were vague, we do not know if they considered this report, but, again, United would have been able to suggest solutions, having seen it. I must emphasise that I am in no way trying to play down any incidents at the FA Cup match (which I have tried to properly assess earlier in the report). But the layout of the away end at a league game doesn’t resemble the layout of the away end at a cup game. As a quick example, a lot of problems at the FA Cup game occurred because of the access to the upper tier of the away end. This does not exist in the league game. There was also a complete failure to consider the unique nature of this game: With it being the last ever match at the ground, United fans would go home at full time and most West Ham fans would stay, minimising the chances of a repeat of disorder by the coaches. So, what did the SAG minutes say? “At the FA Cup game, there were two assaults on police officers by United fans, seven arrests of Manchester United fans, anti-social behaviour by mainly United fans, a bottle thrown onto the pitch.” Aisle and exit blocking was also seen and there were 42 broken seats. Amusingly, one of the people at the SAG speculated over why “behaviour has deteriorated”. This, they said was “as a consequence of bad results and the fans not liking the manager.” How can they possibly pass judgement on the motivation for (alleged) behaviour? We’ll never know who said it because the minutes of the meeting anonymise who said what. It should be noted that, in the past, the Information Commissioner has criticised Newham Council for trying to keep secret who has attended these meetings. The report implies United did not send enough of their own stewards (perhaps they could have sent more if they were around at the SAG meeting to be asked, although perhaps the message is getting
77
through – the minutes did say United should be requested to attend the next police strategy meeting). There are also allegations that United fans pushed past a police cordon outside the ground so West Ham had to open an extra turnstile and that, inside the ground, fans stood where they liked and pushed back the segregation line, and there was video evidence of this. While I don’t want to disagree with some of those points, some of the claims pose serious questions. If seven United fans were arrested, why does the police report say that only four people in total were arrested and only two of them were in the United end? Why does the police report completely neglect to mention the two assaults and why did the police officers on duty miss the destruction of 42 seats? There is no point in having a police report unless it is accurate and there is no point in police officers attending a SAG meeting unless they are prepared to either admit their own report was inaccurate or contradict the minuted claims. Pre-match issues There was a huge build up of people on Green Street and heavy traffic caused the late arrival of the United team coach, which was then attacked near the ground, delaying kick off. While all this was going on, West Ham’s joint chairman David Gold gave several media interviews seemingly blaming the vandal attack on United for setting off late. He later wrote to United to apologise for what happened. After the coach’s arrival, some reds were caught up in a crush on the club car park. One fan who was there gave this account: “I just have to write this because I was caught up in the
crowd crush yesterday as our team bus was reversing into their ground.
“The police lost control and the officers on the ground froze. I was right beside them and they had
no clue what to do.
“It really was very close to being a tragedy outside around 19:00 yesterday.
“I really just do not want these people who attend SAG meetings to brush over what could have
been another disaster in this country.
“Plenty of West Ham fans there would back that up. It was really going downhill fast.”
Match issues
None. The police report focuses heavily on what happened before the game and poor behaviour
from some West Ham fans.
Arising issues
Following the match, an investigation took place by the FA, West Ham and the Metropolitan Police.
78
Several documentations showing a fair bit of hindsight have been drawn up since, following the
review.
One made the point that various authorities did not anticipate that there would be enough tickets
for home fans and thousands of fans would want to gather in the area.
Road closures could have been put in place and a contingency plan could was not in place in case
there were problems with access.
The authorities have acknowledged that the arrival of the United coach caused antagonism because
it was reversing into a small space and people in that space were angry at police as they were
instructing the coach to reverse there.
Some fans had to climb into neighbouring gardens to escape the crush, the report says.
There was a feeling among Metropolitan Police chiefs that lessons must be learned so there is not a repeat when Spurs and Chelsea move grounds.
Another debrief document illustrates that police did put a lot of planning into the organisation of the match.
The report acknowledges that things might have turned out better had a West Ham fan (or several) been invited to the SAG meeting, and this is something they may consider in future.
The report ends with seven ‘lessons learnt’ points, including ensuring opposition team coaches have a secure drop-off area, ensuring someone on the coach is on contact with the police control room and ensuring supporters are represented at SAG meetings.
Finally, there was a recommendation that football players are reminded about the appropriate use of social media in relation to such incidents.
This was probably a reference to social media video from inside the Manchester United coach, taken by a player.
79
80
81
Crystal Palace
Wembley
FA Cup final
Saturday May 21, 17:30
Tickets
28,000 at £45, £65, £85 and £115 with a £10 discount for concessions
Pre-match issues
MUST worked with the club to try to get an idea of how many credits from attending home cup
games earlier on in the season would be enough to get a ticket.
The club’s main priority was to ensure everyone with 10 credits got a ticket. Initially, this looked
ambitious, but they managed to move things around to achieve this.
For example, United staff entitled to a ticket were given an alternative incentive to give up their
ticket and United also bought tickets in the Club Wembley section to relocate some of these staff –
again, freeing up tickets elsewhere.
As an aside, it was curious to see Thomas Cook Sport selling FA Cup Final accommodation and match
ticket packages for £849 to people living outside the UK. However, these tickets were not from
United’s allocation.
Due to the late kick off and the lack of trains, United laid on free coaches from Old Trafford to
Wembley and back, at considerable cost.
MUST lobbied for this and it was impressive that the club were happy to oblige.
Discussions took place between MUST and the Met Police about the policing operation. In honesty,
the semi-final went so smoothly that very little had to be taken into consideration.
Match issues
None. The police report seems quite vague where any issues were referenced. Nothing specifically
relates to United fans.
82
After the game, a lot of fans noted that Crystal Palace fans were louder, largely because they had a
singing section.
In the summer, MUST worked with United and other groups to establish a singing section for the
Community Shield. This was an excellent example of the club responding to fans’ requests via MUST.
83
84
Changes for 2016/17
United are introducing a new sanctions/appeals procedure for fans. Up until now, punishments
have been inconsistent, arbitrary and extremely hard to challenge. The new system should make
things fairer.
The club are planning to require some fans to collect tickets at away games. Mostly, it will only be a
small fraction of ticket holders but, at some games, it will be all ticket holders, though there are
practical problems with organising mass collections..
There will be a ‘two strikes and you’re out’ policy for those who are asked to collect domestic and
then cancel their ticket.
Those people will be then made to collect every subsequent away ticket they get that season.
If they cancel again, they will be banned from applying for away tickets for 12 months.
No shows who do not cancel their tickets in advance will be banned from applying for away tickets
for 12 months.
Once bans expire, supporters must visit the ticket office with photo ID before they are able to apply
for away tickets again.
The club decided to act after just 110 people of the 200 asked to collect at Spurs in 2015/16 did so.
Of the 90 that did not, 80 cancelled in advance and 10 were no shows.
Previously, United had said that 35 per cent of people asked to collect away game tickets from the
host ground did not, on average.
A rise to 45 per cent at the Spurs game seems to have raised many eyebrows at the club.
“For such a big game, it has only reiterated the need to impose much stronger sanctions,” ticket
office manager Sam Kelleher said at April’s fans forum meeting.
When tickets are posted out, they will only be posted to the ticket holder’s address, one ticket per
envelope.
All fans must register the name and address of fans using particular memberships to go to away
games.
Since season tickets – and loyalty pot memberships – are already assumed to be restricted to one
person, it is thought this is particularly aimed at executive members (EMs).
Away tickets gained by EMs will then only be allowed to be used by those they have named
previously, with United checking through ticket collections as described above.
United stewards will be in the away end at every game (if the host club wants it), with the aim of
preventing aisle blocking and retaining high ticket allocations.
85
Fans will be able to apply for six tickets per application.
However, multiple applications will not be able to be made on the same payment card. It is
understood this measure is designed to target ticket touts, but could have an impact on supporters’
clubs, who often use one payment card for convenience.
The club has said it wants to get to a stage where everyone able to apply for domestic away tickets
has been asked to collect at least once.
Afterwards, they will be able to review where away tickets go, on average, and analyse whether the
system is fair or should be changed.
The stricter measures could mean more people dropping out of the loyalty pot, giving the club more
leg room to provide incentives to other fans in the long run.
The club has said that ticket collections are likely to take place at games where our ticket allocation
has been reduced.
This could include Hull, Sunderland, Spurs, Liverpool, Everton and Stoke.
No sponsors or staff will be given tickets for away games and players’ tickets will be kept to a
minimum, the club said.
European away credits will be ‘rolled over’. For the first European game of 2015/16, priority was
given to those with the most number of credits from all of 2014/15.
Then, for the remainder of 2015/16, priority was given to those with credits from earlier on in
2015/16. However, now, priority for all European games in 2016/17 will be given to those with
credits accrued since the start of 2015/16.
Eventually, we will reach a stage where the last three years of credits will be taken into account.
Adult ticket prices for Premier League away games are fixed at £30 per person.