Written originally for Physical Education, a Stage 2 subject, during 2005.

DOES THE NATURE OF SPORT INFLUENCE SPECTATOR VIOLENCE?

The nature of sport influences spectator violence. Does a person watching a sporting match become compelled to act violently? I think, for the most part, yes, the nature of sport influences the violent acts that spectators sometimes participate in – not just in a physical sense, but also in a mental capacity; they could be influenced to use profanity or even, in some instances, resort to forms of racism.

When we think of spectator violence, we automatically think of sports such as ice hockey or basketball; and, while there is quite a substantial amount of violence within the confines of the spectator’s area, we must realize that those violent acts are influenced to a great extent by the actual sports that the crowds are watching. When we look at a sport like golf or swimming, we hardly ever see spectators using force or, even, verbally harassing each other; yet, when we look at basketball or ice hockey – there are many times and instances where crowds have used violence in conjunction with aggression and hostility. In basketball, player’s do, quite a lot of the time, conduct themselves on court in an aggressive manner – the spectators, most of which are fans of either of the teams playing, feed of the energy of the players; and with negative energy being put across by the athletes, it’s obvious that the spectators will be effected. If a fan in the stands sees a player from their favorite team push an athlete from the opposition, the fan will immediately side with their favorite player – meaning, they will feel the need to defend their team’s honor if a fan of the opposition yells obscenities against the team they admire and adore. Sometimes though, the violent acts aren’t even confined between the fans; in November 2004, a NBA game between the Detroit Pistons and the Indiana Pacers exploded into a violent brawl when two players from opposite team had a dispute – players were shoving each other and using foul language. A fan, in the stands, felt it was appropriate to throw a full cup of soft drink at one of the athletes – the player then ran into the stands and started physically assaulting the spectators. So, it’s not just sports influencing spectator violence – the violence within the crowds, sometimes, even merges together with the violent acts taking place in the designated area for play; the lines blur.

With some sports, it isn’t just the nature of the sport that influences the violence – it is, sometimes, the history of the sport. Take, for example, soccer; this sport has been around for many years, and, with a sport that has been around for that long – a rich amount of history is bound to surround it, especially with such a large amount of teams from all different countries that participate in the sport. Teams aren’t just playing against each other – its country playing against country. Racism plays a very large part in the way crowds conduct themselves in a match; because, as stated before – if a fan of the opposition offends your team’s honor, you are going to try to defend it. But, this isn’t team against team – this is nationality against nationality. And it’s not just in the World Cup matches – it happens here, in Australia. In May 2005, in Sydney a riot was started at a soccer match when Croatian-backed Sydney United defeated Serbian supported Bonnyrigg White Eagles in a match. The two opposite fan-bases felt like they hated each other so much that they needed to assault each other – but, was it the actual supporters that prompted these violent acts, or was it the sport itself? The athletes are playing the game, playing to beat the opposition; and the fans want to do more but can’t do anything except cheer – so, they use violence against the opposite fan-base as a way of “helping out their team”. Even worse, is that when the police tried to remove the Sydney United fans, they were assaulted too.

It also seems that spectator violence only occurs during a team sport. Think about it – soccer, basketball, ice hockey. It looks like two athletes playing against each other, one on one, doesn’t give off enough anger to perpetuate a crowd to erupt into violent acts. Where as, with a team game; crowds break into violence so much easier – maybe the level of excitement is higher with a team sport.

In a NSW Sports and Recreation brochure, it is stated that the most common offenders of violence in a sporting environment is the actual players – with them contributing 37 of the violence; with the spectators only having 19. The spectators watch the players; the players set the example. It is very alarming how large that percentage is; and, without a doubt, it has something to do with the dramatic decline of sporting officials since 1997.

Sports clubs are starting to try to adjust to the spectator and athlete violence; putting in place stricter codes of ethics and, in some cases, simply banning teams all together. Most sporting facilities have now banned the consumption and, even, possession of alcohol on the premises – and that’s a fair idea; because, when a fan has consumed a lot of alcohol, their judgment is impaired and that’s when they make mistakes like assaulting others. Sports centers are needing to have a lot more security precautions; with extra security personnel and security cameras to try to, at least, make sure the perpetrators are identified. Luckily, though, most of the average Australian sports-goers don’t want people attending who will cause trouble; they are usually labeled as “yobbos” – a type of individual that, I think, Australians are trying to push out of the culture.

In conclusion, does the nature of sport influence spectator violence? Yes, yes it does. Because, and this is the most obvious answer – without a sporting event to attend, there wouldn’t be anywhere for the crowd to act violent at.