More than 37 million spectators attended football games in 2007-08 while 3,842 people were arrested for disorder connected to matches according to the UK Home Office. Of those arrests, 373 were for violent crimes – an increase of 33 over the previous season. On the other hand, 67% of matches were problem-free and did not result in any arrest. Instead, 60% of football-related arrests took place outside or away from the football stadia (Home Office, 2008). These statistics show that football violence is at least remarkable enough to draw attention of government departments and statisticians. In the past decades, numerous scholars have tried to analyse the roots and dynamics of this violent fan behaviour (Dunning, 2000) that has been labelled ‘Hooliganism’. The name-giving implies that football-related violence is considered as more than just some weekly disturbances. It is regarded as a social phenomenon which needs to be observed, investigated, and defined which can eventually lead to an understanding of and response to this behaviour. In our paper we will expose to what extent this phenomenon can be classified as a social movement. Before, we will look at the rise and growth of Hooliganism exemplifying it with some extreme occurrences. We are going to describe Hooligan behaviour and the people who engage in it trying to pin point typical characteristics and motivations of Hooligans. Doing that we want to justify that Hooliganism can be understood as a social movement which will allow us to apply different social movement models on Hooliganism. In order to arrive at the rationale of Hooliganism a descriptive definition is necessary which will give the further analyses and interpretation a basic framework. With several similar definitions of Hooliganism to choose from, the one meaning that we are going to use as a point of departure terms Hooliganism as “competitive violence of socially organized fan groups in football, principally directed against opposing fan groups” (Spaaij, 2006, p. 11).
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. History of English Hooliganism: Rise and Growth
III. Characterizing the Movement
IV. A Theoretical Understanding of Hooliganism
Anthropological Approach
Psychological Approach
Marxist Approach
Figurational Approach
V. Hooliganism and Social Movement Models – A Successful Match?
VI. Deficiencies of the “Classical” Model and adjustments
VII. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
This research paper investigates whether English Hooliganism can be classified as a social movement by analyzing its historical development, participant characteristics, and theoretical underpinnings in comparison to established social movement models.
- Historical evolution of English Hooliganism from the 1920s to the modern era.
- Sociological and psychological profiles of hooligans, focusing on group identity and masculinity.
- Evaluation of "Classical", "Political", "Cultural", and "Defiance" models regarding their applicability to hooligan behavior.
- The impact of state policies and media reporting on the persistence of hooliganism.
Excerpt from the Book
II. History of English Hooliganism: Rise and Growth
Even though the denoting term 'Hooliganism' was not born, yet, football violence accompanied the sport in England from the beginning throughout almost all of its existence. Having a closer look at only the 20th century, complaints about “noise, swearing and rowdiness” (Armstrong, 1998, p. 6) were reported first in the 1920s and 1930s. However, it was only after the Second World War when the phenomenon really started to take off. Several explanations might help to understand why at this particular time the old-fashioned and well-recognized English 'fair-play' behaviour, which included the fan groups, gradually vanished. Armstrong (1998) and Brimson (2000) argue that this coincided with the end of English national military service in the 1960s, which altered young men’s horizon dramatically. Now the match-going took over the aura of a credibility test and masculinity would be proved in the context of football.
Chapter Summaries
I. Introduction: Outlines the scope of football-related violence and introduces the research question of whether Hooliganism can be classified as a social movement.
II. History of English Hooliganism: Rise and Growth: Examines the timeline of English hooliganism, including the impact of post-WWII societal changes and government interventions like the Taylor Report.
III. Characterizing the Movement: Details the demographic composition and organizational structure of hooligan "firms," highlighting their consensus-based, egalitarian nature.
IV. A Theoretical Understanding of Hooliganism: Provides an overview of anthropological, psychological, Marxist, and figurational academic approaches to interpreting fan aggression.
V. Hooliganism and Social Movement Models – A Successful Match?: Compares hooliganism against Classical, Political, Cultural, and Defiance models to determine structural alignment.
VI. Deficiencies of the “Classical” Model and adjustments: Proposes refinements to the Classical model by integrating media influence and diffusion theory to better explain the movement's duration.
VII. Conclusion: Summarizes findings, asserting that hooliganism is an atypical social movement best explained by a refined Classical model centered on the search for thrill and masculine identity.
Keywords
English Hooliganism, Social Movement, Football Violence, Masculinity, Collective Identity, Classical Model, Crowd Psychology, Fan Firms, Sociological Analysis, Behavioral Patterns, Media Influence, Diffusion Theory.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper fundamentally investigates whether English Hooliganism can be accurately classified and understood as a "social movement" by testing it against various established sociological models.
What are the primary themes addressed?
Key themes include the historical rise of hooliganism, the psychological and sociological drivers of fan violence, the influence of state policies and media, and the evaluation of collective action theories.
What is the main research question?
The primary research question is whether hooliganism possesses the characteristics of a social movement or if it should be interpreted as a different type of phenomenon.
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The author uses a qualitative, theory-driven comparative analysis, juxtaposing empirical data from previous studies (e.g., Dunning, Armstrong, Brimson) with four specific academic models of social movements.
What topics are covered in the main body?
The main body covers the history of hooliganism, the characterization of hooligan members and groups, theoretical interpretations of fan aggression, and a critical analysis of four prominent social movement frameworks.
How would you summarize the key terms?
The work is defined by concepts such as identity, group dynamics, masculinity, collective behavior, social alienation, and the structural reactions of the state and media to hooliganism.
Why does the author prefer the "Classical Model"?
The author suggests the Classical Model is most effective because it captures the irrational search for belonging and group identity among individuals in mass society, which aligns with the observed behavior of hooligans.
What role does the media play in hooliganism according to the text?
The author argues that media reporting is a central factor that can trigger and escalate violence through predictive reporting and by propagating "firm" rankings that incentivize destructive competition.
How does the author define the "backstage" era of hooliganism?
The "backstage" era refers to the 1990s and beyond, where hooliganism did not decline but moved away from stadia into off-site locations, enabled by better coordination through modern communication tools.
- Quote paper
- Anonym (Author), 2009, English Hooliganism - A Different Social Movement, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/176307
