Fill in the form below and we will contact you shortly to organised your personalised demonstration of the Noggin platform.
An integrated resilience workspace that seamlessly integrates 10 core solutions into one, easy-to-use software platform.
The world's leading integrated resilience workspace for risk and business continuity management, operational resilience, incident & crisis management, and security & safety operations.
Explore Noggin's integrated resilience software, purpose-built for any industry.
Security Management Software
Updated July 18, 2023
An eagerly anticipated contest between cricket powerhouses, Australia and India, was marred by allegations of racism and fan abuse. Indian team bowlers, Jasprit Bumrah and Mohammed Siraj complained that they heard fans utter racial slursi. The complaint, lodged officially by the Indian team, precipitated a temporary stoppage in play; the presumed offenders were escorted out of the stadium and held for questioningii.
A subsequent investigation by Cricket Australia (CA) would later confirm that Indian team members had indeed been subject to racial abuse by fans at the venue. The fans held for questioning, however, would be cleared of wrongdoingiii.
Nor would the next day of play go off without incident. An Indian cricket supporter accused security personnel at the grounds of racial profiling and fellow spectators of racial abuseiv. The complainant has since sat down with venue operators to discuss the incident.
The events have generated widespread international press coverage. In their aftermath, both the International Cricket Council (ICC) and CA have put out statements denouncing hate.
To many, the incidents fit into a larger pattern of racial abuse in international sports. So, what does the data suggest?
The University of Central Florida’s Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport (TIDES) catalogues racist acts in sports. Though the pandemic-induced temporary shutdown of worldwide sports complicates reporting, TIDES data from 2019 shows racist acts slightly declining below the highwater mark set in 2018v.
For context: TIDES measured 137 acts in 2018, decreasing to 131 the year aftervi. Of the 131 acts perpetrated in 2019, 62 percent were related to international football (American soccer), with an overwhelming majority of those incidents taking place in Europe, including in Italy, England, Bulgaria, Montenegro, and Russiavii.
For their part, international sporting leagues have sought to address incidents of racial abuse by spectators against professional athletes. For instance, the international governing body of football, FIFA came up with a match observer scheme in the lead up to the 2018 World Cup in Russiaviii. The Match Observer had the power to report findings to FIFA’s disciplinary body who would then analyse the information relayed and decide on whether to open disciplinary proceedingsix.
The year after, FIFA updated its disciplinary code. Changes included enabling FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee to take statements from victims of racial abuse and letting those targets participate in subsequent proceedingsx . In addition, match penalties can also be imposed on team, including mandatory forfeiture if their supporters are found to be guilty of racist and other discriminatory behaviour, after a “three-step procedure”xi.
In the U.K., the Premier League launched its No Room For Racism Action Plan in February 2021xii. The scheme involves improving playing, coaching, and executive pathways for minority ethnic groups but also includes taking action against forms of racism on the pitchxiii. Measures, here, consist of awareness and education drives, as well as moves to make reporting abusive behaviour more effective and improving the enforcement and effectiveness of sanctionsxiv.
Other leagues have longstanding guidelines for fan behaviour. In the U.S., the National Basketball Association (NBA), Major League Soccer (MLS), National Football League (NFL), and Major League Baseball (MLB) have all implemented fan codes of conduct (See the NBA Fan Policy below).
What’s in these codes? Well, not only do they specify what constitutes good fan behaviour, they also stipulate that bad behaviour will lead to penalties for violators. Those penalties range in severity. They might include a fan being
ejected from a game and/or prevented from attending future games. If the offense itself violates local ordinances, the fan might even be referred to local authorities for arrest and prosecution.
The National Basketball Association seeks to foster a safe, comfortable, and enjoyable sports and entertainment experience in which:
The arena staff has been trained to intervene when necessary to help ensure that the above expectations are met, and guests are encouraged to report any inappropriate behavior to the nearest usher, security guard, or guest services staff
member. Guests who choose not to adhere to this Code of Conduct will be subject to penalty including, but not limited to, ejection without refund, revocation of their season tickets, and/or prevention from attending future games. They may also be in violation of local ordinances resulting in possible arrest and prosecution.
The NBA thanks you for adhering to the provisions of the NBA Fan Code of Conduct.
For sporting organisations and leagues as well as owners and operators of sporting venues, the question going forward is are these measures enough? Incidents of racial abuse mar the integrity of the game, while creating PR nightmares for stakeholders in sports. What’s more, they might constitute infringements on an athlete’s right to a safe and healthy workplace.
Professional athletes, after all, are workers. And it’s not hard to suggest that racial abuse by fans produces a hostile work environment. As such, sporting organisations and venue owners and operators (often one in the same) might consider it best-practice risk management to avoid cases of workplace harassment.
Would they win such a case? The issue is difficult to adjudicate, as the legal regimes in which the incidents take place vary.
In Australia, harassment is a form of discrimination, prohibited by Commonwealth legislation, such as the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Act. Australia also has federal racial discrimination legislation outlawing offensive behaviour based on racial hatred; examples of said behaviour include acts likely to offend, insult, humiliate, or intimidate another because of their race, colour, or national or ethnic origin.
Further, anti-discrimination law makes it unlawful to treat a person less favourably on the basis of particular protected attributes, including gender, sexual orientation, race, disability, or age. Meanwhile, employers also have a legal duty to take reasonable care for the health and safety of their employees, a duty which might be breached if bullying or harassment occurs in the workplace.
For athletes, though, the bar to prove their claims of harassment is high. In the U.S., for instance, holding sports organisations liable entails proving that the harassment was unwelcome, based on a protected characteristic, and sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the condition of employment and create an abusive environmentxv. Reaching this evidentiary bar is all the more difficult because the harassment itself is often ambiguous and sporadic, happening in a setting that is difficult to controlxvi.
Of course, this shouldn’t let sporting organisations and venues off the hook for seeking to control sporting environments. Just because they are unlikely to be held liable doesn’t mean that they will not.
Not just that: incidents of racial abuse leave a severe reputational stain. In the case of the Australia-India cricket incident, play was also temporarily halted. Per FIFA’s rules, games in which similar incidents take place might be suspended, with the venue evacuated of fans before play can resume. That’s certainly not in the interests of clubs or venues who rely on ticket sales. The surest route to avoid liability and reputational damage as well as to ensure the continuity of sporting events, therefore, is to take clear steps to prevent or correct harassment in the first place.
Incidents of racial abuse aren’t the only disruptive events organisations and venues need to worry about. The 2011 Dodgers Stadium Parking Lot attack saw two LA Dodgers fans beat a visiting San Francisco Giants fan. The victim of the incident
suffered brain damage and permanent injuries. As a result, the victim’s family sued both the attackers and the Dodgers organisation which owns Dodgers Stadium.
The case went to trial. Lawyers for the Dodgers argued that the security the venue provided was the strongest ever for an opening day contest. A former Dodgers security staffer countered that the organisation had been ill-equipped to handle the
massive crowd that on opening day.
Damning to the defence was the testimony of the then-current head of security who admitted that he had left the organisation for a year in part because he disagreed with a decision to reduce the number of uniformed off-duty police officers at games, rather than rely on more, lower-paid security guards.
The California jury found the Dodgers partially negligent in the matter, ordering the organisation to pay USD 13.9 million, plus the cost of ongoing medical care. The jury considered the Dodgers 25 percent negligent in their duty to keep their
premises reasonably safe, failing to take precautions for the foreseeable acts of a third party against fans, who were entitled to a reasonable expectation of safety.
Sources: Matt Bonesteel, The Washington Post: Los Angeles Dodgers found liable in parking-lot beating that left fain with brain damage
To their credit, sporting stakeholders acknowledge there is a problem. In Australia, various sporting leagues have implemented codes of conduct on athletic staff and players, which lay out what constitutes acceptable behaviour.
Cricket Australia, for instance, has an anti-harassment code for players and player support personnel, clarifying its commitment “to providing a sport environment free of harassment on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status and/or disability.” Harassment, defined along those terms, is strictly prohibited.
What more can be done? Sporting stakeholders might consider taking the extra step and setting down explicit codes of conduct for venue spectators. The process would entail:
In addition to those policies, we advise taking an integrated safety and security approach to the management of the lifecycle of the sporting event. What would such an approach entail?
Foremost, it’s important to involve multiple stakeholders in the mitigation of, preparation for, response to, and recovery from incidents of racial abuse at sporting events. Venue owners and operators have a clear role here, as well, especially if the venue is not owned by the sporting organisation.
Sporting officials should meet with police and venue stakeholders – not just security teams but Safety Management and Guest Services, as well – to identify sporting events which pose the greatest risk of disruption. From there, all stakeholders need to plan out specific procedures to discourage and respond to fan disruptions (up to and including violence).
A crucial component will be training staff once procedures are hammered out. Who’s involved in these trainings matter.
Remember: the incidents in question often don’t constitute classic security breaches. However, they might constitute a pattern of workplace harassment. Therefore, they don’t just deserve security attention but active and aware Safety and Guest Services staff, as well.
Alongside Buildings, Grounds, and Maintenance, all safety and security stakeholders should be trained to handle disruptive fans. And in the preparation and mitigation stages of the incidents, all suggestions for identifying potential issues and measures for ensuring safety and fair play should be heard from these stakeholders, as well.
Other preparation and mitigation measures to consider:
Preparation and mitigation procedures are meant to ensure that the response to an incident of racial abuse by a fan or fans goes smoothly. Committing the above procedures to a written document and training stakeholders regularly on the contents of that document will smooth out the kinks when those same stakeholders are called to action. Regular training also helps diffuse the inevitable stress and tension that comes with response and is therefore crucial to mitigating the risk of wild deviations from the plan.
Response stages are more likely to be dominated by security-specific measures, though responses by Guest Services (reinforced by Security and/or local police in case the incident turns violent) should be planned for, as well. Typical response measures during the competition include:
Sporting competition inspires zealous passion. And so, even the most diligent efforts won’t be enough to prevent incidents of racial abuse from fans.
Part of the recovery from those incidents involves transparent investigation and holding fans accountable for actions found to have transgressed pre-established standards of behaviour. Penalties might include asking a fan to leave or banning that fan from attending subsequent league games or venue events. In more egregious incidents, teams and venues might have to work with local law enforcement to help identify and prosecute malefactors. In the extreme, cancelling future events or
closing them off to the public might be warranted if the event cannot be made reasonably safe.
In instances of racial abuse by fans, everyone loses. And the increasing media glare on such incidents means that the losses are likely to get heavier for stakeholders, including sporting leagues, teams, and the venues that host them.
Don’t pay the price. Here, taking an integrated safety and security approach to the management of the entire lifecycle of an incident of racial abuse offers the best means of prevention, while simultaneously mitigating the severity of reputational, legal, security, and financial fallout.
i John Sinnott, CNN: Fans ejected from Sydney Test as cricket launches probe into alleged racist abuse. Available at https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/10/sport/cricket-austrralia-india-racism-probe-spt-intl/index.html.
ii The Guardian: Cricket Australia confirms racist abuse at Sydney Test but culprits remain unknown. Available at https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/jan/27/cricket-australia-confirms-racist-abuse-at-sydney-test-but-culprits-remain-unknown.
iii Ibid
iv Chris Barrett, The Sydney Morning Herald: 'Go back where you belong': SCG probes alleged abuse by security guard. Available at https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/go-back-where-you-belong-scg-probes-alleged-abuse-by-security-guard-20210115-p56ug0.html.
v Richard Lapchick, ESPN: Racism reported in sports decreasing but still prevalent. Available at https://www.espn.com/espn/story/_/id/28738336/racism-reported-sports-decreasing-prevalent.
vi Ibid
vii Ibid
viii DW: FIFA appoints 'Anti-Discrimination Match Observers' to crack down on racism. Available at https://www.dw.com/en/fifa-appoints-antidiscrimination-match-observers-to-crack-down-on-racism/a-18445772.
ix Ibid.
x Reuters: FIFA introduces harsher punishment for racist behaviour. Available at https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-soccer-fifa-racism/fifa-introducesharsher-punishment-for-racist-behaviour-idUKKCN1U62A4.
xi Ibid.
xii ESPN: Premier League launches plan to combat racism, increase diversity. Available at https://www.espn.com/soccer/english-premier-league/story/4311492/premier-league-launches-plan-to-combat-racismincrease-diversity.
xiii Ibid.
xiv Ibid.
xv Dallan F. Flake, Ohio Northern University: Spectator Harassment. Available at https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=626090113083010003115116085005002104014031023082031066109095075127121000106117077089099
038000101119039109113028105102126017092015059068041031112008075103009096113030069092013072098096124026127002101027092072126113090127082087099077107111087069071104122&EXT=pdf&INDEX=TRUE
xvi Ibid.