한국어

Hull City Fined Over Homophobic Chant… Why the Club Was Also Held Responsible for Crowd Management

The Football Association of England fined Hull City over a homophobic chant.

The problematic chant continued even after announcements were made inside the stadium, and the club was found to have failed in its responsibility to manage spectators.

What does this decision mean, when conduct in the stands led not only to an individual issue but also to disciplinary action against the club?

3-Line Summary
1. Hull City was fined over a homophobic chant
2. A fine of 3만 pounds was imposed after the FA Cup match against Chelsea
3. The key issue was whether it continued after the announcement

Homophobic Chant Continued During the February Chelsea Match

Hull City lost 0-4 to Chelsea in a home FA Cup match held at MKM Stadium in Hull, England, last 2월. Herald Economy reported on 9월 12 that some home spectators sang a homophobic chant targeting sexual orientation during the match.

Messages asking spectators to refrain were delivered through stadium announcements and the electronic scoreboard. However, the chant did not stop. The Football Association (FA) determined on this basis that Hull City had failed to fulfill its responsibility to ensure that spectators and supporters did not engage in inappropriate, insulting, or offensive conduct.

The expression targeted by the FA referred, directly or indirectly, to sexual orientation. The disciplinary grounds were not simply a chant expressing dissatisfaction with the match result; rather, expressions targeting sexual orientation were repeated inside the stadium.

This measure did not end with determining who did what during the match. The club’s actions to prevent and stop the problem in the stands also became subject to discipline. It means that even if an announcement was made, the club’s responsibility did not disappear if the violating conduct continued.

3만-Pound Fine and 3 Banned Supporters

The fine imposed on Hull City by the FA was 3만 pounds. Herald Economy reported this as approximately 5,400만 Korean won (5400 ten-thousand-won units). Newsis also reported on the same day that Hull City had been disciplined with a fine over a homophobic chant.

Hull City admitted its wrongdoing and agreed to pay the fine. It also imposed stadium bans of 3 years or more on 3 supporters who led the chanting. This was a club-imposed disciplinary measure separate from the FA’s sanctions.

The club acknowledged the chant as homophobic vulgarity and condemned it in the strongest terms. It also stated that hate speech of any form could neither be tolerated nor overlooked. It warned that those using the chant could be deemed to have committed a hate crime or face criminal punishment.

However, this report did not confirm whether actual criminal punishment had been imposed. Accordingly, this must be distinguished from the confirmed measures: the FA’s fine, the club’s admission of wrongdoing, and the stadium bans imposed on 3 supporters.

Why Disorder During One Match Became Club Discipline

Although Hull City had suffered a heavy defeat to Chelsea, the FA’s decision focused not on the result but on the hateful expressions that continued in the stands and the club’s management responsibility. The fact that the chant continued despite the club’s requests for restraint through stadium announcements and the electronic scoreboard was included in the disciplinary assessment.

The most notable aspect of this case is that the responsibilities of individuals and the club were addressed separately. The 3 people who led the chanting received long-term stadium bans, while the club faced a financial sanction for failing to fulfill its responsibility to manage spectators and supporters.

In a statement, Hull City described the expression as language that could constitute a hate crime. The case showed that even words spoken inside a stadium will not be accepted as part of supporter culture if they constitute hate speech targeting sexual orientation, and that they can also lead to questions about the club’s operational responsibility. The club was held jointly responsible for consequences that remained even after the match ended.

References

Tags #HullCity #EPL #PremierLeague #EnglishFootball #FACup #FootballAssociation #FADiscipline #FootballFine #HatefulChant #Homophobia #FootballSupporters #StadiumBan