TT BLOG

Matty Hayward

@MattyHayward96

WAS A BANNER BAN IN THE 5 YEAR PLAN?

In recent years, but specifically in the last six months or so, opposition to the way our club is run have been ignored first, then systemically suppressed. This afternoon, the club released a statement (attached here), about flags being brought into the ground, as a direct response to the protests during Saturday’s most recent on-field embarrassment. This statement listed a number of rules that would have to be adhered to for a banner to be permitted into the ground this weekend, from size to fire safety, to the contents of its words.

It’s a well-trodden path: if you want to squash dissenting voices, do so not by shouting “dissent is banned”, but by invoking a semi-legitimate loophole or other and passing your ruling through it, stating that the measures are in the name of public concern when all they do is move aside the dissatisfied choir. There may be well-founded concerns about flammability of flags and banners, but they’ve never reared their heads before. As many have pointed out online, there are myriad flags all over the stands. As recently as 2020, flags were waved on poles as the players walked out. Not long before that, an enormous tifo was paraded over fans’ heads on the Popside before every match. This happens in many football grounds across the country, but has only become a concern at Plainmoor in the week after a spate of Johnson/Osborne-critical banners were unveiled as the team careered towards their thirteenth defeat of the season in a regional league.

Another stipulation mentioned in today’s press release was that banners must not be “deemed offensive, likely to intimidate, or liable to cause unrest.” Of course, none of the messages displayed last Saturday contravened any of those criteria, but the terms are suitably vague and open to interpretation that the club will argue to the contrary. It’s just further obfuscation.

I feel somewhat uncomfortable about comparisons to North Korea that have circulated on social media lately. I think they go some way to belittling serious, real-life suffering under an actual, oppressive dictatorship, and are probably a level of hyperbole we can do without when discussing a football club. That said, today’s press release is the latest in a long list of instances where dissent is being prohibited, where censorship is being enforced. In November, a supporter was removed from the Popside for wearing a t-shirt with the words “Gary Out” on the front. While you might disagree with his argument, or the method by which he made it, nobody can reasonably proffer that he shouldn’t have been allowed to express that opinion in the way that he did, nor can they argue that the heavy-handed response was justified. It’s not quite Kim Jong Un, for sure, but it’s not the behaviour of a football club that has its fans at its heart either.

The club, of course, will dispute the accusation that they don’t listen to fans, or that they baulk at dissent. They may well point towards the recent announcements about the Supporters’ Steering Group. This is, in theory, a great idea. It’s an opportunity for fans to congregate, discuss the issues of the day, and keep the board informed about the way the wind is blowing on the terraces. Ideally, also, they’d harness their loyalty and passion for the club to influence decisions and improve the match-going experience. Its effectiveness is yet to be seen – we hold our breath! – but let’s not be duped into thinking this is a ground-breaking act of altruism and democracy from Clarke Osborne.

One recommendation of the government’s fan-led review of football governance is for all clubs in the top five divisions in England to have a ‘shadow board’ made up entirely of supporters, and for that to be overseen by the new independent regulator. The new supporters’ group, then, is no touch of genius, rather a simple case of forward-thinking before the new laws come into play (and, at this point, some hysterical optimism about our chances of being in the National League any time soon). Also, it’d be remiss of me not to mention that there is already an organisation comprised of loyal, passionate fans that holds the club to account. TUST’s communications with the club, however, have been at best inconsistent over recent years, and their completely reasonable suggestions to improve the fans’ lot have been met with flat rejection. The invitation to the board to attend any TUST AGM remains open.

Edwards will also be keen for us to note the “Online Fans’ Forum” in December as evidence that his ~~kingdom~~ club is open to criticism and fan-input. If, by some means of time travel, Marcus Aurelius were able to watch the spectacle of Mel Hayman, Clarke Osborne, Gary Johnson and Uncle George pontificate on a pair of sofas about how our sole strategy for cutting through the club’s systemic failure was to be “one club united”, I think he’d be appalled. In his time, a Forum was an open air (easier in Rome than Torquay, admittedly) marketplace, that hosted public debates, triumphal processions, elections, criminal trials and gladiatorial battles. It was the epicentre of the community: a place where ideas were traded, where all (maybe not the slaves) were welcome. A “forum” was not a congregation of Devonians watching a recording of pre-screened questions being answered in an, at times, affrontingly flippant tone. Again, this was an organisation wanting to look like it was taking meaningful action, while protecting itself almost completely from dissent. Well, it was that, and the ‘Gaffer’ making a complete tit of himself by saying we’re good at defending set pieces before we conceded three in the next three games.

Torquay United fans are some of the most forgiving in the country. We currently sit 9^th in the sixth tier of English football, the lowest we’ve ever been at this stage of a season, and have won once in eight (a one-goal victory at home to the worst club in the division). After spending almost a century as a member of the Football League, we’ve now spent the last decade outside of it, and look further from returning than we ever have. Our demands are miniscule, our protests pitiful. A bit of meaningful communication about the future, an acceptance of past failures, and a sustained up-turn in form would genuinely shut most of us up! Osborne and Edwards don’t know how lucky they are to have such a meek fanbase.