Responding to online abuse in football: accountability, enforcement and deterrence

The BBC's report published on 3 December, highlighting online abuse directed at managers and players in the Premier League and Women's Super League (WSL) over the weekend of 8 and 9 November, is a stark reminder of this societal problem.

Online abuse is, of course, not limited to football, but abuse of individuals within the sport is a particularly visible example. It reflects a wider issue: social media can foster the worst in individuals, partly because of a wider belief that they are immune from complaint or consequence for what they choose to post.

While some operate under the cloak of a pseudonym, believing this provides anonymity (typically untrue), the failure of social media platforms to police their sites is probably a more significant reason why posters feel they can act with impunity. The importance of the BBC's coverage lies in shining a spotlight on the misconduct and at least pointing to the potential for consequences if individuals are identified and action is taken. Arsenal's action in dealing with abusers speaks to what is possible if those with the ability to do so take ownership.

One of the challenges of dealing with the abuse is the fact that much of it comes from abusers based overseas, which means the immunity from consequences is quite real in practice. However, the BBC report identified that 61% of abusers on 8/9 November were based in the UK and Ireland, meaning that much more can be done.

While efforts can be made to get the platforms to take action for individual breaches of their own community rules, which will have mixed results, there are other avenues open in respect of UK based abusers, which include:

• Exerting more pressure on the platforms to police abuse and abusers more rigorously, to include removal of accounts and instituting bans. As the UK regulator, Ofcom is plainly well placed to apply pressure, backed by its ability to rigorously enforce the Online Safety Act 2023, a subject we covered here.
• As Arsenal has shown, all clubs can be more proactive in dealing with their own fans. Club memberships should be conditional on fans not abusing players of any team, and they should be rigorous in policing misconduct. If nothing else, it brings the club into disrepute for its fans to behave in this manner.
• A prerequisite to having a social media account is an email address and/or mobile number. The providers' contracts will normally include a provision which makes online abuse using the account a breach of the contract. This could and should be much more regularly enforced, meaning it effectively takes away the individual's access to the platforms via that means, as well as creating further practical consequences for the offender. It would also be possible for other providers to refuse to accept as a customer someone who had lost a previous account because of their online misconduct.
• Publicity for those who abuse players and managers will also act as a significant deterrent. It will mean those around abusers, such as family, friends and employers, are more likely to take a dim view of this misconduct and create additional consequences for abusers. Attention on the abuser will create social pressure which in turn will reduce the abuse.
• For the worst offenders, there is always the criminal law. The police are reluctant to involve themselves in these cases because of cost and manpower issues, coupled with the fact that the risk of physical harm to the victim is near enough nil. The threshold for the police to intervene is increasingly raised. However, it is possible for clubs and indeed individual victims to bring private prosecutions. This avenue is not open to all, albeit those in the Premier League can certainly afford to take this action, and it should be limited to the clearest of cases given the requisite tests that need to be met. However, it is a genuine option, to be handled by those experienced in bringing private prosecutions, and has the benefit of giving the prosecuting club/individual control, something they would not have if the police and CPS were to prosecute. In most cases, there will be little, if anything, the defendant can do beyond pleading guilty. Again, the media is free to report the court proceedings.  At present, a private prosecutor will also get most of their costs covered by central funds.

In short, there are several steps that can be taken to address this modern-day scourge. Recognising that action can be taken, it is then about taking ownership, being proactive and selecting cases to pursue with a view to not only creating appropriate sanctions for the perpetrator but also creating a much wider deterrence, so others will see that this is not a path to follow. Only with greater action and publicity will this appalling, often criminal misconduct be significantly reduced.

This publication is a general summary of the law. It should not replace legal advice tailored to your specific circumstances.

© Farrer & Co LLP, December 2025