I want to start off by making it very clear that this is my opinion and my opinion alone.
Right, now that’s out of the way, let’s dive into the curious case that is Liverpool Football Club’s treatment of fan @lfcrazz during the Reds’ 5-1 win over Toulouse.
For those who have yet to come across @lfcrazz’s story, the long and short of it was that he was escorted out of the stands and asked to remove a jumper that demonstrated support for the Palestinian cause – an item of clothing that did not (just to clarify) state support for Hamas nor promote violence against Israel, its citizens nor the Israeli regime.
Some, then, might be wondering how on earth a fan can be pressured to strip themselves of clothing or flags that simply show solidarity.
There are regulations the club could technically point to in aid of defending its reaction to this isolated incident – given the fixture in question was a Europa League clash – though not necessarily ones I find myself persuaded by.
UEFA’s stance
Article 16.2 of UEFA’s Disciplinary Regulations (2022) states the following: “All associations and clubs are liable for the following inappropriate behaviour on the part of their supporters and may be subject to disciplinary measures and directives even if they can prove the absence of any negligence in relation to the organisation of the match:”
With the relevant facet of the guidance being: “e. the use of gestures, words, objects or any other means to transmit a provocative message that is not fit for a sports event, particularly provocative messages that are of a political, ideological, religious or offensive nature.”
A precedent has already been set at club level too. The Belfast Telegraph reports that, following the decision of Celtic supporters to show solidarity with the Palestinian people during the Glaswegian side’s Champions League tie with Atletico Madrid, sanctions are likely to follow.
It goes some way to explaining why Liverpool stewards rushed to “correct” the fan in question, presumably for fear of avoiding disciplinary proceedings, not to mention wishing to follow the letter of the law in the club guidance issued prior to the Europa League meeting with Toulouse (as relayed by the Echo): “In addition to Anfield’s long standing flag policy, and following consultation with safety and security experts, it has been determined that Israeli and Palestinian flags should not be permitted to be displayed at football matches for the foreseeable future and the same approach can be applied to other displays, banners, clothing or scarves identified as pro-Israeli or pro-Palestinian or related to the current crisis.”
Liverpool, you’ve got this one wrong
Whilst we can respect that the conflict between Israel and Palestine is a complex one, and refusing to take any side in the matter is potentially seen as being better than appearing to take one by proxy, the treatment of @lfcrazz still leaves a rather bitter taste.
Especially in light of the fact that the club has recently been selling merchandise in support of Ukraine. Surely we then can’t be selective in which causes are considered worthy. That said, I’d be remiss not to mention the wider context we must pay tribute to when comparing the two conflicts. There is a religious element underpinning events in Gaza that further complicates matters for a club like Liverpool representing a global and multicultural fanbase – ergo, it is possible (though not necessarily agreeable) to rationalise Liverpool’s commitment to neutrality.
I can’t speak for every Liverpool fan, nor can I speak for my colleagues at large in the football reporting/writing space, however, in my mind, I see little reason why supporters should not be able to express solidarity with a populace under genuine threat of genocide.
What does it say about our values as a club if we stay silent on such a matter? Mark my words, future generations will condemn such a stance – and rightly so.
Ultimately, I find myself resting on what I believe to be one final, crucial point: there is (or should be) a difference between showing solidarity (in the interest of keeping the plight of an entire people in the public consciousness) and being ‘provocative’ by, for example, promoting violence and bloodshed.
As far as I’m concerned – @lfcrazz falls into the former of the two categories. In that same breath, mourning the death of Israeli Liverpool fans – The Athletic reported on the removal of a banner, prior to the Merseyside derby, from the Kop reading “In Loving Memory of the Fallen Israeli Reds” following Hamas attacks on 7th October – surely also shouldn’t be considered ‘provocative’ under UEFA’s regulations nor in opposition to Premier League guidance. Either way, it feels like the wrong call.
Even in a debate that divides the world’s powers, there should be room for nuance in this issue at the level of club football and beyond. There should at least be wiggle room for expressions of solidarity for those caught in the crossfire, even if the club is totally committed to a stance of neutrality.
Let’s not completely strip football as a platform of what makes it stand out (with increasing rarity) as a force for good.
#Ep94 of The Empire of the Kop Podcast: EOTK Insider with Neil Jones🎙️