ArticlePDF Available

Penfold, Darby and Kitchin (2024) Disabled people's experiences of English football fandom: Inclusion, exclusion and discrimination

Authors:

Abstract

This article employs a novel theoretical framework, rooted in the social relational model of disability alongside the concept of ableism, to critically analyse disabled football supporters lived experiences of inclusion and exclusion in English Football. In seeking to shed light on this hitherto neglected field, this study utilised a dual-phased qualitative approach comprised of two complementary netnographic methods, specifically online observations of fan message boards and online semi-structured interviews with 33 disabled football supporters of clubs in the English Football League and National League. We demonstrate that while some clubs provide inclusive spectator environments where disabled people experience moments of inclusion and belonging, they nonetheless face structural, social and psychological barriers before, during and after the matchday which create conditions that exclude, oppress and constrain full participation in football fandom. In doing so, this paper offers new insights into how the disabling nature of contemporary capitalist society continues to systematically exclude disabled people from areas of mainstream society-such as football fandom-to which they have a right.
Disabled peoples experiences
of English football fandom:
Inclusion, exclusion
and discrimination
Connor Penfold
University Campus of Football Business, UK
Paul Darby , and Paul Kitchin
Ulster University, UK
Abstract
This article employs a novel theoretical framework, rooted in the social relational model of dis-
ability alongside the concept of ableism, to critically analyse disabled football supporters lived
experiences of inclusion and exclusion in English Football. In seeking to shed light on this hitherto
neglected eld, this study utilised a dual-phased qualitative approach comprised of two comple-
mentary netnographic methods, specically online observations of fan message boards and online
semi-structured interviews with 33 disabled football supporters of clubs in the English Football
League and National League. We demonstrate that while some clubs provide inclusive spectator
environments where disabled people experience moments of inclusion and belonging, they none-
theless face structural, social and psychological barriers before, during and after the matchday
which create conditions that exclude, oppress and constrain full participation in football fandom.
In doing so, this paper offers new insights into how the disabling nature of contemporary capitalist
society continues to systematically exclude disabled people from areas of mainstream society
such as football fandom to which they have a right.
Keywords
football, fandom, disability, disablism, ableism, sport
Corresponding author:
Connor Penfold, University Campus of Football Business, Wembley Stadium, Wembley Park, Wembley HA9
0WS, UK.
Email: drcpenfold@gmail.com
Original Research Article
International Review for the
Sociology of Sport
119
© The Author(s) 2024
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/10126902241268097
journals.sagepub.com/home/irs
Introduction
Between September 2015 and April 2017, the British government released three separate
reports detailing the abject experiences of disabled people who attend stadia to watch live
sports in the United Kingdom (CMSC, 2017; DWP, 2015; EHRC, 2017). Importantly for
this article, one of these, the Inclusive and Accessible Stadiareport (DWP, 2015), high-
lighted a range of structural constraints affecting disabled peoples experiences of English
football stadia, and outlined the systematic failings of many professional clubs in improving
accessibility. Despite subsequent interventions from the government, advocacy charities and
other stakeholders, the provision of accessible facilities for disabled football supporters
remains inadequate and their experiences deeply troubling. This is particularly true for
match-going fans of clubs outside the top tier of the English football pyramid, specically
those in the English Football League (EFL) Championship, Leagues One and Two and the
National League (NL), where expectations to meet accessibility regulations receive far less
scrutiny from the media. Beyond the absence of media attention, there is a paucity of aca-
demic work focused on the lived experiences of disabled football fans at any level of the
game in England. There is some research offering insights into the difculties they encounter
but this does not engage with the voluminous critical disability studies literature which offers
analytical tools to more richly theorise their experiences (e.g., García et al., 2017; Southby,
2011, 2013). As such, there are signicant gaps in our empirical knowledge of the breadth of
disabled supportersfandom experiences, from the logistics of planning to attend a game,
being in the stadium and post-match (Kitchin et al., 2022) and how this might be theorised.
To address these lacunas, this article utilises a netnographic approach involving obser-
vations of fan message boards and online semi-structured interviews (n. 33), to investi-
gate disabled fansperspectives and experiences of the barriers to their access,
inclusion and participation in football fandom. It employs a novel theoretical framework
that draws upon the core tenets of Thomas(1999, 2007) social relational model of dis-
ability, in combination with the concept of ableism. This allows us to reveal that while
some English football clubs are able to create environments where disabled supporters
can experience momentary social inclusion and a sense of belonging, their experiences
of football fandom are nonetheless contoured by ableism and forms of structural and
psycho-emotional disablism that exclude, marginalise and discriminate. These ndings,
we argue, are sociologically important because they clearly illustrate how the disabling
nature of contemporary capitalist society continues to systematically exclude disabled
people from cultural practices to which they have a right, such as football fandom.
This study also pushes existing sociological research on football fandom in novel direc-
tions by focusing on a cohort of supporters whose experiences have been largely ignored.
The article begins with an exploration of how disabled football fans experiences of
inclusion and exclusion have been accounted for and explained in the sparse academic
literature. It then details the theoretical framework deployed in this research.
Following an exposition of our methodological approach, the focus shifts to unpacking
the two core themes that emerged from data analysis: (a) disabled peoples experiences
of social inclusion in English football fandom and (b) the challenges of matchday partici-
pation for disabled people in English football fandom.
2International Review for the Sociology of Sport 0(0)
English football fandom and disability
The academic research on inclusion and exclusion in English football fandom has tended
to focus on modalities such as gender, raceand sexuality (Millward, 2023). As noted
above, there is a dearth of academic work exploring the lived experiences of disabled
fans. That which does exist, provides insights into both the inclusion and exclusion of
disabled supporters. For instance, Southbys (2011, 2013) research with learning-
disabled fans revealed that football fandom can provide many social benets for this
group, particularly in engendering feelings of belonging and a shared identity with
other fans. Being in the stadium offered these supporters a space to form social rela-
tionships with fellow fans through engaging in collective fandom practices such as
talking about the game, singing, clapping and cheering in unison. These sorts of inter-
actions in the context of football can temporarily create what McDonald et al. (2019:
937) term moments of inclusionwhere marginalised individuals overcome feelings
of exclusion experienced elsewhere in their lives. Indeed, Southby (2013) argued
that football stadia can be seen as a semi-institutionalspace where learning-disabled
fans are able to feel included since the typical norms of mainstream society, which nor-
mally exclude learning-disabled people, are suspended and replaced by an alternative
set of (sub)cultural rules and expectations associated with the performance of fandom.
Similarly, in exploring the role of Disabled Supporter Associations (DSA) in improv-
ing access and inclusion for disabled supporters in English football, García et al. (2017)
contend that they create spaces for disabled people to interact and build social relation-
ships both during the matchday and beyond. However, while DSAs can enable feelings
of inclusion for disabled fans, they concluded that clubs are failing to promote inclusive
spectating environments because they focus overwhelmingly on the physical dimension
of access to the football stadia itself. Consequently, García et al. (2017) argue for a
broader conceptualisation of access extending beyond the built environment to incorpor-
ate softerdimensions based on Nind and Seales (2009) multi-dimensional model which
includes elements such as knowledge, relationships, communication and advocacy. This
allows access to be conceived of as a crucial component of social inclusion, reected in
interactions between environmental factors and personal characteristics, having access to
public goods and services, [] and belonging to a supportive social network(Merrells
et al., 2019: 13).
Nonetheless, as Darcy et al. (2020: 210) remind us, despite situational and contextual
experiences of inclusion, disabled people remain largely excluded from, or at best, kept
in the margins of sport. This reects the barriers that wholly or partially exclude disabled
people from full participation in society (Kidd, 2017). But within sport, their exclusion
can be accredited to the longstanding ableist assumption that disabled people are not
interested in participating (or spectating) in sport because of their impairment(s)
(DePauw and Gavron, 2005). While there is limited research on the barriers faced by dis-
abled football supporters, Anderson and Balandins (2019) scoping study revealed that
social and structural barriers emerging from inaccessible facilities, poor disability provi-
sion and negative social attitudes from stadium facility staff can discourage disabled
people from attending matches. Similarly, García et al. (2017) found that English
Penfold et al. 3
clubs often fail to provide accessible information about buying tickets, arranging trans-
port, what to expect at the stadium, and who to contact for additional information.
Evidently, as Fitzgerald (2018: 65) contends, it is society that has created conditions
that restrict participation rather than situating lack of engagement in sport purely as a
choice made by disabled people.
To provide a more nuanced and reality-congruent analyses of the barriers match-going
football fans encounter, we move beyond the social model of disability that underpins the
extant research. We argue that Thomas(1999, 2007) social relational understanding of
disability, in addition to the concept of ableism offers a sharper, more insightful theoret-
ical lens to explain the lived experiences of these supporters. Before addressing these
experiences, we sketch out this theoretical framework.
Theoretical framework: social relational model of disability and ableism
By arguing that people are disabled by societal barriers, not their impairment, the social
model of disability has undoubtably advanced the lives of disabled people by providing a
tool for advocacy and addressing material and structural inequality in several areas of
society, including sport (Fitzgerald, 2018). However, by conceptually separating impair-
ment from disability, the social model leaves much of the real-life experience of the dis-
abled population un-theorised and un-interrogated(Watermeyer, 2012: 15). Indeed, as
Brighton et al. (2023) observed, the social model has created a misleading Cartesian
dualism which rejects the importance of the impaired body, and in turn, is unable to
account for the embodied, emotive and psychological dynamics of the lived experience
of disability.
To reshape how the contingency and interplay between the effects of impairment and
the phenomenon of disability might be better understood, Thomas (1999, 2007) pio-
neered the social relational model. This approach explains disability, disablism and
impairment as manifestations of social relationships between people categorised as
impairedand those deemed normal. This understanding emphasises the subjective
experience of individuals who live with impairment(s) and therefore its use in this
study allows us to centralise disabled fanslived experiences. Crucially, the social rela-
tional model differentiates between the disabling effects of the biological and embodied
reality of living with an impairment in a social setting from the imposed restrictions
caused by external social forces (Thomas, 2007). This understanding maintains that dis-
abled people can experience oppression in a multitude of ways both inside and outside of
the body (Brighton et al., 2023).
What differentiates the social relational model from other theorising of disability is
how it allows us to make sense of these various forms of oppression through its three
core constituent concepts: (a) structural disablism, (b) psycho-emotional disablism and
(c) impairment effects (Thomas, 1999, 2007). Structural disablism borrows from the
social model and refers to the barriers disabled people face that operate outside of the
individual and often manifest in terms of inaccessible environments and social forms
of discrimination (Thomas, 2007). Psycho-emotional disablism moves beyond forms
4International Review for the Sociology of Sport 0(0)
of oppression caused by structural barriers to focus on internal forms of disablism derived
from social relationships with material barriers and other (non-disabled) people (Reeve,
2020). Here, psycho-emotional disablism accounts for the direct or indirect effects of dis-
abling conditions (i.e., structures, attitudes and perceptions) that can hinder disabled
peoples psycho-emotional well-being, and subsequently, what they can do and can
become (Smith and Bundon, 2018). To ensure impairment is appropriately theorised,
the social relational model employs the concept of impairment effects to acknowledge
how the biological reality of living with an impairment has a direct effect on daily life
which may restrict activity and damage psycho-emotional well-being, even without
the presence of structural disablism (Thomas, 2007). Hence, impairment effects
refer to the direct and unavoidable physical (e.g., fatigue) and social (e.g., lack of
inclusive provision) effects of reduced embodied functioning in the social world
(Thomas, 2007).
These concepts are invaluable in this study because they allow us to illustrate how
oppression can occur both inside (i.e., psycho-emotional disablism and impairment
effects) and outside (i.e., structural disablism) of the body, whereby impairment, social,
environmental and psychological barriers can operate simultaneously and limit feelings
of inclusion and fandom participation. While this framework can account for the direct
and indirect experiences of oppression encountered by disabled people, it cannot
expound the root causes of such oppression (Peers et al., 2022). For this reason, we also
use the concept of ableism to explain the experiences of disabled football fans.
Ableism refers to a set of social relations that allow one group to maintain power
over another based on ideas of normalcyand the rights and privileges afforded to
those considered normal(i.e., non-disabled people) (Wolbring, 2012). Ableism pri-
marily manifests in two interconnected ways: through the inaccessible environment
and social structures that are frequently designed by, and for, those deemed
normal; and in the ableist attitudes and cultures many people are socialised into
(Brittain et al., 2023). In parsing out the difference between ableism and disablism,
Goodley (2014) argues that ableism accentuates discrimination in favour of non-
disabled people, whereas disablism emphasises discrimination against disabled
people based upon an inability to comply with the capitalist logic of economic product-
ivity. The various manifestations of ableism induce an internalisation or self-loathing
which devalues disablementin contemporary society (Campbell, 2009: 20). This
process is associated with the concept of internalised ableismwhereby the ableist
norms of society become internalised by disabled people and can result in profound
psycho-emotional consequences (Reeve, 2020). Accordingly, ableism describes preju-
dicial attitudes, structural and internalised processes, and discriminatory behaviours
towards disabled people which can lead to segregation and social exclusion that may
limit opportunities for their full societal participation (Brittain et al., 2023).
Combining ableism with the core elements of the social relational model provides a
novel framework for theorising the lived experiences of disabled supporters by
linking micro-social interactions with macro-social processes.
Penfold et al. 5
Methodology
In this study, we adopt relativist ontological and constructivist epistemological positions
which recognise that observations of the social world are inuenced by the observers (the
researchers) and the observers are inuenced by the observed (the research participants)
(Levers, 2013). It is therefore important to acknowledge that the authors of this paper cur-
rently identify as non-disabled. There has been a long-standing debate about the presence
of non-disabled researchers in the eld of disability studies and this inuenced our reex-
ivity. For some disabled scholars, non-disabled researchers are poorly situated to compre-
hend the lived experiences of disabled people and can perpetuate social inequalities and
reinforce oppression (Braneld, 1998). This contention has been challenged by both dis-
abled and non-disabled researchers as alienating for non-disabled research allies and
counter-productive to advancing knowledge (Kitchin, 2000). More recently, there has
been a shift away from the impairment-based insider-outsider dichotomy, with
Macbeth and Powis (2023: 62) advocating for renewed focus on other aspects of our
identities that we share, offering elements of insiderness to each others worlds and
lived experiences. Bergers (2009) advocacy for disabled and non-disabled researchers
to consider how and why they develop a disability consciousnesshas been important in
this process and informed our reections on our positionality.
The disability consciousness of the rst author, who led the data collection, and his
ability to traverse insider-outsider relations in the research process was tied to his
status as a long-standing football supporter who has lived experience of attending EFL
football matches with disabled family members, together with years of extensive immer-
sion in disability studies scholarship. The second author is also a regular attendee of live
football matches across the UK, including with a close family member who is hearing
impaired, and has conducted research on football fan identities and with actors in football
who have experienced exclusion and marginalisation. Finally, the third author has long
undertaken research with disabled people that has sought to challenge uneven relations
of power in disability sport. Our relational positionality (see Macbeth and Powis,
2023), informed by our personal and professional experiences, therefore helped to
shape the research design including the selection of methods and development of the
interview guide interactions with participants, and data analysis. As we note below,
it also guided our intent to position disabled football fans as knowersand to provide
space for them to authentically convey their lived experiences. We contend that maintain-
ing corporeal reexivity throughout the research process was central for achieving the cri-
terion of engagement,expression of a realityand show, instead of tellin Smith and
Sparkes (2020) conception of excellent qualitative research which we uphold for this
article.
This study employed a netnographic approach consisting of two phases of data collec-
tion (Kozinets, 2020). The rst author collected non-elicited data through online observa-
tions of open-access fan forums located on the Level Playing Field website (https://www.
levelplayingeld.org.uk/sport/football) which provides disabled people with online
spaces to publish text-based reviews of disabled provision of individual football clubs.
To ensure a representative set of comments was chosen for analysis, only forums tied
to clubs playing within the studys four sampled leagues were selected. Comments
6International Review for the Sociology of Sport 0(0)
posted between 2016 and 2021 were used to provide a contemporary perspective on
issues relating to football stadia accessibility and the experiences of disabled fans. A
total of 79 fan comments were collected and thematically analysed. This data helped
to develop our disability consciousness of the barriers disabled fans encounter and the
understanding and sensitivity that it provided, informed the questions posed during
online semi-structured interviews with 33 disabled fans.
To add depth and richness and given the heterogeneity of disability and the small
number of studies focused on disabled supporters, the sample population included fans
with various physical impairments who supported clubs across the four sampled
leagues. Drawing on the social-relational concept of impairment effects, physical impair-
ment is conceptualised as those restrictions of bodily activity and behaviour that are dir-
ectly attributable to bodily variations(Thomas, 2007: 136) in combination with the
social and cultural context in which an impairment is lived. A call for participants
advert was posted on the Level Playing Field website and was shared on social media
to attract participants. Snowball sampling techniques including direct email and tele-
phone communication were also used to extend the sample population. Participants
were purposively selected to include those who had experienced a range of physical
impairments, from people living with multiple sclerosis and cerebral palsy, to others
with amputations, limb and spinal cord injuries. The nal sample comprised ve fans
requiring ambulant disabled seating areas at English football stadia, while 28 used wheel-
chair seating sections. All were aged between 20 and 71 and all but two participants were
white (the exceptions being one black British and one British Asian fan). Eight partici-
pants identied as female, while the remaining 25 identied as male. All interviews
were conducted on Zoom between January 2021 and March 2022.
The initial data collection strategy planned for this study was an in-depth ethnography
with disabled football supporters of English clubs. However, the timing of the data col-
lection coincided with the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent periods
of lockdown. This made conducting qualitative, face-to-face research unviable and neces-
sitated pivoting to netnographic methods. The revised approach, particularly the use of
online semi-structured interviews, was chosen for several reasons. Firstly, online inter-
views provided a exible, convenient and COVID-19 safealternative to face-to-face
interviews (Lobe et al., 2020). Secondly, because football fans are geographically dis-
persed, online interviews enabled the researcher to engage with a broad sample popula-
tion. And lastly, while the internet is not universally available and accessible to all
(Scholz et al., 2017), online interviews provided the disabled participants with a way
to navigate some of the barriers they face simply to have their voices heard in academic
research (see Bundon and Hurd Clarke, 2015). Thus, the two complementary data collec-
tion methods employed for this study provided opportunities to capture the opinions,
emotions and beliefs of participants based on their lived experiences of attending live
football matches in England. The prioritising and foregrounding of the disabled voice
that this enabled, has allowed this study to challenge the underrepresentation of disabled
peoplesperspectives on their experiences of sports settings in the extant research.
Alongside the online observation data, all 33 semi-structured interviews were recorded
electronically, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed according to the six-stage
process outlined by Braun and Clarke (2022). An abductive approach to thematic analysis
Penfold et al. 7
was adopted (Ryba et al., 2012). This helped to foreground and explore participants
experiences of inclusion and exclusion, the various social, structural and psychological
barriers they encounter (inductive), as well as establishing whether their lived experiences
could be understood through the theoretical framework outlined above (deductive). The
themes and subthemes developed through the data analysis process form the foundation
for the arguments outlined below. Finally, condentiality and anonymity of participants
was assured throughout the research process via the use of pseudonyms. All other ele-
ments of the research conformed to the ethical guidelines of Ulster University as well
as those of the British Sociological Association.
Findings
We begin this discussion section by exploring disabled fansexperiences of inclusion
through football fandom, and in doing so, reveal a series of material and non-material pre-
requisites required to cultivate contextual and situational feelings of inclusivity. We then
document the contradictory nature of football fandom for disabled people by analysing
the structural, social and psychological barriers they encounter before, during and after
the matchday. In turn, we demonstrate the existence and operation of ableism and disab-
lism within the context of English football, and how these processes contribute to the
whole and/or partial exclusion of disabled football supporters from fandom participation.
Experiences of social inclusion
In explaining disabled peoples positive experiences of attending football matches, we
found Merrellset al. (2019) interpretation of social inclusion as involving a multitude
of material and non-material factors to be salient. Many of the fans interviewed indicated
how physical access to stadia was critical in terms of their experiences of social inclusion
in the context of their football fandom. Most recognised the importance of legislation
such as the Accessible Stadia Guide and its supplementary iterations (Sports Grounds
Safety Authority [SGSA], 2004, 2015), Article 30 of the United Nations Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and the Equality Act 2010 in enabling suitable
levels of physical access to some English football stadia (Penfold and Kitchin, 2022).
Some participants were keen to highlight clubs who they felt demonstrated industry-
leading provision. For example, James, a fan of a League One club, referenced his
experience at one of these clubs, indicating how good levels of physical access with
clear sightlines, allowed him to interact with fellow supporters:
At [this stadium] youre wheeling in already a tier up. So, you dont need to worry about your
view, and youre just there, in amongst it, and you can intermingle with your own fans and your
mates because its all open concourse.
This welcoming and inclusive spectator environment, created by ensuring disabled fans
are not restricted by structural barriers and can experience unrestricted circulation and
movement, support facilities, and most importantly, a good view of the pitch, has been
identied as important in the disabled supporter experience (SGSA, 2004, 2015).
8International Review for the Sociology of Sport 0(0)
Such is the importance of accessible stadium design for feelings of inclusion among
disabled supporters that Leo decided to stop watching matches at an English Premier
League club with poor facilities and inadequate levels of provision in favour of attending
matches at a League One club:
I think the accessibility instigated a level of inclusion for me, and participation. I started to build
up a relationship with the club, going to the stadium, getting into the stadium, watching the game
with my friends, leaving the stadium, the accessibility became so embedded into a routine.
This perspective highlights the importance disabled people place on being able to exer-
cise their right of choice in an accessible society and to participate in sporting contexts in
the manner they choose (Christiaens and Brittain, 2023). Leos subjective experiences of
access led him to choose to disassociate himself from a club playing at the highest level of
the English game in favour of the better matchday experience provided by the League
One club. This not only allowed him to participate in football fandom in the way he
wanted a crucial component of social inclusion (Merrells et al., 2019) but also to
develop a sense of solidarity with the club he now supports. This emphasises the view
that where disabled people are able to participate in accessible matchday experiences
they are likely to develop loyalties and afliations to particular clubs (Anderson and
Balandin, 2019).
Beyond physical dimensions of access to stadia, several participants outlined the
social benets of attending live football matches. As Rory, a fan of a League Two
club explained:
Going to football is so important for a lot of disabled people, because so much of the outside
world isnt accessible. Football is far from accessible, but going to a match and being able to
watch a game is an opportunity to get out of an isolated social environment and actually mix
with other people.
This was echoed by Darius, a supporter of a Championship club, who expressed his
enjoyment of attending matches and the value of the social interaction offered through
football:
I love meeting and chatting to the people who have been there from day one with me in our dis-
ability section. And Ive made some really good friends going [to the football]. Football gives
me an excuse to get out of the house, meet other people, and become part of a community.
Evidently, the benets of participation in football fandom for disabled people are social in
nature, enabling senses of enjoyment, belonging and community. This is particularly
important when we consider that disabled people are more likely to experience loneliness
and social isolation compared to non-disabled people because of signicant disabling bar-
riers (Macdonald et al., 2018). Leo and Dariuss experiences underline how football
fandom can provide an entry point and access to wider social networks for disabled
people (García et al., 2017). This reveals the importance of expanding our understanding
of access beyond the physical environment and to recognise that access should also
Penfold et al. 9
incorporate safe and inclusive social spaces where disabled people can experience
moments of inclusion(McDonald et al., 2019).
The challenges of matchday participation
Despite the positive experiences outlined above, virtually all participants highlighted how
they routinely encountered barriers and exclusionary practices in football. In particular,
they reported drastic differences in their matchday experiences for home and away
games. The majority of supporters involved in this study held a season ticket for their
respective club during the 2021/22 football season. For many of these supporters, plan-
ning, travelling to, watching the match and returning home after home xtures did not
present any substantial challenges. However, negotiating the working practices of
clubs while planning to attend away matches involved signicant challenges for disabled
supporters. As Declan, a fan of a League Two club, explained:
Ive got to pre plan everything; where can I park? How can I get in through the turnstiles? Can I
get up the stairs? Will I be able to see the game? Will I be able to get to the toilet? Will I be able
to get a drink? There are all these things youve got to consider and process, and it is very taxing
because most of the time the answer is no.
Similar issues were identied by Jimmy, who supports a League One club, leading him to
conclude that despite his desire to travel to away games, the prior planning required was
too complicated to justify attending:
If you look at some of our away matches, you cant do it in a day, so Id have to stay overnight
somewhere. And I need a hoist and a special mattress on the bed, and it becomes just too tire-
some. So I dont bother with away games now, the planning and travel are just too much for me
physically and mentally.
When understood against the backdrop of ableism, these testimonies demonstrate how
the physical world, replete with inaccessible environments, maintains and reproduces
unequal outcomes for disabled people (Campbell, 2009). In the case of attending football
matches, disabled supporters must engage in careful planning to ensure their accessibility
needs are going to be met which frequently remain unfullled by various institutions in
society, including football clubs. Hence, when viewed social-relationally, disabled sup-
porters encounter what Thomas (2007) refers to as barriers to doingbefore they even
leave their homes. Here, disabled fans encounter socially imposed restrictions caused
by inaccessible environments. However, as highlighted by Jimmy, barriers to attending
matches cannot solely be explained as structural or social in nature since the biological
reality of living with an impairment may also inuence decision-making processes
about whether to attend a match or not. His words also reveal that the combination of
barriers to doingand impairment effects can indirectly impact psycho-emotional well-
being by inducing feelings of anxiety and frustration which serve to restrict participation
in football fandom.
As part of the planning process, disabled supporters emphasised the difculties
involved in securing matchday tickets, accessing transport and parking. When buying
10 International Review for the Sociology of Sport 0(0)
tickets, particularly for away matches, several fans expressed their frustration that many
club websites do not provide them with the choice to book tickets in an accessible seating
area online. As Chad, a fan of a League One club, described:
Because Im a wheelchair user I cant purchase a wheelchair space online, the websites always
say you need to phone the club. So, when tickets go on sale online on a Friday, I cant order a
ticket straightaway because the ticket ofce is shut.
Many fans also criticised clubs over the lack of easily obtainable information concerning
how and where to purchase tickets for accessible seating areas, arrangements regarding
personal assistants, and who to contact for disability-related issues. Despite the majority
of participants holding a season ticket at the time of their interview, most raised concerns
about the lack of accessible parking at stadia with only around one-fth able to purchase
accessible parking alongside their season ticket. This resulted in many disabled suppor-
ters having to ght for a carparking space at their own stadium(Chad). Even where sup-
porters secured accessible parking alongside their season ticket, signicant challenges
remained in retaining this space. As Dave observed:
Youll lose your parking space if you dont turn up every week. The club keep track and will
offer your space to someone else. And I think thats unfair and unjust because its a lack of
awareness about how you could be ill or unwell.
This issue also manifests when fans wish to travel to away matches and are unable to
book parking alongside their matchday ticket. A lack of accessible parking provision
for both home and away supporters presents a key structural barrier for disabled
people who rely on their car and is an issue that clearly inuences their level of inclusion.
Moreover, even when accessible parking is available, clubsnarrow understanding of the
experience of living with impairment(s), as demonstrated by Dave, may negatively
impact some fansopportunities to return if their permanent space is removed due to
restrictions emerging from impairment effects. Hence, when examined social-
relationally, by failing to provide adequate accessible parking, some football clubs are
complicit in creating forms of structural disablism (Thomas, 2007). They do so by
placing socially imposed, and avoidable restrictions on opportunities for disabled
people to engage in a cultural practice that is inherently valuable to their lives.
For many supporters, making and accessing alternative pre- and post-match travel
arrangements also prove challenging. As Killian, a fan of a Championship club, notes;
public transport isnt accessible for disabled people to get to games independently.
While the existence of barriers to public transport cannot be attributed to any particular
football club, what can be questioned is why the majority of clubs supported by partici-
pants in this research fail to provide accessible transport for disabled fans wishing to
attend away matches. This was a common issue raised by participants. The sense of
exclusion that this elicited among interviewees was captured by James:
Penfold et al. 11
There are coaches that go to airports which are great for me and my wheelchair. So, its not
beyond the realms of possibility that football coaches could be better and more accessible.
But it just seems that football clubs dont want to fork out for those types of coaches.
Clubs who fail to provide accessible transport for disabled supporters are restricting dis-
abled peoples choice and are complicit in perpetuating ableist discourses which discrim-
inate both in favour of non-disabled people via opportunity hoarding (i.e., granting them
access to away travel) and against disabled people by marginalising them from social
opportunities necessary to experience moments of inclusion in football fandom contexts
(i.e., travelling together, interacting with fellow supporters, and watching the live match)
(Goodley, 2014). This situation highlights the intersectionality of structural and social
barriers, whereby the lack of accessible transport is facilitated by ableist decision-making
processes made by personnel at various football clubs who are either ignorant of the
needs of disabled people or assume they are not interested in participating in the away
matchday experience. Based on the experiences recounted here, the organisational prac-
tices of the clubs that our participants supported, create conditions of structural disable-
ment that restrict disabled peoples participation and inclusion at away matches,
particularly for those supporters who cannot nd alternative means of travel.
Barriers to inclusion at football stadia
Most participants were critical of the accessibility of stadia and provision for disabled
fans offered by the clubs they supported. This is a consequence of many clubsfailure
to comply with international legislation to protect the rights of disabled people and
ignore both national and European best practice guidelines regarding the treatment of dis-
abled spectators (CMSC, 2017; Kitchin et al., 2022). This has created signicant barriers
to inclusion in English football fandom. For instance, many participants raised concerns
regarding structural barriers related to poor or dysfunctional facilities such as toilets, lifts,
bars and seating areas, arguing that they not only impacted their matchday experience, but
in some instances, prevented matchday participation altogether.
The most prevalent structural concern raised by supporters related to the state of
accessible seating areas. Mounting evidence shows that many football clubs in
England fail to provide the minimum provision of spaces for wheelchair users (CMSC,
2017; DWP, 2015; Wilson, 2022). Interestingly, participants were less concerned with
the number of seats provided, but rather the quality of these seats and the sightlines
they afforded. Many expressed concerns about accessible seating areas located at pitch
level, which provided a crap view of the game(Isaac) and offered no cover from the
elements(Lauren). This led to a view, voiced by Joel, that clubs treat disabled people
as an afterthought:
Its an issue with facilities at some clubs because we dont have any choice, we get told where
we have to sit because clubs just retrotted places for us, and they dont have disabled sections
in each of their stands.
The limited accessible seating provision for wheelchair users and their personal assistants
provided by some clubs demonstrates how the built environment within which fandom
12 International Review for the Sociology of Sport 0(0)
occurs, reduces disabled peoples autonomy and choice and negatively impacts their
matchday experience. Hence, if choice is considered an essential aspect of inclusion
(Misener and Darcy, 2014), the conguration of seating provision is such that many foot-
ball clubs are not necessarily becoming more inclusive even where they are meeting
statutory requirements around the number of seats that should be made available for dis-
abled supporters.
Problems also arose for disabled people who make use of raised accessible seating
platforms at some stadiums, with instances of fellow supporters standing up during
matches impeding on an inclusive matchday experience. Darius recounted one instance
of this and its implications:
Other fans started to stand up in front of me during home matches and I couldnt see anything.
[] And the stewards didnt do anything, so it just felt like as a disabled supporter our matchday
experience had been forgotten. You know, if your own fans dont even care enough to sit down
for you, what does that say? And I just thought, if the club dont give a monkeys about me, why
should I carry on going?
According to the SGSA the UK Governments leading advisory body for sport ground
safety all spectators should have a clear view of the live football spectacle, one free from
obstruction by people, roof or railing stanchions, or other means related to seating provi-
sion (SGSA, 2004). However, this is clearly not the reality for many disabled supporters.
This was also reected in a Level Playing Field (2022) survey where 48% of 634 disabled
supporters reported poor sightlines of the pitch to be a signicant barrier to participation.
These issues, however, do not only occur because football clubs are negligent in pro-
viding adequate accessible seating provision for disabled supporters. As alluded to above
by Darius, they are also a consequence of the actions of non-disabled supporters and
stewards. These behaviours can be understood as acts of invalidation(Reeve, 2020)
whereby the actions of non-disabled strangers can result in direct psycho-emotional dis-
ablism. Whilst the act of standing in front of a disabled supporter may not be a deliberate
act of disablism per se, the consequences of failing to consider how the disabled fan may
feel still impacts on the psycho-emotional well-being of the disabled person involved,
particularly if matchday stewards fail to intervene. Hence, football clubs that fall short
in their provision for disabled people, including access to facilities such as adequate
accessible seating areas and toilet facilities, create conditions which can exclude,
oppress and make it difcult to participate fully in football fandom.
Beyond issues of access, many participants highlighted how their presence in stadia
can, at times, result in more subtle experiences of discrimination and exclusion.
Returning to the theme of the role of stewards as a mediating inuence of their matchday
experience, some fans recounted experiences of discrimination. Killian, for example,
recalled incidents where stewards did not directly address him in conversation about
his accessibility needs but rather spoke to his personal assistant. He interpreted this
starkly in the following terms: They think because Im in a wheelchair I cant speak
for myself. Similarly, data from an online fan forum revealed that: The matchday
staff offered zero assistance throughout and completely ignored our request for help.
[We were] told quote its not our fault, you shouldnt be here”’ (fan who attended a
Penfold et al. 13
match at a Championship club in 2019). While SGSA (2004) guidelines stipulate that
full-time staff and matchday stewards should be well trained and sensitive to the needs
of disabled people, in some cases the exchanges between stewards and disabled suppor-
ters can result in infantilising and exclusionary interactions that can undermine disabled
supporters psycho-emotional well-being.
Another recurrent theme was that attending away xtures frequently created scenarios
where disabled people experienced direct forms of discrimination and exclusion. For
example, a mutual concern mentioned by supporters related to the lack of raised access-
ible seating platforms in the away sections of some English football stadia which were
only offered within the sections of the stadium populated by home fans. In some
instances, this scenario created feelings of exclusion. Leos experiences illustrate this
clearly:
I was sat right behind the goal, so I asked to move because Im just gonna be terried of the ball
hitting me all game. [] So, they moved me to a side home stand [with a raised platform], but it
was a stand that was closed, so theres no other fans in the stand. But, of course, whenever my
team scored, you felt so detached from it, because all the players would run to the away end. And
youre sitting there on your own and you feel so disconnected from the team because this is their
offer of accessibility. Their form of accessibility is a form of exclusion.
In this example, disabled people are encouraged to participate in primarily non-disabled
settings (e.g., the football stadia), but do not experience the same activity in the same way
as non-disabled people (Christiaens and Brittain, 2023). In essence, this creates a segre-
gated approach to inclusionwhere disabled people cannot experience the same emo-
tions, camaraderie and belonging as their fellow away supporters, especially in cases
such as Leos where he was separated from other away fans due to a lack of accessible
provision. While it should be acknowledged that there are some practical reasons for this
segregation, not least outdated stadium design, Leos experience exposes English foot-
balls ableist approach towards inclusion whereby disabled people are excluded from
the same matchday experience as non-disabled people through processes of othering
by having special or, as others have put it, segregated areas(Dickson et al., 2016: 535).
More concerningly, however, is the fact that the overwhelming majority of supporters
in this study have experienced the problem of segregation at some stadia, where clubs do
not provide any accessible seating areas for away supporters to sit at the away end of the
ground and are instead forced to sit with the home supporters. It should be noted that the
EFL have introduced new regulations for the 2024/25 season which require all clubs to
enable disabled supporters to be situated with fellow away club supporters (EFL,
2024). However, those participants in this study who had yet to experience this provision,
were unanimous in their view that clubs who allowed this scenario were creating exclu-
sionary environments for disabled people. James astutely observed the ableist discourses
at play in this scenario:
If you were told as an able-bodied person, the only way you can go to a football match is to sit in
the opposition fans and youve got to keep quiet for your own safety, that would completely put
you off.
14 International Review for the Sociology of Sport 0(0)
More worryingly, as Lewis noted, is that direct abuse is more likely in situations where
away disabled supporters are seated with home fans:
Its an obvious scenario for abuse isnt it? The abuse Ive had over the years is unbelievable. It
happened to me at [this club], where I celebrated a goal, and you get the you fucking cripple,
you fucking spaz.
Leo disclosed a similar experience: all game all we got was you shouldnt be sat in this
end,you shouldnt be sitting here you fucking spastic [sic.], and the stewards wouldnt
do anything they would just be so passive. As these accounts demonstrate, English foot-
ball stadiums are a social space where disabled people are subjected to direct forms of
disablism. These incidents constitute disability hate crimes and mark football as
another area of society that can socially exclude, marginalise and oppress disabled
people (Sherry, 2012). For Mia, the negative experiences resulting from repeated disablist
interactions with opposition home supporters, and the physical barriers created by foot-
ball clubs who only provide seats for disabled away supporters in sections of the stadia
populated by home fans had profound psycho-emotional consequences:
There was me and my helper, and we got put in with the home fans. We were getting abused
because we were away fans in their end. And I ended up sitting in my car because I said to
the [non-disabled] person I was with, listen, just go and sit with our [away] fans and Ill just
listen to it on the radio in my car, I cant deal with this again.
It makes me feel like Im not worthy to be there, not worthy to be a football fan. And that I
shouldnt be there and that I shouldnt be following a football club. You know, sometimes it
makes me feel like Im not worthy to be a person. It makes the likes of me feel horrible and
useless when were not treated fairly.
In this instance, Mias experience of attending away xtures resulted in internalised
ableism (Reeve, 2020), where she internalised the prejudice that the likes of medo
not belong in football fandom settings. As such, what she recounts demonstrates the con-
vergent nature of barriers to doingand barriers to being(Thomas, 2007). Indeed, the
segregated seating provision in English football stadia creates a structural barrier which
places limits on what the disabled person can do, but the psycho-emotional disablism
experienced through interactions with non-disabled people creates a social barrier
which places limits on who they can be by shaping ones sense of self, condence and
social behaviour (Thomas, 2007). It is clear, therefore, that the intersecting and com-
pounded nature of the barriers arising from segregated seating provision in football
stadia can, and often does, impact on disabled peoples self-esteem rendering them
more susceptible to psycho-emotional barriers that can exclude them from participating
in football fandom.
Conclusion
This article illustrates that the experience and practice of football fandom for disabled
people in England is one of contradiction and complexity. It reveals on the one hand
Penfold et al. 15
that football stadia can function as sites that allow disabled people to experience moments
of inclusion and feelings of belonging. Our ndings extend previous research (García
et al., 2017; Southby, 2011, 2013) by highlighting several material and non-material pre-
requisites required to foster feelings of inclusivity for disabled football supporters.
However, this study also provides new insights into the multifaceted and persistent bar-
riers to access, inclusion and participation encountered by disabled supporters emanating
from inadequate facilities such as toilets and accessible seating areas, access to accessible
transport, parking provision and matchday tickets, as well as interactions with non-
disabled stewards and spectators.
By theorising disabled supportersexperiences via Thomas(1999, 2007) social-
relational model of disability, alongside the concept of ableism, this article is the rst
to bring the wider, and growing, scholarship on football fandom into conversation
with broader sociological questions concerning the disabling nature of contemporary
society which continues to systematically exclude and oppress disabled people. This
allows us to make further original contributions to knowledge by exposing how disabled
peoples experiences of football fandom are contoured by processes of ableism and forms
of structural and psycho-emotional disablism that contribute to the whole or partial exclu-
sion of disabled supporters from a cultural space and social practice to which they have a
right.
The netnographic methodology applied in this study signposts a further, methodo-
logical, contribution of this article. As noted earlier, given that the data collection
period coincided with the global pandemic and its attendant restrictions on travel and
social interaction, it was necessary to transition from ethnography to netnography.
Rather than constituting a limitation of this study, in hindsight, this aided in the
process of data collection. In fact, the adoption of a netnographic research design
enhanced accessibility and provided an opportunity for disabled participants to fully par-
ticipate and have their often-marginalised voices heard in social scientic inquiry. Based
on this, we would argue that future research on the experiences of disabled people in sport
fandom settings should consider online research methods as a way of helping to create
more accessible, and potentially, co-produced approaches.
Irrespective of the methodology applied, given the paucity of academic scholarship on
disabled football fandom and the importance of mitigating the exclusion and marginalisa-
tion of disabled people in this space, there is clearly a need for further research. One
potentially productive focus emerges out of the fact that disability entwines with other
experiences of oppression resulting from the intersections of race, ethnicity, gender,
sexuality, age and class (Brighton et al., 2023). There is scope, therefore, to build
upon existing work and move it in novel directions by not only investigating how dis-
abled people with other physical, sensory and/or cognitive impairments experience and
practice football fandom, but also by exploring how these experiences may be impacted
through the intersections of other social positionalities. Regardless of its focus, future
research must actively challenge the oppressive social structures which currently hold
disabled people in the margins of sport to ensure they are able to access and experience
the freedoms and opportunities in cultural life to which they have a right.
16 International Review for the Sociology of Sport 0(0)
Declaration of conicting interests
The authors declared no potential conicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or
publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no nancial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this
article.
ORCID iDs
Connor Penfold https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0554-9855
Paul Darby https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4654-476X
Paul Kitchin https://EFL, 2024orcid.org/0000-0001-7219-5167
References
Anderson K and Balandin S (2019) Kicking a goal for inclusion in sports clubs and stadia. In:
Halder S and Argyropoulos V (eds) Inclusion, Equity and Access for Individuals with
Disabilities: Insights from Educators Across World. Singapore: Springer Singapore, pp.
297317.
Berger RJ (2009) Hoop Dreams on Wheels Disability and the Competitive Wheelchair Athlete.
London: Routledge.
Braneld F (1998) What are you doing here? Non-disabledpeople and the disability movement: A
response to Robert F. Drake. Disability & Society 13(1): 143144.
Braun V and Clarke V (2022) Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: Sage.
Brighton J, Howe PD and Powis B (2023) Theorising disability sport. In: Brighton J, Howe PD and
Powis B (eds) Researching Disability Sport Theory, Method, Practice. London: Routledge,
pp. 1341.
Brittain I, van Lindert C and Scheerder J (2023) Understanding disability, disability sport and inclu-
sion. In: Brittain I, van Lindert C and Scheerder J (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Disability
Sport in Europe: Policies, Structures and Participation. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 25
55.
Bundon A and Hurd Clarke L (2015) Unless you go online you are on your own: Blogging as a
bridge in para-sport. Disability & Society 30(2): 185198.
Campbell F (2009) Contours of Ableism: The Production of Disability and Abledness. London:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Christiaens M and Brittain I (2023) The complexities of implementing inclusion policies for dis-
abled people in UK non-disabled voluntary community sports clubs. European Sport
Management Quarterly 23(4): 10461066.
Culture, Media and Sport Committee (CMSC) (2017) Accessibility of Sport Stadia 20162017.
Available at: https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-
select/culture-media-and-sport-committee/inquiries/parliament-2015/sports-stadia-
accessibility-16-17/ (accessed 7 February 2020).
Darcy S, Ollerton J and Faulkner S (2020) Why cant I play?: Transdisciplinary learnings for chil-
dren with disabilitys sport participation. Social Inclusion 8(3): 209223.
Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) (2015) The inclusive and accessible stadia report.
Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/
Penfold et al. 17
attachment_data/le/460162/the-inclusive-and-accessible-stadia-report.pdf (accessed 7
February 2020).
DePauw K and Gavron J (2005) Disability Sport. London: Human Kinetics.
Dickson TJ, Darcy S, Johns R, et al. (2016) Inclusive by design: Transformative services and
sport-event accessibility. The Service Industries Journal 36(1112): 532555.
English Football League (EFL) (2024) EFL Statement: Regulation changes Summer 2024.
Available at: https://www.e.com/news/2024/june/07/e-statementregulation-changes
summer-2024/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR00Tbosl9Y9JYNSL1deyAvBKWxD5
Dnv3zUaBE3Rx8q3pHphqqpadaCtWE_aem_xIUvR8I9qHvL6ifCv35r3A (accessed 20 July
2024).
Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) (2017) The state of play How accessible is your
club? Available at: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publication-download/state-
play-how-accessible-your-club (accessed 7 February 2020).
Fitzgerald H (2018) Disability and barriers to inclusion. In: Brittain I and Beacom A (eds) The
Palgrave Handbook of Paralympic Studies. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 5571.
García B, de Wolff M, Welford J, et al. (2017) Facilitating inclusivity and broadening understand-
ings of access at football clubs: The role of disabled supporter associations. European Sport
Management Quarterly 17(2): 226243.
Goodley D (2014) Dis/Ability Studies: Theorising Disablism and Ableism. Oxfordshire: Routledge.
Kidd S (2017) Social exclusion and access to social protection schemes. Journal of Development
Effectiveness 9(2): 212244.
Kitchin PJ, Paramio-Salcines J, Darcy S, et al. (2022) Exploring the accessibility of sport stadia for
people with disability: Towards the development of a stadium accessibility scale (SAS). Sport,
Business and Management: An International Journal 12(1): 93116.
Kitchin R (2000) The researched opinions on research: Disabled people and disability research.
Disability & Society 15(1): 2547.
Kozinets R (2020) Netnography: The Essential Guide to Qualitative Social Media Research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Level Playing Field (2022) Annual Fan Survey 2022: Results Summary.122. Available at: https://
s27807.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/LPF-Annual-Fan-Survey-2022-Summary.pdf (accessed
2 December 2022).
Levers M-JD (2013) Philosophical paradigms, grounded theory, and perspectives on emergence.
SAGE Open 3(4): 16. DOI: 10.1177/2158244013517243.
Lobe B, Morgan D and Hoffman KA (2020) Qualitative data collection in an era of social distan-
cing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 19: 18. DOI: 10.1177/
1609406920937875.
Macbeth J and Powis B (2023) What are we doing here?: Confessional tales of non-disabled
researchers in disability sport. In: Powis B, Brighton J and Howe PD (eds) Researching
Disability Sport: Theory, Method, Practice. London: Routledge, pp. 5570.
Macdonald SJ, Deacon L, Nixon J, et al. (2018) The invisible enemy: Disability, loneliness and
isolation. Disability & Society 33(7): 11381159.
McDonald B, Spaaij R and Dukic D (2019) Moments of social inclusion: Asylum seekers, football
and solidarity. Sport in Society 22(6): 935949.
Merrells J, Buchanan A and Waters R (2019) We feel left out: Experiences of social inclusion
from the perspective of young adults with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual &
Developmental Disability 44(1): 1322.
Millward P (2023) Football Fandom, Sexualities and Activism: A Cultural Relational Sociology.
London: Routledge.
18 International Review for the Sociology of Sport 0(0)
Misener L and Darcy S (2014) Managing disability sport: From athletes with disabilities to inclu-
sive organisational perspectives. Sport management review 17(1): 7.
Nind M and Seale J (2009) Concepts of access for people with learning difculties: Towards a
shared understanding. Disability & Society 24(3): 273287.
Peers D, Eales L and Goodwin D (2022) Disablism, ableism, and enlightened ableism in contem-
porary adapted physical activity textbooks: Practising what we preach? In: Goodwin D and
Connolly M (eds) Reexivity and Change in Adaptive Physical Activity. London:
Routledge, pp. 3446.
Penfold C and Kitchin PJ (2022) Will it ever be completely safe to be in a crowd again?: The
return of disabled supporters to football stadiums during COVID-19. Managing Sport and
Leisure 27(12): 125134.
Reeve D (2020) Psycho-emotional disablism: The missing link? In: Watson B, Roulstone A and
Thomas C (eds) Routledge Handbook of Disability Studies. London: Routledge, pp. 102117.
Ryba TV, Haapanen S, Mosek S, et al. (2012) Towards a conceptual understanding of acute cultural
adaptation: A preliminary examination of ACA in female swimming. Qualitative Research in
Sport, Exercise and Health 4(1): 8097.
Scholz F, Yalcin B and Priestley M (2017) Internet access for disabled people: Understanding
socio-relational factors in Europe. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on
Cyberspace 11(1): 113. DOI: 10.5817/CP2017-1-4.
Sherry M (2012) Disability Hate Crimes: Does Anyone Really Hate Disabled People? London:
Routledge.
Smith B and Bundon A (2018) Disability models: Explaining and understanding disability sport in
different ways. In: Brittain I and Beacom A (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Paralympic
Studies. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1534.
Smith B and Sparkes A (2020) Qualitative research. In: Tenenbaum G and Eklund R (eds)
Handbook of Sport Psychology, 4th ed. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 10011019.
Southby K (2011) Football fandom, social inclusion and learning disability: Opportunities and con-
straints. World Leisure Journal 53(4): 322331.
Southby K (2013) Social inclusion through football fandom: Opportunities for learning-disabled
people. Sport in Society 16(10): 13861403.
Sports Grounds Safety Authority (2004) Accessible Stadia Guide. London: SGSA.
Sports Grounds Safety Authority (2015) Accessible Stadia: Supplementary Guidance. London:
SGSA.
Thomas C (1999) Female Forms: Experiencing and Understanding Disability. Oxford: Open
University Press.
Thomas C (2007) Sociologies of Disability and Illness: Contested Ideas in Disability Studies and
Medical Sociology. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Watermeyer B (2012) Towards a Contextual Psychology of Disablism. London: Routledge.
Wilson J (2022) Premier league betrayingdisabled supporters by not punishing clubs who broke
commitments to provide adequate facilities. Available at: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/
football/2022/12/29/won-disabled-supporter-didnt-enjoy-single-thing/ (accessed 22 May
2023).
Wolbring G (2012) Expanding ableism: Taking down the ghettoization of impact of disability
studies scholars. Societies 2(3): 7583.
Penfold et al. 19
... In drawing our gaze to the acute reality faced by many disabled people, including children, "who must carefully think and plan how they access leisure" (ibid, 609), on account of having to navigate leisure spaces which often "purposefully inhibit or repel certain bodies from entering these environments" (ibid), Kuppan vividly underscores the very real difficulties faced by disabled people in accessing leisure facilities in the first instance, itself a fundamental pre-requisite for them to exercise their human right to leisure. Indeed, research by Penfold et al (2024) into the experiences of disabled people's experiences of English football fandom reveals that whilst disabled people often do enjoy moments of inclusion and enjoyment, their experiences "are nonetheless contoured by ableism and forms of structural and psycho-emotional disablism that exclude, marginalise and discriminate" (ibid, 2). Through a netnographic examination of open-access online fan forums, in addition to semi-structured interviews with 33 disabled fans, Penfold et al (2024) highlighted numerous exclusionary practices and barriers which affected their experiences of fandom. ...
... Indeed, research by Penfold et al (2024) into the experiences of disabled people's experiences of English football fandom reveals that whilst disabled people often do enjoy moments of inclusion and enjoyment, their experiences "are nonetheless contoured by ableism and forms of structural and psycho-emotional disablism that exclude, marginalise and discriminate" (ibid, 2). Through a netnographic examination of open-access online fan forums, in addition to semi-structured interviews with 33 disabled fans, Penfold et al (2024) highlighted numerous exclusionary practices and barriers which affected their experiences of fandom. These ranged from the need for disabled fans to engage in careful planning in order to ensure that access to football stadia was appropriate, to navigating onsite structural and accessibility barriers including inappropriate seating and toilet facilities, to name but a few. ...
Article
Despite a widespread belief that sports can build community and help lift people out of violence and poverty, scholars have yet to establish a definitive relationship between marginalized communities and sports fandom as a pathway to social inclusion. In this study, we examine publicity surrounding a series of “Super Soul parties,” Super Bowl parties for people experiencing homelessness, to show how sports fandom can be rhetorically positioned to create a sense of belonging. We argue that Kay’s use of the Super Bowl is a strategic utilization of sports as a tool for rhetorically creating 1) visibility, 2) legibility, and 3) dignity. However, we also find this strategy is tenuous; over time, Super Soul parties’ housed attendees revert from seeing homeless people as fans to understanding them as others in need of service. For sports fandom to successfully provide dignity and inclusion, advocates must find ways to avoid reinscribing traditional service hierarchies.
Chapter
Full-text available
This chapter focuses on the experiences of non-disabled researchers in disability sport contexts. Following a review of non-disabled researchers’ accounts of entering and navigating these spaces, the chapter presents two confessional tales from our own research experiences. The chapter then demystifies aspects of the research process by discussing three issues that have been particularly interesting and/or challenging for us as non-disabled researchers: 1) positionality; 2) asking about impairment; and 3) giving back. In doing so, the chapter adds to important methodological discussions and provides a foundation for dialogue and debate between disabled and non-disabled researchers and their disabled co-researchers or research participants.
Article
Full-text available
Purpose The aim of this paper is to synthesise existing literature on sports stadia, spectators with disabilities (SwD) and accessibility to identify themes and to highlight the gaps in the literature. This review subsequently develops two propositions that will enable research in this emerging area to further develop. Design/methodology/approach The research was guided by two research questions: First, what does the peer reviewed evidence tell us about SwD and the accessibility of sporting stadia?; Second, how can this information be used to develop a Stadium Accessibility Scale (SAS)? The authors conducted a rapid review of the literature across three databases that identified 34 papers for synthesis. Findings The synthesis revealed three research themes: a focus on legislative compliance, the need to enhance resources (both physical and human) and research that focusses on moving beyond the stadium experience. The latter can be subdivided into two streams – studies that look at accessibility as a social legacy of major events and studies that seek to understand the whole journey that SwD's must make to attend sport events. Research limitations/implications The study makes two key recommendations. The first is to encourage further research aligned to the HOPES framework (Paramio-Salcines et al. , 2016) that explicitly recognises the importance of understanding the broader approach to the customer experience. The second is the need for the development and validation of a reliable SAS. Originality/value Greater accessibility provides a foundation for inclusive environments in sport. The findings are relevant for all stakeholders in sport as universal accessibility benefits more than people with disabilities.
Chapter
Full-text available
This chapter draws from a commercial netnography we conducted to explore Chinese cosmetics consumers' changing notions of female beauty. Specifically, we were tasked with informing the new product development efforts of ArtCosmetics, an Italian B2B contract manufacturer operating in the global cosmetics market. We use the project to discuss how we used a team of researchers to collect, interpret, translate, and understand data about the central role of cultural codes of beauty in cosmetics tastes and routines. In response to the complexity involved in the project, we improvised a netnographic research design. As a result, our netnography with ArtCosmetics was a methodological and intellectual journey that challenged us in many ways: transnational and effective sampling, appropriately bricolaged research design, collecting and comprehending the nuance of foreign language and foreign culture data from new platforms, resolving heterogenous data, managing vast cultural complexity, and translating sophisticated ethnographic finding into pragmatic consumer, brand, and new product development insights. Today, Chinese notions of beauty and identity are firmly rooted in historical ethnic and national identities but are also fluidly global. Adapting netnography to this fluid transnational context allowed us to grasp a flow of beautyscapes, infoscapes, brandscapes, selfscapes, and usagescapes as shifting elements in a primordial process that oscillates between East and West, traditional and futuristic, and symbolic and functional.
Chapter
The country-specific chapters in this handbook give a comparative overview of the different ways various countries across Europe attempt to include persons with a disability in sport, and the policies they adopt to try and promote this. The aim of this chapter is to try and explain some of the reasons why such policies are necessary and why persons with a disability might feel excluded from such opportunities in the first place. In order to do this we will outline some of the theories and models that exist in order to assist in the understanding of why ‘disability’ exists, as well as looking at the importance of language use when talking about disability and also in defining ‘disability’ within different nations. We will then conclude by discussing what we mean by disability sport, its potential for inclusion and how we define the system of disability sport in the context of this handbook.
Book
I am not allowed to share the full text - please don't request - thank you! https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/thematic-analysis/book248481
Article
NB: Available Open Access using DOI link! Research question Adopting a qualitative case study design, this article draws upon the concept of ableism to analyse the extent to which mainstreaming policy in the UK leads to inclusive sport practice at the community level. Research methods In-depth qualitative data were collected from 31 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders in the inclusion process in England including sports organisations, officials in community sports clubs and disabled people. Data were thematically analysed to explore how stakeholders understood inclusion and what the role of ableism might be in formulating this understanding. Results and findings The findings illustrate that ableism appears to play a key role in the understanding of inclusion and how it is operationalised in different clubs and sports organisations. This in turn impacts whether disabled people feel able to participate within that environment. The research identified three outcomes of inclusion (parallel inclusion, full inclusion and choice) and four approaches used or necessary to achieve the three outcomes by stakeholders (able-inclusion, barrier removal, creating opportunities and mutual identity). Implications This article identifies that, irrespective of policy intent, the way inclusion policy is understood by those that have to operationalise it is often underpinned by an ableist view of disability, meaning that the desired increases in participation may not materialise. Based on the findings, it is suggested that sport organisations should strategically embed disability provision and should actively rather than passively engage with disabled people.