Le Figaro: Does the recent storming of the OM training center highlight, in your opinion, a deep crisis among supporters in France in the past few months?
Sebastien louis
: I do not believe.
You have to know how to keep reason.
The protest observed in several clubs recently and what happened in Marseille in particular, results first of all from a conjunction of elements.
In Marseille, the dispute is not new, it had started in January 2019 in the stadium with the appearance of the first banners against the management, paving the way for an escalation of the confrontation.
We also observed a protest movement in Bordeaux where the ultras demanded the resignation of the management of the club, in Saint-Etienne but also in Nantes, with long-standing opposition to President Waldemar Kita, or even in Valenciennes since September 2018. There, the showdown took the form of a social conflict: the ultras whom I often compare to popular football unionists sent a false letter of dismissal
in
recommended December 24 the President of Valenciennes.
Finally, on January 24, a month after the end of the notice, they organized a demonstration in front of the Hainaut stadium which ended in a rather funny way, because the ultras deposited moving boxes in front of the president's offices. from the club, Eddy Zdziech and organized a starting drink.
“The supporters must find other means of expression, sometimes funny, sometimes more violent.
"
Did the health crisis and closed-door football play a role in triggering this protest movement?
Ultras Roisters 2002
Yes, there was nothing really new except that all of the pieces coordinated at the same time.
The health crisis prevented supporters from speaking in the stands.
The stadium is the ideal place to be heard and to challenge by exercising its role of counter-power to the management of the club: with banners, with songs, by deserting the stands, or by sending smoke so that the club has to pay fines.
The supporters must find other means of expression, sometimes funny, sometimes more violent.
It is all the more frustrating for the groups of supporters as the crisis has shown that the competitions can continue without them.
Isn't the fans' uneasiness deeper, linked to the evolution of football in recent years?
Probably.
Football has changed considerably over the past few decades, especially since the Bosman ruling in 1995. It is no longer a professional sport but a real leisure industry which has become a target of foreign investors who often have no special link with this sport, like the owner of OM, the American Frank McCourt.
The excessive financialization will end up killing football.
Much of the leadership does not understand that clubs are not ordinary businesses.
The clubs retain a historical, cultural and social dimension which should not be swept aside.
In our globalized world, the stadium remains one of the places where it is still possible to take root in its identity, one of the rare places also where there is still a real social mix and not only a place of consumption.
Moreover, if the classic supporters line up behind the ultras it is because they feel excluded from a football where the spectator at the stadium is only there to consume.
Someone like Jacques-Henri Eyraud, from an economic elite, has a hard time understanding this and his vision of football, a European league closed in 2030 demonstrates.
He is unfortunately not the only one.
"In England, from the end of the 19th century, there was a trace of very violent outbursts with anecdotal matches"
Are we witnessing a radicalization of supporters and an increase in violence?
Some have short memories.
On March 29, 1936, the meeting between Lyon and Saint-Etienne ended with incidents of rare violence, the referee was evacuated by the police.
On August 27, 1969, the match between OM and Saint-Etienne was interrupted in the 75th minute following the invasion of the field by the furious public.
In the 70s, there were already many tensions observed around the matches between OM and ASSE.
Violence has always accompanied football in all countries with excesses.
In England, from the end of the 19th century, there was evidence of very violent outbursts with anecdotal matches, in Scotland in 1899, 19 police officers were injured during clashes between rival fans.
The Italian championship began in 1899, they appeared in 1904 and the first death occurred in 1920. In the past, OM players have already been shaken up in the Commanderie, sometimes even with the complicity of the leaders who vowed get rid of a trainer.
The great hours of hooliganism in France, in the 90s, are behind us.
Overall, there has been no radicalization of supporters lately but the difference comes from the fact that these incidents are now much more publicized.
The travel bans for supporters have increased in recent years and has the repressive aspect of the public authorities contributed to worsening the situation?
Ultras Roisters 2002
Since 1993 and the violent incidents during the PSG-Caen match, the authorities have multiplied the laws aimed at curbing the excesses with the prohibition of alcohol, pyrotechnics, the exhibition of racist or xenophobic symbols.
Then, the administrative stadium ban was used introduced into the legislation in January 2006, then a few months later a new text allows groups of supporters to be dissolved, this is what happens in April 2008 with the Boulogne Boys and the Faction in Metz.
In 2011, the legislative arsenal was reinforced with the possibility of prohibiting the travel of supporters likely to cause disturbances to public order.
The bans have multiplied, sometimes concerning 4th division matches, such as January 30, 2016 for a Saint-Louis Neuweg-Grenoble.
But the incidents of supporters that occurred during Euro 2016 on the sidelines of the England-Russia meeting marked a turning point in this policy showing its limits.
"We went from a very repressive situation to a situation rather favorable to the supporters"
Have the public authorities started a shift in their approach to the problem?
The Larrivé law in 2016, which strengthened dialogue with supporters, was positive even if it includes a strong repressive component.
In 2020, the report of the fact-finding mission on stadium bans and the supporterism of Marie-Georges Buffet and Sacha Houlié proposed to reduce administrative sanctions and travel bans by proposing the controlled use of smoke.
Then Minister of the Interior, Christophe Castaner had given very clear directives in a circular in November 2019 to limit travel bans.
We went from a very repressive situation to a situation rather favorable to the supporters.
It is a turn of the bar 180 ° to move towards the innovative model of management of French supporterism.
In England, supporters have been gradually forced out of the stadiums, in particular thanks to the increase in ticket prices. Can we see the same phenomenon in the future in France?
No, because France is one of the countries where ticket prices remain very low compared to neighboring countries.
The price of tickets for opposing supporters who travel is also regulated, except at Paris SG.
You can go to watch matches in Lorient for 5 euros, which is very rare in Europe.
In Germany the prices are slightly more expensive, in Italy the prices are growing continuously and I am not even talking about England, the cheapest Arsenal subscription cost almost € 1000 (£ 89) at the time of the season 2019/20.
And, second reason, in France, spectators are still lacking in the stadiums which are not full.
In Marseille, for example, this is unthinkable because the audience base is extremely popular.
Paris SG fills the Parc des Princes but wanted to renew a dialogue with its ultras by always giving them a place by bringing them back from October 2016 following their eviction in 2010 with the Leproux plan.
It is a positive sign.
Sébastien Louis is professor of History-Geography and Sociology at the European School of Luxembourg. He is notably the author of “Ultras, the other protagonists of football” (Editions Mare and Martin).
Read also
Divorce football clubs and supporters