[Official Site] Barnsley FC Charged With Supporter Misconduct

I know it's yet another reply by me but I've just read the fa report and it's pretty damning of the club and our stewarding.

It took 8 minutes from the referee alerting the stewards to anyone bothering to deploy the stewards to the offending area. 8 minutes!!! And the stewards responding were not told what they were responding to, just to go to that area.

CCTV wasn't aimed at that area of the ground even after the complaint. They didn't point a camera there until the second half, half an hour later when McLean was at the opposite end of the ground.

The club declined to put out a stadium announcement (against the guidelines set out by the fa)

The deputy safety officer essentially told the referee and a PGMOL representative that James McLean needed to just accept it.

The fa found that based on our head safety officers evidence they had serious concerns over cleggs suitability to hold such a high ranking safety job at Oakwell.

The club didn't discipline clegg and chose to still use him as deputy safety officer even after the incident.


It really really doesn't look good for the club and as usual it seems that when it comes to stewarding they couldn't care less.

 

Not really. They removed him from frontline duties and launched a criminal investigation against him. A criminal investigation not a simple internal one. Perhaps they aren't allowed to just suspend him? Or perhaps putting him behind a desk is actually more of a punishment? A month off on holiday full pay or still having to earn that money by doing all of the paperwork that frontline police generally hate? I know which is consider the bigger punishment whilst they decide if I'm getting jailed or not

 

This. No opportunity for him to clear his head and get away while the investigation is ongoing. He’s got to be there, reading and writing about other investigations, cases and sentences. I know which I’d rather be doing as well.

 

I knew there’d be a thread on this, and that there would be some complaints about consistency, and that it was because McClean winds people up, that the IRA song is sang at england games and that Celtic get away with stuff etc etc.

That’s a load of tripe. Read the full report :


http://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/.../the-fa-v-barnsley-fc---12-february-2020.ashx

If anyone still thinks the club have been harshly treated, especially if you were one of the people screaming ‘Fenian *******’ or ‘Irish lovely person’, and singing the IRA song, can I kindly suggest you don’t attend football matches or any event with large numbers of attendees from the general public.

McCleans beliefs and his actions derived from them are inflammatory. Other clubs have been in similar positions, but most of them haven’t been found guilty of chronic inaction and complete apathy after the event.

It’s a £20k fine. That really isn’t a lot on the grand scale of things.

It doesn’t make strong reading for Dane Murphy or Steve Bailey either. In fact in part it reads like an absolute embarrassment, almost as though both are completely out of their depth in the roles they are in...

 

To highlight the main points of the fa report (sort that it's long):
Peter Clegg (our deputy safety officer) claimed that no stewards had heard the chanting despite the fa finding that it was clearly heard on the club's match video several times and by a large number of fans.

Steve bailey told the fa that since he had been at the club here had been 3 instances of "behaviour being used by
supporters towards players that had included reference to race" despite there being instances at more home games than that in the opening months of this season alone with the diaby chants.

The fa could find no evidence of what the club has done to minimise racism.

The fa found that in the past the club used to utilise messages in the programme and in posters etc highlighting that racism is not tolerated but Steve bailey was unable to tell them how regularly they had been used and how long it was since we stopped doing it. The fa found that the club had stopped doing it but was given no reasons when or why we had just stopped.

The fa found that the club has a telephone number for reporting racism but that there is no evidence that it is advertised anywhere, not on posters at the ground and not in the matchday program. It merely exists in the club's contact list. Steve bailey was unable to tell the fa how the club communicated the number to fans, how it advertised it or how it described the numbers purpose.

Steve bailey told the fa that in the past we had used the PA system before matches to warn fans against racist behaviour but he did not know how often that was used or even if it had been used at all before the Stoke match. The fa found that if it had been used in the past it was certainly infrequently enough that the club's safety officer wasn't really aware of it.

The club said that it had plans and protocols but couldn't show any written proof of any protocols or plans to deal with discrimination. Steve bailey was unable to tell the fa what these plans and protocols were.

The club said that clegg had briefed stewards about what to do in the event of racism or discrimination however he couldn't tell the fa what this briefing had involved and provided no evidence that it had occured.

Steve bailey told the fa that prior to the match he had spoke to other clubs safety officers about how to deal with the remembrance Day match specifically with regard to James McLean. However he couldn't tell the fa who he had spoke to, when he had spoke to them or what conversation had taken place. Or what conclusions he had taken from the conversations. The fa say they were left in the dark as to what, if anything, the club had done based on these conversations.

Steve bailey informed the fa that the McLean situation had been specifically discussed in three separate match planning meetings with SYP however he gave little detail what had been said or what conclusions and been drawn or what had been implemented based on these.

The fa found that the club had done nothing different for this game than t did for any other game despite the increased risk of racism being made clear to them. Steve bailey told the fa that the club decided not to be proactive against possible racism in case it increased the risk of racism, instead taking a passive stance.

The fa found that the club's post match action plan (the plan put together since the incident to stop it happening again) still doesn't provide any way to report behaviour and doesn't tell supporters that they risk prosecution for racist behaviour.

The fa found that "Doing nothing – as the Club chose to do – to prevent or deter such behaviour was not an acceptable option"

The fa found that the Club had done little to identify individuals who had used the insulting and abusive words and behaviour, and no such individuals had in fact been identified. Steve bailey said that he club had reviewed CCTV but didn't give any details. The club hadn't asked supporters for help identifying culprits (and still hasn't). It appears that the club has not asked for police help at all.

The club didn't deploy stewards till 8 minutes after the racist chanting was reported. Steve bailey was unable to explain this and didn't provide the control room log to explain what had happened.

Deploying stewards to the high risk areas of the ponty end rather than across it didn't stop the chanting. The fa could find no evidence that the club had told the stewards why they were being deployed.

The fa found that the club never played an announcement asking for chanting to stop, didn't put a message on the scoreboard and didn't put CCTV on the area until half an hour after the report and after the chanting had stopped.

The fa found that the club had not apologised to McLean and hadn't condemned the chanting until after the fa charge. This led the fa to give less credit to the club for its apology to the fa.

The fa found that the club's post match action plan to decide discriminatory chanting wasn't good enough and so the fa gave the club an action plan.

The fa found cleggs comments of "he's a professional footballer he should be used to it," to be a really aggravating factor".

Clegg doesn't work for the club (presumably Doyle's) but the fa has concerns over his suitability to do the job and is disappointed that the club hadn't disciplined him and still uses him in the same role.

The fa was unable to take the club's financial position into account before setting the fine because despite being invited to do so Dane Murphy provided no information about the club's finances "save in the very vaguest of terms"

The fa has ordered that the club conducts a review of all stewarding management, shall review it's matchday operational planning, shall I prove its stewards briefing processes, improves it's steward deployment plans. That the club's CEO and safety officer has to visit and liase with other clubs to see how they do things and improve our own.
The club must evaluate the station cctv Capabilities and operator training and should consider I proving the CCTV infrastructure.
The club should review and update it's supporter charter regarding discrimination and needs to inform supporters of potential sanctions for discriminatory behaviour.
The club must deploy stadium announcements, advertising boards, scoreboard messages, programme messages and stadium posters targeting racism
The club must review ticket sales policies to reduce the risk of it happening again and to provide usable data to identify culprits.
The club must communicate for the next home game on the website, social media and in the programme an appropriate message to supporters explaining the background to the charge, condemning the behaviour and the initiatives the club is taking for the future.



All in all it is damning of the club and it is quite clear that we simply do not have any written evidence of our practices, that nobody seems to actually know what we do and why.
For example had the club been more prepared then Steve bailey could have told the fa that the club put out before every game the message of "Barnsley football club takes spectator safety very seriously etc etc" but they hadn't prepared enough so couldn't answer the question. I could tell them pretty much word for word what the message was but nobody from the club could.

Get your act together Barnsley because it ain't good enough. Get rid of Doyle's and get a proper company in and take your responsibility seriously. Maybe then we won't have to play at 12:30 in a reduced capacity stadium. We've all blamed the police for it but maybe just maybe it's because we simply aren't good enough at hosting and stewarding football matches?

 

I hope those bashing the FA about this decision read this.

We've been shocking for years when it comes to stewarding at the games.

 

Best post on here.

Times fecking 10.

 

So when Liverpool fans went on the rampage at Heysel, who was accountable to make sure the fans behaved?

 

Pete Clegg .

 

Had to smile at the above what chance have we the fans got of getting the club to talk to us when they won't talk to the governing body to tell them what's going on...

 

I know everyone has their own beliefs and ideas but when non English players come to our country to play football and earn their money they should respect English traditions

 

He respected our traditions.

He just chooses not to participate.

There’s a massive difference.

He has very valid reasons for doing so, reasons that shouldn’t be ignored or dismissed.

Either way, that’s not what this thread is about. It’s about the club not doing the best they can to stop racism and protect players and supporters.

 

It looks incredibly bad for us that we still employ him and that despite the fact any of us could have told the club the player would get chants towards him, we felt the best thing to do would be to only film fans in the second half when the chanting had already stopped, probably because those doing it so cameras coming out to record them.

 

There’s some truth in that. No massive argument though I would state we ought to have a little more tolerance as we don’t know what he was brought up in or what his parents and grandparents lived through. He is inflammatory though, granted.

But whatever the consensus is about James McClean, it has absolutely no relevance.

None of what you have written excuses neanderthalic idiots hurling abuse and singing songs which are known to be racist in connotation and origin.

And it certainly doesn’t excuse Barnsley FC, it’s CEO, or it’s safety officer from being unfit for purpose, not even non-league in application. We are an embarrassing two-bit operation, Mark Robins said it years ago and little has changed apparently. The FA report is damning in the extreme and if the owners of the club have anything about them at all then changes will be made, by which I mean heads will have to roll.

For a CEO to be unable to outline even the most basic financial detail (and let’s not think he was instructed to withhold, as the club are required to report such things in due course anyway - he was just unable to do it); for a chief safety officer to not be able to give any details about any supporter safety initiatives or conversations with police - or in fact prove he’d done anything he suggested he had, is little short of scandalous.

It is an absolute disgrace that a championship football club are so comically inept and I hope mssrs Conway, Lee et al are as embarrassed as I feel as merely a supporter.

 

F uck him and f uck the IRA.

Go play football in Ireland.

 

Are you defending the racist chanting?

 

I think they sent him back to the café at Holmfirth

 

So if those things had happened and the chants still happened would we still get the fine?

 

No as the club would have discharged it's obligations by doing everything possible to reduce and manage the risk. The fa found that we had done practically nothing to manage that risk so hot us with a big fine.

 

Cant really argue against that BUT it shows even with those things in place it dowsnt solve 5he racism issue