class=”sc-29f61514-0 icZBHN”>
The last example of fan violence wasn’t that long ago. It’s September 30th. The day when YB won 1-0 against GC. What remains in Zurich is a demolished bus, police vehicles with smashed windows and a death threat against a bus driver. Three days later, the licensing authorities’ working group reached a verdict: the YB fan sector would be closed at the next meeting between the two teams in Bern. It will be on January 20th.
The YB fans – Ostkurve and Gäubschwarzsucht – react with dismay and claim that the police bombarded them without warning with rubber bullets at eye level, tear gas and pepper spray. YB also no longer understands the world, says that this collective punishment is ineffective and finds it “a shame” that thousands of fans are being punished for the behavior of a few individuals.
The Sion curve closed out of nowhere in May
It is the final dispute that inevitably always arises when there is fan violence and subsequent repressive measures. Because since the Servette case against Zion, politics has taken sway. That was in May 2023, in the middle of FC Sion’s relegation battle, when frustrated Valais fans injured five Geneva police officers. The working group decides to close the FC Sion fan curve for the next match. A measure from nowhere! And this was when the so-called step-by-step model that was presented shortly before only existed as a paper tiger.
Since then, everything has revolved around this model, which is essentially a catalog of punishments explaining which measure applies to which crime. The catalog divides the country. Clubs and fans are against it. The Swiss Football League is stuck in a sandwich and silent. Politicians and police consider the model as no alternative. This is from October 2023.
YB CEO Wanja Greuel formulates the champion’s concerns as follows: “About fifteen road riders caused the incident. Thousands are being punished for this. I don’t see the proportionality in that. We do not want to turn the perpetrators into victims. On the contrary. You have to catch them and that is the job of the police. But corner closures? This doesn’t change anything.”
Difficult to reach private individuals
However, Karin Kayser, government councilor of Nidwalden, co-chair of the Cantonal Conference of Directors of Justice and Police, sees things very differently. “It is understandable that the measures are seen as collective punishment and that individual perpetrators must be punished. However, it is usually very difficult to reach individuals because, on the one hand, they cannot be recognized by the mask and disappear into the crowd of fans and are often even protected by them. Therefore, it is not possible for the security forces to identify these persons. For this reason, a certain degree of solidarity can be expected in supporting the punishments. The fact that these measures are seen as collective punishment should not be the focus.”
Kayser continues: “It seems much more important to me that we all have an obligation to work together to develop and advocate for effective solutions. It is necessary to take clear and easily implementable measures so that the situation does not degenerate into an unnecessary game of cat and mouse. Anything else would mean simply letting the few rioters take control. Sport and ultimately society suffer from this. Most fans look forward to a quiet game and want to spend their free time safely. It should not be the case that a few rioters make this impossible.”
Basel suffers from ‘causal liability’
Let’s continue the ping-pong match and pass the ball to FC Basel. “The FCB is committed to preventing fan violence where possible and at the same time consistently punishing individual misconduct. However, the measures in the step-by-step model are implemented flawlessly and cannot be averted by the club in question through its own behavior. In other words, it is a causal liability, which means that the responsibility for misconduct by third parties is shifted entirely to the clubs.
From FC Basel’s point of view, this is reprehensible from a legal perspective alone and devalues the time clubs invest in possible solutions. “It is also serious that the proposed measures would affect a large number of innocent fans, who would be punished for individual misconduct and banned from visiting the stadium. The chosen route of collective punishment is simple, because it is not necessary to investigate individual perpetrators. But from our point of view it is also the wrong one because the punishment mainly affects people who are not involved.”
For Kayser, the problem is that identifying the perpetrators is often difficult and sometimes almost impossible. “The fans protect each other in the corner. And if there’s a crowd rampaging on a bus, it’s unreasonable to send police officers there to collect personal data. This would effectively escalate the situation and put the security forces at great risk.”
Canepa finds forfeiture ‘absurd’
There is also frustration among the clubs. YB writes in the communiqué about the GC case that the club’s statements were not listened to. Greuel even notices some consternation when it comes to the step-by-step model. “We made a lot of suggestions in the workshops. But what did it mean afterwards? No! No! No! We were given the hope that the model would be developed together. But many opinions were preconceived and already made.” That is why he has no great expectations from the consultation.
The clubs have expressed their concerns in unison. Mainly because of the forfeits provided at level five for clubs that are double repeat offenders. FCZ president Ancillo Canepa even described this possible punishment as “absurd” after it was presented. “Some people can arbitrarily influence a match so that a team loses. That does not work.”
Kayser also sees this proposed final escalation level as “huge.” “The model that is now being consulted by football and fan clubs has not yet been politically approved.” There is a huge need for discussion. According to the co-chairman of the KKKPD, it is not expected that the model proposal will be accepted by everyone without comment.
|
team
|
SP
|
T.D
|
PT
|
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1
|
 FC Zurich
|
10
|
13
|
22
|
|
|
2
|
 BSC Young Boys
|
9
|
11
|
20
|
|
|
3
|
 FC St. Gallen
|
10
|
6
|
18
|
|
|
4
|
 FC Lugano
|
9
|
3
|
15
|
|
|
5
|
 FC Lucerne
|
10
|
-1
|
15
|
|
|
6
|
 Yverdon Sports FC
|
10
|
-4
|
15
|
|
|
7
|
 Napkin FC
|
10
|
-2
|
13
|
|
|
8th
|
 FC Winterthur
|
10
|
-2
|
12
|
|
|
9
|
 Grasshopper Club Zurich
|
10
|
-3
|
8th
|
|
|
10
|
 FC Lausanne Sport
|
10
|
-5
|
8th
|
|
|
11
|
 FC Stade Lausanne Ouchy
|
9
|
-8th
|
8th
|
|
|
12
|
 FC Basel
|
9
|
-8th
|
5
|
Source : Blick
I’m Emma Jack, a news website author at 24 News Reporters. I have been in the industry for over five years and it has been an incredible journey so far. I specialize in sports reporting and am highly knowledgeable about the latest trends and developments in this field.
