“We really have to go back to individual sanctions and let justice do its job”, believes the lawyer for groups of supporters Pierre Barthélémy Monday, November 22 on franceinfo, the day after the interruption of the Lyon-Marseille football match after a supporter threw a bottle at the head of Dimitri Payet. The lawyer believes that the football community too often takes collective sanctions which are “unfair” but not enough individual sanctions. He is also in favor of changing the rules to help the referee decide to interrupt a match.
>> Lyon-Marseille: bottle spray on Dimitri Payet, crisis meeting, waiting, stoppage of the match … What happened at Groupama Stadium
franceinfo: How do you feel the day after the incidents during the match?
Pierre Barthélémy: A great feeling of weariness in the face of the repetition of these incidents since the start of the season and systematically these throwing projectiles which are often isolated, cowardly, useless acts, which have nothing to do in a stadium. Obviously, I am tired because there are too many incidents, isolated people who disrupt the whole of French football and who cast shame on all the supporters.
Why have we still not found a solution to these incidents?
Maybe because we do not ask the right questions and choose the right remedies. Since the start of the season, the main responses that have been provided have been collective sanctions, such as taking decisions behind closed doors, closing an entire stadium or an entire stand, which is unfair for everyone. And we forget the main thing. In society, when we commit a fault, we are personally responsible, we go to justice, we assume, we defend ourselves and we can be the subject of a fine, a prison sentence.
“For the supporters, it is a stadium ban with an obligation to score in each match which is a very heavy constraint when for five years.”
Pierre Barthélémy, advocate for groups of supportersto franceinfo
Every Saturday, you are at the police station and on Tuesday evening in addition if you are in the European Cup. We have an arsenal but today, perhaps out of a desire for a media response, to give the feeling of hitting hard, we are taking these collective sanctions of closing an entire stadium, punishing 60,000 people, punishing the players, punishing the club, and we forget the individual sanctions because we think we have already solved the problem. But these collective sanctions do not deter anyone because they are perceived as unfair. It is a vicious circle that we have locked ourselves in and which is completely ineffective. We really have to go back to individual sanctions and let justice do its job.
Should nets be installed between the stands and the field? Or strengthen the system of referent supporters?
Perhaps installing nets in the stadiums is also a temporary solution to this recurrence of projectile throwing, but it is clearly not a lasting solution.
“That’s all you don’t want to see in a stadium, it’s creating a border between the pitch and the fans.”
Pierre Barthélémyto franceinfo
It is contrary to the spirit of supporterism and the forums. Supporters referents are an excellent tool that has proven itself since its creation in 2016, but during the health crisis these referents found themselves on short-time work for 18 months and therefore changed jobs, except that it is a position where he You need experience, experience, a bond of trust with the supporters and indeed there is this confidence deficit to be made up at the start of the season which can also partly explain certain incidents.
The Minister for Sports, Roxana Maracineanu, told franceinfo that the rules should be changed so that the referees can interrupt a match more easily, while the referee took two hours to announce his decision on Sunday. Is it a good idea ?
Indeed, today in the event of a serious incident, the arbitrator must ascertain whether the incident continues or if it stops and then he must consult the public authorities therefore the prefect, the prosecutor, the head of the police and the delegates of the League, and there he must decide to resume the match if he considers that all the ingredients are there or not to resume it if he considers that there is a situation which is still at risk or a problem quite simply. If a player cannot return to the field because he has been injured, we can understand the referee’s decision. Indeed, perhaps there can be a more suitable protocol in the face of this recurrence of incidents. We must review the protocols, perhaps impose that decisions be taken within a limited timeframe, between 15 and 30 minutes. There are things to review, but it is difficult. These are new events, you need time to adapt, the regulations are drawn up before the start of the season so not everything can be done with the snap of the fingers. Perhaps a new mechanism should be found with simpler criteria so that the referee can also rely on a framework and on texts that do not place too much responsibility on him when hot and in the cold. difficulty of these situations. I think that after this type of incident it is necessary to mark the occasion. It is obvious that we cannot tolerate this type of act because otherwise it will become a habit when it is totally unethical of football and supporterism.