Racism in football – a touchline issue

Published: The Times | Dated 5 January 2012

Adrian Hoggarth, Head of Employment writes; an employment lawyer’s view on the current racism debate in football - double standards

Your starter for 10: Who is more likely to be sacked?

A)   Chelsea’s John Terry, who will appear before magistrates in February charged with a racially aggravated public order offence that the Crown Prosecution Service believes was likely to cause Anton Ferdinand harassment, alarm or distress.

B)   Liverpool’s Luis Suarez, who has been banned for eight games and fined £40,000 for racially abusing Patrice Evra and, according to the Football Association, damaging the image of English football around the world.

C)   The BBC’s Alan Hansen, who caused a Twitter frenzy by using the word ‘coloured’ on Match of the Day.

Answer: (C). More importantly, why?

Football has cleaned up its act over the past couple of decades. It has embraced organisations such as ‘Kick it Out’ (football's equality and inclusion campaign) and the charity ‘Show Racism the Red Card’. Racist attitudes are in general no longer tolerated by the sport’s governing bodies, its players or its supporters.

But what about the attitude of clubs?

Clubs are employers, and the same laws apply to them as they do any other employer. Most employees would expect to be dismissed for gross misconduct for making racially abusive comments, especially where those comments bring their employer into disrepute.

In the context of football punditry, Ron Atkinson was forced to resign from his position at ITV over racially abusive comments made on air in 2004. Last year Sky sacked Andy Gray for unacceptable and offensive sexist behaviour. Despite the Twitter furore it seems unlikely that Hansen will suffer the same fate, but the point remains – he is more likely to be fired than either Suarez or Terry.

In stark contrast, Chelsea manager Andre Villas-Boas has stated that Terry has his, and Chelsea’s, full support ‘whatever the outcome.’ Liverpool expressed their ‘disappointment’ at the FA’s decision to find Suarez guilty and allowed their players to wear t-shirts in support. No action has been taken against either player by his employer.

In September 2009 during a League Cup match between Blackpool and Stoke, Blackpool’s Jason Euell was racially abused. The perpetrator was convicted of a racially aggravated public order offence and banned from all football grounds in the UK for three years.

Commenting on the incident, Spurs manager Harry Redknapp said: ‘Anyone who does it should be put in prison – not banned from football.’ The difference? In the Euell case the abuser was a fan not a player, and the decision taken by a court not a club. It will be interesting to see how a court treats John Terry.

The statements from Chelsea and Liverpool are unsurprising. Terry is Chelsea’s captain and Suarez cost Liverpool £23m less than a year ago. They both have enormous value to their employers and this will have a significant influence on the way in which their behaviour is viewed.

In employment law it is typically employees who have to defend their actions and plead against dismissal for gross misconduct. In football, their employers do this for them. Do clubs therefore condone racism by taking an aggressive stance in supporting players found guilty of racist abuse? Arguably so.

Player sackings in football are rare, and reflect a player’s value more than his conduct: Chelsea fired Adrian Mutu when he failed a drugs test in 2004 and was banned for seven months; Jimmy Bullard was recently sacked by Hull City, arguably to avoid a £4m wage bill over the next two seasons. It is unlikely that either would have occurred if the player was a valuable asset.

To be addressed effectively, racism needs to be tackled by the sport’s governing bodies in conjunction with clubs. To be an effective deterrent, a worldwide ban would have to apply, and this seems unlikely unless pressure is exerted on FIFA to change its laws.

None of this would deal with the key concern of clubs – the financial consequences of dismissing a star asset. And until football’s grotesque attitude to money changes, clubs will continue to back players that are assets and sack players that are liabilities. In the meantime, racism will remain a touchline issue. 

Contact us

• 0207 743 6700
• Request a call back
• Email us

Knowledge centre
Elucidate: let our knowledge centre empower you with our legal expertise. more >