Editorial: Punish the hooligans, not the fans

Opinion

Of all the games we play on the international stage, cricket stands out as the most unusual. For instance, it is by far the longest, even in its short form, and it stops and starts like no other; periods of stillness are punctuated by frantic action. Moreover, despite it being intensely physical and played in a large arena, cricket is above all a mind game.

Such a contest requires something special from its spectators - concentration, understanding and insight. Sadly, these attributes are well beyond the capabilities of some people who pay their money to go through the turnstiles. Unable, it seems, to appreciate the finer points, they become bored and, egged on by their mates and with their courage bolstered by alcohol, they set out to spoil it for those who do understand.

This is usually not too difficult, even for someone of modest intellectual abilities. The standard methods are as unoriginal as they are unfunny: these people throw things at players or, even more effectively, sprint on to the field in a state of semi or total nakedness. The latest example of such lamentable behaviour occurred at Eden Park during the opening match of the Chappell-Hadlee series. Five spectators ran on to the field and others threw plastic bottles and fruit.

All this despite New Zealand Cricket's warnings of zero tolerance. In the light of Eden Park, the cricket authorities have raised the stakes: extra security at grounds, low-alcohol beer and a buffer zone between the ground and the players.

Their intentions are admirable but there are good grounds to question whether they have got the detail right. One who believes they have gone too far is former New Zealand coach Warren Lees who argues that over-zealous policing has the potential to make things worse rather than better. "We're basically breeding aggressive crowd behaviour through our approach to crowd control," he said after the new security measures proved intensely frustrating to many cricket lovers last week.

Whether the extra security will really make it worse is a moot point. What is more likely is that the long queues to get into the grounds and the warm beer will discourage those who genuinely love the game. This would be a great pity. Not just because New Zealand cricket needs all the spectators it can get but because the roar of the crowd, the interaction between spectators and players - especially those fielding on the boundary - the banter and the barracking are an important part of cricket.

Most people who go to the matches understand this and know the limits. Unfortunately, by imposing blanket security measures and enforcing exclusion zones around the boundary, New Zealand Cricket will be punishing the many for the sins of a few who, by their very behaviour, cannot be described as cricket lovers in any true sense of the phrase.

A much more effective approach would be to follow the lead of sporting bodies overseas where the conventional wisdom seems to be that it is better to identify and isolate individual troublemakers than to apply general measures that hurt everyone. Once identified, troublemakers should be punished with sufficient severity to make them think again and to discourage anyone else whose idea of a good time is throwing bottles or running naked around a cricket field.

In Australia such behaviour can bring fines of $5500. That is not a bad start, but the authorities here should also consider soccer-style bans for troublemakers. Unlike true cricket lovers, such people will not be missed.