Why American police and the Tartan Army have managed to get along so well
Some in law enforcement take a hardline stance on crowd control, based on an outdated 19th century theory, but US police have adopted a very different approach
There are many challenges involved in organising a World Cup. One of the most important – and misunderstood – is crowd management. Traditionally, authorities have focussed on crowd control, attempting to coerce crowds to act in particular ways.
However, research from the last 40 years shows how a crowd management approach, which involves working with crowds rather than on them, is more effective.
While debates about the nature of crowd behaviour can be traced back to Aristotle, it was Gustave Le Bon in 1895 who popularised the idea that individuals become irrational and violent as they lose their identities and morals in a crowd.
Le Bon was a member of the French elite and was writing at a time of political instability as cities filled with jobseekers from the impoverished countryside. When these crowds came together, they represented a challenge to power hierarchies.
If crowds were irrational and dangerous, Le Bon argued that repressing them was the only sensible response. This politically motivated view was wrong for at least two reasons.
READ MORE: When did Scotland last beat Brazil? Head to head record ahead of World Cup clash and latest odds
The goals of French peasants
First, people don’t lose their identities in groups, rather they shift from personal to social levels of identity. For example, a Scotland supporter will think, feel and act as a member of the Tartan Army when in a crowd of fans.
The idea that crowd action might be an expression of identity (like French peasants arguing for better housing, jobs and food) was never considered by Le Bon, so their behaviour in pursuit of those goals could be discarded as irrational.
Second, despite historians showing that violent crowd behaviour of that time was almost always instigated by authorities, the intergroup nature of crowd conflict was not included in Le Bon’s analysis. Without this context, violent crowd behaviour appeared unpredictable and could only be explained by the crowd’s apparently deviant psychology.
A recipe for disaster
The legacy of this flawed work is still felt today. If one starts from the notion that football crowds are inherently dangerous (and probably drunk), it makes sense to ban them from bringing bottles into stadiums where they might be used as missiles.
However, stopping people from drinking water inside stadiums during a heatwave is a recipe for disaster. This daft policy was only partially rectified (to one sealed bottle each) after an outcry from fans and health experts.
A crowd management approach based on an understanding of social identity represents a fundamentally different way of working with crowds. The starting point is for authorities to learn about a crowd’s social identity and how they behave (march with bagpipes, party with other fans, drink lots of alcohol). Next, work with the crowd to facilitate the safe and legal expression of this identity.
If fans are going to march to the stadium anyway, help them do so safely. Clear communication of how this behaviour will be enabled – and the limits of acceptable behaviour – is vital.
Finally, if an issue does arise, authorities should clearly differentiate between fans causing trouble, and the peaceful majority who are not. This encourages fans to self-police their behaviour, enabling those seeking conflict to be easily dealt with.
Police playing keepy-uppy
Research shows that if police regard the whole crowd as a threat and act indiscriminately, this can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Previously peaceful people can see violence against the police as self-defence, escalating the conflict.
The policing of Scotland fans in Boston clearly represented a crowd management approach. The Tartan Army marched, drank the city dry and placed cones on every statue in sight, but the city recognised this as friendly expressions of identity, and joined in the fun.
Viral videos showed police doing keepy-uppies surrounded by cheering supporters, stadium stewards dancing to “No Scotland, No Party”, and fans getting their photos taken with law enforcement (often swapping police and traffic-cone hats).
While access to Foxborough Stadium was painfully slow for the Haiti match, lessons were learned with more gates open and staff on duty for the Morocco game. Research has shown how important these encounters with authorities are for crowd safety.
These interactions can only happen if fans feel the authorities are ‘on their side’. When police and stewards are seen to work to enhance the experience and safety of the crowd – rather than working against them – this leads to greater trust, perceived legitimacy, adherence to guidance and safer outcomes in the event of an emergency.
This is why building good relationships with fans is so important. If authorities aren’t trusted, people may ignore, or even react against, safety instructions. Positive or negative relationships and behaviours can then spread to other fans in different locations.
Fears about ICE
Relationships between the public and authorities during the World Cup are particularly complex due to the various roles of law enforcement, Fifa and the current US administration.
While Scotland fans have been welcomed in Boston and Miami, others had their visa applications rejected at short notice. Fans of other teams – particularly those branded “s***hole countries” by Donald Trump – have had no chance of attending. Other supporters have stayed away due to fears about ICE agents.
So far, there’s been very little crowd conflict. However, the conditions are there if police or ICE are seen to act illegitimately towards supporters. When authorities try to prevent what crowds see as the legitimate expression of their social identities, conflict can occur.
This was seen in New York last week, when trouble flared after Knicks watch parties for the basketball finals were cancelled at short notice, partly due to the security required for Trump to attend a game.
The key message is that effective crowd management is not primarily about control. Those in authority should shun discredited Le Bonian psychology, and actively facilitate safe expressions of fan identities. Not only will this lead to a more fun World Cup, it will make it safer too.
Dr Fergus Neville is a senior lecturer in organisational studies at the University of St Andrews
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.