The Blick research makes it clear: Super League clubs cannot do anything with the cascade model

FCZ president Ancillo Canepa expressed himself most clearly. Last week, after the south corner was closed for the home match against Lausanne-Sport, he took a stand and appealed the decision. With the aim of setting a precedent for the whole of Switzerland. Canepa to Blick: “This is collective punishment, even though the authorities claim it is a preventive measure. “That is why we want a court to rule on the extent to which collective punishment is legal at all.”

Canepa lacks the know-how

Canepa has little interest in the cascade model: “For me, this approach borders on declaring our system bankrupt.” In the current debate between authorities, politicians, clubs and the competition, Canepa lacks the knowledge and experience in this regard. These points were more present in previous working groups on this topic.

At the request of Blick, FC St. Gallen is already questioning the legal basis of the cascade model. There is also the question to what extent clubs can be held responsible for the behavior of fans outside the immediate stadium environment.

“In such cases, where the only connection to football is often just that the perpetrators wear certain club colors, the clubs are faced with an impossible task because they have no authority outside the stadiums,” said WG vice-president Andras Gurovits. problem that all clubs refer to.

Clubs give authorities more responsibilities

Instead, several clubs are turning the tables and giving the authorities more responsibilities. For example, in the case of the Léman Derby at the beginning of December, when there were riots between Lausanne and Servette fans in front of the Stade de la Tuilière. “We believe that people who commit violence on the sidelines of sporting events should be identified, arrested and prosecuted. In public spaces, this falls under the jurisdiction of the authorities,” said Servette, who accused the security authorities: “As far as we know, no people were identified or arrested during the riots in front of the Stade de la Tuilière.”

Instead of aiming to prosecute individual perpetrators, the cascade model focuses on collective punishment, says FC Luzern. These would not be directed against those who caused the violent riots, but against the large, peaceful majority. The fear of all clubs: collective punishments may cause people who have previously behaved peacefully to feel provoked by these measures and to show solidarity with people who are prone to violence.

“The measures are ineffective because they create more problems than they actually have to solve,” says FC Lugano. At FC Basel and YB, the imposition of collective punishments is also not considered proportionate or effective.

Dialogue must be central

Instead, the clubs agree that the emphasis should remain on dialogue between all parties involved. If you can take anything positive from the cascade model, it is the introduction of uniform measures throughout Switzerland. “Unfortunately, even before it is official, it is being applied unevenly,” it is said in Lugano. FC Luzern also believes: “It is absolutely not clear which type of incident leads to which measures.”

In recent months, the various authorities have made uncoordinated decisions, without consulting the clubs or the SFL, which are contrary to the cascade model. Similarly, YB also assesses the recently imposed sanctions. In principle, a model developed by the authorities and the SFL is effective, “but before this model was even adopted, in practice the authorities took a different, uncoordinated path.”

In this week’s Blick interview, KKKPD co-chair Karin Kayser-Frautschi announced that she would talk to the clubs again. One thing is clear: it will take a lot of convincing from the politicians to get the club bosses back on board.