The Premier League says it cannot be blamed for the gatherings which followed Liverpool’s title success, with its chief executive insisting: “Individuals have to take responsibility for their own actions.”
Top-flight chief Richard Masters faced questions from MPs at a Digital, Culture, Media and Sport committee evidence session on whether, as competition organisers, the league bore any responsibility for the ugly scenes in Liverpool city centre last Friday, the day after the Reds’ first league title in 30 years was confirmed by Manchester City’s defeat at Chelsea.
Rules on social distancing were ignored in mass gatherings at the city waterfront, with fireworks aimed at the Liver Building causing damage costing £10,000.
Masters said: “What happened that night is regrettable, it was wrong.
“In the end we are not in control of individuals’ actions and it is possible to celebrate with social distancing.
“It obviously got out of hand, in the same way we have seen gatherings on beaches, street parties and all these sorts of things going on within wider society so I see it pretty much as an extension of that where individuals have to take responsibility for their own actions.”
The Government requirement for social distancing is one of the key barriers to supporters returning to sports grounds, but Masters is keen to explore “technical solutions” to safely speed up the process.
Asked whether digital passports, which might prove an individual had recently tested negative for coronavirus in order to gain access to a stadium, was the sort of thing being considered, Masters said: “In a nutshell, yes.
“That technology doesn’t seem to be available yet, it’s that sort of thing.
“What we would like is the Government to be flexible in their approach about how we can return to full capacities.
“Obviously social distancing forms part of Government policy at the moment and the Government tends to be interested in what works effectively, which is why I go back to my earlier statement which is that the Premier League is happy to act as a test pilot to prove what can work effectively and keep fans safe and perhaps speed up the process in a safe and appropriate way.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here