On the Eastside

:

Research Report into the Estate Based
Social Inclusion Interventions of Leyton
Orient Community Sports Programme







Tim Crabbe
Pat Slaughter August 2004





2
Contents
Page

Section 1. Introduction. Why study LOCSP? 3
Getting to know you: A visit from the Anglo-Irish Council 3
Section 2. Putting LOCSP’s work into context: A historical and
theoretical review 7
Sport, social policy & social control 7
The new criminology, social change, exclusion and control 9
Theorising community today 13
Section 3. ‘Talking tactics’: The purpose and methods of enquiry 16
Lies, damn lies and statistics 16
Aims and focus 16
Methodology and evaluative structure 17
The sample group 20
Research team 21
Section 4. The social and political context for the emergence of
community sports interventions – Rhetoric and practice 22
Rapping the rhetoric 22
Sport and social exclusion – the policy context 23
Putting policy into practice 28
Section 5. ‘The Office’: Understanding the organisation of
community sports work 32
A day at the office 32
Corridors, portakabins and boardrooms: The emergence
of LOCSP 34
Time for long trousers: Gaining independence and
autonomy 38
‘Ask for forgiveness not permission’: Organisational culture
and office dynamics 40
‘Transfer windows’: Arrivals and departures 42
The search for funds 46
Section 6. ‘Kick off’: Communities, engagement and cultural
capital 50
Defining LOCSP’s communities 50
Engagement: Authenticity, respect and ‘cool’ distance 53
‘The good, the bad and the ugly’: False promises, bad
practice and hostile residents 74
Section 7. ‘Playing the game’: Delivery and professional practice 81
Blazers and tracksuits: conventional approaches to
community sports provision 81
The LOCSP approach: Planning, flexibility and community
engagement 82
Section 8. ‘Final score’: Conclusions and recommendations 104
Sporting interventions: A typographical framework for
analysis 104
In search of respect 105
Participatory community 106
Recommendations 109

References 114

3
Section 1. Introduction: Why study LOCSP?

'Cett|ng to know you': A v|s|t from the Ang|o-|r|sh 6ounc||

0re ol lre |esse(-|roWr corsecuerces ol lre 0ood F(|dav Ad(eererl Wr|cr soudrl lo
o(|rd peacelu| acco(d lo lre ro(lr ol l(e|ard Was ar a((ardererl lo( lre l(|sr ard 8(|l|sr lo
sra(e dood po||cv p(acl|ce. As a d|(ecl sp|r-oll l(or lr|s a((ardererl |l Was ad(eed lral
va(|ous (ep(eserlal|ves l(or l(|sr arl|-d(ud aderc|es as We|| as corrur|lv spo(ls Wo(|e(s
srou|d core lo Erd|ard lo |oo| al |rroval|ve spo(l|rd |rle(verl|or p(ojecls. Wr|cr a|red lo
(educe d(ud aouse |r vourd peop|e lr(oudr lre p(ov|s|or ol spo(l|rd oppo(lur|l|es. As We||
as lre l(|sr (ep(eserlal|ves de|edales l(or lre Crarre| ls|ards We(e |rv|led lo allerd. Tre
Ard|o-l(|sr Courc||. a oodv sel up spec|l|ca||v ov lre Ad(eererl lo lac|||lale lre
d|sser|ral|or ol dood p(acl|ce. lurded lre v|s|l. Pos|l|ve Fulu(es. urde( lre d|(eclo(sr|p ol
lre reW|v appo|rled Ne|| walsor. rosled lre lr(ee-dav everl. Wr|cr Was oased al a sra(l
role| |r \|clo(|a Wre(e lre de|edales We(e slav|rd. A corle(erce (oor Was sel as|de lo(
p(eserlal|ors ard d|scuss|ors. A(ourd lre s|de ol lre ra|r (oor d|sp|av ooa(ds l|asred
s||c| posle(s p(orol|rd lre Wo(| ol Pos|l|ve Fulu(es. A lao|e ca((|ed p(orol|ora| ||le(alu(e
l(or olre( aderc|es corce(red W|lr lr|s ||rd ol Wo(|: Pos|l|ve Fulu(es. 3po(l Erd|ard.
C(|re Corce(r. NACR0. lre Fooloa|| Fourdal|or.
Tre l|(sl dav Was d|ver ove( lo lre v|s|l|rd de|edales. A se(|es ol p(eserlal|ors dela||ed
lre |ssues ard p(oo|ers pa(l|cu|a( lo lre|( oWr ju(|sd|cl|ors. Eveo(oWs We(e (a|sed or ro(e
lrar ore occas|or sucr as Wrer lre (ep(eserlal|ve l(or lre Nal|ora| 3po(ls Cerl(e lo( lre
ls|e ol Var corceded lral lre|( po||cv. as |l slood. Was a|red exc|us|ve|v al lre ove(-25 ade
o(ac|el. A|| |r a|| lre dav dave ore lre |rp(ess|or lral spo(l|rd |rle(verl|ors We(e rol or
lre aderda |r le(rs ol lre v|s|lo(s app(oacr lo lac|||rd lre scou(de ol d(uds.
0av lWo Was ar oppo(lur|lv lo( lre Erd||sr lo d|scuss va(|ous app(oacres. Wr|cr rad
allerpled lo use spo(l as a d|ve(s|or l(or d(ud aouse. arl|-soc|a| oerav|ou(. c(|r|ra||lv.
ard soc|a| exc|us|or ro(e dere(a||v. A dove(rrerl r|r|sle( We|cored lre lo(e|dr
corl|rderl oelo(e oe|rd d(|ver oll lo r|s rexl appo|rlrerl. 0a(v 3larra(l l(or lre K|c| 3la(l
p(ojecl |r 3oulr Lordor la||ed aooul r|s Wo(| W|lr ra(d|ra||sed voulr. lre p(oo|ers ol
lurd|rd. lre d|ll|cu|l|es ol ope(al|rd |r a po||l|ca||v co((ecl po||lv Wr|cr escreWed lre ve(v
lroudrl ol suppo(l|rd a oox|rd p(ojecl |Wr|cr r|drl oe seer as loo racro. v|o|erl.
urc|v|||sed ard la|rled ov ar assoc|al|or W|lr Wo(||rd c|ass 'oovve('). A se|ecl|or ol Pos|l|ve
Fulu(es p(ojecl rarade(s (ecourled lre p(oo|ers ard lre successes lral lrev rad
expe(|erced. Tre aud|erce as|ed cuesl|ors ol lre|( spea|e(s ard exp(essed exc|lererl
ard opl|r|sr al lre p(ospecl ol |rp|ererl|rd s|r||a( |r|l|al|ves |r lre|( oWr courl(v.
Alle( |urcr. a|| s||ve( p|alle(s. doujors ard sra(l|v p(eserled l|rde( lood. lre pa(lv Was
d|spalcred or a ous lo see sore p(ojecls |r p(acl|ce. lr sla(| corl(asl lo lre d||lz ol lre
role| lre ous l(urd|ed lr(oudr lre (ur-doWr sl(eels ol Lordor's easl erd lo 8(|soare Road.
Wre(e Levlor 0(|erl Corrur|lv 3po(ls P(od(arre ras |ls rore. L0C3P's Cra|( ol
T(uslees. Fal|ra Kouroa(j|. lre reW 0|(eclo( 0(arl Co(rWe|| ard lre 3l(aledv 0eve|oprerl
0ll|ce( 'Adar' la||ed lo( ra|l ar rou( aooul lre deve|oprerl ol lre o(dar|sal|or. |ls elros
ard lre p(adral|sr assoc|aled W|lr |ls d(oWlr |r lre corlexl ol a pa(l|cu|a( po||l|ca| ard
lurd|rd erv|(orrerl. Alle( lral lre duesls ooa(ded lre ous ada|r ard d(ove lo lre
8eaurorl Eslale. P|ars lo (edere(ale lre a(ea |rvo|ve lre v|(lua| dero||l|or ol lre ex|sl|rd
rous|rd sloc|.
we pu||ed up ov lre 'cade' - a sra|| l|ve-as|de p|lcr - lral p(ov|des lre or|v spo(l|rd
lac|||lv lo( lre ||ds or lre eslale. 'Kv|e' rad o(dar|sed a lu(r up ard p|av lou(rarerl lral
Was We|| allerded W|lr a(ourd ler lears o(dar|sed |rlo a corpel|l|ve lo(ral. 8evord lre
p|ave(s lre lou(rarerl rad all(acled a la|( c(oWd ol |oca| voulr. Teerade(s sal asl(|de
rourla|r o||es W|lr roods pu||ed up sroul|rd ercou(adererl ard p(olar|l|es |r ecua|
reasu(e.
'Core or rar. |||| r|r. You pussv'.
4


0u( a((|va| causes ro sra|| |rle(esl. A ous|oad ol su|ls |s a rol oller seer speclac|e |r
lr|s re|droou(rood.
'wro a(e vou? wral a(e a|| lrese duvs do|rd? wral do vou Warl?'
0re ol lre L0C3P slall puls r|s read |r r|s rards. d(oars ard jo|es.
'Trev'(e a|| do|rd lo |ose lre|( Wa||els a(er'l lrev?'
we r|rd|e |r W|lr lre speclalo(s. laces up ada|rsl lre resr. su((ourded ov lre d(ev ard
d(|r loWe( o|oc|s corderred lo( lre|( c(|r|roder|c lerderc|es. A ser|o( c|v|| se(varl
slards rexl lo re. Al lre l|re sre Was Ne|| walsor's |rred|ale supe(|o( |r lre 0(uds
0|(eclo(ale ol lre lore 0ll|ce. NeW lo lre joo re(se|l sre Was corce(red aooul oulpuls.
3re |s corce(red lo assess lre |||e||rood ol ev|derc|rd lral lr|s ||rd ol Wo(| (ea||v ras arv
|rpacl or d(ud aouse.
'A(e lrese lre ||rd ol ||ds Wro Wou|d rave la|er d(uds arvWav? loW do We p(ove |l?
loW do We (ea||v |roW Wrelre( lrev rave slopped?
Tre l(|sr corl|rderl rave 'lre c(a|c' W|lr lre |rcu|s|l|ve vourdsle(s oedd|rd lrer
cuesl|ors. wrer lre lou(rarerl cores lo ar erd lou( o( l|ve ol lrer sl(o|| orlo lre p|lcr
ard sla(l rav|rd a ||c|-a(ourd W|lr sore ol lre p|ave(s.
we ooa(d lre ous ada|r ard rove or lo LoW la|| p|av|rd l|e|ds. 3|lualed |r a deso|ale
pa(l ol wa|lrarsloW. rexl lo lre c|v|c durp. lrese p|av|rd l|e|ds (ep(eserl lre rore d(ourd
lo( Easls|de. '3o|' ard 0(arl Walcr l(or lre s|de||res as lre lear p|av oul a corlo(lao|e 3-0
v|clo(v ove( opporerls l(or lre Tru(sdav alle(roor Lordor Wo(|s |eadue. '3o|' ard 0(arl
cral corlo(lao|v W|lr lre|( courle(pa(ls l(or l(e|ard. '3o|' d|ves r|s le|eprore ruroe( lo
va(|ous |rle(esled pa(l|es Wro p|ar lo ca|| al a |ale( dale lo p|c| r|s o(a|rs aooul deve|op|rd
sorelr|rd s|r||a(. Everlua||v lre pa(lv p||es oac| or lre coacr lo oe d(|ver oac| lo cerl(a|
Lordor ard lre o|d d|rre( oe|rd re|d |r lre role| lral r|drl.
Allerdarce al lre lo||oW|rd ro(r|rd's sess|or Was palcrv. Eve(v so oller a de|edale
Wou|d a((|ve |ale ard as| a l(|erd |l lrev rade |l pasl lral puo |r 3oro. 'oejesus. rv read
ru(ls'.
Tre l|ra| sess|or Was ded|caled lo le|||rd peop|e roW lo do a|| ol lr|s p(ope(|v. Vardv
Av(es la||ed aooul lre Wo(| ol lre Fooloa|| Fourdal|or. N|c| RoWe read ol (esea(cr ard
eva|ual|or l(or 3po(l Erd|ard sroWed peop|e roW lo cuarl|lv success. A (ep(eserlal|ve
l(or V0Rl. Wro rad (ecerl|v Wor lre lerde( lo eva|uale Pos|l|ve Fulu(es. dave a ve(v s||c|
poWe(-po|rl ass|sled p(eserlal|or Wr|cr a(dued lral ar o(dar|sal|or sucr as lre|(s Was
pe(lecl|v ecu|pped lo corv|rce lurde(s ard polerl|a| lurde(s lral vou We(e |rdeed
5
'successlu|'. wrer as|ed Wrelre( V0Rl Wasr'l oelle( ecu|pped lo ra(|el wr|s|as as a cal
lood p(ele((ed ov r|re oul ol ler cal oWre(s re (ep||ed lral lre expe(l|se (ecu|(ed Was
oas|ca||v lre sare.
Vo(e lrar a vea( alle( lre v|s|l rooodv ras ca||ed '3o|'.

For the past seven years there have been many visitors to Leyton Orient
Community Sports Programme. Politicians, journalists, researchers and
practitioners have ventured out onto the housing estates, playing fields and
schools of East London to witness the work of the charity that was formed in
1997. They have consistently expressed their admiration, returning with a
sense of respect and desire to see more of the same, an expansion of the
programme's work, its extension into new social and geographic areas and
dispersal of the 'model' to other organisations. This confidence in LOCSP’s
work has indeed contributed to the emergence of new funding streams and
the propagation of the organisation's work as a model of best practice, which
now reaches out beyond British shores to other parts of Europe and indeed
the Middle East. However, until now this response has been driven largely by
a mixture of intuition, ignorance and excitement in the face of innovation
rather than a substantive understanding of what it is that makes the LOCSP
approach 'work'.

This is not surprising. For it is often harder to convey what works than what
doesn't. We often tend to have an intuitive sense of when things are going
well, as with a football team's performances on the pitch, which is not easily
recorded and which in the moment of its realisation is more readily enjoyed
for what it is than how it might be reproduced. But just as with the successful
football team, good form and popularity are rarely long lasting and indeed are
often found to be susceptible to close examination, since it is through such
examination that others can learn, develop and move beyond.

It was with these thoughts in mind that the research programme, which is
presented here, was conceived. Since for the organisers and guardians of
LOCSP, community sports work and engagement with disadvantaged groups
for the purposes of social development was never a matter for popular
consumption, navel gazing or point scoring. Rather it has long been
recognised as a complex sphere of activity that requires considerable self-
awareness, reflection and criticism. A field of work that often relies upon a
willingness to take risks in the full knowledge that they will not always pay off
but from which valuable lessons can always be learned.

This had been LOCSP’s experience from the moment it began to engage in
estate based diversionary social interventions in 1995 when the sporadic
attendance of the early participants tested the organisation’s nerve to keep
going at a time when this type of work was less in vogue. Up to that time the
organisation was not attempting to reach out to the more marginalised but
rather was focused on those that its staff had the skills and understanding to
engage with. After spending several years learning the language and
business of the social inclusion agenda, and in the aftermath of the
publication of the Government’s PAT 10 report on the role of sport and the
arts in tackling social exclusion (DCMS, 1999), LOCSP had the confidence to
commission this study with a view to better understanding the context of its
work and to inform similar organisations interested in developing their own
interventions.
6

This desire was also informed by a dissatisfaction with the lack of status
accorded to ‘community’ work both within Leyton Orient Football Club and
the wider world of football and sport, which painted a picture of the
organisation’s staff as social workers in tracksuits rather than skilled
community sports coaches. The role of researchers in highlighting these
distinctions and the particularity of estate based sports delivery (Crabbe,
1998) had also had its part to play in securing the confidence of staff to carry
on and funders to provide backing, whilst helping to inform the strategic
thinking of the organisation through this often difficult phase of development.

It is in this context that LOCSP has also sought to evaluate its work with
young people on the estates of East London in ways which move beyond the
conventional 'spot checks' and exercises in number crunching which have
traditionally justified sports development programmes on the basis of the
numbers of participants and other quantifiable 'outcome' measures. The
motivation for commissioning this study emerged from a quite different
imperative to reveal the processes and practices through which programmes
come into being, participants are engaged and results are achieved. The
research then was based upon a long term, evaluative approach that we
reflect upon in more detail later and which saw the researchers develop an
intimate relationship and engagement with the organisation and those that it
comes into contact with. Through this intimacy it does not seek merely to
describe the what of community sports practice but rather to articulate the
how. Through this work we hope to have revealed something of the
complexity and difficulties of using sport to engage with the social exclusion
agenda whilst also highlighting some practical measures for achieving the
best results and avoiding the deepest pitfalls.

In seeking to meet this challenge we have necessarily adopted a particular
style, which may not be entirely familiar to the audience for evaluation
reports. We have sought not merely to present 'findings' and conclusions but
rather to invite the reader to get to know something of the 'feel', the 'smell'
and the 'taste' of this kind of work. At the same time we are conscious of the
need to develop a new conceptual vocabulary for the discussion of these
kinds of intervention. As such, after providing a historical and theoretical
context for our work we present the substantive elements of our research
here by attempting to weave our analysis and theorisations alongside what
we hope are compelling narratives intended to bring the activities we have
observed and engaged with vividly to life. The audience for this report will
best judge our success. These passages - or ethnographic interludes - have
been separated from the more reflective discussion, theoretical consideration
and conclusions through the use of an alternative font and indentation of the
text.

Key issues: For the past seven years there have been many visitors to
Leyton Orient Community Sports Programme. Politicians, journalists,
researchers and practitioners have ventured out onto the housing estates,
playing fields and schools of East London to witness the work of the charity
that was formed in 1997.
7
Section 2. Putting LOCSP’s work into context: A historical and
theoretical review

Sport, social policy and social control

Arts and sport, and cultural and recreational activity more widely, can
contribute to neighbourhood renewal and make a real difference to
health; crime; employment and education in deprived communities.
(DCMS, 1999)

This statement is but one of many recent assertions by government and non-
governmental bodies which uncritically attests to the imbued properties of
sport. There remains a widespread tendency within sporting, political and
popular discourses to regard sport as an entirely wholesome activity for
young people to be involved in, an activity which is conferred with a whole
series of positive attributes to the exclusion of the social ills facing wider
'society'. As the Labour Party put it before the 1997 General Election:

sport can be crucial to the social and personal development of young
people. By participating in sporting activities they can learn to
differentiate between good and bad behaviour (Labour Party, 1997:8).

There is nothing new about this approach. Arguably, organised modern sport
owes its very existence to the Victorians’ attempts to influence and shape
attitudes within British public schools and to service the needs of the Empire
through the concept of ‘Muscular Christianity’. More pertinently, during the
nineteenth century ‘sports were to play a major part...in the creation of a
healthy, moral and orderly workforce’ and in shaping the values and
behaviour of working class youth (Holt, 1989: 136), as the introductory
comments to a late nineteenth century edition of Cassells Book of Sports and
Pastimes reveals:

The benefits of athletic and other manly (sic) exercises, from an
educational as well as a recreative point of view, are now very generally
recognised. There is no better means of promoting a healthy action of
the body or of bidding defiance to the doctor than a moderate
indulgence in sports and pastimes. But not only are these exercises of
supreme importance in maintaining a vigorous state of health in our
boys, they have also a peculiar and decided value in what may be
called a moral sense... “A boy”, says Mr. Lyttelton, “is disciplined by
athletics in two ways: by being forced to put the welfare of the common
cause before selfish interests, to obey implicitly the word of command,
and act in concert with the heterogeneous elements of the company he
belongs to; and secondly, should it so turn out, he is disciplined by
being raised to a post of command, where he feels the gravity of
responsible office and the difficulty of making prompt decisions and
securing a willing obedience. (Cassell, not dated: iii)

Without necessarily seeking to do so, social considerations of sport have
tended to be framed by ‘functionalist’ narratives such as this which
emphasise what sport does to people and for ‘society’. It is this model which
most immediately comes to mind when considering the sources of the Labour
Party’s declaration that it ‘will develop sporting opportunities for young people
8
to help them foster a sense of their value to society and to help tackle
problems of youth crime’ (Labour Party, 1997:4).

In keeping with this position a number of North American studies have over
the years provided some empirical support for the notion that participation in
sport serves as a deterrence to delinquency and ‘deviance’ (Schafer, 1969;
Buhrmann, 1977; Hastad et al, 1984). Nevertheless, there remains little
definitive evidence of a direct causal relationship between involvement in
sports, moral outlook and criminal or deviant behaviour (Long & Sanderson,
2001; Collins et al, 1999; Snydor, 1994; Robins, 1990; Coalter, 1989).
Robins’ review of eleven sport based crime prevention schemes concluded
that ‘information about outcomes was hard to come by’ (1990:92) whilst
Coalter (1989) felt ‘unable to conclude that the correlation: high level of
sports participation/low level of delinquency holds good in the UK’. What
evidence is available tends to come from internal assessment or isolated
independent evaluation and does not clarify what causes measured
reductions in crime (see Collins et al, 1999).

Whilst Long & Sanderson 'are persuaded that there is sufficient cause to
believe that community benefits can be obtained from sport and leisure
initiatives' they recognise that these may be small scale, exclusionary and
isolated (2001:201). Furthermore, whilst there are reasons why sport and
leisure activity might influence levels of crime, the objectives and rationales
have rarely been made clear, leaving the measurement of outcomes an
uncertain exercise.

In his review of understandings as to why sport and leisure programmes
might reduce crime, Nichols (1996) does outline several possible rationales
including:

• reduction in the ability to take part in crime
• meeting a need for excitement
• increases in self esteem
• the development of cognitive competencies
• the importance of role models
• provision of employment opportunities.

More classically, Purdy & Taylor (1983) highlight how sport can generate
self-esteem that participants are unable to obtain from educational
achievement or other sources of social status. However, in her review of the
literature on wider rehabilitation and treatment strategies, Mckenzie (1997)
argues that interventions must directly address characteristics that can be
changed and that are associated with an individual’s criminal behaviour. The
factors identified as fitting into this category include attitudes, cognitions,
employment behaviour, education, peer groups, authority, substance abuse
and relationships. She suggests that raising self-esteem is less important.
The point being that in some situations the drug use-crime nexus which often
characterises the circumstances of those that LOCSP works with can itself
provide meaning and purpose in the absence of ‘legitimate’ structured
opportunities (Pearson, 1987) and generate status and identity in contexts of
social and economic exclusion (Burr, 1987; Gilman & Pearson, 1991; Young,
1999).

9
As such, whilst one of the principle reasons why sport is used in crime
prevention and diversionary interventions is because many young people
enjoy it, this is often for much the same reason that they might also choose to
use illicit drugs (Coffield and Gofton, 1994; Measham, et al, 1994; Parker, et
al, 1995, 1998), become involved in criminal activity (Gilman & Pearson,
1991) or even sport related violence (Armstrong, 1998). Indeed British sports
sociologists working within the 'figurational' tradition (Elias & Dunning, 1986)
have long focused on the historical transfer of emotions from direct
participation in acts of aggression and violence to the mimicry of ‘danger’
through sport and, indeed, the increasing preference for the visual pleasure
of witnessing more controlled acts in the sports arena (Smith, 1983).

It is increasingly clear then that in terms of the degree to which sport can
influence other forms of behaviour, we need to recognise that the sorts of
experience people seek through sport, namely emotional satisfaction,
exhilaration, confrontation, financial reward, sexual desire, the overcoming of
fear and the joy of celebration can also be accessed through crime and drug
use. Indeed it could be argued that whilst formal images of sport may be
policed through societal expectations, which stress its wholesome and
socially cohesive nature, at the level of experience it is precisely sports’
legitimation of ‘deviance’, which is most compelling (Blackshaw & Crabbe,
2004). Sport provides environments in which acts of violence, confrontation
and drug use are licensed in ritualised fashion and given meaning through
their association with the hegemonic masculine ideals of toughness, heroism
and sacrifice. Rojek makes the point that not everybody is in the game of
rationing everyday life to comply with the ordinariness of the dominant moral
order and from this standpoint it is the behaviour of ordinary people, which
'seems transparently inauthentic and life-destroying’ (2000: 192).

As such, sporting activity itself does not necessarily offer the most
appropriate means for challenging 'deviant' behaviour. As Lasch argued
‘Games quickly lose their charm when forced into the service of education,
character development, or social improvement’ (1978: 100). Nevertheless,
Clarke and Critcher (1985), in their seminal study The Devil Makes Work,
recognised the widespread interpretation of sport’s role in challenging
‘deviant’ behaviour amongst unoccupied working class young men. They
suggested that state sponsored sports interventions are organised around
the perceived need to deal with the ‘problem of working class youth’ by
keeping them ‘off the street’, ‘under supervision’ and with ‘something
constructive to do’ (1985:135), albeit in the context of cultural contestation
between dominant and subordinate groups (p.227).

Key issues: There remains a widespread tendency within sporting, political
and popular discourses to regard sport as an entirely wholesome activity for
young people to be involved in. Sporting activity itself does not necessarily
offer the most appropriate means for challenging 'deviant' behaviour.

The new criminology, social change, exclusion and control

In part, the contemporary favouring of such interventions can be related to
the concern amongst criminologists to address wider populist concerns
associated with unoccupied youth and the rising levels of ‘crime’, which they
imply. For Jock Young:
10

the new administrative criminology... explains crime as the inevitable
result of a situation where the universal state of human imperfection is
presented with an opportunity for misbehaviour. The task is to create
barriers to restrict such opportunities and to construct a crime
prevention policy, which minimises risks and limits the damage. An
actuarial approach is adopted which is concerned with the calculation
of risk rather than either individual guilt or motivation…It is not an
inclusionist philosophy which embraces those found guilty of an
offence and attempts to reintegrate them into society. Rather it is an
exclusionist discourse which seeks to anticipate trouble whether in the
[sports ground] or in the prison and to exclude and isolate the
deviant…Such an administrative criminology is concerned with
managing rather than reforming, its ‘realism’ is that it does not pretend
to eliminate crime but to minimise risk.’ (1999:45-46)

Lianos with Douglas (2000: 103) suggest that this ‘new attitude to deviance is
a side effect of new forms of social regulation’ based on dangerization, which
has seen society develop ‘the tendency to perceive and analyse the world
through categories of menace’ (p110) and invokes the tacit assumption that
the world ‘out there’ is unsafe and that as a consequence it becomes
essential ‘to continuously scan and assess public and private spaces in terms
of potential threats by other people’ (p111).

Indeed, what the anxious majority cannot abide above anything else ‘is
difficult people and dangerous classes which it seeks to build in the most
elaborate defences against' (Young, 1999: 390). For Young, with the
development of a risk society what we see is the dwindling tolerance for
difficulty and difficult people. Basically calculations of risk (Beck 1992) take
over issues of responsibility for social inequality, and at the same time,
difficult ‘problem’ populations replace the ‘deserving’ and ‘undeserving’ poor
as targets of dangerization.

This approach to managing risk reflects what Feeley and Simon (1992: 188)
have described as the new penology, which is basically concerned with the
efficient administration of danger in contemporary societies. The problem is
that this approach not only increases public perceptions about the probability
of crime, but it also provides the general public with tangible targets of
dangerousness that ‘can be handled, tied down, locked up, neutered, even
destroyed – unlike most threats, which tend to be disconcertingly diffuse,
oozy, evasive, spilt all over the place, unpinpointable' (Bauman, 1999: 10).

For Bauman our contemporary condition is constructed through a consumer
society and if we are all consumers, it is only the minority, the ‘flawed
consumers’ (Bauman, 1995), whose financially subordinate position prevents
them from participating freely in what has become for the masses a dream
world of consumption. Consequently, today it is only the poor who experience
the hard edge of exclusionary and repressive surveillance, which re-forges
‘the unattractiveness of non-consumer existence into the unattractiveness of
alternatives to market dependency’ (1992).

In this sense, repression is ultimately manifest in the form of the welfare
services - the reforms that once aimed to destroy the ‘five giants’ of want,
11
disease, squalor, ignorance and idleness. Today, rather than being
emancipatory, welfare services constitute a second-rate and repressive
regime, which have recourse to the expert governmental ‘gaze’ of those
employed by the state: the community sports development worker as much
as the DSS officer, GP, social worker, probation officer, and so forth. Those
agencies which have traditionally dealt directly with the marginalised begin to
withdraw to a safer distance (the police patrol less on foot, the probation
officer relies less on casework and more on the electronic tag, the
headmaster expels more frequently, etc.).

For Bauman (1995: 100), ‘distance’ is of the utmost importance here since it
is not merely used to differentiate ‘us’ from ‘them’, it also allows ‘us’ to
construct ‘them’ as ‘the objective of aesthetic, not moral evaluation; as a
matter of taste, not responsibility’. As Bauman puts it, the principle of this
type of social distancing is ‘making certain actions, or certain objects of
action, morally neutral or irrelevant – exempt from the category of moral
evaluation’ (p149). In Jock Young’s (1999) terms, whereas in earlier times
populations suffering problems were identified and welfare-type aid was
dispatched, in the immediate period it is ‘problem populations’ (rather than
‘problems’) that are identified, and strategies devised to manage and control
them.

In this sense 'social exclusion' provokes an increased polarisation whereby
‘respectable society’ places distance between itself and the feared and
mistrusted members of those outer groups which constitute ‘excluded
society’. Social exclusion increasingly comes to be understood as an
umbrella concept which implicitly presents to society a whole plethora of
issues - crime; drug use; low educational achievement; truancy;
unemployment; anti-social behaviour; broken-down neighbourhoods; low
personal esteem; vandalism; lack of civic pride - as the product of
problematic individuals and populations.

In some ways the development of these perspectives and the jargon that
goes with it relating to the 'socially excluded', 'most at risk of offending', 'most
marginalised' echoes with the work of symbolic interactionists, who following
the path of their antecedents within the early twentieth century Chicago
School of sociologists (Park & Burgess 1925), have been concerned with the
descriptions of the full range of social worlds, or subcultures, occupied by
street corner gangs to beach bums and football hooligans. Within this
scheme of thought there is an understanding that meanings are established
subject to constraints, principal amongst which are the names and symbols
upon which definitions are built. As Howard Becker articulated in his classic
study, Outsiders: studies in the sociology of deviance:

Social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction
constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people
and labelling them as outsiders. From this point of view, deviance is
not a quality of the act the person commits, but rather a consequence
of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an ‘offender’. The
deviant is one to whom that label has successfully been applied;
deviant behaviour is behaviour that people so label. (Becker, 1963:9)

12
A point no better exemplified than through Presdee’s consideration of the joy
riders on the Blackbird Leys estate in Oxford, an otherwise invisible
underclass who’s illegal car chases he argues might have ‘occurred because
for those on the estate, there is no other site of carnival’ (2000:51), no access
to the legitimised transgressive potential of the market place. In this sense,
following Rose, the repressive regime might be ‘better understood as
operating through conditional access to circuits of consumption and
civility…[which] may succeed in producing enclaves of contentment and
encouraging the pursuit of pleasure, [but are] grounded in an exclusionary
logic: those who are excluded – the new ‘dangerous classes’ – are forced to
consume elsewhere’ (2000:190-195).

In the face of this 'distance' then attempts to tackle the ‘menace’ of social
exclusion also become increasingly innovative. In the search for palliatives to
the problem, the state identifies organisations that have not traditionally been
regarded as having a role in social problem solving as being more
appropriate vehicles than more traditional agencies. The funding
representatives or agents of those who are legitimate members of consumer
society, the socially ‘included’, sponsor the endeavours of community sports
agencies such as LOCSP because of their presumed capacity to ‘reach’ and
‘manage’ a constituency of the ‘excluded’ who, have proven increasingly
troublesome for more traditional interventionist agencies. In accordance with
Andrew Scull’s famous essay, Community Corrections: Panacea, Progress or
Pretence (1983) which sought to account for the fundamental shift in the
basis of social control from the 1970s onwards, such agencies are also in
tune with the process of decarceration, whereby the focus of control has
shifted beyond the walls of those institutions charged with incarcerating
problematic sections of the population, namely prisons and mental asylums.

The negative vocabulary newly associated with incarceration contrasts
markedly with the (supposedly) new, ‘community’ based system of social
control. Since ‘community’ is a word bereft of all negative connotations. As
Bauman suggests, it is a word that also has a ‘feel’, a good feel, ‘like a
fireplace at which we warm our hands on a frosty day’ (2001:1). To talk of
community corrections then is to talk more fondly and optimistically of dealing
with our social problems, since crucially, ‘community’ is a word that sells, that
has a market value, particularly when put together with sport and more
particularly - in the context of young, urban males - football.

Key issues: In part the contemporary favouring of such interventions can be
related to the concern amongst criminologists to address wider populist
concerns associated with unoccupied youth. In this sense 'social exclusion'
provokes an increased polarisation whereby ‘respectable society’ places
distance between itself and the feared and mistrusted members of those
outer groups which constitute ‘excluded society’.

Theorising community today

The fondness for 'community' is nothing new and indeed it is in the environs
of East London that this depiction has been most powerfully and consistently
deployed. Young and Willmott's Family and Kinship in East London (1957)
depicted the traditional working class community as 'a place of huge families
centred around Mum, of cobbled streets and terraced cottages, open doors,
13
children's street games, open-air markets, and always, and everlastingly,
cups of tea and women gossiping together on the doorstep' (Cornwell,
1984:24). For Crow and Allan 'in this mythical representation, community
relations are built on 'the warmth, charm and humanity of working-class
family life' (Wilson, 1980:64)' (1994:24). A characterisation which extends to
discussion of criminality in the area in Hebditch's account of the Kray Twins
(1974) and Hobbs' account of the 'independence, internal solidarity, and pre-
industrial characteristics combining to form a community that does not
conform to either proletarian or bourgeois cultural stereotypes' (1988:101) in
the East End underworld. Whilst some writers continue to evoke a strong
sense of community in the midst of the area's social problems (Mumford &
Power, 2003), today, and for our purposes, the vital aspect is the extent to
which romantic notions of community are read against a theme of 'loss'
whereby 'community' is seen in utopian terms as:

1. retrievable
2. recoverable
3. yet to be achieved

In Victor Turner's terms however, Community is not merely seen as a
representation of traditional values, but of various forms of social
organisation and belonging, which provide the possibility for self-
transformation. In this fashion, and despite the pessimism associated with
urban transformation in the 1980s, which is associated with the work of David
Harvey, others have pointed to the possibilities associated with the growth of
social movements and new expressions of community such as community
health initiatives and community radio (Castells, 1983). Such perspectives
highlight the empowering elements of community and are suggestive of the
ways in which 'community' might be utilised for raising political
consciousness through community action.

In this light much recent debate has focused on the notion of
communitarianism and the appropriation of the concept of 'community' for
political ends, which address the idea of belonging as an expression of
citizenship. Delanty's (2003) work brings our attention to Tony Giddens’
observation that on each side of the political spectrum today there is the fear
of social disintegration and the concomitant call for the revival of community.
In this regard he highlights different varieties of communitarianism and how
the concept is mobilised politically. Most pertinent amongst these varieties is
the notion of civic republicanism, which focuses on the notion that citizenship
and public life are central to community. This form of communitarianism is
located in the work of Robert Putnam (1999) and the concept of social capital
- the ways that social groups and individuals draw from the cultural resources
of people around them. The Blairite 'Third Way', which emphasises 'stake
holding' might also be seen to extend from this conceptualisation through its
emphasis on the idea of government through community.

Delanty’s interpretations of communitarianism reflect the limitations of a post-
traditional conception of community. For Bauman this relates to the nostalgic
vision of community in a society where insecurity has become acute. In a
world where community (as Raymond Williams put it) is ‘always has been’,
for Bauman the void is filled by what he ‘calls ‘peg communities’, ‘ad hoc
communities’, ‘explosive communities’ and other disposable substitutes
14
meant for an instant and one-off consumption…’they quench the thirst for
security, albeit briefly. None is likely to deliver on the hopes invested, since
they leave the roots of insecurity unscathed’ (Bauman, 2001). Bauman’s
understanding of community has ‘no other firm ground but the members’
commitment to stand on it.

Delanty's comprehensive review of the wider literature on community
similarly alerts us to the point that it is no surprise that people have looked for
the warmth of a 'community' in an increasingly fragmented and insecure
world and that this has provided a basis for political mobilisation. For Delanty
however, community does not merely reflect a backward looking nostalgia
but an expression of very modern values, which relate to the desire to
experience communicative belonging. As such he suggests that
communities, today, are expressed in more unstable, fluid and highly
individualised groups, which are less bounded by religion, nation, ethnicity,
lifestyle and gender. They are constructed in communicated processes rather
than in institutional structures and symbolic forms of meaning. Today
communities are freed of older cultural structures and the individual is not
tied to one community, but has many multiple and overlapping bonds.
Organised, more like networks, communities today are abstract, their viability
relating to an imagined capacity which demands us to recognise that there is
more to belonging than boundaries (See Amit, 2002) and the exclusions
those boundaries imply.

For Delanty, today, community is not the opposite of individualism but rather
pre-supposes individualism which makes visible a fuller sense of the
possibilities of community. Simply put individuals are not placed in
communities by wider social forces, but they situate themselves in
community. The recognition of our contemporary desire for self-determination
does not preclude the fact that we are always actively engaged in the search
for new forms of solidarity and ways of belonging and togetherness (viz.
Maffesoli, 1996).

It is here that we might bring together the twin calls to community and sport,
which sit at the side of social concerns with crime, disorder and social
exclusion. In an insecure world, as we have suggested, the concepts of sport
and community both offer up a sense of security and the potential for
belonging and togetherness in a manner which is understood as
unthreatening, empowering and wholesome. Both offer the prospect of
shelter from uncertainty and a meeting ground between those on either side
of the rhetorical divide between the 'excluded' and the 'included', the 'criminal'
and 'law abiding', the 'deviant' and the 'normal'.

It is little wonder that the activities of LOCSP have found favour in these
circumstances and it is with the task of uncovering the legitimacy of the
organisation's appeal and impact that we are concerned in this report.

Key issues: The fondness for 'community' is nothing new and indeed it is in
the environs of East London that the positive depiction has been most
powerfully and consistently deployed. Romantic notions of community are
typically read against a theme of 'loss'. Much recent debate has focused on
the appropriation of the concept of 'community' for political ends, which
address the idea of belonging as an expression of citizenship. The concepts
15
of sport and community both offer up a sense of security and the potential for
belonging and togetherness in a manner, which is understood as
unthreatening, empowering and wholesome.





16
Section 3. Talking tactics: The purpose and methods of enquiry

Lies, damn lies and statistics

LOCSP has always been good at creating evidence. It is good at creating
evidence on the sports fields, in schools and on the estates of East London.
Real evidence, real activity with real impacts on real people's lives. It is also
good at supplying the numbers, which provide funding bodies and politicians
with the clearest picture of how far their investments are reaching, but it does
so without passion, without belief and without faith in the validity of what it is
supplying. Putting names on lists, providing numbers and accounting for
petrol expenses never seemed much like community work. They produce the
evidence because they have to. Because it is part of the game. Because if
you don't complete the boxes you won't be able to get the funds to go and do
the work you want to do. Some workers collect the necessary data more
assiduously than others but they are motivated not by a belief in the benefits
of data collection for its own sake but rather because they are more caught
up in the 'game' than their colleagues.

On the other side of the fence there are some funding bodies who know that
what is returned to them cannot be relied upon but that it has to be collected
all the same, because without it they will not be able to tell a story which
politicians and journalists can consume. The bottom line is numbers, even if
those numbers can be fiddled, manipulated, made up, guessed and even if
the numbers of attendees at a sports session do not reveal that a motorbike
has been stolen by one participant in order to get there on time. The more
enlightened always seek to augment such data with the more informative,
contextual, qualitative stories which lie at the heart of the community
development process. For it is in those stories that we are able to understand
why and how sport might or might not play a part in widening horizons,
installing discipline, generating a sense of responsibility, improving
confidence, creating respect and the likelihood that it will do so.

In this sense LOCSP’s disinterest and obligatory attitude towards the
production of what are ultimately subjectively produced and interpreted
statistics does not derive from hostility to the need to monitor and evaluate.
Rather it is an outlook that is underpinned by the belief that long-term
developmental projects require long-term intimate evaluation and it is this
belief, which prompted the commissioning of this research.

Aims and Focus

The research presented here is itself the result of a long term evaluative
framework which has aimed to assess, at each stage of their development,
the impact of Leyton Orient Community Sports Programme's (LOCSP) estate
based, sports-centred, community development interventions.

At the outset we proposed a number of objectives, which included our desire
to:

• Monitor and analyse the development of LOCSP and specific sports
centred community based interventions
17
• Examine the delivery of coaching sessions, educational messages and
sports activities
• Measure the extent and assess the nature and focus of contacts with
target groups
• Account for the ways in which the programme’s target groups receive,
interpret and respond to organised and informal activities and contacts
• Monitor and interpret the role and place that sport plays within the lives of
target group members
• Assess the effectiveness of sport as a vehicle for promoting community
development and social inclusion
• Assess the relationship between LOCSP, partners and funders
• Consider the impact of racial, gender, age and other demographic factors
on patterns of response
• Establish the sustainability of community sport in the absence of outside
structured opportunities

Methodology and Evaluative Structure

One of the points of departure of this research is our contention that
meaningful evaluation of initiatives such as those being examined here
requires a methodological strategy that goes beyond simple quantitative
analysis. The shortfalls of such an approach are increasingly being
recognised across academic, practitioner and policy making circles but
without an associated effort to address the problems which existing
mechanisms promote. The structure of urban regeneration programmes,
characterised by short-termism and led by performance indicators, can result
in evaluations which are, at best, only partial and, at worst, simply self-
fulfilling. This, as Adam Crawford recognises, subsequently leads to the
sponsorship of initiatives, which fulfil the often-limited stated criteria, and as
such:

…can serve to extend a particular vision of crime control…[which
tends] largely to be pragmatic and managerial. The forms of
intervention tend to be short-term and situational. Those interventions,
which are so beloved of funding bodies, the commercial sector and
the media, are consequently accorded priority. As such, they tend to
focus on target hardening, “designing out” crime, and other
“technological fixes” at the expense of interventions, which question
the social causes of crime. (Crawford 1997)

Taking this point on board, we believe there is a need to break this unhealthy
cycle, whereby poor projects are sustained by poor evaluations, which simply
pay lip service to previously set key performance indicators. The ‘tick-box’
mentality accompanying what has been termed ‘the new managerialism’ is of
only limited application when utilised in the analysis of sporting intervention
programmes. At its very best it can produce a numerical record of, for
example, how many participants have not been arrested over a given period,
or, how many were offered full-time employment etc.

However, the incomplete nature of this ‘data’ renders its usefulness limited. It
is only when the quantitative method (used sparingly and effectively) is
utilised to support a qualitative approach that we can achieve an evaluation
18
which communicates the social structures, 'feelings' and context in which
participants find themselves, and in turn how they themselves respond to
such pressures. Returning to our example, the ‘fact’ that somebody has not
been arrested gives no indication as to whether that person has been
involved in crime or not. Criminal statistics are notoriously unreliable with
research suggesting that the most optimistic figure for arrests as a
percentage of total crimes committed is less than five per cent. For the
purposes of our research it is important not just to establish whether an
individual team member has or has not done something, but the reasons that
stand behind the actions. In particular, of course, we are concerned with
establishing to what extent participation in the Programme has affected the
individual’s commitment to a ‘criminal/non-criminal’ lifestyle, whilst at the
same time checking for the effects of other variables.

As such in our approach a variety of methods of enquiry were adopted,
located predominantly around a qualitative strategy centred on the actual
lived experiences of the organisation's staff and the participants in the
selected areas - two contrasting housing estates in the East End of London
and a group of individuals with an offending background from a broader
geographical area across the East of the city.

Extensive participant observation was conducted in the office, ‘the café’, on
the estates, at training sessions, matches and competitive tournaments in
other parts of the UK and abroad as well as in policy forums and conferences
in order to provide detailed descriptions of the organisational contexts in
which LOCSP’s work is situated, the engagement strategies employed,
particular sporting practices and the social worlds that surround them. This
strategy was utilised in order to elicit material on the particular style and
function of sport and associated social activities in a variety of contexts as
well as naturally occurring data on the ways in which sport interacts with
participants and residents everyday lives.

A combination of intermittent life history interviews with participants and
project staff as well as group qualitative interviews and discussions were also
conducted in order to enable us to observe both individual accounts and the
interactional factors, which affect the content of those accounts. These
interviews were in the main loosely structured and in certain situations took
on the form of informal discussions rather than recognisable 'interviews'.
Through this approach we have sought to establish how a variety of
individuals and social groups talk about the place of sport within their lives
and account for the ‘taken-for-granted’ assumptions about how ‘facts’ and
‘realities’ come to be represented and the different ways in which
communicative resources are used (Atkinson, 1990). By combining these
approaches we have established not only what people involved say about
sport, community and issues of social exclusion but have also examined
actual patterns of behaviour.

The research has also included an archival dimension focusing on
documentary sources relating to the role of sport in community development.
In addition we conducted a survey of local archive sources to establish the
social characteristics of the environments and estates where the study was
based, including racial make up, patterns of migration, housing, the local
economy and histories of community organisation. This material has been
19
used to situate the place of sport within the social ecology of the areas and to
explore sport’s relationship with particular regional histories and notions of
neighbourhood.

Having said all this, conscious that, as outsiders, researchers will always be
closest to the staff who’s work frames their enquiry, our objective was not to
reveal life on the estates from the inside but rather to illustrate how sport has
come to find a place within the more seductive armoury of state interventions
targeted at ‘disruptive elements’ at the social margins.

These broad areas of enquiry have been framed by three principle foci:

• Organisational context

• Engagement strategies

• Sporting practice

1. Organisational context

This aspect of the work sought to trace the conceptual development of
LOCSP and to examine the practical issues of financing, organisation and
management. We consider the theoretical and motivational concepts, which
lie behind the development of the programme and the contextual background
provided by contemporary community development initiatives and the
promotion of sport as an avenue for promoting social inclusion. This involved
qualitative interviews with project managers, funders and a broad literature
review. In addition, extensive participant observation was conducted in the
LOCSP offices where the principal field researcher sought to become
embedded within the structures of the organisation, as a member of 'staff'.
Contact with external agencies was also monitored through attendance at
policy forums, development meetings and conferences.

2. Engagement strategies

This section of the work sought to focus on the ways in which sport is
mobilised to engage with young people in the areas targeted by the
programme as a vehicle for promoting community development and social
inclusion.

Regular visits to each of the areas included in the study were made to
monitor the approaches used to engage young people and residents on the
estates targeted by the programme and their effectiveness in meeting the
project’s objectives and the response and group dynamics of participants.
Throughout the period of research efforts were made to build up contacts
with local residents and participants in order to assess respondents’ shifting
attitudes towards the provision of sporting activities, the organisers and the
programme’s relationship with residents’ lives. Intermittent life history
interviews were conducted in both formalised individual and focus group
sessions and through informal discussions and enquiries at various stages of
the project’s development.


20
3. Sporting practice

In order to more effectively theorise the use of sport in community settings a
series of training sessions, matches and tournaments were observed with a
view to developing an understanding of the training strategy, group dynamics
and the group’s role in challenging or re-enforcing notions of self worth,
confidence, personal fitness and teamwork. Analysis of these issues
considered the impact of team and individual performances and sporting
achievements. Crucially this aspect of the research also focused on the skills
of the practitioners in drawing out the potential of participants and their
approach towards delivery.

In addition to the observation of coaching activities, efforts were also made to
extend the research beyond the formal activities of LOCSP so that the sport
interventions could be situated within the broader context of residents’ lives
and everyday behaviour.

The Sample Group

One of the key tasks for the research team during the first year of the
research was to determine which of the teams run through the Programme
should form the focus of the research. The rapid expansion of LOCSP meant
that it was never going to be feasible to include all of the Programme’s
activities in the research. To have attempted to do so would in all likelihood
have resulted in a superficial account and analysis. LOCSP’s commitment to
inclusion and equality issues, and the energy, with which they pursue these,
has resulted in the formation of numerous teams – each with its own
rationale for inclusion in the Programme’s workload. After careful
consideration it was decided that two groups would form the nucleus for the
research.

These groups, who have been engaged by the programme, include
members’ whose status as ‘socially excluded’ is distinct but whose
identification as potentially problematic renders them, for the purposes of
those who seek ‘order’ and safety, essentially similar. Embracing a qualitative
approach we sought to record the experience of negotiation and control as
experienced by the members, and have tried to locate the work of LOCSP
within the wider context of changing social control strategies more generally.

• Group 1: ‘Deependers’ – Consists of individuals who have been
referred to LOCSP through either the probation service or
drug/alcohol agencies. They are engaged in a range of sporting
activities and several participants have been integrated into the
programme's football teams. The main reasons for including this
group was that to different extents these participants were at the
'deep-end' of social exclusion and as such might be thought to present
the most difficult challenges.

• Group 2: ‘Wannabies’- Consists of teams of young men living on two
large local authority housing estates. Many of the players have been
identified by the police and other agencies as being ‘at risk’ in terms of
their likely involvement in criminal and/or anti-social activity.
Compared to the ‘Deependers’ these groups might be thought of as
21
representing the 'shallower end' of social exclusion. One key reason
for focusing on them was to assess whether or not early intervention
is more or less effective than when administered at a later stage in the
development of a 'deviant' lifestyle.

Research Team

In some respects the recruitment of the research team for this piece of work
reflects the wider style of the organisation itself in that the researchers
already had a history of involvement with the programme. This had derived
from both the evaluation of previous interventions (Crabbe, 1998; 2000) and
professional friendships with key workers in the organisation that had
developed through an informal interest in each other’s work. As such there
was a sense in which the research team already had something of an
intuitive 'knowing' of LOCSP, which would assist the research process and
ease the issue of 'access' given the confidence that staff had in those that
would be 'investigating' them.

At times these relationships have been compromised by the research
process as the principal ethnographer's own biography clashed with those of
project staff and as he found himself caught in the middle of disputes
between staff and project participants which, whilst illuminating, brought into
question the researcher's role in the organisation. Even where open access
is provided to an organisation such as that granted at LOCSP it is unlikely
that personal differences and tensions between the researcher and those
they are engaged with will not emerge over the course of a three year period
of study and, in that regard, this investigation was no different. We are
confident however that such issues have not prevented us from capturing a
sense of LOCSP’s work and those that have been associated with it during
that time.

In the conduct and analysis of the research the team has also benefited from
the particular skills relating to their specialist academic disciplines. Whilst Pat
Slaughter works as a criminologist at Middlesex University, Tim Crabbe is a
sociologist with a specialist interest in the field of sport and leisure. As such
our professional biographies brought complimentary skills and access to
resources to the project, which embrace the full range of fields of enquiry
relating to this investigation.

Key issues: LOCSP believes that long term; dynamic interventions require
long-term qualitative evaluation and research

22
Section 4: The social and political context for the emergence of
community sports interventions - Rhetoric and practice

Rapp|ng the rhetor|c

Tre corle(erce o(dar|se(s rad serl oul d|ossv o(ocru(es ra||rd |l c|ea( lral lo( a|| ol
lrose |rvo|ved |r lre ous|ress ol voulr c(|re lr|s Was ar everl lral (ecu|(ed allerdarce. A
sla(-sludded ||re-up ol a|| lrose |rd|v|dua|s read|rd lre |ev aderc|es cra(ded W|lr lre
pe(err|a| p(oo|er ol o(|rd|rd ur(u|v ard daraded leerade(s lo ree|. as We|| as l(orl-||re
p(acl|l|ore(s ol lrose p(ojecls (eda(ded as (ep(eserl|rd oesl p(acl|ce. We(e scredu|ed lo
p(eserl. Vo(e s|dr|l|carl|v: lre lore 3ec(ela(v. lre cra|(rar ol lre Youlr Jusl|ce 8oa(d.
ard lre Corr|ss|ore( ol lre Vel(opo||lar Po||ce |Tre Rl. lor. 0av|d 8|ur|ell. Lo(d
Fau||re( ard 3|( Jorr 3levers (especl|ve|v) We(e lo oul||re |r dela|| lo( lre l|(sl l|re a reW
p(od(arre ol |ed|s|al|or. lre (al|ora|e lral |av oer|rd |l. ard lre sl(aled|es ol erlo(cererl
lo oe |rp|ererled. lral Wou|d corsl|lule a (oousl. |rroval|ve ard ellecl|ve (esporse lo arl|-
soc|a| vourdsle(s. Tre suddesl|or Was lral |l vou We(e rol re(e vou r|drl 'r|ss lre ooal'.
rol 'oe or ooa(d'. 'oe oul ol lre |oop'. Tre corle(erce Was re|d |r lre Corraudrl Roors |r
Lordor. lre F(eerasors ecu|va|erl ol wero|ev 3lad|ur.
Tre d|ossv o(ocru(e p(orol|rd lre corle(erce la||ed aooul lre ev||s ol 'soc|a| exc|us|or'
ard lre v|s|or ol a ro(e |rc|us|ve soc|elv oased or lre p(|rc|p|es ol re(|loc(acv. w|lroul
r|l|dal|or seals cosl £250. W|lr vo|urla(v seclo( Wo(|e(s reed|rd on|y lo pav £1Z5...lre
'soc|a||v exc|uded' We(e rol expecled. Neve(lre|ess lre corle(erce (oor Was lu||. A d||rpse
al lre de|edale ||sl (evea|ed lral Youlr 0llerd|rd Tears ard Youlr lrc|us|or P(od(arres
rad p(ov|ded ra|l lre aud|erce. Loca| Aulro(|l|es We(e We|| (ep(eserled loo: po||cerer.
rad|sl(ales. voulr-Wo(|e(s ard reroe(s ol lre vo|urla(v seclo( |ess p(or|rerl. A|| |r a||
lre(e We(e p(ooao|v |r lre (ed|or ol 1500 de|edales. Tre corle(erce o(dar|se(s We(e
oov|ous|v W|se lo lre lacl lral la|||rd aooul c(|re ard soc|a| exc|us|or pavs |ore
corsecuerce ol (ed|sl(al|or lo( lr|s everl rear|rd |rc|us|or or a ra|||rd ||sl Wr|cr
adve(l|ses 'rusl oe al' corle(erces or a rea( Wee||v oas|s).
Tre cra|( ol lre ro(r|rd sess|or apo|od|sed lo lre assero|ed. Tre Rl. lor 0av|d
8|ur|ell rad oeer re|d up |r l(all|c. wrer re a((|ved re spo|e aooul ||ves oe|rd o||drled ov
c(|re ard arl|-soc|a| oerav|ou(... Eve(voodv Wro ||ved |r 'lre (ea| Wo(|d' cou|d see lral
p(ev|ous po||cv rad oeer r|sdu|ded. lral lre |edacv ol corse(val|sr Was a de||rcuercv
r|drlra(e lral rooodv cou|d p(ev|ous|v rave |rad|red. le appea|ed lo corror serse. as
re oller does. ard p(oceeded lo oul||re lo(lrcor|rd |ed|s|al|or lral oWed |ls sp|(|l ro(e lo
lre lo(re( secl|or ol NeW Laoou('s rarl(a or c(|re lrar lre |alle(. Ard lrer re Was dore.
(usred l(or lre ra|| su((ourded ov a (el|rue ol a|des as re roved or lo r|s rexl
appo|rlrerl. Tr(ee-cua(le(s ol lre red|a lo||oWed su|l.
Tre lore 0ll|ce r|r|sle( Lo(d Fau||re( la||ed aooul |essors |ea(rl l(or lre r|sla|es ol
lre pasl. lre |rp(ess|ve (esu|ls l(or |r|l|a| eva|ual|ors ol lre l330 |lrlers|ve 3u(ve|||arce
ard 3upe(v|s|or 0(de(s). A (relo(|c |ed|l|r|s|rd a sl(aledv ol o|lu(cal|or Wre(eov lre 'ra(d
co(e' ol |((el(|evao|e sou|s Wou|d oe (eroved l(or soc|elv ard |rca(ce(aled url|| (erde(ed
sale Was sollered ov a p|edde lo dea| W|lr lrose Wro cou|d oe sa|vaded W|lr|r a corrur|lv
sell|rd ov rarv ol lrose o(dar|sal|ors (ep(eserled |r lre aud|erce. 8olr 8|ur|ell ard
Fau||re( la||ed aooul |rc(eased ouddels lo( lrose Wro Wo(|ed or lre coa|lace ol voulr
exc|us|or ard lre aud|erce sc(|oo|ed roles |r a lu(|ous lasr|or. ard c|apped |||e rad Wrer
lre|( pavrasle(s We(e dore. 3|( Jorr 3levers oedar r|s la|| W|lr a c(|r|ro|od|ca| l(eal|se
derard|rd lral |l Was u|l|rale|v lul||e lo o|are ard pur|sr lre d|spossessed Wrer lrev
lu(red lo c(|re lo oelle( lre|( |ol oul corc|uded ov |rs|sl|rd lral arl|-soc|a| oerav|ou( ard
p(edalo(v p(ope(lv c(|re reeded lo oe r|pped |r lre oud. le suddesled a pe(|od ol 'loudr
|ove' r|drl We|| oe recessa(v. w|lr Fau||re( ard 3levers rav|rd l|r|sred lre leW (era|r|rd
(ep(eserlal|ves ol lre p(ess We(e dore loo.
23
Tre r|d-ro(r|rd collee o(ea| a||oWed lre aro|l|ous lo r|rd|e. Peop|e eved de|edale
oaddes. Wr|cr oel(aved lre oea(e(s rare. slalus. (ar| ard o(dar|sal|or oelo(e dele(r|r|rd
Wrelre( cr|lcral Was Wo(lrWr||e. wrer lre corle(erce (esured We ||slered lo va(|ous
|eade(s ol o(dar|sal|ors la|||rd aooul lre daWr|rd ol a reW e(a |r voulr jusl|ce. |rs|sl|rd or
lre p|vola| (o|e lral lrev rusl p|av |l success Was lo oe acr|eved. wr||sl lre (oc| corce(l
ou||ds up lo lre read||re acl. lr|s corle(erce ope(aled or a (al|ora|e lral Was corp|ele|v
lre oppos|le. Tre corle(erce ra|| erpl|ed d(adua||v al l|(sl oul lre rorerlur oedar lo
ou||d up as We p(od(essed doWr lre o|||. 8v |urcr -l|re or|v ra|l lre o(|d|ra| de|edales We(e
sl||| |r allerdarce. Trose |ell |rc|uded a YlP Wo(|e( l(or 8a(||rd Wro. as We W||| see. rad
core lo svroo||se lre d|sjurclu(e oelWeer lre (relo(|ca| des|(e lo (eacr oul lo lre
ra(d|ra||sed ard exc|uded ard lre ||r|lal|ors ol ar app(oacr Wr|cr cerl(es lre po||cv
ra|e(s ard p(acl|l|ore(s. 'Roooo' rad reve( oeer |roWr lo ro|d oac| Wrer re saW Wral re
pe(ce|ves as a l(|erd|v lace. 3u(e eroudr |l Was a||: 'A|(|drl deez. dood lo see vou'. oul a||
lre sare lre(e Was sorelr|rd d|lle(erl. ar urcorlo(lao|e serse lral re W|sred We We(er'l
lre(e. 'wral va do|r' re(e. vou'(e rol slav|rd l||| lre erd a(e va'.
ll Wasr'l url|| We (elu(red lo lre ra|| ard |oo|ed al lre p(od(arre ol alle(roor spea|e(s
lral We (ea||sed Wrv re rad rol oeer cu|le r|s usua| se|l. Tre(e re Was. secord l(or |asl.
||sled as a l(orl-||re voulr Wo(|e( due lo sra(e lre sec(els ol Wrv r|s YlP rad p(oduced lre
rosl d(aral|c (educl|or |r c(|re so la( (eco(ded. 'Roooo' |s. |l rolr|rd e|se. a corsurrale
pe(lo(re(. Tre lacl lral ro(e lrar lr(ee-cua(le(s ol lre aud|erce rad dese(led lre ou||d|rd
ov lre l|re re loo| lo lre slade seered rol lo oolre( r|r al a||. le app(oacred lre |ecle(r
so|err|v. d(essed |r r|s l(adera(| oaseoa|| cap ard 'deeze(s' dea(. le p|c|ed up lre
r|c(oprore l(or lre slard ard Wa||ed lou( paces lu(lre( loWa(d lre aud|erce. No p(ev|ous
spea|e( rad verlu(ed lu(lre( lrar lre |ecle(r oecause |l soreroW seered ralu(a| lral vou
srou|dr'l. ard l(or a p(acl|ca| po|rl ol v|eW lral Was lre or|v p|ace l(or Wr|cr vou cou|d
ope(ale lre poWe( po|rl.
'A(e vou (eadv lo( lr|s?' re laurled lre c(oWd. le sluc| r|s cr|r oul. r|s eves ou|ded a
le((|o|e corlerpl. 'wou|d vou do Wral rv o(elr(er ard l do? Core oul ol vou( cosv oll|ces
ard v|s|l lre p|aces ard peop|e lral l do. Tr|s |s |l peop|e. vou car la|| ard la|| a|| vou |||e
aooul lr|rds lral vou a|rl eve( seer. oul ur|ess vou'(e p(epa(ed lo core ar |oo|. (o|| vou(
s|eeves up |||e We rave lo do - We'e'e'|| vou'(e la|| dorra ra|e ro d|lle(erce. Core ard
||ve |l |||e |l |s. ll a|r'l easv. ro ro |l su(e |l a|r'l easv. Tre drello dor'l c|ose doWr al 5pr.
We rave lo oe lre(e 21/Z. Nol Vordav lo F(|dav. 21/Z. You la|e r|ce ro||davs. Tre(e |rl ro
ro||dav or lre sl(eel. ja|| pe(raps. Peop|e ||sler: |ls 3ê5 davs a vea( lral vou rave lo oe oul
lre(e lo( lrese vourd peop|e. You dor'l |roW Wrer arvoodv dorra del srol. reed a
so||c|lo(. la|e loo rucr srac| |r lre|( a(r.' 0u( |audrle( |s rel ov l||lrv |oo|s. l|rde(s oe|rd
p|aced lo ||ps. 'l'r rol a rad|c|ar. l'r jusl lre(e lo( lre oovs. l lo|d lrer l Wasr'l lre(e lo
p(eacr. lral l Warled lo ||sler. Trev d|dr'l Warl arvlr|rd spec|a|: lrev sa|d lrev Warled lo
p|av looloa||. No o|d dea| lo( vou ard re. oul |l Was lo( lrer. l dave rv oovs a looloa||
lear. ard lrev (especl re lo( lral. Tral's Wral |l's aooul -d|v|rd lrer (especl ard lrev
(especl vou. A(e vou (eadv lo( lr|s peop|e. core ard see Wral l see. Core ard do Wral l
do 21/Z 3ê5 davs a vea(....' le does or ard or lo( arolre( ler r|rules o( so.
wrer re l|r|sres lre c(oWd a(e or lre|( leel c|app|rd ard cree(|rd ro(e erlrus|asl|ca||v
lrar lrev rave a|| dav. Tr(ee ser|o( po||cerer jurp up ard ra|| lre 8|||v 0(arar ol
de||rcuerl r|(ac|es. 0u( rulle(s ol '||a(' a(e rel W|lr corlerpl.

Sport and social exclusion - the policy context

The YIP worker's populist appeal, even amidst this gathering of 'experts'
relates to his (albeit falsified and self serving, as we reveal later) claims to
authenticity and the simplicity of his response to the needs of 'his boys'. 'His'
success related to his ability to connect through the provision of football. A
perspective, which accords with the British Government's advocacy for the
24
use of sport in general, and football in particular, in a wider range of policy
contexts than ever before. Through the force of its own presence in
contemporary social arrangements sport has been identified as a key
deliverer of social, economic and health objectives. It can, therefore, currently
be found in the portfolio of a number of Government departments including
the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM); the Department for Culture,
Media and Sport (DCMS); the Department of Health (DoH); the Department
for Education and Skill (DfES); the Home Office; and the Prime Minister's
Strategy Unit, regardless of the tenuousness of its links to those agencies
wider agendas.

1. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

Two key subsections of the ODPM currently employ sport as a deliverer of
social change in the context of urban redevelopment and regeneration.
These are the Social Exclusion Unit (SEU) and the Neighbourhood Renewal
Unit (NRU).

The SEU was established in 1997 to tackle social exclusion in association
with a number of Government departments. Since 2002, the SEU has been
located within the ODPM to bring it into closer contact with other departments
that work on social justice and quality of life issues and defines social
exclusion as:

what happens when people or areas suffer from a combination of
linked problems such as unemployment, poor skills, low incomes, poor
housing, high crime environments, bad health and family breakdowns.
(Social Exclusion Unit website: http://www.socialexclusionunit.gov.uk/)

In 1998 the SEU established a framework for tackling social exclusion in their
paper Bringing Britain Together: A National Strategy for Neighbourhood
Renewal. To establish the role of sport in this exercise, it was proposed that
a Policy Action Team (PAT) should be formed to investigate how sports and
the arts could contribute to social inclusion initiatives. PAT 10, as the action
team came to be known, were to report back to the DCMS to inform its policy
objectives.

In 2000 the ODPM further outlined its vision for the use of sport in
neighbourhood renewal in its white paper Our Towns and Cities: The Future -
Delivering an Urban Renaissance. Specifically, the white paper set out four
key reasons why sport and the arts can aid urban redevelopment and
regeneration. It stated that sports and the arts:

• are a source of civic pride and a positive way of celebrating racial and
other forms of diversity
• can be an important factor in economic success
• promote and develop lifelong learning
• can help tackle community safety and promote social inclusion by
enabling more people to participate in sports and cultural activities in
the most deprived neighbourhoods. (Social Exclusion Unit, 2000:126)



In turn the Government has committed, in association with a wide range of
partners, to ensuring that an accessible and affordable sporting and cultural
25
infrastructure would be in place in all urban communities. This, it was
claimed, would enable the Government to utilise the ‘intrinsic’ benefits of
sport and the arts, whilst also maximising the contribution that both can make
to reducing crime and informing education initiatives.

The ODPM followed their urban white paper with the publication of the NRU’s
New Commitment to Neighbourhood Renewal: A National Strategy Action
Plan (2001). Here the Government again highlighted the importance of sport
to its regeneration strategy and explained how sports policy and sports
funding arrangements would incorporate social inclusion considerations (see
commitments 52-55, Neighbourhood Renewal Unit, 2001: 38)

2. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport

The recent policy development work at the ODPM has had clear implications
for the DCMS. As the lead Government department involved in sports policy
and sports funding arrangements, the identification of sport as a key deliverer
of social inclusion and urban regeneration has significantly altered the
working agenda of the DCMS. The change of focus began with the
publication of the PAT 10 report that aimed to investigate:

• best practice in using arts, sport and leisure to engage people in poor
neighbourhoods, particularly those who may feel most excluded, such
as disaffected young people and people from ethnic minorities
• how to maximise the impact on poor neighbourhoods of Government
spending and policies on arts, sport and leisure (DCMS, 1999: 5)

The report concluded that “arts and sport, cultural and recreational activity,
can contribute to neighbourhood renewal and make a real difference to
health, crime, employment and education in deprived communities”. (DCMS,
1999:8). This was put down to the understanding that arts and sports:

• appeal to individuals’ interests and develop their potential and self-
confidence
• relate to community identity and encourage collective effort
• help build positive links with the wider community
• are associated with rapidly growing industries. (DCMS, 1999:8)

The specific proposals that the PAT 10 report made to maximise sport’s
potential for addressing social exclusion and other socio-economic
challenges are too numerous to detail here. The plethora of
recommendations contained in the document had potential implications for
the work of a range of Government departments, but most crucially placed
regeneration and social inclusion at the centre of the DCMS’s agenda.

The importance of social inclusion to the work of the DCMS was underlined
in the publication of A Sporting Future for All in March 2001. Here, the
Government set out its vision for sport in the 21
st
century and explained
again the role that sport should play in tackling social problems. Specifically,
the document noted that all key funding bodies in sport had been told to
ensure that social inclusion was a key part of their work, and that Best Value
reviews within local government must be mindful of the wider value and
benefits of sports provision in terms of the contribution that sport can make to
26
health, social inclusion, regeneration, educational opportunities and crime
prevention. (DCMS, 2001: 39)

In April 2002 the DCMS published The Government’s Plan for Sport. This
contained, amongst other things, a detailed action plan for the DCMS for their
work on sport and social inclusion. According to the report, the DCMS would
now have to:

• strengthen recognition of the value of sport across Government
departments
• establish and build upon joint sport working groups within and across
Government departments
• establish secondment arrangements with the Department of Health
and the Home Office to develop policies around sport and physical
activity promotion and sport and crime prevention respectively
• increase the recognition of sport as an important factor in regional
policy, especially with Regional Development Agencies (RDAs)
• increase research on the role of sport in tackling social problems.
(DCMS, 2002: 25-29)

3. The Department for Education and Skills

The DfES has worked closely with the DCMS in recent years to establish a
clear plan for sport and physical education in schools, further education
colleges and Higher Education Institutions. It has also investigated ways in
which sports can tackle problems within the education system and,
specifically, help engage children who find traditional education techniques
uninspiring or difficult.

In 1997 the DfES launched the Playing for Success (PfS) initiative in
partnership with the FA Premier League, the Nationwide League,
professional football clubs and Local Education Authorities. Through this
initiative, the DfES has established study support centres at football stadia
and other sports clubs’ grounds and venues. In the words of the DfES:

Playing for Success centres use the environment and medium of
football, rugby and other sports to help motivate pupils identified by
their schools, as being in need of a boost to help them get back up to
speed in literacy, numeracy and ICT. (DfES website:
http://www.dfes.gov.uk/playingforsuccess/)

Whilst the core business of the PfS centres remains the provision of
additional support for under-performing Key Stage 2 and 3 pupils, some
centres have expanded their activities to make full use of available
resources. Some, for example, run revision and booster courses for local
schools, family learning sessions, courses for parents and carers, Basic
Skills Agency courses, adult education ICT courses, 'New Deal' training,
gifted and talented courses, and summer schools. Some clubs’ academy
players also use centres.

The work of the DfES with football clubs as a medium for learning has not
been restricted to establishing study support centres. They have also
produced Learning FC: a set of study support materials that encourage Key
27
Stage two and three pupils to learn more effectively through their interest in
football. These materials, designed for use in schools, can support more
traditional teaching and learning techniques.

4. Department of Health

In 1999 the DoH published their white paper Saving Lives: Our Healthier
Nation which set out the Government’s health priorities for the period up to
2010. The white paper set out a vision for “improving the health of everyone
and the health of the worst off in particular”. (Department of Health, 1999: 2)

The Saving Lives white paper aimed to redefine health policy in Britain by
focusing on the prevention of disease and illness as well as on its treatment.
It also placed ‘health inequalities’ at the centre of health policy for the first
time, and drew attention to the influence that social, economic and
environmental factors have on individuals’ and communities’ health. (DoH,
1999:3)

The white paper’s focus on the prevention of disease and illness led it to
consider the role that sport and physical activity could play in reducing cases
of coronary heart disease and stroke, and promoting good mental health.
(DoH, 1999:3). The white paper proposed that the Government should
engage in policies that would promote participation in sport and physical
activity for all, regardless of class, ethnicity or other factors.

5. The Home Office

The Home Office’s central interest in sport is focused around the Positive
Futures initiative. Positive Futures was launched in March 2000 as a national
programme and is now managed within the Home Office Drugs Strategy
Directorate. The initiative is based around the provision of a variety of
sporting activities (including football) and other opportunities that are targeted
at vulnerable and ‘at risk’ young people between the ages of ten and
nineteen. Programmes are based in neighbourhoods that have been
identified as being amongst the twenty per cent most deprived in the country.

Positive Futures has an advisory group that is made up of representatives
from the DoH, the DCMS, DfES, Sport England, the Youth Justice Board and
the Football Foundation. The programme is currently being delivered through
108 local partnership projects located throughout England and Wales. These
are led by a range of agencies including local authorities, charities, sport
clubs, and crime reduction organisations.

In many respects, through its partnership approach the programme brings
together the elements of the Government's sport agenda, which are most
closely concerned with addressing the issue of social exclusion and youth
crime.

6. The Prime Minister's Strategy Unit: Game Plan Report

The Government's overall thinking on sport was recently brought into sharp
focus and re-evaluated by the joint publication by the DCMS and the Strategy
Unit of the Game Plan: A Strategy for Delivering the Government’s Sport and
28
Physical Activity Objectives in December 2002. Commissioned by the Prime
Minster, Game Plan was designed to rethink Government priorities for sport,
whilst also ensuring that sport is well placed to make an important
contribution to a range of Government policy objectives. (Cabinet Office,
2002: 5)

A possible change of emphasis was signalled by the publication in that whilst
the ability of sport to aid in the delivery of health objectives is underlined, the
capacity to contribute to education and social inclusion targets is viewed less
favourably. The report notes that 'some' evidence of sport improving
educational attainment exists, but that 'evidence of benefits in crime
reduction and social inclusion is less clear'. (Cabinet Office, 2002:15). The
report goes on to state that 'this is not to say [that] these benefits do not
exist', but that:

it is difficult to isolate and assess the impact of sport and physical
activity in these areas. Experience suggests that where such benefits
exist they can be best achieved by using sport and physical activity as
part of a wider package of measures. By themselves, they do not
necessarily produce the desired outcomes. There is a pressing need to
improve our understanding of these linkages. (Cabinet Office, 2002:15)

Key issues: Through the force of its own presence in contemporary social
arrangements sport has been identified as a key deliverer of social, economic
and health objectives.

Putting policy into practice

The emergence of Football and Community Schemes

Backed by £1 million of Labour Government money, the Sports Council
helped to launch thirty nine 'Football and the Community' schemes across
the country in 1978: twenty nine at professional football clubs and ten at
professional rugby league clubs. The concerns that formed the background
to this development were threefold:

• The lack of leisure facilities that existed in many urban areas.
• Issues associated with football hooliganism.
• Falling attendances at football matches.

In 1981 Dr. Roger Ingham produced an evaluation of the Football and the
Community schemes on behalf of the Sports Council in which he made a call
for increased funding and an expansion of the initiative. Despite this move
most disappeared after the Sports Council ceased to fund them whilst others
slipped into disarray. (Sports Council, 1986: 81).

In August 1985, Michael Burns of the Footballers’ Further Education and
Vocational Training Society (FFE&VTS), the educational branch of the
Professional Footballers’ Association (PFA), met with the Sports Council to
discuss possible new initiatives. In the wake of the Heysel disaster that saw
thirty nine Juventus fans die in disturbances with Liverpool supporters before
the 1985 European Cup Final in Brussels, FFE&VTS proposed a new
29
scheme entitled ‘Football in the Community’ (FiTC) which they wished to
launch with the financial help of the Manpower Services Commission.
Approval for the scheme was granted in January 1986 when the FiTC pilot
scheme was launched in the North West of England with the following aims:

• To provide employment and training for unemployed people
• To promote closer links between professional football clubs and the
community
• To involve minority and ethnic groups in social and recreational
activities
• To attempt to prevent acts of hooliganism and vandalism
• To maximise the use of facilities at football clubs. (PFA, 1999)

The main focus of the FiTC schemes was young people and much like their
predecessors, FiTC schemes were cast in the social and political context of
providing recreation for the ‘socially disadvantaged’ and preventing young
people from becoming involved in hooliganism or other ‘anti-social’
behaviour.

FFE&VTS, the PFA, and other bodies that were involved in their provision
largely regarded the original six FiTC schemes as a success. By 1987 a
further ten football clubs in the North West of England were invited to set up
schemes, whilst in 1988, with the support of a new Regional Office in
Barnsley, eleven Yorkshire and Humberside clubs established projects and
four were set up in the North East.

At the same time as the FFE&VTS FiTC schemes were being established, a
number of other, unconnected football and community programmes emerged
in the London area. In the mid-1980s, three London football clubs set up
community schemes at the behest of the Greater London Council (GLC) that
were designed to bring those clubs closer to their local communities. The
clubs involved; Arsenal, Fulham, and Millwall; received funding from the GLC
to appoint Community Development Officers with a brief to open up clubs’
facilities to local use and to find ways of using clubs for the benefit of the
local area. After the abolition of the GLC in 1986, a number of partnerships
emerged across London between Local Authorities, the Sports Council and
football clubs that aimed to replicate the successes of the GLC schemes.
Examples include the partnership between Brentford Football Club, Ealing
and Hounslow Council and the Sports Council; and the partnership between
Crystal Palace Football Club, Croydon Council and the Sports Council. In all
cases, these partnerships enabled Community Development Officers to be
employed at clubs to undertake project-based work with local people.

In the 1990s, the FFE&VTS FiTC programme continued to grow and also
began to incorporate a number of the independent London schemes. In
1991, under a new management support framework that included the PFA,
the Football League and the Football Association (FA), the FiTC schemes
developed a new set of aims and objectives that were incorporated into a
new Business Plan. With increased funding offered for the schemes by the
Football Trust and new commercial sponsors such as Pizza Hut, Wagon
Wheels and Adidas, these aims were refined again in 1996 when it was
stated that the schemes should:

30
• Encourage more people (especially children) to play football
• Encourage more people (especially children) to watch football
• Promote closer links between football clubs and the community
• Encourage more people to support their local club
• Maximise community facilities and their community usage at football
clubs
• Provide temporary and/or gainful employment and training for
unemployed people (where appropriate). (PFA, 1999)

These aims and objectives are instructive. As the perception of football as an
inclusive and friendly game was re-established in the 1990s, clubs became
able once again to sell themselves to their local communities, not as
nuisances and harbourers of hooliganism, but rather as positive
representations of local values and identities.

Key issues: As the perception of football as an inclusive and friendly game
was re-established in the 1990s, clubs became able once again to sell
themselves to their local communities, not as nuisances and harbourers of
hooliganism, but rather as positive representations of local values and
identities.

Sport and social inclusion

Similarly, beyond football, wider sports based interventions have been in
place for much of the last quarter of a century. During the 1980s the Action
Sport programme pioneered by the newly founded Sports Council was
targeted at the young unemployed living in inner city urban areas
experiencing a range of social problems.

These schemes, which were later to pass into local authority control, were
characterised by a community approach in that they employed ‘outreach’
methods as a means of contacting their constituency. Later, their remit was
extended from a major focus on 'problem' youth to under-participating
groups, including the elderly, disabled people and women in general
(Macdonald and Tungatt, 1993; Haywood 1994).

More recently, following the re-organisation of the Sports Council into
regional bodies, Sport England initiated the ‘Active communities’ programme
which was designed to increase and sustain sport participation and to
promote continuous improvement in sporting opportunities and services at a
local level. This initiative continues the former Sports Council’s theme of
‘sport for all’. ‘Active communities’ is financed through Sport England and
again looks to develop approaches to sport and recreation with excluded
groups with some of its key aims being to deal with problems such as
truancy, anti-social behaviour, racism and crime prevention. The active
communities scheme focuses on ‘Sport Action Zones’ and works with the
Government Social Exclusion Unit. ‘Sport Action Zones’ are seen as
proactive initiatives that try to create ‘effective and sustainable
infrastructures’ in areas of high economic deprivation to ensure equitable
participation in sport.

31
In recent years the work of Leyton Orient Community Sports Programme
(LOCSP) has been held up as a model of good practice in relation to the
agendas raised in this section. In particular the organisation’s work with those
perceived as being the most socially deprived or ‘at risk’ has come to be
regarded as groundbreaking. It should be recognised however that the type
of work which has developed at LOCSP is complimentary rather than
alternative to the other community based football and sports programmes
which have proliferated in recent years such as inter-school competition,
coaching courses, 5-a-side clubs, disability and girls football programmes,
each of which has its place with regard to sports role in the social inclusion
agenda. The championing of LOCSP’s approach coincides then with the
more general ‘re-discovery’ of sport’s ability to ‘do good’ in a social policy
context, which we have articulated here, and the concomitant expansion of
associated funding opportunities. We review the ways in which LOCSP's
work has related to these developments in the following section.

Key issues: In recent years the work of Leyton Orient Community Sports
Programme (LOCSP) has been held up as a model of good practice in
relation to work with those perceived as being the most socially deprived or
‘at risk’


32
Section 5. 'The Office': Understanding the organisation of community
sports work

A day at the off|ce

ll's or|v ler ard vou dor'l expecl lo see rarv ol lrer |r. You Wa|| lr(oudr lre l(orl doo(
ard '0(arar' Waves a rard ard rods a read. ard la|es lre dela||s l(or a rolre( |r
Cr|rdlo(d:
'll's lWerlv sever pourds lo( lre Wee|. No lre p|lcr |sr'l la( l(or vou. lWerlv r|rules rax
|l vou( d(|v|rd a l(aclo(......loWeve( vou |||e (ea||v: 3W|lcr. 3o|o. 0e|la. crecue.'
'Kev' |s (ead|rd lre |oca| (ad. loca| Pens|oners $raoe 3|noo 0|osure Proresr sc(ears lre
read||re:
'A|(|drl Pal. raver'l seer vou |r a o|l. 3eer lre Porpev (esu|l al lre Wee|erd'.
l|s |eds a(e or lre des|: re s|oucres oac| |r r|s seal. lr lWerlv r|rules. re le||s re. re
|s do|rd lo lre loWr ra|| lo d|ve a p(eserlal|or lo va(|ous lurde(s Wro rave exp(essed
lerlal|ve |rle(esl |r d|v|rd l|rarc|a| oac||rd lo lre p(oposed |alesl exlers|or ol r|s rucr
|auded educal|or p(od(arre. 'Ad' |s sal |r lre corpule( (oor. re ras lre |alesl lurd|rd
app||cal|or lo(r or r|s |ree. oelo(e re l|||s |l |r re scars r|s lavou(|le Weos|le lo |eep laos
or lre |alesl deve|oprerls |r Easl Eu(opear looloa||. Tre lWo Wo(| expe(|erce oovs l(or
ore ol lre |oca| scroo|s lral |s la|||rd s|urp oo(ed |r lre|( cra|(s. 0re sroWs sore |r|l|al|ve
ard lulu(e p(or|se:
'Farcv a cuppa?'
'Zoe' oources |r. 3re usua||v oources |r. occas|ora||v sre slo(rs |r ard rooodv lee|s
corlo(lao|e eroudr lo as| Wrv. wrer 'Zoe' oources |r sre s|rds ard darces lo a 19Z0's
d|sco arlrer. sre ra|es peop|e |audr. Fo( a|| ol lral 'Zoe' |s a o|l ol a s|rdu|a( sou|. sre
does lre oarle( oul rosl ol a|| sre dels or W|lr re( Wo(|. Al va(|ous l|res sre ras peop|e
core |r lo re|p re(. olre( lera|e looloa||e(s lral sre ras e|lre( coacred o( p(ev|ous|v
p|aved W|lr. As Ne|| rad rarre(ed |rlo re( l(or lre sla(l 'll's vou( (espors|o|||lv. vou
croose vou( coacres. vou srou|d |roW Wro |s oesl lo( lre joo'. |rd|cal|rd r|s l(usl ard la|lr
|r re( ao|||l|es.
A|| lre olre(s re ras l(usled rave croser rer lo re|p lrer. oul lrer ada|r lrev a(e rer.
lre|( Wo(| |s W|lr oovs ard rer. Tral 'Zoë' ras dec|ded lo croose Worer lo coacr Worer
ard d|(|s. lo deve|op ard (a|se lre p(ol||e ol lera|e looloa|| srou|d oe |ess lrar su(p(|s|rd.
'Zoë' corrards a d(eal dea| ol (especl l(or lrose Wro Wo(| a(ourd re( oul. lo a |a(de
exlerl. sre Wo(|s ov re(se|l. lr le(rs ol lre oll|ce dvrar|c. sre s|rds oul |oud:
'Vv oaov la|es lre ro(r|rd l(a|r.......'.
3re does a larcv lWo-slep. ard lrer sre s|ls ov lre prore. corpule( ard l||es ard dels
or W|lr lre rusl|e ard ousl|e ol o(dar|s|rd ore ol lre rosl successlu| Worer's looloa||
acader|es |r lre soulr ol Erd|ard.
Alle( 'Zoë' |or arolre( dav: alle( 'Kv|e'. alle( '3ue'. alle( 'Nal' - lre(e |s ro l|xed o(de( lo
Wro l(oops |r Wrer) lre olre(s a((|ve. 8v e|ever lre p|ace ras sra|er oll |ls ea(||e( ca|r
ard l(arl|ca||v does aooul lre ous|ress ol o(|rd|rd looloa|| lo lre corrur|lv. Tre Wo(|
expe(|erce oovs |sorel|res lrev a(e d|(|s. oul or|v sorel|res - scroo|s d|ve pup||s lre
cro|ce ol Wre(e lo do ard looloa||. pa(l|cu|a(|v |r lre se|l corsc|ous zores ol ado|escerce.
|s rosl corror|v seer as a rar's dare) oed|r lo expe(|erce Wo(|:
'wrer vou've l|r|sred lral lo( 'Kev' l've dol sore |aoe|s l reed do|rd |r lre rexl lWerlv
r|rules'.
A|| ol lre lao|es ard corpule(s a(e la|er. oul seer|rd|v rol ov lre sare pe(sor lo( ro(e
lrar lWerlv r|rules o( so. Peop|e a(e lo( eve( dell|rd up lo do soreWre(e. lo arolre( des|.
lo a coacr|rd sess|or. lo lre reel|rd (oor lo d|scuss sl(aledv W|lr oll|ce co||eadues. lo lre
loWr ra|| lo c||rcr lr(ee vea(s ro(e lurd|rd o( l|rd arolre( ru(d|e lo jurp lr(oudr. lo
d|sser|rale dood p(acl|ce al a corle(erce. Varv ol lrose Wro core |r lre oll|ce reve( s|l
doWr. Coacres p|c| up oads ol oa||s ard slard a(ourd lo( ler r|rules lo le|| lrose Wro a(e
33
|rle(esled lral Jorrrv Vasor rad a 'r|rde(' |r lre cup dare or wedresdav. P|ave(s core
|r ard ra|e lrerse|ves a cup ol lea. s|l or lre eddes ol lao|es. l||c| lr(oudr ooscu(e Wo(|d
looloa|| radaz|res lral 'Ad' suosc(|oes lo. ll lee|s ro(e |||e a le(r|rus. a pass|rd lr(oudr
po|rl. lrar a sell|ed p|ace ol Wo(| - a p|ace Wre(e Wo(|e(s co||ecl lre|( lroudrls. (e|ax. p|ar
lre|( rexl rove. la|| rorserse. (ead lre pape(. oelo(e (elu(r|rd lo lre d|(lv Wo(|. Ever lre
'oll|ce slall' dor'l slav |r lre oll|ce a|| dav. '0(arar' does lo coacr. 'Ad' does lo radd|e. ard
lre ooo||eepe(s |eep |((edu|a( rou(s lral reve( add up lo e|drl.
0(arl Wa||s |r aooul e|ever-lr|(lv. 0(arl srou|dr'l oe Wa|||rd |r. re |s or arrua| |eave:
'8usv |r re(e. car'l oe rucr Wo(| do|rd or |r lral corrur|lv'
ll's lvp|ca| 0(arl oarle(. 0(arl d|dr'l relaro(prose |rlo Ne|| Wrer re succeeded r|r as
0|(eclo( ol lre P(od(arre. oul re Was ecua||v susp|c|ous ol lrose Wro ||rde(ed loo |ord |r
lre corlo(l ol lre oase carp.
'l lroudrl vou We(e or ro||dav 0(arl'.
'l ar or ro||dav. l'r |r Tere(|le. |l's |ove|v. W|sr vou We(e re(e..... 'Ad'. We dorra rave
lr|s reel|rd? l've dol a sur-lar lo calcr up or'.
0(arl ard 'Ad' (el|(e lo lre reel|rd (oor.
wr||e lrev la|| ard p(epa(e lre|( p|lcr lo( a reel|rd rexl Wee| lre ra|r oll|ce sees a
corslarl l(all|c ol peop|e cor|rd ard do|rd. Tre le|eprore reve( seers lo slop:
'le||o. corrur|lv p(od(arre.....ves radar roW car l re|p'.
'0(arar' |s l|(sl ||re ol delerce oul as soor as re arsWe(s ore ca|| arolre( prore oed|rs
lo (|rd. Reda(d|ess ol pos|l|or eve(voodv |s expecled lo p|lcr |r:
'Corrur|lv p(od(arre.....ves. lre pe(sor Wro dea|s W|lr lral |s aclua||v or lre prore al
lre rorerl. Car l la|e a ressade?'.
3orel|res vou lo(del:
'Pal vou dorra del lral prore o( Wral?'
lr lr|s space al |easl. lre o(dar|sal|or cores lodelre( ard eve(voodv rusl p|av lre|( pa(l.
pu|| lre|( We|drl. oe a lear p|ave(. lrd|v|dua|s rav oe d|ver |rd|v|dua| p(ojecls oul lre(e |s
ro(e lo |l lrar lral. Ea(||e( 'Ad' dave a la|| aooul p(oless|ora||sr:
'wrer vou arsWe( lre prore vou srou|d sav. 'dood ro(r|rd Levlor 0(|erl Corrur|lv
3po(ls P(od(arre¨. rol. 'A|(|drl. Wral car l do lo( vou?¨. we'(e rol sore V|c|ev Vouse
secord-rard ca( sa|esrer'.
wrer lre prore (|rds rexl 'Kev' p|c|s up lre (ece|ve( ard olle(s:
'Corrur|lv P(od(arre car l re|p?' ard lrer puls r|s rard ove( r|s roulr ard d(|races
|r (ecodr|l|or ol r|s oWr |ac| ol p(oless|ora||sr.
Jusl oelo(e ore. 'Ad' ard 0(arl ere(de l(or lre reel|rd (oor:
'l'r do|rd up lre cal' lo( a sardW|cr. Arvore cor|rd?' 0(arl |rv|les.
ll's a (|lua|. lre(e |sr'l a sel |urcr o(ea|. lre(e a(e ro sel rou(s. oul jusl oelo(e ore lre
sare |rv|lal|or |s rade. Ne|| walsor used lo as|. ard roW |l |s usua||v 0(arl. ll's lre '|ads'
Wro do lo lre cale. 'Zoe'. '3ue' ard 'Nal' o(|rd sardW|cres |r luppe(Wa(e corla|re(s o( do lo
3orre(l|e|ds lo( ecororv p(|ce sausade (o||s. 'Kev' cores lo lre cale occas|ora||v oul rol
lral oller. 'Ad' a o|l ro(e lrar r|r. 'Lads' |r lre serse ol lre looloa|| |ads. Tre oarle( |r lre
cale roves aWav l(or lre suojecl ol Wo(| ard (evea|s sra(ed |derl|l|es ard pasls:
'E(e 0(arl. vou (ereroe( walsv Wro used lo p|av lo( Nol(e 0are Wrer We We(e al
scroo|? 0ecerl p|ave(. used lo p|av |ell oac|' 'Troro' as|s.
'0r|v dore ard dol r|rse|l ore ol lrose |rle(rel o(|des l(or Russ|a. A (|drl do||v o|(d. Tre
ud|v luc|e(. sre rusl rave rad a (|drl sroc| Wrer sre dol oll lre coacr ard spolled r|s
ooal'...
Nol eve(voodv Wro does lo lre cale Werl lo lre sare scroo|. oul lrev lerd lo la|| lre
sare |arduade. we Wa|| oac| lo lre oll|ce. '0ave' |s slood |r lre ca(-pa(| rav|rd a
c|da(elle. '0ave' |oo|s alle( lre l|rarces. re Wea(s a su|l ard sro|es. re |sr'l ore ol lre
|ads.


34
Corridors, portakabins and boardrooms: The emergence of LOCSP

Portakabins are intended to house, temporarily, those who have the practical
skills to build upon the ruins of yesterday’s crumbled edifices a bright new
tomorrow. Portakabins are not designed for comfort but imply progress. They
serve the purpose of providing crude shelter for those who have bigger
projects in mind, other homes to go to, more substantial buildings to
construct. They represent a stopgap or stepping stone even if some are left
hanging around longer than was ever intended.

The portakabin, which housed Leyton Orient’s Football in the Community
scheme between 1995 and 2000, fitted into this category, its occupation by
the community scheme almost representing an extension of its life in the face
of the stalled redevelopment of the stadium. Precariously perched on the
north-east perimeter of the ground it almost seemed to spill into the gutter of
Brisbane Road, apparently speaking volumes for the football club’s
perception of where the scheme fitted into the grander scheme of things.

There was never enough room in the place, which was always cluttered with
bags of balls, cones and boxes of leaflets. In winter the office was too cold,
on hot summers days it became a rat-infested sweatbox. Workers and
coaches were instructed to stay away from the place whenever it was
practically possible. But then even from the earliest days, before the
portakabin, when Neil Watson became the club's first community officer and
had a desk in the corridor of the main stand, the vision of what constituted ‘a
day at the office’ had little to do with conventional notions of ‘putting in a nine
to five’.

This had much to do with the architect of the new programme who, according
to the conventions of both professional football and sports development,
might have appeared unqualified. Unassuming and seemingly naïve, a
teacher on the run from the classroom, within the realm of football and
community in 1989 his was not a face that had an obvious fit. At a time when
football in the community was rapidly becoming the preserve of former
professional footballers and a conventional sports development agenda, the
chosen community officer offered something different, which had been
learned during his time coaching for the community programme at Brentford.

Presented with a brief to target and engage social groups which were
traditionally excluded from mainstream sport - young people, girls and
women, people with disabilities, over fifties and minority ethnic groups - as
well as improving the image of the club (which like many others at the time
was tainted by the presence of hooliganism and overt racism) a mission soon
emerged. At that time it was a mission to get as many people as possible
involved in the scheme's programmes and people from the parts of the
borough who had traditionally not engaged with organised football courses in
particular. As Neil recalls:

It was that…dual role I guess, of trying to keep the Club happy by
getting them a better public image, enlisting the support of one or two
more players and getting a bigger and better behaved crowd...but all
that was… fairly nebulous in a sense and the second thing was about -
which interested me much more - was about how to use the name of
35
the football club to engage with some of the kids around kind of
Waltham Forest really. Because the local authority had run football
courses before that, but only ran them in Chingford, a place called the
Jubilee Sports Ground, where we still run them now, but they used to
get 70-80-90 kids going along with their packed lunches and the
parents would drop them off and pick them up. And I remember
running a course really early on in Leyton and people telling me "kids
in the South of the Borough don't really do that kinda stuff". And me
thinking that my…mission was to prove them wrong, that kids would
actually come along and get involved all over the Borough and again
just running...twenty courses a week in the Borough, every hard play
area, grassed fields, whatever just running loads and loads of courses,
five-a-side clubs, after school clubs...and it slowly became a kind of
mission to get as many people involved.

In this sense, in its earliest incarnation, LOCSP operated on a modus
operandi, which was not dissimilar to the other football in the community
schemes emerging around the country. It sold coaching courses to children
who craved association with professional football. Kids liked to play football,
even to dream of doing it for a job, whilst parents liked to believe that their
kids could do anything. In keeping with wider understandings of the term,
'community' scheme had a nice ring to it, easier on the ear than commercial
exploiter of little boys’ dreams. Whilst community schemes up and down the
country at the time were premised on an economic imperative that suggested
little more, what was different in Leyton was the determination to extend
provision into the zones of exclusion and the personal sacrifices that went
with it:

The fact we organised twenty courses meant that kids could literally
walk, you know, in the Borough, to a course, literally it was on…bits of
concrete in places in Leytonstone, you know there's no grass around
there, its difficult to run a course, and we just used to run a coaching
course every afternoon and send someone down and we never got
more than fifteen, ten-fifteen kids on a course. But you know, so what,
there was fifteen kids doing football and there was another twenty
there, and there was a hundred up here, we used to get six or 700 on a
half-term coaching course doing football. Not for the whole week, not
for the whole day, but at the end of the week when we looked back at
the register there was a massive amount of kids [who had been] with
us. But I mean it's also a thing I guess, and I…mentioned this to staff
about the kind of commitment it took to run that, because I was in here
every single morning by about, certainly never any later than
6.30...with the cleaner, doing about two or three hours work in the
morning before anybody else had arrived...and the rest of the day I
was out in schools, coaching on school yards and doing all that
stuff...and then I was back here at five or six o'clock and then I was
staying here with reserve matches, first team matches, youth team
matches, and quite often sleeping here...I mean I almost felt it needed
that, it wasn't the kind of job at that stage that you could just dip in and
out of, turn up at nine and expect to…achieve what you needed to
achieve by five, so it was literally…you know a thirteen, fourteen hour
day... [but] I guess a lot of people saw the potential very early on, a lot
of people stuck around and… got it the way it is today...It ain't just me,
36
its all for another ten people involved who have spent the majority of
their working life here, over the last ten years, one way or another.

Despite the enthusiasm, which was underpinned by a sense of doing work
that was fun with people who got on well together and had few other
commitments more than any ideological principles, it was never a linear
progression towards today's more professional outfit. Whilst lauded for its
success in engaging with previously marginalised groups, funding crisis
followed funding crisis, which acted as a wake up call to those involved. It
taught the lesson that just doing a good job is never enough and the
importance of strategic thinking, the need to be pro-active in planning for the
future rather than merely reactive.

The point was reinforced when the sports promoter Barry Hearn famed for
his promotion of the snooker legend Steve Davis and the boxing rivals Chris
Eubank and Nigel Benn, bought the club for a fiver in 1995 and promised that
Brisbane Road would never again have an empty space on the terraces.
Hearn never missed the opportunity in the media clamour that surrounded his
latest venture to proclaim the beginnings of a philanthropic adventure, which
sought to reclaim the Orient as a football club that properly represented the
East End constituency, which spawned it. Declaring to the local press at the
time that:

I was born in Dagenham, so Leyton Orient is my local side - I was
there when I was ten years old - and I believe that there is a role that
supporters like me can play in the game...There is a tremendous buzz
in working at this level, developing local talent working with the
community, and having some fun. It is the greatest challenge that I
have ever had in my sporting life - in twenty five years of involvement.
What is the challenge? The challenge is not Premier League - it is
survival, firstly, and, secondly, contributing something to the local
community. Premiership football is not the people's game anymore -
we are - clubs like Orient are the people's game.

Outside the formalities of public relations rhetoric it was clear that other
memories of childhood had informed a different sentiment when he told the
director of the community programme that in reality he “never went to football
when I was a nipper. Orient was off the map, for mugs. It was round the
corner, but so was the Salvation Army”. Despite the populist appeal to all
things 'community' it was clear that things were going to change and that this
time the community programme would need to be prepared.

As such whilst Hearn was later to declare that "we should be a focal part of
the community and an asset to the community, and hopefully the community
can become an asset to us. It is a partnership" (Sprott, 2002) Watson was
quick to the chase. He was convinced that unless he was made an offer that
made commercial sense Hearn would fold the community scheme, viewing it
as an expensive and unnecessary luxury, having already moved it from the
Main Stand sponsors room to the aforementioned portakabin where the club
shop, whose status had been raised in the new scheme of things, had
previously been housed. As he recalls:

37
Over the course of the next two or three months I realised... what he
meant was "I'm not interested in the community and I'm not going to
fund it, but…I'll let you down slowly"...So I realised at that stage that
the football club was going to become much more of a commercial
animal, and I guess I spotted a chance to get out ...So what I said was,
you know "Barry here's an option for you to get out, let us do what we
want and there'll be a trade-off because we'll never come to you for
another penny again". So it just made sense really...it was all thought
through over a period of a year or two, and me and Grant kind of
throwing this around, and…knowing where it was going over a period
of time and knowing that the Club weren't really committed to the
community scheme. And us…saying "look there's got to be a better
way of doing things" and so we just started thinking, if this is our
business, we'll run it, because we think we're the best people to run it
and then we'll make all the decisions on it.

In principle the potential benefits of the new arrangements were clear
enough, provided the community programme maintained premises at the
club. The scheme would benefit from its association with a professional
football club without being tied to its commercial objectives or playing second
fiddle to the primary focus of all professional clubs, in the shape of the on
pitch performances of the 'first team'. On the other hand the club lost
responsibility for what appeared to be a commercially fragile but politically
sensitive operation whilst gaining the attributed benefit of the free publicity
associated with the community scheme's work, along with the prospect of
rental for the premises planned for the club's proposed new stand.
Furthermore, with a ‘smaller’ club like Leyton Orient there was far less
prospect of an independent organisation working from within the club’s
premises and carrying its name damaging the ‘brand’ in the way that might
be feared at a big, media feeding frenzy like Manchester United. Indeed
whilst funders might also shy away from donating money to a big Premiership
club with a ‘loadsamoney’ image, it was precisely the association with football
at a club with a more local, ‘community’ feel that was likely to lever in
resources at Leyton.

Barry Hearn saw the sense in what was being suggested and, over the
course of the next two years, things developed to the point where in 1997
Leyton Orient Community Sports Programme was constituted as a not for
profit company limited by guarantee with its own board of eight trustees.
These trustees themselves were not recruited blindly and reflected the
organisation's desire to engage with the issues and communities that
surrounded them. Board members were in the main living and or working in
the area and were invited to volunteer their expertise rather than see
membership as an extension of their own job descriptions, which can be the
case on management committees in the voluntary sector. As such they were
expected to ‘bat for’ LOCSP, to offer a commitment without prejudice. A
position, which, as we discuss below, was validated by subsequent events,
which exposed the tensions, associated with more conventional
arrangements.

Key issues: In its earliest incarnation, LOCSP operated on a modus
operandi, which was not dissimilar to the other football in the community
schemes emerging around the country. What was different was the
38
determination to extend provision into the zones of exclusion. Following Barry
Hearn's takeover of Leyton Orient in 1997 Leyton Orient Community Sports
Programme was constituted as a not for profit company limited by guarantee
with its own board of eight trustees.

Time for long trousers: Gaining independence and autonomy

The management philosophy, which was to be applied to the nascent
organisation, was in part inspired by the co-operative approach espoused in
Maverick: Success Story Behind the World's Most Unusual Work Place, a
business book by the Brazilian industrialist Ricardo Semler. In essence what
was taken from the model was its far from unique emphasises on a
management style which tries to empower workers to make their own
decisions within a ‘flat’ operational structure, which is fundamentally
oppositional to traditional bureaucratic hierarchies. Whilst Watson recognised
that he would necessarily be the ‘boss’, guide the direction of the
organisation, make crucial decisions, sack and hire people, etc. individual
employees would nevertheless be encouraged to take charge of their own
projects. There would be no space for time-wasting ceremonies of deferment
and false praise – a meritocracy of sorts was envisaged where people would
be given certain concessions of time and space to prove their contribution
worthy of the overall project. As Watson put it whilst he was running LOCSP:

The whole business was…broken down into little components and
that's what I think, well we haven't got it here, but that's what I'd like to
have, you know, get the staff to run the football schemes well, alright,
you run them brilliantly, run them how you want but go run them so that
you get more money, so that they're your football schemes and not
mine necessarily. I don't care as long as the work gets done, I don't
need to have fifty staff, I don't need to, its not an ego trip, I don't get off
on any of that...I like managing the organisation, but I don't get off on
managing individuals, they manage themselves.

However, ultimately, after researching various options and considering their
likely ramifications it was decided that the best working model that an
independent LOCSP should adopt was that which applied to those
organisations that had been granted independent charitable status. A purely
co-operative model of the type discussed was ultimately recognised as un-
viable, not because its ideological underpinnings had been discovered faulty
but because there seemed to be no space to accommodate such an
organisation in the legal and commercial categories, which attached to and
facilitated entrepreneurial ventures in this sector. Instead LOCSP applied for
and were granted independent charitable status.

Although this was an important and fundamentally crucial development, the
organisation's autonomy remained constrained by the rules and governance
of the Charities Commission’s own regulatory framework. In this sense it is
important to recognise the new boundaries and regulations that must be
observed and which continue to constrain the new and more innovative
projects, which the programme aspires to pioneer. Indeed it reminds us that
for any grand claims of independence, the autonomy enjoyed by LOCSP is
necessarily ‘relative’. For all the spaces that can be exploited and enjoyed
39
there are also walls and perimeter fences, new atmospheres and
environments to be adapted to if they are to survive and flourish.

Nevertheless its determination to follow its own path was clear from the start
and reflected an internal consciousness that the work in which they were
engaged was changing and required new skills and broader horizons. When
LOCSP was constituted as a charity, the national football in the community
scheme, FFE & VTS, were invited to nominate a trustee. Some time later a
potential conflict of interests emerged when minutes of a trustees meeting,
where a discussion about the appropriateness of FFE & VTS's influence on
LOCSP’s work had taken place, were passed to the organisation's national
officers. A dispute ensued which led to the involvement of the football club
and seemed to centre around the national scheme's desire to maintain its
'authority' over its constituent members.

In large part the conflict related to the development of LOCSP as an
organisation rather than personalities or power struggles. Quite simply the
organisation had outgrown the structures, which had supported its early
growth. Having just broken its ties with the club, LOCSP felt unable to live
with the attempt to impose external restraints on their activity and ultimately
the FFE & VTS representative was asked to leave the board of trustees
which, amidst a great deal of acrimony, in turn prompted FFE & VTS to
withdraw LOCSP’s right to be a member of the national scheme. Whilst FFE
& VTS and the club had at one time been significant and supportive partners,
this parting of the ways was accepted by LOCSP as part of the process of
'growing up'. Even when faced with the prospect of the club showing an
interest in establishing their own Football in the Community Scheme once
again, LOCSP remained unperturbed. From their perspective, they felt that
no-body was going to be able to compete with their core business. If the club
wanted to try, that was up to them.

This period, during which LOCSP gained independent charitable status and
its autonomy has been characterised by one of the organisation's trustees as
the moment of realisation that they "had to become a long trousers
organisation". For all the excitement that the Programme’s new ‘freedoms’
inspired there was also the growing awareness that it involved taking on new
responsibilities and duties as well as being subject to a whole new raft of
requirements and regulations. There was a recognition that LOCSP would
have to be much more hard nosed, given the tendency towards assumptions
that community organisations work for nothing, as the Director reflected:

So what we try and do is kind of shift the paradigm I suppose about
what this…work is really about. I think it's incredibly important, but you
can't exist on this…do it just for the love of it almost, which is what
people perceive that you're doing...So we've just become more
business like, more…professional.

Part of this professionalism also involved developing a degree of market
‘savvy’ and a willingness to work on the presentation, marketing and media
representation of LOCSP. Given the organisation’s target groups and the
attraction of participating in organised sporting activity, community
organisations of this type will always run the risk of attracting negative
publicity relating to the notion of ‘rewarding the wicked’. In order to avoid this
40
type of simplistic representation, LOCSP placed a significant emphasis on
media management, both to protect the reputation of the organisation and
also to protect their participants.

As their reputation has grown LOCSP have increasingly been called upon to
host ‘launches’, ‘photo shoots’ and ‘celebrity visits’ in order to promote new
government policies and funding opportunities. As such there is an
imperative to protect participants from being held up in a goldfish bowl, as
'exhibits' from the urban jungle. Equally the organisation recognises the need
to provide access, characters and storylines for the media, which avoid the
sensationalism, that can surround discussions of urban deprivation. One
strategy has been to engage journalists and publications with a more intimate
interest in the work of the organisation and its context to write articles for the
mainstream press and passages for in-house publications (see Brown,
2002). Indeed the organisation’s willingness to commission this piece of
research is undoubtedly partly influenced by the same motivations. In this
sense the media management practiced by LOCSP, rather than hiding
stories is concerned to put as much on show as possible whilst attempting to
minimise the disruption to the core work of the programme.

Key issues: The management philosophy, which was to be applied to the
nascent LOCSP, proposes a ‘flat’ operational structure, fundamentally
oppositional to traditional bureaucratic hierarchies. For all the excitement that
the Programme’s new ‘freedoms’ inspired there was also the growing
awareness that it involved taking on new responsibilities and duties as well
as being subject to a whole new raft of requirements and regulations.

'Ask for forgiveness not permission': Organisational culture and office
dynamics

A symbolic moment in the establishment of LOCSP’s credentials as a serious
organisation came with the completion of the new south stand at Leyton
Orient’s stadium, into which LOCSP was re-located. In comparison to the
previous 'temporary' accommodation it was akin to being upgraded from the
cheapest single in a hotel to the Presidential Suite. The main room is large
enough to house three clusters of desks. Running parallel to the main office
are three smaller rooms which now house a kit room, a meeting room and a
computer office and photocopying room. From this location there is easy
access to the stand's other facilities including the match day function room
for hosting presentation ceremonies and visits and indeed the pitch and
seating areas themselves for the staging of matches.

With such a transition comes the prospect of cultural change. Portakabins
are essentially democratic workspaces; the transient nature doesn’t lend
itself to the hierarchical colonisation of space traditionally found in more
permanent places of work with their boardrooms, typing pools and
management offices. Yet whilst LOCSP moved premises the attempt was
made to retain an egalitarian floor plan. Nobody, right up to the director, has
a fixed desk or table, which they can call their own. Some people have their
favourite places but if somebody else is already sat there by the time they get
to work they find somewhere else. This arrangement helps those who work
there and those who come to visit understand something of the nature of
what is being attempted. Staff are still encouraged to use the office sparingly,
41
to understand that for most of them their real work is to be done outside of its
confines.

Despite the move and the administrative framework in which LOCSP
operates the organisation continues to be run on the basis that staff are
largely left to their own devices. As Watson put it:

All I want to do is appoint members of staff who just go out and get on
with it, and then we chat, if there's problems then we'll resolve it, eh, I
mean... they're the experts, every single one of them [needs to be] the
expert in what they do and they [need to] know more about it than I do.

Staff then are encouraged to get on with their own work in the manner which
they see best. As long as they can be contacted they are encouraged to be
out there 'doing it'. It is recognised that if they can use their time working at
home better then it’s a waste of everyone’s time if they come in to the office.
They are encouraged to take risks, to be bold and to take responsibility rather
than to ask for direction as symbolised in the words, which were once placed
on the notice board "Ask for forgiveness not permission". But as managers,
captains of the ship, both of LOCSP's directors have taken their own work
extremely seriously. A suspicious eye is quickly cast upon those football
development coaches who spend increasingly long hours talking over the
weekend’s results, drinking tea, sitting on the computer, wallowing in the
freedom extended to them:

He’s getting too comfortable y’know, "’Thomo’ you joined the
Samaritans or are you still a coach for us – just wondering like, you
spend more time on the fucking phone than Busby".

Those who hardly ever come in are also subject to critical scrutiny. Those
who miss appointments, who aren’t contactable at home when they should
be, have the book thrown at them. The operation is run on trust; long lengths
of rope are freely available for those who want to hang themselves. Only
those dedicated to the cause, those who can be counted on, who prove
themselves consistently reliable stay on board. Certainly under Watson’s
stewardship there was no space for personal friendships or loyalties to get in
the way of the job at hand:

I’ve had to get rid of some really nice guys…I would just get them in
the office and say that we didn’t need them anymore. When Grant
would find out about it he would get in a bit of a nark about it and we
wouldn’t be talking properly to each other for a few days but he would
usually come round to my way of thinking and things would get back to
normal.

In many respects LOCSP’s 'success' can then be related to its status as an
exemplar of the 'flexible organisation', increasingly held up as the model for
successful business practice in the contemporary era. Its organisational style
might be contrasted with the conventional organisation of public sector
community sports provision through its closer adherence to developments at
the cutting edge of the commercial sector.


42
Table 1: Organisational framework

Traditional organisation LOCSP
Labour as an expendable spare part Staff as a resource to be developed
Breakdown of tasks - single skills Multiple broad skills
External controls (supervisors,
procedures)
Internal controls (self-regulation)
Hierarchical, autocratic style Flat, participative style
Competition, conflict Collaboration
Primacy of Organisation's purposes Shared interests, purposes
Alienation Commitment
Low risk taking Innovation

(Adapted from Cross (1985: 4)

Key issues: A symbolic moment in the establishment of LOCSP’s
credentials as a serious organisation came with the completion of the new
south stand into which LOCSP was re-located albeit subject to commercial
rentals. Whilst LOCSP moved premises the attempt was made to retain an
egalitarian floor plan. Staff are still encouraged to use the office sparingly, to
understand that for most of them their real work is to be done outside of its
confines. Staff are encouraged to take risks, to be bold and to take
responsibility rather than to ask for permission. In many respects LOCSP’s
success can then be related to its status as an exemplar of the 'flexible
organisation', increasingly held up as the model for successful business
practice in the contemporary era.

Transfer windows: Arrivals and departures

Releasing players

In any organisation there is normally an element of tension surrounding the
degree of security of tenure. Despite its humanitarian outlook LOCSP is no
different in this regard from any other contemporary business unit. Its need
for commitment, initiative and flexibility in equal quantity places demands that
are beyond the measure of many, whose limitations are easily revealed in the
midst of such a hive of activity.

It can be quite difficult to adjust to an organisation which is run according to a
logic which invites people to manage themselves and which accords the
greatest respect to those who's work is to be found at the ‘front line’. Certain
qualities come to be regarded as admirable and worthwhile, embodying the
appropriate 'cultural capital' to do the work that LOCSP is concerned with. As
circumstances change though, previously admired talents can appear to be
redundant if they are deployed in a fashion which is out of kilter with the ever-
shifting culture and orientation of the organisation. The confirmation of that
redundancy often comes swiftly and can appear ruthless.

Throughout the life of LOCSP individuals have come and gone as the
organisation has outgrown their capacities. There are those who were distinct
from most employees by virtue of the fact that they weren’t out there getting
their hands dirty, being 'one of the boys', playing football. Then there were
43
those who were uncomfortable with the development of the organisation and
its movement into new areas of work and those who were 'too comfortable',
taking it easy when there was important work to be done.

The philosophy of the organisation is one which does not lend itself easily to
those in search of sympathy. Whilst co-operative, with a fierce collective
belief in the merits of what it does, LOCSP’s work stands or falls on the ability
of its staff to stand on their own two feet, to be self-reliant, to get on with it. In
this sense it reflects the masculinist tradition of the football industry, which is
suspicious of vulnerability, weakness and depression (see Wagg, 2004). But
this has never been articulated as personal. There may have been personal
animosity and personality clashes at times but management of the shifting
staffing requirements has always been strictly about protecting the interests
of the organisation.

As such LOCSP has been no stranger to the concept of redundancy. As their
work has evolved and new skills have been required and old ones have
become superfluous, coaches, development workers and office staff have all
readily been moved on or required to change direction. The flow of human
traffic through the office has moved with the times, reflecting the changes in
the wider environment and funding streams.

Key issues: Whilst co-operative, with a fierce collective belief in the merits of
what it does, LOCSP’s work stands or falls on the ability of its staff to stand
on their own two feet, to be self-reliant, to get on with it.

Transfers

The departure of Neil Watson was an altogether more drawn out process
than many of the other departures from the organisation. For whilst disease
is best nipped in the bud, tackled early and vigorously, losing a guardian is a
more sensitive business. For some time we had sensed something akin to
dissatisfaction on the part of LOCSP’s first director. A restlessness informed
both by the limitations of what was left to do and the director's perception of
his own limiting influence upon the organisation. Neil Watson was acutely
aware that in many respects his departure might be seen as a critical
moment in the history of LOCSP and a threat to its future but his talents were
increasingly coveted elsewhere and he was conscious that if he did not leave
when he did, he might never get the chance again.

In many respects Neil had himself outgrown the organisation. The Football
Association, Sport England, DCMS and others, increasingly courted his
views on the role of football in tackling social exclusion. He was invited to
contribute to Lord Bassam's Working Group on Football Disorder and finally
was asked to join the Football Foundation's Community and Education
Panel. He had also been involved in the consultancy that led to the
identification of the first wave of Positive Futures, a sports based social
inclusion programme within the Home Office. It was Positive Futures, which
finally landed him. Following a number of flirtations it was the opportunity to
take his experience into the heart of government policy and to roll out a
programme of interventions nationally that stole it.

44
It was a shock to the organisation but Neil has always had confidence in his
deputy Grant and his ability to take on the leadership role. In many respects
he saw him as more ideally suited to the task than himself. The way that
LOCSP had been organised meant that there was no 'manager's' job in the
conventional sense of the term. There was a front face to be deployed but in
many respects it was Grant that embodied what LOCSP was all about. Whilst
stoic, understated and happier working with the young lads on the estates
than making presentations to seminars, his suspicion of glory hunters and
indifference to those in positions of 'power' epitomises LOCSP’s 'soul'.

Whilst Neil had prepared the ground for his own departure he was equally
conscious not to leave a blueprint. He had been asked by the trustees to
produce a business plan, which was duly completed, but it was really for their
benefit rather than the organisation. Business plans are basically anathema
to what LOCSP is about and the organisational philosophy, which had driven
it forward. Its work was about spontaneity and the freedom to take risks “to
be able to get up one morning and decide to start a community radio station”
and then not worry when it didn't materialise. Neil was convinced that LOCSP
would survive and that enough key individuals were in place to ensure that it
would find its own new directions. Whilst central to the developments that
had transformed the vision of what community sports work was over the
previous decade, LOCSP had become far bigger than one man. Indeed the
organisation was becoming increasingly driven by the twin forces of the
expansion of major external funding sources relating to the social exclusion
agenda (which perversely had led to the former director's departure) and the
recognition of the organisational talents of its remaining staff on the football
development side. As 'Ad' reflects:

...obviously we didn't replace the director because Grant moved up so
there was a gap there which ‘Sol’ then moved up to fill. So internally
basically we're doing a lot more work with sort of more support coming
from...part-time staff and the existing staff to get things done. And at
the same time, I mean when Neil left, it was just at the time of all the
big money coming through for the summer so we had to manage that
quite quickly and then since then it's been sort of a heady process...It's
been an interesting year because...obviously we had Neil leaving and
then the administrator left and since then two of our sort of developers
have left, but that's all been a part of the transition really.

From Grant's perspective it has been a matter of letting the organisation
continue to play to the strengths of its various members of staff. Whilst his
own workload has inevitably increased and involved more of a contribution to
the institutional face of LOCSP, others continue to do what they do well.

Key issues: Whilst LOCSP’s first Director had prepared the ground for his
own departure he was conscious not to leave a Blueprint. Since his departure
the new Director has followed a policy of letting the organisation continue to
play to the diverse strengths of its various members of staff.

New signings

Whilst LOCSP had long sought to ensure that, as an organisation, its staff
base reflected the age, gender, racial and social background of those it
45
worked with, it recognises that the best recruits are sometimes those who
stumble across an organisation rather than those on the career ladder or who
are attracted by the bright lights of a job advertisement. 'Ad' is one such
individual. 'Ad' is no product of a 'youth academy' or Sport England training
camp. He is something of a maverick. His route into the office was
unorthodox. Having established contact with the organisation in 1997 through
his work as a research assistant for the charitable grant giver, the Sir John
Cass Foundation, his own politically informed fascination with football and its
wider social impact prompted him to develop the relationship when his
contract with the Foundation ran out. He rang, in the manner of Boys from
the Black Stuff's Yosser Hughes, to see if he could have a job. Learning that
LOCSP had lost its administrator he asked if he could take on the role. The
answer was no. So he volunteered to come in one day a week to look at
funding opportunities and was told that he could in order to see how things
went. He was delighted even though it was November 1999 before he was
finally taken on full-time... Five years later he secured the final element of the
£7 million worth of funding which led to the developers moving on site to
begin construction of the SCORE project which he initiated, guaranteeing the
provision of community sports facilities for the people of Leyton for the next
generation.

In some senses 'Ad's' engaging eccentricity exemplifies the point that there
are no models for successful community sports practice, only individuals. As
Neil Watson suggests:

People say, you know, I need an 'Ad' when they come here...they think
they need someone who can find them some money. But I don't think
there is anybody else like 'Ad', I mean I think he's completely unique in
terms of what he brings the organisation, you know...he certainly never
worked for an organisation that needed to raise money before...he's
just got involved in the culture of the organisation. I don't think we
could have got him if we'd advertised and interviewed. I don't think we
would have got an 'Ad', [I think it is often the case that] people like him
find you rather than you find them.

By the same token though, it is the cocktail of characters of great personality
and commitment who provide the blend of skills required to work in this multi-
dimensional field and who have driven LOCSP, encouraging innovation and
a restless quest for the new, the bold and the exciting. There is a firm belief
within the organisation that the next generation of staff will not be drawn from
the ranks of conventional mainstream sports organisations or the burgeoning
army of sports development graduates. Increasingly there is a commitment to
the training and education of the fourteen to nineteen year old participants in
LOCSP’s schemes with a view to encouraging them to work on the
programme. As 'Ad' points out:

An off-shoot of that has been for ‘Sol’ and ‘Graham’ to devise their own
community coaching course, education course, because what we're
finding is we're not getting the sort of people we want through to work
on the areas we want them to work on. They're coming through the
traditional FA model of this is a football coach, this is what a football
coach does, and so we're now writing materials which will provide us
46
with qualifications that we can run courses that will bring through
actually what we need.

Aside from the general courses that LOCSP run, the coaching staff at
LOCSP have developed Open College Network Courses, which are geared
to the needs of the community sports coach. These include:

• An Introduction to the Football Industry and Coaching - OCN Level 1/2
• Introduction to Football Coaching - OCN Level 1/2
• Introduction to Weightlifting - OCN Level 1/2
• Introduction to Weight Training Instructing - OCN Level 1/2
• Football in the community Club Coach - OCN Level 3

The Football in the Community Club Coach course is distinct from the
Football Association's Level One and Two Coaching Awards and is
specifically designed to develop the skills required to do the kind of coaching
work that LOCSP is involved in and covers ten key areas of study including:

• Organisational skills
• Planning & evaluating football coaching sessions
• Sports psychology
• Counselling skills
• Emergency Aid
• Child protection
• Safety in sport
• Organisation of football tournaments
• Improvisation and adapted games
• ten hours of practical coaching work experience

Additionally LOCSP has engaged with Springboard Islington to provide
vocational and practical training for young people identified by the
programme who are interested in work in the sports and leisure industry
under the banner of Entry to Employment (e2e).

Key issues: Key members of staff are often those who stumble across an
organisation rather than those on the career ladder and it is the variety of
'characters' and individuals of great personality and commitment that have
driven LOCSP, encouraging innovation and a restless quest for the new, the
bold and the exciting.

The search for funds

One of the principle complaints within the voluntary sector relates to the
insecurity of funding but so much of the success of LOCSP has been built on
its ability to respond to the needs of funding bodies and its entrepreneurial
flare for finding the next opportunity. In many respects it thrives in this
environment. Whilst he was director of the organisation Neil Watson argued
that LOCSP:

will always be a hand to mouth organisation, you know, we can have,
we've got a three year business plan which talks about where we want
to be and the projects we want to do, but the reality is we've got to find
47
the wages for next month. And that's just the nature of the beast and I
mean we're never going to change that, we're never going to have
anybody that comes in and underwrites the scheme so we can just get
on and do what we want to do. It's the nature of the voluntary sector,
unfortunately... [but] there's also a lot to be said for I think
organisations who live this kind of life where we have a backs to the
wall mentality. We've got to get the staff to know that, you know... the
only way we're going to get more funding to do what we want to do is
by convincing everybody that what we do is worth funding in the first
place. So...yeah, [it] gives us that edge.

This perspective is partly borne out of a personal experience, which had
threatened to bring Leyton Orient's community scheme to a close at the end
of the first period of funding. A situation which was only curtailed by a great
deal of lobbying and negotiating with a series of funding partners and which
set the tone for the coming years. The lesson was re-enforced when Neil
Watson was seconded to work with the ARC Theatre Ensemble for a year on
the production of the anti-racist theatre production Kicking Out and was
struck by the company's determination to secure funding for their projects
and the passion that they displayed to potential backers.

...they used to go there and sell it and wear their heart on their sleeve
and convince everybody that that's what they wanted to fund. And so
we did it...we started to do that, we started to say alright, how do we
make these things happen ourselves? And we started to get involved
in single regeneration budget programmes, only one or two, for the first
two or three years, renegotiated our deal with the local authority, said
you used to give us a grant out of your budgets, we said keep it in your
budget, we don't want it any more, we're going to make an application
for what we think we're worth and if it doesn't get supported it doesn't
get supported.

But at the same time whilst LOCSP is known as a community sports
programme, under this arrangement funding streams dictate its activity,
whether a project is worth £500 or £4 million:

We're kind of opportunistic, you know, if there's a bit of money there,
we think we can do the project and it's good for us, we do it...I don't
have this…sense that, you know, we have to be something, or heading
for something.

With the arrival of 'Ad', that opportunism became more directed, more
focused and more strategic in terms of an engagement with the government's
social exclusion agenda. 'Ad' is not like anyone else who works for LOCSP.
He is passionate about everything that the organisation does, but his passion
is often displayed in uncharacteristic ways. Buried away in a DCMS web site
in the midst of the hullabaloo of the office he might blurt out excitedly 'it's all
about capacity building, fantastic!' whilst others ignore him or shake their
heads happy in the knowledge that 'Ad' is doing his stuff. His is the head
which is peering over the other side of the walls of social exclusion,
deciphering the mystical jargon of government agencies and pouring over the
minutia of policy documents and their associated funding streams. 'Ad' likes
this stuff, he loves it, spends Saturday nights devouring it and excitedly
48
recognising the ways in which LOCSP’s talents might coalesce with the latest
twists of government policy. His enthusiasm is paid back in buckets:

we're getting a lot more, I mean our turnover's gone up from 300
(thousand) or so three or four years ago to 850 to a projected over a
million for this year...We're now far more getting resources from
government related funds, so if it is Connexions, Learning Skills
Council, the Association of London Government, borough grants,
Home Office, Neighbourhood Renewal Fund, New Opportunities Fund
- all these funds are now coming through, coming through government
originally then being fed out rather than us applying to trusts...the way
we're approaching it now is that we've got these hubs of cluster areas
of projects and each one of the staff is expected to contribute to each
of the hubs, because...what we've done in writing the bids is replicate,
just keep on replicating [the search for funds]. So we're saying that in
these areas these kids will be getting this programme and [the funding
strategy is] standardised. So there'll be a lot more cross working now.
And I think we're going to be knocking a lot more of the smaller funders
on the head.

Reflecting on the wider tendency to knock the successful which manifests
itself in English football culture as much as elsewhere, in some ways this
move away from smaller funders becomes unavoidable as the winning of
larger contracts starts to close off access to smaller local grants:

Now we've kind of, you know, [got a] fairly high profile in the Borough
as a voluntary sector organisation that's getting loads of money. Yeah,
we get it from all sides, you know. We didn't get a grant the other week
for £5,000 for a project in Leytonstone cos one of the councillors said,
"ah, they've got lots of money, they don't need any more”. Right
through to community groups who kind of say, “Leyton Orient, they
don't know what they're doing, I think you're much better than them”.
You do set yourselves up as kind of being…important locally and so
people then want to have a go at you and a pop at you.

At the same time though, LOCSP’s bigger aspirations have not always been
satisfied. In 2002 the organisation submitted an application to the Sport
England Lottery Fund under the auspices of the Sport Action Zones
Programme with a view to establishing a bridge between local people and the
proposed SCORE community sports facility, which was ultimately rejected.
The logic of the proposal was in LOCSP’s view incontrovertible. The
organisation's confidence in their own abilities and the sense in ensuring that
the major capital investment going into SCORE was backed by an associated
community development plan seemed complete. Yet from Sport England's
perspective it was precisely this integration that was problematic, as they
were unable to discern the vision of SCORE from that for the proposed SAZ.
In this sense it was ultimately the frameworks for funding and the
assessment process, which were limiting rather than LOCSP’s engagement
with the principles of community sports development. In the end, funding for
the new phase of Sports Action Zones was in any case withdrawn, whilst the
SCORE project is underway with a significant investment from Sport
England's other funding streams.

49
Beyond the mechanics of identifying funding sources and submitting
applications, ultimately the organisation's capacity to secure funds relates to
two principle qualities, which run through its work, namely:

1. Flexibility

The flexibility to move into new areas of work and for staff to move across
different projects. LOCSP relies upon an extensive pool of part-time and
casual coaching staff that can be drawn upon during intensive periods of
work whilst not overloading the organisation with full-time permanent
members of staff who may need to be laid off when funding streams close.
Whilst this arrangement may appear exploitative it is also reflective of the
principal focus on the needs of those that the organisation serves. The
flexibility of the organisation meets not only the administrative needs of
LOCSP but also the diverse interests and needs of those who engage with
the programme's work, as we will consider later.

2. Credibility

LOCSP’s attraction to funding partners is however also located in the
organisation's credibility as a consistent provider of community sports
interventions in areas where other agencies have found young people to be
hard to engage with. There is a track record, which precedes the State's
forays into the realms of community sports provision. That track record is
itself consequential of LOCSP’s own unique approach, which has evolved,
not from a statutory manual but from the lessons learned through the practice
of community sports provision. In this sense the funders might be regarded
as having followed the work rather than the more conventional tendency for
work to follow funding streams. This credibility is also found in the faces of
participants who are attracted by the association with a professional football
club but also and more crucially the skills of the staff they encounter which
we will consider in more detail in later sections.

Key issues: Much of the success of LOCSP has been built on its ability to
respond to the needs of funding bodies and its entrepreneurial flare for
finding the next opportunity. Ultimately the organisation's capacity to secure
funds relates to two principle qualities, which run through its work - flexibility
and credibility
50
Section 6. 'Kick off': Communities, Engagement and Cultural Capital

Defining LOCSP’s communities

Leyton Orient Football Club, where LOCSP is based, is situated close to the
heart of Leyton within the London Borough of Waltham Forest on the eastern
side of the capital. Whilst a considerable amount of work goes on in the
Borough in a whole series of locations, which is focused around young
people, housing estates, girls and women, refugees, schools and people with
disabilities, LOCSP’s interventions extend well beyond Waltham Forest itself.
The estate based activities in particular initially emerged and developed in
the neighbouring boroughs of Tower Hamlets, Hackney and Barking &
Dagenham. More than anything else this is a reflection of the tendency for
government funding of social inclusion interventions to be targeted at the
most deprived areas according to the standardised indices of social
deprivation. Our analysis here will primarily focus then on two of those areas
and a further project whose locus is around a particular client group rather
than a specified geographical area.

From Offending to Employment (FOTE)

This initiative was launched as an element of a wider SRB programme with
the intention of bringing about a ‘sustained reduction in the levels of crime
and fear of crime, primarily in the London Boroughs of Newham and Waltham
Forest’ but also extending into Redbridge, Barking and Dagenham and
Havering. This was to be achieved through the provision of education,
training and employment (ETE) opportunities, and other activities designed to
divert offenders and those at risk from crime and other anti social behaviour,
into mainstream training and employment.

As part of the initiative a vocational training package was developed which
was targeted at ‘socially excluded’ groups from across North East London,
including adults on probation orders, clients recovering from substance
misuse referred from voluntary and statutory drug agencies, young people
(aged from fourteen up) who have come into contact with the criminal justice
system and/or social services and young people referred to crime diversion
initiatives by FOTE in the North East London area.

The overall aim for the project was to engage young adults caught up in the
criminal justice system by organising football coaching sessions, small-sided
games and matches. From this initial interest it was anticipated that
individuals would enrol on courses linked to football and sport run by staff at
LOCSP. These individuals were most likely to become involved with the
Eastside team which had emerged out of a Drug Challenge Fund project
which represented one of LOCSP’s first forays into issue-based work back in
1995, when the organisation began working with clients referred from local
drug agencies and probation services.

Positive Futures

Launched in March 2000, Positive Futures is a national programme that is
now managed within the Home Office Drugs Strategy Directorate. It has an
advisory group made up of representatives from the Department of Health,
51
Department of Culture, Media and Sport, Connexions (Department for
Education and Skills), Sport England, the Youth Justice Board and the
Football Foundation. Its overall aim is to have a positive influence on
individual participants’ drug use, physical activity and offending behaviour by
widening horizons and access to lifestyle, educational and employment
opportunities.

Each of the twenty four first phase projects was to be based around the
provision of a variety of locally appropriate sporting activities and other
opportunities for engagement, targeted at the most vulnerable and ‘at risk’
young people between the ages of ten and nineteen, in neighbourhoods
identified as amongst the twenty per cent most deprived in the country.
Barking & Dagenham and Hackney were identified as two of the initial areas
in which the programme was to be delivered on the basis of a partnership
between the local youth offending team and a range of agencies including
local authorities, charities, sports clubs and crime reduction agencies.

Following local negotiations and working with the local youth offending teams
LOCSP was identified as the lead agency in each of these boroughs where it
was determined that the work would focus on one specific estate in each
case. These were the Gascoigne estate in Barking and the Woodbury Down
estate in Hackney where the Youth Justice Board had just established local
Youth Inclusion Programmes (YIPs).

The Gazza

Barking and Dagenham emerged as a key population centre between the
wars when the London County Council built a series of estates to re-house
the occupants of inner city slums in the East End and north London. The area
was quickly established as a stubbornly working class district, in Willmott's
terms a 'one class colony' (1963). Despite relatively high levels of
employment more recent studies continue to reveal the area as one in which
'strong, traditional family and cultural processes relying on non-formal ways
of 'getting by'...have a constraining impact on social mobility. In Barking and
Dagenham this is because intergenerational survival strategies have not
been dependant upon formal qualifications and academic achievement,
hence reducing the likelihood of social mobility' (O'Brien & Jones, 1997: 115).

The Gascoigne estate in the south west of the Borough consists of
approximately 2000 homes, predominantly local authority owned, made up
by a mixture of inadequate low rise, low spec. balcony access flats and high
rises so typical of early 1970s housing developments. These homes
accommodate a mixed populace, less than fifty per cent of which is employed
and, in contrast to the rest of the borough, a third of which is non-white. Most
households do not own a vehicle and over fifteen per cent have a lone parent
living with dependent children (neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk). In contrast
to Willmott and Young's nostalgic representation of family and kinship in the
East End (1957) the estate appears increasingly flimsy and transient. It is
also, if the populist rhetoric is to be believed, pervaded by the fear of crime
(Golder, 2003) which has foundation in the Gascoigne ward of the London
Borough of Barking and Dagenham being in the top three wards in each
category of crime statistics bar one in the Borough’s most recent audit of
crime and disorder (LBBD, 2001). The acquisitive nature of this crime is
52
revealed by the ward's status as having the highest rates of reported crime
for residential burglary and theft from a motor vehicle in the Borough.

In relation to the impact of LOCSP’s work on rates of crime on the Gascoigne
estate, the Youth Inclusion Programme (YIP), which relied heavily on the
Positive Futures project led by LOCSP, was hailed in 2002 in the local and
national press as contributing to a fifty eight per cent fall in crime since the
initiative was launched. Similar plaudits met the award for the Team category
in the Young Citizen of the Year Award run by the Barking and Dagenham
Post, Barking and Dagenham Council and the Police's Community
Involvement Unit.

Woodberry Down

Woodberry Down is a similarly run down social housing estate which lies in
the New River ward in the north west of Hackney in north east London which
was ranked as the fourth most deprived local authority area in England and
Wales according to the Government's 1998 Index of Deprivation. Initiated in
the period immediately after World War II the core housing blocks were
completed in 1948 and augmented in the 1960s and 1970s by high-rise
blocks of flats. Similarly to the Gascoigne there are over 2000 homes on the
estate which house up to 9,000 people, over ninety per cent of whom are
council tenants (Crime Concern, 2000). In the New River ward, the smallest
district for which data is available almost thirty per cent of the population is
under the age of 16. The estate is multi-cultural and multi-racial, thirty five per
cent of residents in the ward define themselves as non-white (the majority of
whom are black) and over twenty per cent as Jewish whilst in twenty per cent
of households on the estate a language other than English is spoken at
home. In recent years a significant number of refugee families have been
housed in the area.

Only twenty six per cent of residents aged fifteen to sixty-five are employed
full-time with a further nine per cent employed part-time. Of the remainder,
twenty six per cent are either unemployed or unable to work. This picture of
relative deprivation is reinforced by the point that in the New River ward
nearly sixty per cent of households have no car
(neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk).

The estate is similarly blighted by both the experience of crime and an
associated anxiety towards crime. According to the Metropolitan Police's
Crime Reporting Information System acquisitive crime in the form of
residential burglary, as on the Gascoigne, was proportionately higher in New
River than in the rest of the borough for the period prior to the
commencement of our research. According to the local Police and
Community Safety Unit a disproportionate number of these offences occur on
the Woodberry Down estate (Crime Concern, 2000: 10).

Estate based sports activity

Organised sessions take place on and around the targeted estates on an
almost daily basis generally with between twenty and fourty participants on
each occasion. Sometimes the numbers are smaller but sometimes they are
greatly increased depending upon the time of day or year. As a rule of thumb
53
an approximation can be made that an average of thrity participants attend
each session or match.

On this basis, in the region of 400 to 500 contacts are made on a weekly
basis as a result of the sessions. These are not new people on each
occasion as repeat attendance is welcomed and indeed encouraged as this
is the basis for establishing relationships which enable effective interventions
to be made.

Engagement: Authenticity, respect and 'cool' distance

Dn rne Sazza

0(|v|rd lr(oudr lre de-|rdusl(|a||s|rd u(oar sp(aW| ol Easl Lordor loWa(ds 8a(||rd |r
0(arl's looloa|| |ader Fo(d 0a|axv lre d(|ve( |s |r lar|||a( pose. ca|r|v crasl|s|rd ro(e
add(ess|ve le||oW c(aW|e(s or lre ove(l|oW|rd (oads 'wro a(e lrese peop|e. T|r. l as| va.
Ar l d(|v|r' a lorda C|v|c 'e(e?¨ as re oulraroeuv(es a o|ac| 8Vw W|lr l|rled
W|rdsc(eers lo secu(e a p|ace or lre ro(lr c|(cu|a(. ra|l|rd r|s adve(sa(v |r r|s l(ac|s. r|s
ca|rress e||d|rd W|lr (ead|ress lo( corl(orlal|or. 0(essed casua||v |r r|s oll|ce ||l ol
carvass jears. crec| sr|(l ard T|roe(|ard's 0(arl |s lre so(l ol duv vou |roW car |oo| alle(
r|rse|l oul Wro vou'd a|so l|rd |l ra(d rol lo del a|ord W|lr. A slo|c rasle( ol dep(ecal|rd
Lordor palle( Wr|cr rares ro v|cl|r oul |eaves |ls aud|erce or |ls loes. ralcr|rd a so||d
prvs|ca| p(eserce lral oe|ords lo r|s deres (alre( lrar a dvr. le |s la||rd re lo lre
0asco|dre. lre rolo(|ous sp(aW||rd rous|rd eslale |r 8a(||rd Wre(e L0C3P ras oeer
(urr|rd eslale oased spo(ls acl|v|l|es s|rce lre surre( ol 2000. To lre lurde(s ard lrose
Wo(||rd W|lr|r lre a(eras ol u(oar (edere(al|or ard soc|a| exc|us|or lre Wo(| does urde(
lre oarre( ol Pos|l|ve Fulu(es. To lrose or lre eslale. |l's jusl ar araleu( looloa|| lear. lre
0asco|dre Eslale C(eW.
wr||sl prvs|ca||v re|l|rd |rlo lre corc(ele jurd|e lral corsl|lules lr|s pa(l ol Lordor. lre
0asco|dre's 'p(oo|ers' a(e arrourced lo (es|derls ard Wou|d oe |rle(|ope(s ov lre |a(de
sl(eel s|dr al lre daled oper|rd lo 3l Va(da(el's (ead|rd 'Tre Vel(opo||lar Po||ce Wo(||rd |r
pa(lre(sr|p W|lr lre |oca| corrur|lv lo c(eale a sale( erv|(orrerl'. To lre relWo(| ol
We|la(e. (edere(al|or ard c(|re pa(lre(sr|ps la(del|rd lre eslale. lre oarre( d|ves a reW
p(eserce lo lre|( Wo(|. ras||rd arolre( (ea||lv oevord lre s|odars.
0r lre |rs|de ol lr|s 'daled corrur|lv'. Wre(e lre oa((|e(s a(e lacl|ca||v dep|oved lo |eep
(es|derls |r (alre( lrar l(espasse(s oul. lre(e |s ||ll|e s|dr ol lre pa(lre(sr|p Wr|cr ras
oecore pa(l ol lre eve(vdav ve(racu|a( ol corlerpo(a(v soc|a| po||cv. Tre 8ase||re voulr
p(ojecl. v|cl|r ol lre sare p(oo|ers |l |s lre|( lo cu(la||. |s p(olecled ov slee| doo(s ard a
secu(e access svsler lral vou r|drl ro(e (ead||v expecl al a r|drlc|uo erl(arce dua(ded
ov oource(s. Wr||sl sr|(l s|eeved po||ce oll|ce(s do lre app(oacr|rd. p(orpl|rd lre susp|c|or
ol vourde( (es|derls.
As We d(|ve pasl lre ooa(ded up Aooev A(rs or R|pp|e Rd. Wr|cr re|droou(s lre eslale.
0(arl correrls
'Tre l|(sl r|drl l care doWr 'e(e lre(e Was a duv |v|rd or lre l|oo( ouls|de lral puo dead.
Jusl |v|r' lre(e dead. or lre pavererl.'
Tr|s Was ro allerpl al sroc| l(ealrerl. ro sea(cr lo( (especl. lo( 0(arl ard l rave
|roWr eacr olre( ard lr|s Wo(|d lo( rarv vea(s. oul |l d|d sel lre corlexl lo( 0(arl's l|(sl
verlu(es orlo lre eslale Wrer ne Was as ur|roWr as arv olre( v|s|lo(.
ll occu((ed lo re lral oac| lrer. Warde(|rd a(ourd |r r|s c|uo l(ac|su|l. ca((v|rd a oad ol
oa||s. lre coacr rusl rave sl(uc| passe(s-ov as |oo||rd soreWral oul ol p|ace. Tre eslale
|s oller c(oWded W|lr sl(o||e(s: rarv ol lrer seer lo rave ||ll|e |rred|ale pu(pose apa(l
l(or pass|rd lre l|re. ourp|rd |rlo l(|erds ard slard|rd lo la|| lo( a Wr||e. Yourd rolre(s
W|lr pusrcra|(s Wa|| l(or ore s|de ol lre eslale lo lre olre( ard lrer oac| ada|r W|lroul
54
verlu(|rd oul. 0(oups ol vourd Warraoe's rudd|e lodelre( ouls|de lre pa(ade ol srops.
ur|roWr laces |rev|lao|v p(orpl |rle(esl re(e ard cu(|os|lv d(adua||v dol lre oelle( ol sore
ol lre vourdsle(s as lrev app(oacred lre rar |r lre l(ac|su|l lo as| Wral re Was do|rd. As
0(arl (eca||s:
'l'd jusl oeer do|rd doWr lre(e lo( a leW r|drls ard Warde(ed (ourd. l saW lre(e Was a ra(d
p|av a(ea lral rad seer oelle( davs. oul vou cou|d use |l. Tre ||ds sla(led as||r' Wro l Was
ard l jusl as|ed lrer |l lrev We(e |rle(esled |r looloa|| ard d|sred oul a leW |eal|els. l lo|d
lrer l'd oe lre(e or Vordav r|drl. ard lrev We(e |||e. 'Year. vear. a|| (|drl' ard l |reW
lrev We(e lr|r||rd l'd oe dore oelo(e arvlr|rd dol do|rd oul lre(e We(e a dozer o( so lre(e
lre rexl Vordav ard We sla(led lo suss eacr olre( oul ard lrer We jusl |epl do|rd. (a|r o(
sr|re. Vordavs. wedresdavs. Wee|erds.'
3|rce lrer. |r lre lace ol 0(arl's (e|erl|ess corr|lrerl. cors|slercv ard o(dar|sal|ora|
lro(oudrress. ove( 200 vourdsle(s rave oecore |rvo|ved |r lre p(ojecl. seve(a| ol Wror
a(e roW erp|oved as sess|ora| coacres ard p(ojecl Wo(|e(s lrerse|ves ard Wrose Wo(|
re rad core lo ror|lo( or lr|s ever|rd.
l|s ao|||lv lo correcl W|lr lre vourd peop|e re(e (e|ales lo ar |rlu|l|ve urde(slard|rd ol
roW lre ru|l|p|e d|scou(ses or c(|re ard exc|us|or. Wr|cr d|sso|ve lre easv d|sl|rcl|ors
oelWeer v|cl|r. ollerde( ard corsure(. a(e Wover |rlo lre ve(v lao(|c ol da||v ||le.



As We pa(|ed up ard Worde(ed ove( lo lre ra(d cou(l p|av a(ea (urr|rd a|ords|de 3l
Va(da(el's 0(arl assured lre (o|e ol |rle(p(ele(. correrl|rd
'3ee lr|s ||d re'|| rave vou( Walcr oll vou |r a rorerl. le's ar 0|d 8a||ev l(|a| Wa|l|rd lo
rapper. le'|| oe a ore-rar T\ p(od(arre |r ler vea(s' oelo(e p(ovocal|ve|v sroul|rd oul
'0| d|rde(l' as lre ||d ruc|ed aooul or lre la( s|de ol lre cou(l. A ler vea( o|d c(op
ra|(ed. oa(e cresled u(cr|r |oo|ed up del|arl|v oelo(e (ecodr|s|rd r|s rerlo( ard c(v|rd oul
'0(arll' ard (urr|rd ove(. jurp|rd up ard rudd|rd r|r as lroudr re We(e a (elu(r|rd rucr
r|ssed lalre(. 0lre( ||ds saurle( ove( ard lre oarle( l|oWs as lrose urlar|||a( W|lr '8oo's'
rale corducl lre|( oWr su(ve|||arce. lesl|rd oul lre 'ouls|de('. Tre |rposs|o|||lv ol a l|xed
|derl|lv |r lre r|dsl ol Lordor's corlerpo(a(v d|ve(s|lv erao||rd lr|s Wr|le. la|( ra|(ed 19ê0s
55
coc|rev sor ol ar Easl Erd courc|| eslale lo p|av W|lr r|s aud|erce ard lre|( (ac|a|
sle(eolvpes. le|||rd lrer re's A|oar|ar.
'You'(e rol A|oar|ar' d|sr|sses ore ||ss|rd r|s leelr.
3r|(||rd|v |rd|drarl '0(arl' p(oc|a|rs
'l am. wral |s lr|s. cuslors? You Warl rv passpo(l? l'r le|||r' va l'r /|oan|an'.
A|Wavs a|e(l re spols ore ol r|s p|ave(s. A 'lace' or lre eslale Wro's slalus re |roWs W|||
sell|e lre sco(e ard p(ov|de ar oppo(lur|lv lo eroe|||sr.
'You |roW '3az'?'
'Year'
'A|oar|ar vear? 'E's rv o(uve('.
urcorv|rced oul sull|c|erl|v ursu(e. lre vourd p(elerde( roves or.
'wrv vou re(e?'
'l'r scoul|rd. Core lo see you.'
Trev lu(r oac| lo lre ||c| aooul lral ras oeer do|rd or |r advarce ol lre l(a|r|rd sess|or
Wr||sl We |ear ada|rsl lre pe(|rele( ol lre o(|c| ard W|(e erc|osu(e. Tre vourdsle(s a(e
soor pull|rd or a pe(lo(rarce. ra|l ar eve or lre dare. ra|l ar eve or lre sradoWv.
urce(la|r poss|o|||lv lral 0(arl (ep(eserls. '8oo' ras c||roed or lop ol lre slee| po(la|ao|r
lral douo|es as a slo(e(oor lo Wr|cr arv p(elerce ol secu(|lv ras |ord s|rce oeer
aoardored url|| 0(arl. ur|rp(essed. ca||s r|r doWr. 3oor re's oac| a|ords|de us sra(|rd
la|es. Wr|cr |rve(l lre aulro(|lv ol r|s |oca| scroo|'s (u|es
'wrer d'vou o(ea| up lo( surre(?'
'l've l|r|sred. 8|r exc|uded'
'wrv We(e vou exc|uded?'
'0|dr'l do rv Wo(| |rr|l'
'wrv rol?'
'Cos lrer vou del exc|uded ard vou dor'l 'ave lo do ro Wo(|'
'8oo' jurps a(ourd |||e a c|(cus acl W|lroul a l(apeze. corslarl|v l|dd||rd W|lr 0(arl's
Walcr ard ||ll|rd r|s |evs.
'wral ca( d'vou d(|ve 0(arl? ls lral vou( Ve(c?'
'l'r rol le|||rd vou Wral ca( l d(|ve. ll'|| oe dore |r 2 r|rules'
'ls |l lre 8eare(. l Wor'l r|c| |l. l jusl Warra s|l |r |l. 0o or |el's 'ave a d(|ve'
lr a l|asr lrev a|| (ur oll up lre sl(eel alle( soreore sa|d sorelr|rd aooul Wral soreore
e|se rad sa|d |r lre exc|led rarre( ol arv d(oup ol cr||d(er or a surre(s ever|rd. we
loo| ou( cue lo do oll lo( a sl(o|| ou(se|ves ard Wrer We (elu(r '8oo'. '0ear' ard lre|( rales
We(e oac| rard|rd oul oes|de lre p|av a(ea W|lr 'Ke|s' Wro roW Wo(|s lo( lre o(dar|sal|or
ard |eads rarv ol lre sess|ors or lre eslale ard Wro Was d(essed lo( acl|or |r sro(ls ard
c|uo T-sr|(l oul Was ra||rd ro rove lo del lr|rds do|rd |r lre lace ol lre |rd|lle(erce ol lre
Wa(r surre('s ever|rd sursr|re. Tre o(dar|sal|ora| |rlers|lv ol 0(arl's ea(|v |rle(verl|ors
rav|rd roW d|ver Wav lo 'Ke|s's' 'arl|-sl(uclu(e' app(oacr as re s|ls crall|rd W|lr sore ol
lre '||ds' Wr||e r|s severleer vea( o|d coacr|rd ass|slarl 'Pau|o' |s sa|d lo oe c(u|s|rd lre
eslale or a 3uzu|| Z50 rolo(o||e. 0(arl |s rol sroW|rd |l vel oul vou |roW re'|| oe ra||rd
su(e lr|rds a(e oac| or l(ac| rexl Wee|.
As We jo|r lrer. '8oo' c|a|rs lo rave jusl purcred a oov Wro rad a |r|le al lre olre( erd
ol lre eslale |r lre (ecerl spal Wr||sl r|s rale '0ear' p|avs doWr r|s p(elerce as re Wree|s
a(ourd or r|s rourla|r o||e.
'E's jusl acl|r' loudr |rr|l. we jusl crased 'er.'
Tre o(asrress suos|des as 0(arl leases r|r
''E(e's lre 0|d 8||| '8oo'. Core lo del va'
As lr(ee ur|lo(red oll|ce(s Worde( loWa(ds us '8oo' sr|ll||v roves lo s|l oelWeer 'Ke|s'
ard 'F(ar|'. Wro a|so re|ps oul W|lr lre coacr|rd. p(orpl|rd |rle(esl |r 'Ke|s's' T-sr|(l ard
lre oa|| re |s oourc|rd.
''Ave vou dor' arv ro(e ol lrer? Car l 'ave ore?'
56
0(arl |s p(orpled |rlo l(|ed ard l(usled Wree|e(-dea|e( rode. p|av|rd lo lre ero(vor|c
duc|e( ard d|ve( sers|o|||l|es ol r|s aud|erce.
'l'|| le|| vou Wral'. You oe dood 'l||| Noveroe(. dor'l del exc|uded 'l||| Noveroe( ard l|| del
vou a T-sr|(l ard a oa||'.
''T||| Noveroe(. lral's ades'
'll's lre surre( ro||davs roW |sr'l |l. so vou've or|v dol lo rarade 3epleroe( ard
0clooe(.'
'Trer vou'|| d|ve re ore ol lrose T-sr|(ls ard a oa||?'
'3lav |r scroo| 'l||| Noveroe('.
'Yessss'
'8e dood lo( vou( leacre(s. vear'. le |roWs lral |r a|| |||e||rood re Wor'l. oul vou've dol
lo l(v. d|ve eve(vore a crarce (alre( lrar W(|le lrer oll.
VearWr||e 0(arl leases 'F(ar|' aooul r|s la|e '8ec|rar' ea((|rds ard p|avs W|lr rol|ors
ol sexua||lv W|lroul (ecou(se lo roroproo|a |r lr|s p|avd(ourd ol rascu||re pe(lo(rarce.
0r|oo|e(s la|| lo eru|ale lre p(ec|s|or ol r|s jousl|rd. c(v|rd d|sr|ss|ve|v
'Pussv'
8ul 'F(ar|' passes lre lesl. urpe(lu(oed ard d(essed |rracu|ale|v |r r|s Ev|su jears ard
des|dre( l(a|re(s re (espords |rcord(uous|v
'l'r o||rd|r' rar. |rr|l'. as 'Rueoer'. s|r||a(|v all|(ed. Wa||s pasl. ac|roW|edd|rd 0(arl ard
slopp|rd lo cral.
'You rol p|av|rd looloa||?'
'No'
'wro's vou( rale?' |Wro 0(arl ras rol rel oelo(e) 'N|ce l(a|re(s. loW d'vou allo(d lrer?
You Wo(||rd. vear?'
le (espords p(oud|v
'Year'
'wre(e vou Wo(||rd?'
urres|lal|rd|v. ercou(aded ard erpoWe(ed ov 0(arl's corp||rerls re (espords
'Vc0ora|ds.'
'Core doWr rexl Vordav |l vou Warra p|av looloa||. vear. N|ce sroes le||a.'
As We do lo rove or 0(arl |s |oo||rd oul lo( 'Pau|o'. Wro rad oeer (|d|rd up ard doWr
lre eslale al speed. lre sare 'Pau|o' Wro al lre ade ol l|lleer rad orce sc(eecred pasl r|r
al 110rpr Wr||sl Wea(|rd ro re|rel or lre ro(lr c|(cu|a( |r o(de( lral re Wou|d rol oe |ale
lo( a l(a|r|rd sess|or. NoW severleer re Was d(|v|rd r|s o(olre('s o||e. Wro |s s|xleer ard
ur||cersed lo (|de |l. oul as 0(arl correrled
'Al |easl re's dol a re|rel or roW.'
'8oo' la|es or lre (o|e ol PR oll|ce( l(v|rd lo del lre |oca| ce|eo(|lv lo slop a leW l|res as
'Pau|o'. (ecerl|v (elu(red l(or a spe|| p|av|rd as a l(a|ree W|lr 8(|slo| Rove(s looloa|| c|uo.
|dro(es r|r url|| 0(arl d(|ves pasl ard ca||s oul. jusl orce
'PAuL0'
lrslarl|v d|arc|rd (ourd. sapped ol r|s |rvu|re(ao|||lv. lre d(|ve( slops ard lu(rs r|s o||e
lerlal|ve|v. as '8oo' l(|es lo la|| r|s Wav |rlo lre ca( W|lr lre d(|ve( pal|erl|v lerd|rd r|r oll.
oelo(e 'Pau|o' arl|c|pales 0(arl's corce(rs. p(olle(|rd lral
'll's |eda|'
'Year. vear oul Wral aooul vou. A(e vou |eda|?' Teas|rd r|r 'lre po||ce a(e up lre(e vou
|roW'
'A(e lrev?' cue(|es lre roW corce(red sla( pe(lo(re(.
Rese(v|rd juddererl lo( roW. 0(arl. eade( lo ersu(e r|s corl|rued pa(l|c|pal|or |r lre
coacr|rd sess|ors Wr|cr re Wou|d ro(ra||v re|p lo (ur ard Wr|cr rave rode(aled r|s
excesses ard (ur-|rs lo( lre pasl lWo vea(s. le||s r|s allerl|ve p(olédé
'Tu(r up rexl Vordav. You rusl oe lre(e. l dor'l ca(e |l ro ores lre(e ard lre(e's ro
coacr|rd do|rd or. You musr oe lre(e'. oelo(e We d(|ve oll lr|r||rd ol 'Pau|o' as We pass
lre ex|l p|aca(d dec|a(|rd '0asco|dre eslale We|cores ca(elu| d(|ve(s'.
57

In the midst of the banality of these everyday encounters one might question
the Youth Justice Board’s dissemination of the organisation's work on the
Gascoigne as an example of best practice amongst interventions with young
people at risk of offending. Why is it the case that so many social inclusion
professionals regard Grant’s unstructured forays on to the estate as being so
revolutionary? Is it not slightly perplexing that those people who are
supposedly responsible for regenerating the excluded wastelands of the
urban metropolis believe those very same areas are out of bounds;
dangerous places where other people live and work? When considering the
plethora of government and community organisations who state their purpose
as positive intervention in the lives of the marginalised and at risk, why is it
that a small community football programme can seemingly enter into the lives
of these people in a way that very few of the others can claim to do, bridging
the rapidly widening chasm that separates the world of the ‘excluded’ from
those of the ‘included’?

From top to bottom: Re-ordering community sports work

Conventionally, sport in both its elite and mass participant versions has been
organised according to much more highly structured and inflexible models of
provision than those associated with LOCSP’s estate interventions. Even
within the sphere of community sport the principles of direct service or top
down delivery have defined the approach of both public and voluntary sector
providers, as the community worker takes on duties and functions, which give
a direct service to a user, public. According to this scheme of things,
ultimately, it is the delivery agency that has the final say, control and power.
This approach has been criticised by some proponents for being
paternalistic, since it depends on the interpretation of politicians and public
service officers as to what constitutes a suitable case for action.

By contrast the community development approach is seen by Glen (1993:24)
to entail 3 main elements:

• Community definition of its own needs and making provision for those
needs;
• The fostering of creative and co-operative networks of people and
groups in communities;
• Practitioners operating in a non-directive way.

In Baldry's (1976) terms, adapting the conceptualisation of community arts
projects, the terms “animation” and “animateur” are significant in that:

Community [sport and recreation practitioners] are distinguishable not
by the techniques they use…but by their attitudes towards the place of
their activities in the life of society. The primary concern is the impact
on a community and their relation with it: by assisting those with whom
they make contact to become more aware of their situation and of their
own creative powers, and providing them with the facilities they need
to make use of their abilities, they hope to widen and deepen the
sensitivities of the community in which they work and so to enrich its
existence. To a varying degree, they see this as a means of change,
whether psychological, social or political, within the community.
58

This approach also recognises people’s own capacities to ‘develop
community’ through self-help. ‘At the most basic level, there is a strong belief
that the human resources necessary for change and development are
available in the community itself – the aim of the community worker is to
release these resources’ (Taylor et al, 1976). Community development is
concerned with meeting the needs of the community, through the community,
in non-directive ways.

Community sport and recreation is an alternative to mainstream forms of
sport and leisure provision, which recognises the failure of sport to reach all
or most people. It is de-centralised and is a devolved form of sports
participation. It has a focus on community development, which seeks to
repair the destruction of traditional working class communities. It also lends
itself to cohesion and community spirit and involves participative and
consultative practices about policies affecting people’s everyday lives.
Community sport and recreation is integrated with other service provision. It
looks for an efficient use of resources and service delivery and tends to have
a holistic view of needs. In this way community sport and recreation can be
seen as a means of bringing about political, social and psychological change.

Hoggett and Hambleton (1987) look at the decentralisation and
democratisation of public services. Given that traditional methods of sport
and leisure provision i.e. facility based, have failed to attract significant
numbers from disadvantaged groups, community sport and recreation is
seen as a means of addressing this problem. Hoggett and Hambleton (1987)
argue that the development of a more responsive form of public service is
now required to cater for the differentiated consumer. Differentiated
consumers are in contrast to universal consumers and are therefore not
blindly and automatically regarded as male, white, able-bodied, heterosexual
breadwinners.

Nevertheless there are few cases of community sport practice that overtly
combine education and recreation goals. Community sport initiatives are
often limited, piecemeal and delivered in top-down ways meaning that they
have little significance for most local people. Until recently they have gained
little if any status as legitimate ways forward for sport and recreation whilst
sport itself has not easily incorporated community ways of working, in the
face of ‘market’ led alternatives. In Butcher's terms:

Community practice constitutes part of a distinctive, yet relatively
undeveloped approach to decision-making and service-delivery within
a range of UK public services. The approach – of which community
sport, recreation, and leisure is part – is fairly new, and in many ways
represents an alternative to, and embraces a critique of, more orthodox
and well established approaches to policy and service provision within
the public sector (Butcher 1993: 3).

In this context though Haywood (1994: 77) has argued that community sport
is sometimes used as ‘a fashionable label with virtually no recognition that a
particular set of practices and values is implied’. Plant’s (1974) suggestion
that ‘community’ is merely a ‘spray on’ term is pertinent in this regard. Critics
might justifiably argue that the term ‘community’ is used 'purely to lend
59
legitimacy and positive feelings, credence and acceptability’ to mainstream
sports provision, which is essentially still bureaucratically organised and
professionally and politically controlled.

It is in the space between these arbitrary classifications, between mainstream
and community approaches, that the work of Grant and his colleagues at
LOCSP finds its niche. In the development of their programme the key
workers have consistently attempted to develop projects which will, in their
eyes, make their work more relevant to the ‘communities’ that they see
themselves as serving as well as attracting the funding to secure their future
operations. The move on to the Gascoigne and Woodberry Down estates
was a consequence of a decision that their work should be taken to the very
core of what was more widely perceived as the rotten heart of social
exclusion.

Whilst, through their surveillance, the more authoritarian agents of the state,
such as Youth Offending Teams and Probation Officers, had identified the
'targets', the fifty young people ‘most at risk of offending’, on each of the
estates earmarked by the Positive Futures programme, the organisation's
coaches had their own approach. Their capacity to connect with the ‘target’
group relating to their own biographies, social outlook and interpretive market
savvy as well as their commitment to helping those they engage with to
realise their potential.

In the domain of sport and community development work a coach who is
linked to a professional football club has the kind of credibility that a local
authority sports development worker would die for. But professional football
club coaches do not generally wander onto the Gascoigne or Woodberry
Down. Third Division football club's do not carry the same appeal as those
from the 'Premiership' but LOCSP's association with Leyton Orient still
provides a sense of authenticity which can buy an introduction, an
opportunity to engage. But beyond that introduction the capacity to achieve
the aspirational goals that the organisation sets itself is reliant upon an
empathy with the participants, which marks the work apart from the more
repressive, hierarchical conventions of traditional sports provision.

Key issues: LOCSP organise sessions on and around their target estates on
an almost daily basis generally with between twenty and fourty participants
on each occasion. In the region of 400 to 500 contacts are made on a weekly
basis. It is in the space between the arbitrary classifications - mainstream
and community approaches - that the work of LOCSP finds its niche

'You can take the boy out of the East End but you can't take the East End out
of the boy': Cultural capital, authenticity and the community sports worker

The late French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu argued that all humans inherit
dispositions to act in certain ways. In this sense they possess an inherited
concept of society, which they then modify, according to their own specific
local conditions and experiences. Referring to his research on Kabyle culture
in Algeria he pointed out that:

By the very reason of the intensity of communal sentiments, the rules
on which the community is based do not need to be made to appear as
60
imperatives. They permeate the living reality of manners and customs
(1962:23-4).

For Bourdieu, the ability to absorb appropriate actions is the key for
individuals to be at ease with themselves and others. As such, within sport,
being a competent social actor and having a mastery over social practices
involves a ‘feel for the game’, which requires the internalisation of social
mores by an individual. Bordieu's notion of ‘habitus’ then is an internalised
schema that structures but does not determine individual actions, thoughts
and feelings which is expressed or embodied in people’s physical and verbal
deportment. It is through this notion of habitus that we see the social world
and the position of others and ourselves in it as unexceptional.

Bourdieu also offers a view of social relations, which supposes that
individuals and groups artificially construct differences as part of their
position-taking activity. The cultures of individuals and groups are the tokens
by which they distinguish themselves in order to position themselves.
Consideration of this relationship between situation and position leads us to
an understanding of Bourdieu’s concept of ‘cultural capital’ and the point that
our cultural ‘choices’ are strategically guided by our habitus, a kind of ‘second
nature’ associated with our biography. Indeed he suggested that an individual
can deploy a cultural situation or position strategically in order to take a new
social position. In this sense culture is regarded as a currency that people
use rather than an intrinsic quality.

Bourdieu used the concept of ‘capital’ as developed in economic theory and
applied it to culture. As such our social positions are seen to be modified by
our cultural tastes in as much as the cultural system assigns more value to
some tastes than others. Thus the habitus encompasses orientations
towards the aesthetics and uses of the body and physical activity which are
class specific such that we must see ‘society written into the body, into the
biological individual’ (1978):

The practical affirmation of an inevitable difference…There is no
accounting for tastes…each taste feels itself to be natural – and so it
is, being a habitus – which amounts to rejecting others as unnatural
and therefore vicious (1980:253)

The usefulness of these concepts here relates to the point that the ability of
the LOCSP coaches and development workers to engage with the young
residents of the Gascoigne and Woodberry Down estates relates to their own
biographies and embodied selves and the degree to which they are
acknowledged and valued in these locales. In this regard Grant is the
embodiment of what Garry Robson calls Millwallism (2000), his own
biography intrudes throughout, providing an intuitive knowing of the condition
of those he works with. Constantly reading the multitude of clashing texts
presented in front of him, picking up on the nuances of individual style and
quick with a comeback Grant is at ease in a way, which makes those, he
works with comfortable. When ‘Bob’ tells of his sister smoking indoors, now is
not the time to probe further whether he means cigarettes, spliffs or crack
cocaine. The police are not tipped off about ‘Paulo’s’ unorthodox means of
arriving at training on time. ‘Terry’s’ casual tale of a fight with ‘Bob’s’ Dad
over a mattress which flew out of a window too quickly is a source of
61
amusement rather than a reason to discourage him from doing some
summer coaching. Experiences are shared, forming the basis of lasting
relationships through which guidance is sought and Grant's approval is
prized. Since in his terms:

it’s about having the right people out there, week in, week out, building
those relationships with the kids. Without that, it doesn’t matter how
much money you throw at it, or how good your intentions are, it just
won’t work….

Whilst having the right credentials, talking the talk, walking the walk are vital
elements of the successful community sports worker’s tool kit, it is not
sufficient to just be 'one of the lads'. There is a requirement to offer
something more, to stand out from the crowd; to be inspirational without
breaking with the world that is being engaged. Whether that is in terms of a
worldliness gleaned from an educational setting, through work experience or
life history, there must be a sparkle and a confidence backed up by action.
The point was well illustrated at Stansted airport as a squad of players from
the two estates gathered for a trip to Berlin to play Union Berlin’s academy
side which had been organised by LOCSP and which ‘Sol’ was leading:

3po(ls lears |r a|(po(ls rave a ce(la|r |oo| aooul lrer lral sels lrer apa(l l(or lre
usua| le(r|ra| c(oWd ol ous|ressrer. lar|||es. coup|es. ard l(|erds. Ero(rous ||l oads. a
s|rd|e-sex d(oup ol a ce(la|r s|ze. ar aW|Wa(d serse ol se|l-|rpo(larce. 'le(e We a(e. a
lear. or a r|ss|or. oll lo corpele'.
'Ad'. Wro rad sel up lre l(|p. |rsl(ucled us a|| lo Wea( jac|els ard l|es. Tr|s Was oll|c|a|
ous|ress. L0C3P or lou(. Jac|els ard l|es a(e rol ro(ra| (ecu|(ererls or L0C3P oul|rds.
Tre(e a(e ro c|uo o|aze(s ard jac|els ard l|es dor'l core ralu(a||v lo lre L0C3P p|ave(s o(
slall Wrelre( or lre eslale. |r co||ede. al lre oll|ce. o( or a r|drl oul.
As sucr rosl ol lre p|ave(s rad opled lo( lre w|rdso( Krol ol lre ||rd lo oe seer
ado(r|rd P(er|e( Leadue sla(s |r posl ralcr |rle(v|eWs. 3l(eel-sra(l sers|o|||l|es |rlo(red
lre|( cro|ces ol des|dre( |aoe||ed c|olres: A(rar|. 0o|ce ard 0aooara. 3lore ls|ard. Ev|su.
Tre dav derarded lre scuad lo oe sra(l |r a corverl|ora| rarre( lral Was rol ro(ra||v
expecled ol lrer. oul |r adapl|rd lo lrese derards lre p|ave(s (e||ed or lre|( oWr |oca|
(u|es ol Wral |l |s lo oe 'coo|' |r lre|( eve(vdav ||ves.
'3o|' Wo(e a su|l W|lr ar oper-rec|ed sr|(l.
'l dor'l do l|es' re p(oc|a|red.
ll Was ar expers|ve su|l. |l Was up-lo-lre r|rule lasr|or. re |oo|ed sra(l. re |oo|ed coo|.
8v corl(asl 'Ad' doesr'l do des|dre( |aoe|s. re |roWs aooul lrer oul re lr|r|s lrev a(e
lo( lasr|or-v|cl|rs. ove(-p(|ced da(rerls lo( lre du|||o|e. le Was Wea(|rd a (el(o 19ê0's l|e
lral Was loo lr|r lo( lre w|rdso( |rol. P(er|e( Leadue supe(sla(s do rol |rl|uerce 'Ad's'
sa(lo(|a| sers|o|||l|es.
Tre p|ave(s urde(slard '3o|': lrev asp|(e lo oe |||e r|r |r so rarv Wavs. le ra|es lrer
|audr. re ras ar urde(slaled poWe( ard aulro(|lv Wr|cr |s |rred|ale|v |rp(ess|ve. re |s ol
lrer oul re ard r|s cu|lu(a| cap|la| rave ralu(ed la( oevord lrer. le la||s lre|( la|| W|lr
ease. re urde(slards lrer. oul re la||s aoove lre|( la|| W|lr a ce(la|r Wo(|d||ress lral lrev
eade(|v corsure.
Tre p|ave(s dor'l (ea||v urde(slard 'Ad'. le |sr'l ore ol lrer. l|s ercvc|opaed|c
|roW|edde ol ê0's ard Z0's rus|c doesr'l |erd |lse|l lo deoales aooul Easl Coasl ard wesl
Coasl. u(oar rouse. 50cerl.
8olr '3o|' ard 'Ad' a(e d(essed sra(l|v. '3o|' |s (eda(ded ov lre p|ave(s as 'coo|'. 'Ad' |sr'l.
'Ad' ras lo||oWed lre d(ess code (u|es ol lre dav. '3o|' rasr'l.

62
‘Sol’s’ independence and self-confidence, a defiance of that which he sees
as unnecessary alongside an unswerving commitment to the LOCSP cause
and meticulous attention to doing things properly (as he sees it), is regarded
as a strength by the players, resonating as it does with their own cultural
values and commitments. Whilst 'Ad’s' allegiance to the LOCSP cause is
equally unswerving, the players appreciate, understand, and relate to ‘Sol’s’
in a fundamentally different way. It is this distinction, which is what defines
their abilities to do their respective jobs, illustrating the blend of skills, which
are required to make things work. 'Ad's' contacts in German football and
within the British Council, his ease with the world of low fares, budget
airlines, internet bookings and promotional offers have made the trip
possible, the players respect for 'Sol' has ensured it happened.

Key issues: The ability of the LOCSP coaches and development workers to
engage with the young residents of the Gascoigne and Woodberry Down
estates relates to their own biographies and embodied selves and the degree
to which they are acknowledged and valued in these locales. There is also a
requirement to offer something more, to stand out from the crowd; to be
inspirational without breaking with the world that is being engaged.

Involvement and detachment: Cultural intermediaries, 'cool' distance and
respect

It is in such contexts that we might better begin to understand the supposed
success of LOCSP. What the Programme achieves is direct interpersonal
contact with the outsiders in a way in which other agencies, and particularly
conventional sports agencies, do not. To a very large extent it is this in itself
which constitutes success, the quantifiable targets laid down by funding
bodies have to be met, but it is in the nature of the work - the relations
formed, the level of access achieved - where the battle for legitimacy and
status is largely won. LOCSP straddles two increasingly different worlds, it
acts as interpreter for each. A skill, which is increasingly significant at a time
when the inhabitants at either end of the inclusion/exclusion spectrum are
losing the old skills of communication, advocacy and negotiation.

In this way, rather than developing sporting talent per se (although this is a
significant element of LOCSP's work which we consider further in the
following section) the success of the organisation lies in its position as a
‘cultural intermediary’. This concept has been most readily applied following
Bourdieu (1984) in his book Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of
taste and Featherstone’s (1991) use of the term in his book Consumer
Culture & Postmodernism as a way of understanding the emergence of a
‘new middle class’ which has helped to collapse some of the old distinctions
between ‘popular’ and ‘high’ culture and opened the possibility for a
broadening of access to an intellectual and artistic way of life. We use the
term here in relation to a quite different cultural axis between the socially
‘excluded’ and the ‘included’. It is illustrative of our contention that LOCSP
has been able to bridge what is otherwise perceived as an ever-widening gap
between the excluded minority and the included majority through its appeal
as somehow legitimate and authentic to individuals, groups and agencies on
either side of this discursive divide.

63
Whilst ‘from above’ such interventions are regarded as innovative, offering an
effective and ‘fresh’ approach to tackling the criminogenic consequences of
exclusion, the constituencies they ‘deal with’ are seen to appreciate and
welcome the ‘intervention’ because it is perceived and experienced as being
of a non-interfering and non-threatening variety. The coaches are seen in
different ways to many of the other agents of social control such as teachers,
police officers, probation officers and youth workers. They are regarded as
opening up possibilities, providing guidance and demystifying mainstream
society rather than asserting some kind of repressive authority. The credibility
of a sports background coupled with an empathy for the condition of those
they work with has encouraged many young people on the estates to
become qualified as coaches themselves, going on to work with LOCSP and
other community schemes whilst many more have been influenced to go
back to school, on to college or into jobs. Others may have fallen by the
wayside or been identified as having little hope of escaping a life peppered
with incarceration but none are ignored, demeaned or denied access.

As such, all kinds of contingencies are at play across the panoply of social
distinctions which mark the uncertain times in which we live as the
organisation's work necessarily sets up clashes and discomforts the easy
routines of a more parochial existence in its efforts to make new opportunities
available to participants. Biding time, waiting for the moment and using life as
an educational tool characterises the approach as with the case of ‘Jay’, the
star of Eastside and former captain of the Woodberry Downers who now has
aspirations towards working for the organisation and emulating the standards
set by his mentor, ‘Sol’. As yet ‘Jay’ is someway short of developing the
professional and life skills to take on that role and was recently in court
following a fight where the magistrate told him in no uncertain terms that if he
came before the courts again he would be sent to prison. ‘Sol’ vouched for
his character and potential despite his knowledge that he was already
‘known’ to the police because he genuinely believes that ‘Jay’ has a future
working in this field. He believes in ‘Jay’. He likes him: “he’s a nice lad,
they’re all nice lads”.

Whilst in the footballing context ‘Sol’ is unforgiving of ‘Jay's’ excesses and
easy involvement in confrontations and fights, which has borne fruit in terms
of a moderation of his behaviour in recent months he does not conceive his
role as moral guardian to the players. He is non-judgemental about stories of
off the field ‘deviance’ that filter into the dressing room. But ‘distance’ is
always entwined with involvement and beyond his role as a football coach
‘Sol’ became a central figure in ‘Jay’s’ life and when a casual girlfriend fell
pregnant and Jay felt a sense of responsibility but did not believe that the
relationship had a future, he turned to ‘Sol’ for advice on how he should
proceed, apparently demonstrating the extent to which the player had trust
for him. Indeed 'Jay' has even reflected that:

'Sol' is like a Dad to me. I don't know about everyone else, but to me,
because me and 'Sol' like we phone each other...just chatting, not only
football, something in general want to know. So 'Sol's' like a Dad I
never had in this country you know. That's how it feels to me. He just
knows the right things to say to you.

64
‘Sol's’ approach in such situations is to outline the options as he sees them
rather than to impose ‘solutions’.



In another context, back on the trip to Berlin where professional pride and the
image of the organisation are at stake more direct intervention is required:

we loucr doWr |r 8e(||r ard lax| lo lre 'a((|va|s' |ourde. Vov|rd lr(oudr passpo(l
corl(o|. a coup|e ol us dor'l. 'Jav' ard 'N||e' rave oeer pu||ed lo ore s|de ov lre r|dd|e-
65
aded |Wr|le) |rr|d(al|or oll|ce(. le cuesl|ors lre va||d|lv ol lre|( l(ave| docurerls. le
seers al a deru|re |oss as lo Wrv arvoodv Wou|d (easor lral |l Was o| lo l(ave| or
arvlr|rd |ess lrar a slarda(d |ssue EC passpo(l.
'll's ar |derl|lv ca(d. |l's a|(|drl v'|roW. |l's a|(|drl v'|roW.'
le |sr'l corv|rced. oul al lre sare l|re re doesr'l seer |r arvWav rosl||e - |l jusl seers
lral re |s rol used lo lr|s ||rd ol lr|rd.
l|s srou|de(s s|urp ard r|s rec| d|ves Wav lo a||oW r|s read lo s|r| doWr lo a c|ose(
exar|ral|or ol lre l||rsv p|eces ol pape(. w|lr a|| lre olre( passerde(s rav|rd passed
lr(oudr lre |rr|d(al|or crec|po|rls lre urdec|ded dale|eepe( Was jo|red ov cu(|ous
co||eadues. Trev rudd|ed a(ourd ou( pa|( ard l(|ed lo ra|e serse ol lre l(aved pape(Wo(|.
'wral |s lr|s. |l |oo|s |||e |l cou|d oe rade or a prolo-cop|e(.''
wrer lrev l|(sl dol slopped l |rred|ale|v lroudrl vear. vear - o|ac| peop|e ard
|rr|d(al|or oll|ce(s. 8ul l'r |oo||rd al |l roW ard l'r rol sers|rd arv d(eal rosl|||lv. jusl a
'lral's rol lre Wav vou do |l'.
'3o a(e lrese vou( l(|erds. lre looloa|| lear?''
we a(e ourcred up or lre olre( s|de ol lre cao|r lral lo( lr|s a|(po(l d|v|des 0e(rarv
ard ro-rars-|ard ||rc|uded/exc|uded - We|core/ve(ooler). ll's a r|xlu(e ol la||:
'wrv We dell|rd |epl up? |l(ars. l'r exaspe(aled - l've dol soreWre(e lo do)
''Jav' d|ve us vou( Eu(os' |l(ars. You'(e rol dell|rd |r - la||rd lre p|ss)
'wrv us. sorelr|rd W(ord lre Wav We W|lress?' |l(ars. co||ecl|ve serse ol |rjusl|ce
|ocaled |r c|ass/(ac|a| d|sl|rcl|ors).
'3o|' sleps |r.
'Year. l |roW ....vear. ro. ro. |l's l|re. No |l's a|| o|. Trev a(e l(ave|||rd W|lr us... ro.
ro...We a(e |eav|rd loro((oW...No. ro lr|s |s lre (esl ol lre lear... vear We'(e oe|rd p|c|ed
up ov lre (ep(eserlal|ves ol lre olre( lear...Year lral's (|drl. loro((oW. l car urde(slard |l
- lrev |oo| |||e urdes|(ao|es dor'l lrev |ard eve(vore or ou( s|de ol lre d|v|de |s |audr|rd.
oul rol |oud|v oecause lrev car see '3o|' |s W|rr|rd - lrev Warl r|r lo W|r) Year cou(se.
o(||||arl. lral's larlasl|c. we'|| see vou loro((oW'.
Tre |rr|d(al|or oll|ce(s rad core lo sore ||rd ol corp(or|se. lrev sr||ed ard
desl|cu|aled W|lr rards oulsl(elcred
'Tral's lre oesl We car do lo( vou -oul |l's dood eroudr - vou del lo slav'.
0re ol lre oll|ce(s does oll lo prolocopv lre |derl|lv ca(ds: lre olre(s sr||e al lre (esl ol
us Wro a(e a|(eadv or lre (|drl s|de ol 0e(rarv. 'Jav' ard 'N||e' srull|e W|lr a re(vous
arl|c|pal|or. lrev |roW lral |l |s or|v a cuesl|or ol l|re roW. oul lrev Warl |l lo oe soore(
(alre( lrar |ale(.
'wrer vou core oac| loro((oW vou le|| us lr|s ard We crec|. ves?'
Trev W|sr us |uc| |r lre ralcr ard Wave 'Jav'. 'N||e' ard '3o|' lr(oudr.
'll's rol lurrv v'|roW'. 'Jav' savs.
le doesr'l lr|r| |l's lurrv: re puls r|s srou|de(s up as lre (esl ol lre lear l(v lo s|ap.
scueeze ard po|e.
'3aW a oad rar cor|rd lr(oudr |rr|l'.
Tre (esl ol lrer a(e |audr|rd. oul lre(e |s ar urr|sla|ao|e serse ol (e||el lral eve(vlr|rd
ras oeer so(led oul ard lral lre lear ras passed lr(oudr |rlo 0e(rarv p(ope( |rlacl.
As We pass lr(oudr cuslors ard |rlo lre ra|| ro|d|rd Wa|l|rd (e|al|ves. l(|erds ard p|c|-
up d(|ve(s ro|d|rd p|aca(ds |derl|lv|rd lre|( la(es. 'Ad' sl(|des pu(poselu||v ard
erlrus|asl|ca||v lo a l|l-|oo||rd ard We|| larred rar Wea(|rd a o|aze( ard l|e.
we cu|c||v |ea(r lral lr|s |s ler(v lause|e(. lre d|(eclo( ol lre voulr acaderv al FC
ur|or. le d(eels us Wa(r|v ard appea(s deru|re|v de||drled lral We rave a((|ved. Tre
p|ave(s |oo| a ||ll|e aW|Wa(d al eacr rav|rd lo la|e lre|( lu(r lo d(eel lre|( rosl. oul al lre
sare l|re lrev a(e |eer lo del lr|s (|drl.
Nooodv seers lo oe exacl|v su(e exacl|v roW ler(v l|ls |rlo a|| ol lr|s oul r|s p(eserce
d|ves eve(voodv ar |rp(ess|or lral re |s soreroW |rpo(larl ard soreoodv Wro reeds lo
66
oe l(ealed W|lr (especl. Tre suodued ard s||drl|v lo(ced po||leress corl(asls W|lr lre
(aucous oarle( a|red al 'Jav' or|v r|rules oelo(e.
Tre |ads a(e |ea(r|rd roW lo oerave.

In this sense we can borrow from Sennett’s (2003) critique of the lack of
mutual respect which otherwise tends to pervade the provision of services to
those who are forced to abide by or are dependent upon bureaucratic welfare
organisations and their representatives. He presents what is essentially an
argument for the performativity or stylistic presentation of ‘respect’ in a world
characterised by fleeting social relationships and pervaded by inequality,
where gaining respect becomes a matter of composing the appropriate kind
of ‘performance’. Success here is measured not by mere acts or gestures but
by the extent to which the performance embodies what it takes to generate
respect between two communities of people who do not know and do not
really want to know the full extent of each other’s experience. Here then, in
maintaining a ‘cool’ distance, ‘respect’ and authority are based upon an
understanding of the futility of any efforts to impose it by putting participant's
in their ‘place’ in the manner of the more traditional authoritarian sports
leader. In our times, gaining respect has become a matter of being accepted
by the Other as ‘cool’, as Sennett himself puts it: paying respect to the
Otherness of others.

Key issues: What LOCSP achieves is direct interpersonal contact with the
outsiders in a way in which other agencies, and particularly conventional
sports agencies, do not. The success of the organisation lies in its position as
a ‘cultural intermediary’. In maintaining a ‘cool’ distance, ‘respect’ and
authority are based upon an understanding of the futility of any efforts to
impose it by putting participants in their ‘place’.

Poachers and gamekeepers: Sporting gateways

One of the key markers of success for LOCSP and for the estate based work
in particular has been the transition from participant to coach of many of the
young men that the estate based interventions have engaged. Some of these
transitions have proved more successful than others.

...'Tore' Was ore ol lrose peop|e Wro. orce rel. Was reve( lo(doller. le rad ar ere(dv
lral loo| ove( arv s|lual|or. You Wou|d desc(|oe r|r lo lrose Wro rad rol rad lre p|easu(e
as. 'a cra(acle('. 'Tore's' (eco(d lo( ou(d|a(v. d(ud aouse ard crur|s ol ||le Wasled |r p(|sor
spo|e lo( |lse|l. 'Tore's' polerl|a| lo( 'success' seered appa(erl |r lre |rred|acv ol r|s
jo|r|rd lre 'deep-erde(s'
1
. le Was |oud ard corl|derl: lre (esl ol lre lear |oved r|r.
Tr(oudroul dares ard coacr|rd sess|ors re Wou|d ra((v. cajo|e. erpalr|se. ard
ercou(ade. le Was corp|ele|v oa|d ard l|ve lool rolr|rd. re |audred aooul lr|s ard |el
eve(voodv |r lre lear |roW lral |l Was o| lo do lre sare. 'Tore' Wou|d cu|le oller W|r
dares ov r|rse|l. 'Tore' Was cu|le sorelr|rd.
L0C3P oedar lo erp|ov r|r as a sess|ora| coacr. le Was (eda(ded as lre ep|lore ol
'success'. C|ulcr|rd c||crés. sore ol us oedar lo la|| ol 'poacre( lu(red dare-|eepe('.
loWeve(. 'Tore's' sr|r|rd ||drl cu|c||v oedar lo lade. Tre |r|l|a| eupro(|a. Wr|cr ce|eo(aled

1
We referred to and described this ‘sample group’ in our first annual report. However, during
the course of our research we had to adjust the sources of access to individuals within this
category as a consequence of the fluidity of movement of players across the different teams
that LOCSP organise. The concept of the ‘deep-ender’ is now more closely related to the
experiences and character of individuals than to particular teams or ‘projects’.
67
r|s doWr-lo-ea(lr. oul reve(lre|ess |rsp|(|rd. (appo(l W|lr lre '||ds'. Was (ep|aced ov a
serse ol urease. 'Tore' oecare |rc(eas|rd|v ur(e||ao|e. ll re Was |ale. o( |l re r|ssed a
coacr|rd sess|or. re Wou|d olle( slo(|es ard excuses ever W|de( lrar r|s pe(sora. wrer
re Was l|(sl app(oacred lo Wo(| W|lr lre P(od(arre re Was |rs|slerl lral re d|d rol Warl
pav|rd
'l Warl lo do |l lo( lre |ads so lrev dor'l erd up |||e re - |||e a |eror'.
Tre |asl leW l|res lral l saW 'Tore' lre c|(curslarces We(e s|r||a(. le Wou|d ra(cr |rlo
lre oll|ce ard derard rorev. le c|a|red lo( rou(s lo( Wr|cr re rad reve( oeer corl(acled
lo Wo(| |lo( Wr|cr re rad rol Wo(|ed). lo( sess|ors. Wr|cr re rad la||ed lo de||ve(.
A|le(ral|ve|v re Wou|d as| lo( ar advarce or r|s Wades. exp|a|r|rd lral lre das ard lre
e|ecl(|c|lv rele(s oolr reeded leed|rd ard lral r|s e|de(|v rolre( Was erac|aled ard |r
despe(ale reed ol o(ead. le oecare |rc(eas|rd|v vo|al||e. re crased ar oppos|l|or p|ave(
l(or lre p|lcr o(ard|sr|rd a Weapor ard lr(ealer|rd urspea|ao|e v|o|erce. L0C3P
le(r|raled 'Tore's' corl(acl. le rad sore serse lral re rad oeer urla|(|v l(ealed. lral re
Was oWed corpersal|or. wrer re Was rol sroul|rd ard oe|rd o|lle( re sa|d lral re Was
so((v. lral re |reW re rad 'luc|ed-up'. Alle( a l|re 'Tore' Was ro |orde( lre(e. 0lre(
p|ave(s |r lre 'deep-erde(s' sa|d lral lrev rad rea(d. oul cou|d rol sav lo( su(e. lral re rad
dore oac| lo p(|sor.

‘Tone’s’ fall from grace was a disappointment, a ‘failure’. Those LOCSP staff
most involved with the newly unfolding social exclusion projects were
beginning to conjure up an image of what a successful ‘client’ might look like
or do and, for a period, ‘Tone’ had appeared to fit the bill. ‘Success’, was now
beginning to be thought of as being evidenced by incorporating those who
had already been redeemed by sporting interventions into their further
development and provision. In many ways we should consider ‘Tone’s’ story
as somewhat tragic, a man whose history prior to coming into contact with
LOCSP was remarkable largely in terms of its futility and nihilistic tendencies.
His subsequent association with LOCSP suggested the possibility of a ‘fresh
start’, more than that, he could salvage something from a hitherto ‘wasted
life’ and put it to ‘good’ use. He had ‘screwed up’ before, but in the context of
what had just been put before him this appeared to be as big a blunder as
any previously made.

Yet those LOCSP staff that had been closest to ‘Tone’ never gave the
appearance of being overly disturbed by his downfall. When he failed to
‘show’ at a coaching session he was cursed in the same way that any other
colleague would be. It was never suggested that because ‘Tone’ had been
given a ‘chance’, an opportunity that somebody with his antecedents would
not normally receive, that he owed the organisation any added sense of
responsibility or duty. Attempts were made to reason with him when he
demanded money that he was not owed, but afterwards they would shrug
and joke that ‘Tone’ had ‘lost the plot’. ‘Tone’s’ ‘failure’ was understood as
being ‘just one of those things’, an occupational hazard.

Such stories are countered however by the succession of individuals who
have and continue to enjoy a more positive, lasting relationship with LOCSP.
‘Saz’, a reasonably good footballer that plays up front for the GEC, provides
one such example. The sport that he excels at is swimming. Before he
scored goals for a team that represents a run-down, council estate blighted
by the debilitating effects of drugs and crime he swam for Albania. It was
while representing his country in a tournament in Italy that ‘Saz’ made the
decision to come to England. Making his way across Europe clandestinely,
68
‘Saz’ arrived in this country and applied for asylum. His motivation for coming
here was, from our understanding of what he has revealed, principally
underscored by a young man’s sense of adventure. He talks of Albania with a
passion. He wants to return, possibly very shortly, it depends on whether he
can gain a place at university in which case he will stay a bit longer. His
reasons for being here confound those assumptions that usually attach to the
asylum-seeker debate. His modest lifestyle and academic ambitions belie the
‘economic migrant’ tag so freely banded about in popular discourse.

(So far) ‘Saz’ is a ‘success story’. Since joining the GEC he has become a
regular feature of the team. He impressed the coach as a dedicated and
responsible young man. He was encouraged to submit for the Junior Team
Managers coaching qualification, which he duly passed. At this stage it was
possible for LOCSP to employ ‘Saz’ on various projects. He has coached
young people in a variety of settings, and now ‘manages’ a team of asylum
seekers. The asylum seekers team is something, which is a great source of
pride to ‘Saz’. The team, for him, is much more than a collection of
individuals brought together for the purpose of sport:

To begin with it was really bad, they were fighting all the time. We
played against ‘Kyle’s’ team (a team managed by another LOCSP
coach) and they were fighting all the time. One of our players picked
up the corner-flag pole to fight with. After we played some games I had
to have a meeting with them. I said, ‘look, they will throw us out. Then
what will they think of us? We need to be better, so that our community
will have pride in us.’ They were better after that; I think they thought
about what I was saying to them.

Later he went on to reflect how the very process of engaging with young
people generates its own rewards, building self worth and confidence:

You actually think to yourself like...I actually helped that child you
know. I actually...I can't believe...You know you actually think of it,
you're actually proud of yourself. You're actually more proud of yourself
than you're proud of the person you just helped.

As such he is committed in his conviction that:

If it had not been for the community programme and Grant (the LOCSP
coach most closely involved in the GEC project) I could have been in
trouble. I could have had to find the wrong people to be with. I could
have been in prison.

‘Saz’ is in no way unique. The work of LOCSP has produced countless
success stories of this type. ‘Tone’s’ ‘failure’ then appears to contrast sharply
with the ‘success’ of ‘Saz’ and the many others like him, some of which we
reflect upon below. However the role that LOCSP has played in determining
these apparent outcomes is still somewhat ambiguous. Indeed, we have to
be open to the fact that neither of these ‘stories’ are resolved or complete in
any way. To make any real sense of the work of LOCSP one has to be
sensitive to the reality of the situation, to understand that rehabilitation is not
to be discovered in the short-term. Redemption does not occur in the instant
69
of a moment, the road to Damascus is not one that many of our players have
trodden.

More than this, there is a need to begin to question the underlying
assumptions that legitimate a strategy of sporting interventions. Pivotal to
such a justification process is the belief that the reason why the clients are ‘at
risk’ or ‘problematic’ is that they have somehow become detached from the
mores, values and aspirations of mainstream society. On the contrary
however, both ‘Tone’ and ‘Saz’ were eloquent and articulate in their belief
that the world should be a more equitable place, that communities needed to
be rebuilt, that the prevalence of crime reduced ‘ordinary’ people’s quality of
life. ‘Saz’ and ‘Tone’ coached for LOCSP because it paid a wage, but to
watch them go about their work gave an unmistakable impression that they
took immense pride from the belief that they were engaged in an honourable
project – that they were helping to improve things and implicitly that LOCSP
inspired them. Their values and dreams were not spectacularly at odds with
those of the ‘mainstream’, what was different was the ways in which they
went about their lives.

Blurred boundaries complicate the task of making simple distinctions
between LOCSP’s successes and failures. The stories of ‘Jay’ and his
contemporaries on the Woodberry Down estate illustrate the point well.

‘Jay’, who originally hails from Nigeria, now lives on the Woodberry Down
estate where LOCSP began to work as part of a multi-agency partnership
whose remit was to engage with those teenagers identified as being most at
risk of offending. ‘Sol’, the LOCSP coach responsible for developing this
particular project, recounts that ‘Jay’ was there from ‘day one’. He has rarely
missed a coaching session, his dedication to the team cause, his pride in
being made captain, are self-evident. ‘Jay’ passed his junior team
management qualification and was given regular sessional coaching work
with the organisation.

‘Jay’ also attends college. The recently developed programme of studies for
which he has enrolled is promoted on the basis that successful students will
be perfectly placed to enter the ‘football industry’. ‘Sol’ is sceptical. He
believes that the rationale for the programme’s inclusion into the syllabus is
based on a hunch that ‘football sells’, that it will ‘bring in the punters’. In spite
of his doubts as to the vocational potential or academic credentials of the
course ‘Sol’ seems to be pleased that ‘Jay’ is there. For his part ‘Jay’
believes his future will be in football.

During his early involvement with LOCSP he had several trials with semi-
professional teams but was never selected. During the summer he was given
a leading role in LOCSP’s provision of ‘sporting diversions’ in local Summer
Splash projects. He would arrive at sessions early and set out the equipment.
He talked to the children who attended with a quiet authority, he exuded
confidence. The children liked him. He was good at what he did. It struck us
that ‘Jay’ was playing the part of ‘Sol’ (in terms of style, mannerisms,
approach), playing the part not in a deceitful manner but as someone who
recognised that he had been taught well and was committed to continuing
good practice. 'Jay’ no longer harbours serious ambitions that he will be
‘spotted’, that his fortune lies in playing football at a professional level.
70
Rather, he has some sense that he may have a future working for LOCSP or
an organisation like it.

When seeking out the stories of success and failure, which we might
associate, with the work of LOCSP, ‘Jay’s’ story strikes us as immediately
more ambiguous than ‘Saz’s’ or ‘Tone’s’. He has proven himself to be a
conscientious worker, he attends college, he is a personable and popular
young man. For all of this, however, ‘Jay’ continues to be engaged in ‘risky
business’, a flirtation with danger with potentially long-term and damaging
consequences. The complications of ‘Jay’s’ domestic life, the manner in
which he sits astride two destinies (one positive the other ultimately
negative), his relationship with ‘Sol’, draws into sharp relief the complex task
that LOCSP has set itself.

Similarly, several of ‘Jay's’ friends and teammates have benefited from
LOCSP's work in ways, which do not fall easily from the coaching handbook.
Whilst ‘Zaidie’, a refugee from Sierra Leone, began to withdraw from the
programme after a couple of years this was in response to his own failure to
achieve the high standards he had set for himself which are now being
displayed in other directions and which do not undermine his respect for the
work of LOCSP. As ‘Sol’ reflects:

He’s become a DJ. 'DJ collect' I think his name is, so erm its still, I
mean he is a bit disillusioned by the football cos obviously... he went to
many trials. Unfortunately he wasn’t successful 'ere... he did work hard
and to be, he was a bit unfortunate on a few occasions so erm I think
he got a bit disillusioned by the whole thing, erm so he stopped, he
stopped playing, stopped playing with us, he hasn’t played with us for a
little while, but he still comes over and he stays in touch... I think he’ll
be back... yeah, he’ll be back, he’ll be back, he’ll be back definitely,
definitely. Cos I think he misses it like he was over there yesterday
saying he wants to play next week and this and that, he’ll be back, he’ll
be back... I actually spoke to him yesterday, said he wants to come
back but the nights that we train, he’s at college doing his accountancy
so that makes it difficult. So I think he, he’ll be back...

‘Lewis’ on the other hand, whilst always regarded as the least likely to get
involved in football or sport in any serious kind of way as his aspirations lay
elsewhere has since gone on to University but also remains in contact with
‘Sol’ and comes down to see the team during breaks from University. In turn
this continued contact and belief in the programme has since led to his own
involvement with the Football in the Community Scheme at Wolverhampton
Wanderers where he has become one of the star community coaches.

By contrast ‘Jim’, who was referred to the Eastside team from a local drug
agency, whilst having completed an Introduction to Coaching course and
coached successfully on the programme's summer courses has recently
been charged with possession in a drugs case for which ‘Sol’ has been
asked to send a character reference. In this respect ‘Jim’ continues to walk
the more familiar tightrope between the prospect of legitimate employment
and activities and the 'riskyness' of his former lifestyles.

71
Reflecting on the diverse and flexible ways in which engagement with the
project can evolve ‘Mo’s' case is also significant. 'Mo' has remained a
committed solid player but has also got into DJing and in relation to this
development was able to perform at a summer Splash event in Stoke
Newington for which he was paid. Despite the voluntary work he was doing
for LOCSP he could not be employed to do coaching as he was not trained
but he was able to work on the disco. As ‘Sol’ recalls

we were able to say ‘look, you know if you want to do the disco, we will
pay you to do it cos you know your trained to do it, your professional,
cos that’s what he does, so he came down here and done that so erm
he helped us out.

He also continues to come to training every week and plays for the team and
remains committed to helping the team play at a higher level and whilst other
players may have drifted away he is becoming closer to the organisation as
well as the team as a consequence of his wider involvement.

Reflecting on these short biographies it is clear that despite their
surroundings, in many respects the young men encountered by LOCSP are
often just very ordinary regular guys who happen to live and socialise in an
area that has been characterised as suffering from an excess of social
problems. As ‘Sol’, their main point of contact reflects:

We are working with these people and we just see em as you know
young people of sixteen, sixteen plus and we’re working with them and
they’re on, you know what’s supposed to be like a kind of rundown
council estate, you know, if we wasn’t there would they be better would
they be the same or would they be worse. I don’t know, I ain’t got a
clue; I just ain’t got a clue.

Outcomes are clearly hard to measure but what is significant is that two and
half years after identifying these young men all of them are still engaged with
the project in some way and maintain personal relations with the coach who
first made contact with them. This is a reflection of the journeys they have
shared. Perhaps it is the normality and banality of their situations, which is
the best testimony to LOCSP’s work on the Woodberry Down.

What seems important is the extent to which LOCSP provides the potential
for rather than a guarantee of a more positive destiny. This potential seems
to be at least partly wrapped up in the ability of the organisation to provide
training and employment opportunities, which extend beyond the involvement
in sporting competition alone. It is the extent to which the community sports
coach acts as a recognisable and achievable role model for young men who
are provided with the opportunity to achieve those goals for themselves
through the attainment of coaching and OCN qualifications as well as doing
paid sessional coaching for LOCSP themselves. In 'Ad's' terms:

I always just think back to the sort of stuff that we're doing and Positive
Futures is doing is in essence, it's just engagement, it's just because in
certain areas that whole infrastructure of youth clubs or church groups
or whatever people got involved with in the 50s and 60s to develop
young people's leadership skills, aren't there any more. And all we're
72
doing is replicating that really. It's nothing scientific or its just finding
committed staff that are interested in this kind of work and are going to
do it. There's nothing mesmerising. It's just what used to happen all the
time...just bringing through young leaders. When your 13,14, given
responsibility. Again like on school trips or anything like that it's being
given responsibility for stuff. That's all it is. And then giving them
opportunities to go on and do other things.

In this sense aspects of LOCSP’s work relate to the idea of organic growth
and the creation of participatory and flexible communities, which we reflect
on further in the final section of this report.

Key issues: One of the key markers of success for LOCSP and for the
estate-based work in particular has been the transition from participant to
coach. To make any real sense of the work of LOCSP one has to understand
that rehabilitation is not to be discovered in the short-term. What seems
important is the extent to which LOCSP provides the potential for rather than
a guarantee of a more positive destiny.

Urban myths and mundane realities: Authenticity, local knowledge,
discrimination and the everyday

Whilst characterised by an inflated fear of crime and above average levels of
reported crime, in areas such as the Gascoigne and Woodberry Down such
notoriety is simultaneously a source of resentment and cause for celebration
amongst its young residents. Each escalation of violence a travesty for its
victims whilst adding to the stock of street gossip, local mythology and
veneer of urban authenticity. Survival strategies in the East End of London
have long coalesced with a culture of 'ducking and diving' which gives
legitimacy to the practice of a range of pseudo criminal practices which are
'essentially working class, favouring an entrepreneurial style that is rooted in
pre-industrial forms of bargaining and exchange' (Hobbs, 1988: 101).

Accordingly, engagement with young men from these locales and more
particularly young offenders referred to LOCSP's Eastside team from the
probation and drug treatment services requires a certain willingness to
tolerate the masquerade of these cultural attachments:

Easls|de's l|(sl seasor corpel|rd |r a Tru(sdav alle(roor Wo(|s' |eadue rad dore We||.
Tre po||ce lear rad (a|sed corce(rs W|lr lre |oca| |eadue aooul p(oless|ora| oo||dal|ors
Wr|cr lo(oade lrer lo corso(l W|lr |roWr c(|r|ra|s. oul apa(l l(or lral lre l(ars|l|or l(or
||c|-aooul lear lo sorelr|rd a|lodelre( ro(e sl(uclu(ed. o(dar|sed ard (espors|o|e rad
(ur sroolr|v.
Al lre erd ol lre seasor a l(|p aWav lo corpele |r a oar| ro||dav |rv|lal|ora| corpel|l|or
appea|ed l(or lre pe(specl|ve ol L0C3P as rol or|v a l|ll|rd (eWa(d lo lre Easls|de p|ave(s
Wro rad corl(|ouled lo lre success ol lre |asl sever rorlrs. oul a|so as a lear-ou||d|rd
exe(c|se Wr|cr Wou|d lu(lre( corso||dale lre ere(derl serse ol ur|lv ard pu(pose le|l ov
scuad reroe(s.
Tre coacr la||rd us lo Easl Ard||a p|c|ed us up al r|re o'c|oc|. A lear l(or Po(lsroulr
rad rade lre oac| secl|or ol lre coacr lre|( oWr. As We ooa(ded lre coacr lre v|s|o|e
corl(asls oelWeer 'us' ard 'lrer' se(ved as relapro(s ol soc|a| Wo(|ds la( apa(l. Tre scuad
l(or Po(lsroulr We(e Wr|le. eve(v ore ol lrer. 0r|v lWo ol ou( lear sra(ed lre|(
corp|ex|or. 3lore ls|ard rol|ls suddesl lral lre Wesl courl(v corl|rderl rave ar
73
a||ed|arce lo a socce( casua| roo||dar suocu|lu(e. lre Ev|su l|ou(|sr corsp|cuous or lre
oull|ls ol Easls|de p|ave(s. rooded lops a(e a|so popu|a(. ra(||rd oul d|lle(erl suo cu|lu(a|
sers|o|||l|es. As T |epl or sav|rd:
'll's a Lordor lr|rd' - a o|ac| coc|rev da(ade scere ol a lr|rd.
Tre urW(|ller sra|| p(|rl ol expers|ve des|dre( |aoe|s Wa(red lral lrese co|ou(s r|drl rol
r|x. T c(ar|ed up r|s sourd svsler. Tre coacr (ad|o p|pes oul Rad|o 0re.
As We W|rd ou( Wav lr(oudr ar Easl Lordor v|sla ol ru|l|-cu|lu(a||sr. |ols ol d|lle(erl
co|ou(s Wa|| r|dr sl(eels ol ||ll|e oppo(lur|lv. save creap |rle(ral|ora| ca||-cerl(es ard
cra(|lv srops lral se|| doraled doods lo lre reedv. Lordor l(all|c |s s|oW: vou car |oo| oul
ol lre W|rdoW ard l(ave| slep ov Wree| W|lr a pedesl(|ar ol vou( cro|ce.
Tre Po(lsroulr lear cu|el|v corlerp|ale lr|s co((|do( ol lre rel(opo||s.
T p|avs r|s rus|c |oud|v ard p(oud|v: re p|avs |l lo( Easls|de. o|ac| Lordor le|||rd lre
vo|e|s roW |l |s - lral's roW re sees |l.
'll's a Lordor lr|rd' |s lre sroul eve(v l|re T |rc(eases lre vo|ure ard lre (ea( secl|or
rulle( lre|( d|sp|easu(e.
wa|||rd s|oW|v ard de||oe(ale|v doWr lre daurl|el. a Po(lsroulr |ad app(oacres lre
d(|ve( ard as|s r|r lo lu(r lre vo|ure up or lre (ad|o. Eve(voodv rea(d. re rad Warled
lrer lo. a|| ol lrer:
'We'(e rol ruds. reve( rea(d ol lre Po(lsroulr lr|rd?'
le lu(rs a(ourd ard Wa||s loWa(d r|s l(|erds... lav|rd sl(uc| oac| re roW rad lo Wa||
oac|.
T purped up lre vo|ure. Tre s|oW Wa|| oac| lo roreloWr l(|erds derarded a
3padrell| wesle(r oac||rd l(ac|. |l Was loo ro|sv lo rea( lre corpel|rd oeals. re Wa||ed
|||e Jorr wavre a|| lre sare.
'Pussv. pussv-rar'
le |dro(es |l. oul vou car see lral re |s d|ad lral re ras Wourd lrer up.
we a((|ve. ll's la|er lo(eve(. No pa(lv dave Wav: lrev jusl p|aved lre rus|c |oude(. Tre
coacr d(|ve( Wasr'l erjov|rd r|rse|l. lre l(|cl|or ard ro|se d|slu(o|rd r|s corlo(l.
'l dor'l ca(e |l vou sro|e |ads'.
Tre Po(lsroulr |ads sro|ed. lre pu(|sls l(or Levlor Waved rards ove( roses ard sa|d
|oud|v lral lrev d|dr'l Warl lo sl|r| |||e a l(arp.
F|ra||v |l ||c|ed oll as We Wa|led lo( lre oads. 8od|es lr(usl |rlo eacr olre(. a(rs
sl(elcred oul. T |s |r lre r|dd|e ol lre re|ee W|lr lre daurl|el-Wa||e(.
'le ca||ed re a r|dde(. rar'.
'3o|' p|aces r|rse|l |r lre r|dd|e ol |l a||:
'|eave |ll' we Wa|| aWav.
'le ca||ed r|r a r|dde(. v'|roW. '3o|'. se(|ous. re ca||ed r|r a r|dde('.
Tre Po(lsroulr Wr|le oovs read lo( lre|( 'cra|els'.
we rave a((|ved |r a |ard lral l|re srou|d rave lo(doller. a 'le|d|-r|' ro||dav pa(|. lappv
Wr|le lar|||es eal|rd l|sr ard cr|ps. 0ads |r |rolled rar||es. a corrura| ce|eo(al|or ol a||
lral |s dood Wrer lre sur sr|res or 'dood o|d o||drlv'. Trev carrol re|p oul sla(e al lre
ro(e corlerpo(a(v |rsu(derls.
As We Wa|| a(ourd lre arusererl a(cades ard lac|v souver|( srops |l Was |rposs|o|e
rol lo oe corsc|ous ol lre sl|( We We(e caus|rd arordsl lre olre( ro||davra|e(s. ll le|l as |l
lrese peop|e cou|d rol urde(slard Wral o|ac| oovs We(e do|rd re(e. Nore ol lrese
or|oo|e(s cou|d poss|o|v rave |roWr lral lr|s Was a looloa|| lear ol ex-ollerde(s ard d(ud
aouse(s oul lrev |reW lral lrev We(e o|ac|...

Alongside such exclusionary sentiment, relentlessly played to by the young
participants in search of credibility, respect and authenticity, the areas in
question and those who inhabit them are characterised by mundane
everyday qualities and vulnerabilities. As 'Ad' reflected in the aftermath of the
joint Gascoigne-Woodberry Down trip to Berlin:
74

I mean that's one of the things that struck me on that trip, is...that
things seemed to go from one level of being very mature sort of quite
streetwise London kids who you know can talk the talk or whatever, to
sometimes swinging back to the other level of absolutely appearing
absolutely quite naive. Not immature, that's not the right way of putting
it. Sort of a real inexperience...Yeah it was quite sweet, yes. It was like
a school trip in a way. that's right. They were all trying to be cool and
yet when it comes to it they're just like, yeah, they're still that age.

...8ac| |r 0(eal Ya(roulr alle( lre l|(sl ralcr ol lre lou(rarerl lre p|ave(s crarde |rlo
lre|( l|re(v ard We la|e a Wa|| aWav l(or lre (eso(l doWr a courl(v palr Wr|cr |eads us lo a
cu|rlesserl|a||v Erd||sr v|||ade.
Ever|rd sl(o||e(s casl us cu(|ous |oo|s oul lre alrospre(e seers soreroW ||drle( lrar
lre (eso(l.
Tre sre|ves ol lre \0 slo(e We(e scou(ed lo( |rd(ed|erls. Wr|cr r|drl d|ve ar edde |r
lor|drl's coo|e(v. p|av oll: 'vou |||e pasla '3o|'?'.
wrer We (elu(r lo lre cra|els lre p|ave(s rave a |roc|aooul oelo(e (epeal|rd lre
p(ev|ous r|drl's soc|a| aderda. lr-oelWeer rards ol ca(ds ard ooasls aooul supe(|o(
coo||rd s||||s lre la|| Was a|| aooul looloa||.
'0|d vou see re s||r r|r'?
'Trev lroudrl lrev We(e dorra ru(de( us. vou see lre|( laces Wrer l sco(ed?'
'we car W|r lr|s v'|roW. |l We car p|av |||e We car loro((oW We car W|r lr|s'.
N|ce oovs. do|rd r|ce lr|rds oelo(e 'Tore' upped lre arle:
'lre Porpev |ol dol lr(oudr. We r|drl del lrer |r lre l|ra|'.

Key issues: In areas such as the Gascoigne and Woodberry Down notoriety
is simultaneously a source of resentment and cause for celebration amongst
its young residents. Accordingly, engagement with young men from these
locales requires a certain willingness to tolerate if not indulge the
masquerade of these cultural attachments.

The good, the bad and the ugly: False promises, bad practice and
hostile residents

3ack ro rne rao

Tre dare oelWeer lre 0EC ard lre |oca| po||ce Was s|dr|l|carl lo( a ruroe( ol (easors.
As a p(e-seasor l(|erd|v |l Was |rpo(larl p(epa(al|or lo( lre lear Wro We(e aooul lo
eroa(| or lre|( l|(sl seasor ol corpel|l|ve |eadue looloa||. ll Was a|so a dare lral rad
dood puo||c (e|al|ors polerl|a| lo( p(orol|rd Pos|l|ve Fulu(es. Loca| jou(ra||sls ard c|v|c
d|dr|la(|es rad oeer |rv|led lo allerd. Tre ral|ora| coo(d|ralo( ol lre Pos|l|ve Fulu(es
P(od(arre rad l(ave|ed lo lre dare |eer lo exlo| lre v|(lues ol spo(l|rd |rle(verl|ors lo
arvore Wro crose lo ||sler.
Al a svroo||c |eve| lre dare a|so suddesled lral lre |oca| po||ce We(e p(epa(ed lo
susperd |ord-(urr|rd rosl|||l|es W|lr lre vourd peop|e ol lre 0asco|dre Eslale ard |erd
suppo(l lo ar |r|l|al|ve p(er|sed or lre oe||el lral vourdsle(s |rvo|ved. o( 'al (|s|' ol
oecor|rd |rvo|ved. |r dev|arl ||leslv|es cou|d oe (erao|||laled.
F|ra||v |l Was a|so ar oppo(lur|lv lo( pa(lre(s |r lre p(ojecl lo oose(ve al l|(sl rard lre
v|s|o|e ev|derce ol p(od(ess rade lo dale.
'Roooo'. lre 8a(||rd Youlr lrc|us|or P(od(arre's oll|ce( des|draled lo Wo(| W|lr 0(arl
Was re(e. ro|s||v sroul|rd ercou(adererl lo lre p|ave(s as lrev Wa(red up or lre p|lcr.
le spolled us Wa|||rd loWa(ds r|r.
75
'A|W|dr'. deeze('. re erlrus|asl|ca||v ruds 0(arl lrer ro|ds oul a l|sl so lral 0(arl car
(ec|p(ocale |r lre rarre( ol lre u(oar rardsra|e popu|a(|sed ov sl(eelW|se o|ac| voulr
|c|ercr l|sl ourp lo||oWed ov a sra(ed c|ercred d(|p).
le rods eade(|v lo Ne|| W|lr a cresr|(e cal d(|r:
'A|(|drl Ne||. lr|s Wral |l's a|| aooul er' po|rl|rd lo lre p|ave(s sl(elcr|rd ||ros |r
p(epa(al|or.
'A|(|drl 'Roooo'. roW'(e vou do|rd? 'Roooo' l Warl vou lo reel Pal 3|audrle(. Pal's ou(
(esea(cre('.
'AW 0eez'. 'Roooo' d(aos rv (|drl rard ard sullocales |l oelWeer oolr ol r|s oWr.
'we dol lo la|| deeze(. 0(arl Was le|||rd re a|| aooul vou. You'(e lre c(|r|ro|odv deeze(
a|r'l vou. You used lo (ur W|lr Leeds |rr|l. l Was urde(-5's oac| |r lre dav. used lo crase
0(arl ard r|s V|||Wa|| ruppel rales up ard doWr Lordor. |r'l lral (|drl deeez?'
'll vou sav so 'Roooo''.
Ne|| ard 0(arl rad sa|d lral 'Roooo' Was a cra(acle(

‘Robbo’ who, inverting time lines, we introduced earlier in the report through
our reflections on his subsequent rhetoric at the Youth Justice Board
conference, provides a good example of how the staged performance of
'authenticity' and efforts to accumulate the 'right' sort of cultural capital and
respect can backfire. For all his performance of street style, the LOCSP
coaches held this particular individual in low regard, believing him to be a
braggart and generally unreliable. At no time were these beliefs articulated
directly to the LOCSP team players, but the coach’s facial expressions, body
language and general discomfort whilst ‘Robbo’ was trying to win over the
team, effectively communicated to them that he had little respect for this
individual. In turn we observed how the team members quietly mocked
‘Robbo’, how the communication process was subverted (he believing that he
was winning their respect, and they believing that their coach’s assessment
of this character was vindicated by their ability to dupe him).

Such pursuit of respect has the potential to enter into a negative downward
spiral such that increasingly outrageous claims were made by the project
worker about what was to be provided for participants. At one stage there
was excited talk of a trip to Argentina whilst Grant continued to turn up to do
his coaching sessions on the Gazza every Monday night, come rain or shine.
Ultimately it is the consistency, reliability and honesty of LOCSP’s work,
which earns respect, rather than the glamour of unfulfilled promises. Whilst
Grant's work continues and the GEC continues to thrive, ‘Robbo’ left the
project midway through the period of our research. To this day, his superiors,
so eager to promote his work in the face of the first flushes of the recorded
reductions in crime on the estate, remain reluctant to reveal the full details of
the circumstances surrounding his departure.

Key issues: The staged performance of 'authenticity' and efforts to
accumulate the 'right' sort of cultural capital and respect can backfire.

'Something for the ladies'?

Away from the performance of empathy with the programmes participants,
more routine, familiar structural obstacles also continue to stand in the way of
a fully effective engagement strategy. To begin with some sports have been
criticised for being irrevocably gendered i.e. so imbued with sexist, usually
male, values as to render them unsuitable for an approach to participation,
76
which embraces community ideals. Some argue that particular sports are not
suitable for community ways of working, while others have a less radical view
of sport and see the structure of many sports as neutral in gender terms, so
that any sport in effect is potentially available to both men and women
equally. It seems clear though that sport’s continued association with
modernist assumptions can, in the context of interventions which are
predominantly focused on young men, lead to the predominance of an
exclusionary masculinist perspective (Hargreaves, 1994).

Whilst encouraging the integration of women into the core staff team - with
four female members in the full-time compliment of 10 staff - and celebrating
the place of girls and women in its wider inclusionary philosophy which has
seen the development of one of the most comprehensive Centres of
Excellence for women's football in the South East, as well as an extensive
netball and tennis programme, the ‘tougher’ estate based work of LOCSP
and other similar organisations often remains colonised as ‘men’s’ or
‘geezers’ work. Broader programmes of activity, which include netball, tennis
and women's football are included in the estate-based work but these
elements tend to be more structured and building or school based. Women
are welcome at the more informal sessions and some girls and women do
take part in sessions but sexist language remains ubiquitous and largely
unchallenged. In some respects the street vernacular amongst young men in
such neighbourhoods often exemplifies the heavily eroticised masculinist
discourse of football.

Through 'wind ups' and 'cussing' by young men and young women (Back,
1996) demonstrations of effeminacy or weakness are widely derided through
the use of the term ‘pussy’. Regardless of its authorial voice the metaphoric
implication of this form of sexualised denigration is clear, that to be a ‘pussy’,
a woman, is to be ‘deviant’, inferior. Away from the environs of the football
pitch itself young men express their sexual desires through the deployment of
their own, more familiar engagement strategies whilst standing ready to cast
any failure onto the limitations of the female ‘other’. Whilst on the trip to
Yarmouth the group of girls who hooked up with the Eastside players on the
last night seemed smitten but when it all came to nothing the boys cheered
themselves up on the walk home with a banter that suggested that; 'my
woman was wanting it but her ugly dog friends that you were sniffing all
round chased her away', 'no way man, your girl needed a bag on her face',
and so on.

The extent to which contemporary community sports coaches are complicit,
through their silence, in these expressions of masculine dominance is in
marked departure from the conventional restrictions, imposed or otherwise,
on ‘inappropriate’ language which are associated with mainstream forms of
youth work (Frosh, Phoenix & Pattman, 2002; Tett, 1996). Yet they are
entirely consistent with the non-judgemental frameworks and ability to read
and adapt to the alternative social realities of participants through which the
coaches operate.

It would be easy to dismiss this departure from the conventions of
contemporary youth work, which are also to be found in practice on the
estates where LOCSP work, as idle or a product of a shared ‘male’ outlook,
but to do so would be an injustice to the complexities of this approach. The
77
work described here is not delivered by a youth work organisation and does
not embrace building based educational programmes in this context. Equally
those they work with did not invite the coaches onto the estates. Rather, they
made their own introductions and, as pilots of an engagement strategy must
navigate their own pathways into participant’s lives. Whilst we are not naive
enough to assume that such approaches will necessarily transform social
outlooks grounded within the wider discursive restraints of sexist social
arrangements in sport and further beyond, it is through their engagement with
participants’ lives that the opportunity arises to have more meaningful
discussions concerning respect for partners, sexual behaviour and
responsibility. In turn influencing behaviour in a way that would not be
possible through moralistic challenges to the vernacular use of sexist
language by participants with whom relationships have not yet developed.
Indeed there is some recognition amongst participants that, beyond the
'playground' bravado ultimately their own destinies and ability to navigate a
path away from criminogenic lifestyles are tied up with their relations with
women. As Saz reflected:

A lot of people that is on the street that does bad stuff, the only people
that take them off the street is women...I know a lot of guys like, that
are older than me, maybe 22, 23, you know, 24, they are older from
back in the days that we used to call the big boys, you know. From the
minute all of them started getting like girls, having kids, they calmed
down.

Having said this LOCSP’s estate based work does remain almost exclusively
a male preserve both in terms of participants and coaches. LOCSP has an
extensive programme of girls and women's football provision but in the main
it is not delivered according to the same outreach principles, which guides
the estate based activities. A small number of women have engaged with
‘Sol's’ weight training sessions which we consider further in the following
section but it is clear that estate based football sessions, on their own, are
not a sufficient mechanism for engaging young women in those locales.

Key issues: the ‘tougher’ estate based work of LOCSP and other similar
organisations often remains colonised as ‘men’s’ or ‘geezers’ work

'Cool niggers': Race, ethnicity and cultural pluralism

Sport is often characterised as an area of social life in which racial and ethnic
differences are less marked than in, for example, the workplace.
Furthermore, football is seen to provide one of the key vehicles for the ritual
articulation of identity, be it through the expression of regional pride, local
patriotism or national belonging (Back, Crabbe & Solomos, 2001). Equally
though, football makes available a means for expressing the boundaries of
inclusion, exclusiveness, xenophobia and racism. Evidence of racism in
football first became a subject of widespread concern in the late 1970s and
1980s, a time when there was increasing racist behaviour related to football
and attempts by extreme right-wing groups to use football as a basis for
recruitment (Clarke, 1973, 1978). But interest in the issue was also partly
related to the increasing presence of black players amongst the ranks of
professional footballers and, increasingly, all levels of football during the
period since the 1970s.
78

The earliest discussions of racism in football tended to see the phenomenon
as an extension of the problem of football hooliganism, often connected
closely with support for the national team (Williams, Dunning and Murphy,
1989). The portrait of racism offered in most studies is limited to the
behaviour of young white working-class men, in which racism and
hooliganism are coupled as mutually reinforcing social phenomena. What we
want to argue here, following Back, Crabbe and Solomos (2001) is that the
relationship between racism and football culture - at all levels - is more
complex than is often assumed. We wish to make a case for trying to situate
the discussion of racism within the local ecology of social relations that give
football meaning in specific contexts.

The racial and ethnic profile of LOCSP’s participants and coaching staff is
remarkably diverse. A large majority of those engaging with the
organisation's estate based activities are from minority ethnic groups, many
of whom are also asylum seekers and recent immigrants. In this context
there have been examples of the expression of racism in the face of the
gatherings of youth, which are prompted by the organisation of football
sessions on the estates. This was particularly visible in relation to the
Gascoigne estate, where an established white working class population has
seen a steady transformation of the ethnic profile of the area in recent years.

When Grant first started making visits to the estate, the tensions were
revealed not in terms of the direct hostility of local residents but rather in the
guise of the individual charged with the task of protecting community
facilities, the estate caretaker. Neil Watson and Grant had first met the
caretaker at a tenants meeting held in the Gascoigne Estate Community
Centre. They were addressing the meeting, attempting to explain what they
hoped to achieve with the football project that was about to commence. For
the most part the caretaker just ‘slept’ and displayed his disinterest but later,
prior to a coaching session he asked Grant accusingly; ‘yeah, well this is all
very well, sorting out the ethnics and the junkies, but what about our kids, the
good kids, the kids who were born and bred on the estate what’s in it for
them?’ And for him that was what it was all about, community was a simple
concept which applied simply to white working class Eastenders who
struggled to retain a sense of identity and common purpose in the face of an
alien invasion which brought with it problems of crime and ill-conceived
policies which ignored the needs of the host population. From that moment
onwards the caretaker was as obstructive to the project as he possibly could
be. Lights were never switched on, gates were never left open. Grant would
send one of the boys to the community centre and the caretaker would trot
out some story about losing the keys, or forgetting that LOCSP needed the
‘cage’ opening tonight. As much as possible Grant had to bypass the
caretaker, learn how not to deal with him whilst still dealing with the kids. A
good example of how sometimes you need to not deal with self-elected
representatives of the ‘community’ when dealing with the needs of the
community.

This hostility possibly reflected a wider tension in the environs of LOCSP’s
estate based work and indeed those who regard themselves as part of the
Leyton Orient 'community' which has been illustrated both in the form of
letters to the community programme and in the discussion of the club's
79
relationships with its 'community' on radio phone-ins and message boards on
the official web site of Leyton Orient Football Club which have included some
quite overtly racist postings. In some ways the interjections of fans on the
club's website (which it must be understood are countered by an
overwhelming volume of posts which are critical of their sentiment) reflect a
wider distinction between LOCSP’s work and the mainstream cultures of
participative support for professional football clubs which often underpin the
motivation for football to 'do good'. As illustrated on Eastside's trip to Great
Yarmouth these distinctions can operate in contrasting directions, prompting
respect for the 'cool' exoticism of the 'other', alongside the more exclusive
forms of hostile racism we witnessed earlier as well as raising the prospect of
cultural exchange.

Easls|de We(e oealer |r lre ser|-l|ra|s ov a lear Wro used lo p|av lodelre( lo( 8(|slo|
ur|ve(s|lv. As lre dare p(od(essed lo |ls |rev|lao|e corc|us|or lre lac||es l(or lre |os|rd
s|de oecare ud||e( ard ud||e(. Arv voca| corp|a|rl l(or lre 8(|slo| corl|rderl |ed lo a
srov|rd ralcr ard ar |rv|lal|or lo 'so(l lr|rds oul'.
Easls|de We(e corp|ele|v del|aled Wrer lre l|ra| Wr|sl|e Was o|oWr. P|ave(s l(ade |rsu|ls
W|lr ore arolre(:
'roW car vou rol sco(e l(or lre(e rar?'
'3o|' dalre(s lrer lodelre( ard le||s lrer l|(r|v rol lo la|| apa(l roW. lo (ereroe( roW
We|| lrev rave a|| dore. Vosl ol lre lear a(e cajo|ed |rlo a Wa(r-doWr jod a(ourd lre p|lcr.
a leW (eluse:
'Wa(r-doWr? l reve( Wa(red up. ll '3o|' |reW roW lo (ur a lear l Wou|d rave sla(led ard
oossed lr|rds |r lre r|dd|e. Var. l car'l oe||eve |l v'|roW. we cou|d'a Wor lral'.
Ever lre reWs lral lre Porpev oovs rad a|so oeer |roc|ed oul |r lre|( ser|-l|ra| la||ed
lo (a|se sp|(|ls oevord lre s|c| as a pa((ol |eve|.
we d(|lled ac(oss lre p|av|rd l|e|ds ard slopped lo Walcr a dare corlesled ov vourd
oovs ro o|de( lrar ler. '3o|' la||ed lo ore ol lre suosl|lules Wro sa|d lral lr|s Was lre l|ra|
ol lre|( ade d(oup's corpel|l|or. l|s lear care l(or No(W|cr. lrev We(e cuo-scouls. Tre
rarade( ol lre lear oa(|ed r|s d|sp|easu(e al la|||rd scuad reroe(s. '3o|' rade sa(casl|c
correrls aooul lr|s rar's ralu(a| |rao|||l|es lo coacr ||ds ol lr|s ade. '3o|' ard a leW ol lre
scuad la|e |l |r lu(rs lo |rp(ess lre vourd oov W|lr r|llv l(|c|s ard ||c|s.
'we've rea(d aooul vou. vou do a s|||v darce ard sroul slull. we saW vou vesle(dav.'
Tre dare |s l|ed al lre erd ol ro(ra| l|re. Tre rarade( |s |eer lo la|| aooul poo(
pe(lo(rarces oul r|s lear d(av|lale loWa(d '3o|' ard lre olre(s:
'You'(e coo|' lrev coo.
'3o|' la|es s||erl p|easu(e |r upslad|rd r|s courle(pa(l. 0u( l(|erd lre suosl|lule |s d|ver
r|s crarce W|lr lWo r|rules ol exl(a l|re (era|r|rd. ll does lo pera|l|es. 0u( l(|erd sl(o|es
W|de lre pera|lv lral dele(r|res deleal. Tre Wro|e lear d|sso|ve as ore. sooo|rd so ra(d
lral lrev Wooo|e. Vurs ard dads le|| lrer lral |l |s o|. lral |l doesr'l ralle(. lral lrev d|d
We|| lo del lr|s la(. lre oovs carrol slop c(v|rd. '3o|' ard lre olre(s l(v lo jo||v lrer up oul
W|lr or|v ||r|led success.
Tral r|drl lre lear d(ess-up ard do lo( a Wa||. T(opr|es ard reda|s a(e rarded oul |r
lre ra|r oa(. soreoodv Wro orce p|aved lo( No(W|cr C|lv. Wro rooodv cou|d (ereroe(.
d|d lre rorou(s. Tre lear slaved aWav. a leW ol us d|d Wral We lroudrl Was po||le ard
sa|d lrar| vou or oera|l ol lre olre(s. l la||ed lo sore ol lre 8(|slo| p|ave(s |Wro rad dore
or lo W|r lre lou(rarerl) al lre oa( ard lrev (ec|ored lral We dave lrer lre ra(desl
ralcr lrev p|aved.
'Trev sla(led do|rd c(azv al lre erd lroudr. Tre(e Was ro reed lo( sore ol lral. wral
Was lre p(oo|er?'
P|ave(s l(or olre( lears jo|red |r lre oarle(. |rc|ud|rd sore ol lre Porpev corl|rderl.
Eve(voodv sard lre p(a|ses ol Easls|de: dood p|ave(s. l|e(ce sp|(|l. a rad ce|eo(al|or.
80
'wrv a(er'l lrev re(e?'
Trev d|dr'l |||e |os|rd. lrev d|dr'l |||e oe|rd Wr|le l(asr r|dde(s. lre Lordor lr|rd Wasr'l a
lac|v d|sco. jac|el ard l|e. (urre(s-up reda| ||rd ol lr|rd.
we We(e due lo reel al lre dales al ler. Tre Porpev scuad We(e a|| lre(e oul or|v ra|l
ol lre Easls|de lear We(e or l|re. Tre olre(s d(|lled oac| lo lre coacr s|oW|v: '3o|' lea(ed
|rlo lrer. '3ear' Was |asl. L||e rosl ol lre olre(s re rad oeer sropp|rd |r seas|de
erpo(|urs spec|a||s|rd |r lre sa|e ol rove|lv p(oducls. le loo| lre (ep||ca dur oul ol |ls oox
ard (ar r|s l|rde(s ove( |l as '3o|' (ead lre (|ol acl. Jurp|rd lo r|s leel re sa|d lral re Wou|d
oe cu|c|:
'oac| |r lWo r|rules'.
le lo|d re |ale( lral rooodv Wou|d oe||eve lral |l Was deru|re. lral |l Was a Wasle ol
rorev. lral re reeded r|s rorev oac|. '3o|' Was ard(v. |l Wasr'l lre dur |l Was lre
d|s(especl.
Tre Porpev oovs sard lre Porpev cr|res. Easls|de (esporded W|lr a corl(|ved olle(|rd
exlo|||rd lre re(|ls ol easl Lordor c|l|zersr|p - vou |reW al orce lral lre Lordore(s rad
reve( oeer (edu|a(s or lre le((ace.
'Trev'(e a|(|drl lr|s |ol v'|roW' seered lo oe lre popu|a( corsersus ol lre Easls|de lear
as lrev (a|sed la(eWe|| sa|ules lo Wesloourd d|sc|p|es ol lre looloa|| lr|rd.

For the most part the participant's in LOCSP’s activities are motivated by a
desire to play football which is distanced from the conventional modes of
engagement with football associated with spectator cultures and organised
'functions' which can create a further tier of distinction making onto which
racialised understandings can be mapped. Whilst LOCSP’s participants are
conversant with the stars of the game and the leading clubs in English and
European professional football, they tend not to be ‘fans' in either the
conventional or more contemporary understandings of the term (Giulianotti,
2002) and certainly have little attachment to Leyton Orient as a football club,
beyond their engagement with LOCSP staff and feint hopes of a place in the
club's youth development programme. Whilst not presenting a problem for
the provision of community sports sessions in itself, such a situation does
raise the potential for the kind of tensions, exclusionary language and
hostility to community work reflected in the website postings and letters
referred to above which are consistent with Madden’s reflections on ethnic
minority attendance at Leyton Orient (2002)

Key issues: There have been examples of the expression of racism in the
face of the gatherings of youth, which are prompted by the organisation of
football sessions on the estates. For the most part the participant's in
LOCSP’s activities are motivated by a desire to play football which is
distanced from the conventional modes of engagement with football
associated with spectator cultures and organised 'functions' which can create
a further tier of distinction making onto which racialised understandings can
be mapped.

81
Section 7. 'Playing the game': Delivery and professional practice

Blazers and tracksuits: Conventional approaches to community sport
provision

According to Torkildson (1998) there are two key approaches to sport and
recreation provision: social planning and community development.

Social Planning

The social planning approach is concerned with meeting consumer needs
and ultimately has a limited view of citizenship. This perspective can basically
be characterised as a 'top down' approach which views participants as
consumers of services. It emphasises the importance of management and
administrative skills, which need to be applied to establish consumer 'needs'
and develop plans for the distribution of available resources.

This perspective has heavily influenced the various sports councils' approach
towards the organisation of sport in Britain over the last 30 years but has also
been subjected to concerted criticism particularly in relation to its failure to
address the needs of women and minority groups (Yule, 1990). Yule's
critique is premised upon the following key failings:

1. Failure to locate policy/programming within a wider social, political and
economic context.
2. Lack of analysis of power relations.
3. The treatment of individual lives and recreation policy/programming as
distinct spheres each surrounded by their own constraints and
barriers.
4. The extent to which interventions are seen to 'play at the edges', thus
maintaining the status quo rather than achieving 'real' transformations
in people's lives, social outlooks and wider social and political
relations.

Community Development

In contrast to the social planning approach, from a community development
perspective the emphasis is placed upon finding ways of organising sport,
which set out:

• To work with people who may not normally participate in sports
• To benefit the recreationally disadvantaged
• To provide opportunities for participation
• To help people to help themselves
• To democratise and decentralise provision
• To generate community empowerment

The emphasis is placed upon outreach approaches and organisation from
the 'bottom up’, which implies a quite different approach towards the
management and delivery of community, sports resources.

The key distinctions between the two approaches can be established in
terms of the categories outlined in the following table.
82
Table 2: Rationales underpinning modes of sports service delivery

Mainstream Sports Delivery

National and Regional
Activity Focus
Facility Based
Formal
Trends
Commercial
Expertise
Professionals
Standardised
Detached
Prescriptive
Community Sports

Local
People Focus
Outreach
Informal
Barriers
Social
Enablers
Animateurs
Flexible
Empathetic
Empowering

The LOCSP approach: Planning, flexibility and community engagement

Whilst the approaches to engaging with young people outlined in the
previous section of this report are very much characterised by a casual, easy
going and confident style which places an emphasis on the interests and
outlook of individual participants, the coaching sessions and sports events
that LOCSP organise are nothing of the sort. Indeed much of the respect that
LOCSP staff have built up amongst participants in their schemes is derived
from the organisational and coaching skills they possess and their ability to
make participants work hard and emulate their own commitment and sense
of responsibility. The point of departure with more conventional planned
interventions is that, in the main, the young people recognise the coaches as
'one of their own' and worthy of emulation. As such the LOCSP approach
might be considered as something of a hybrid of the social planning and
community development approaches in that it relies upon mainstream
funding, targeted interventions and the expertise of staff to engage and
empower young people in 'community' settings.

Key issues: The LOCSP approach might be considered as something of a
hybrid of the social planning and community development approaches. Much
of the respect that LOCSP staff have built up amongst participants in their
schemes is derived from the organisational and coaching skills they possess
and their ability to make participants work hard and emulate their own
commitment and sense of responsibility.

The organisation and structure of LOCSP estate based sports

LOCSP is responsible for the organisation of an almost bewilderingly
extensive programme of sports activities ranging from taster sessions
through to Leyton Orient Football Club's own youth development programme
and Centre of Excellence. In the region of 150 sessions are organised on a
weekly basis with between 4 and 5000 participants. These are delivered
across the East End of London and further a field in relation to a wide variety
of contributions to the community sport agenda.

The estate-based work constitutes only one element of this work but
represents an increasingly significant part of the overall programme.
83
Sessions are organised on the Woodberry Down estate from 3.30 to 7.30 on
a Monday night, training for the Eastside team in Stoke Newington on
Tuesdays from 7:00 to 9:00 and for younger participants on Wednesdays.
Sessions are organised on the Gascoigne estate on Mondays and
Wednesdays from 5:00 to 9:00. Sessions take place on the Beaumont estate
in Waltham Forest on Monday's from 3:30 to 5:30 and on the Teviot estate in
Tower Hamlets from 5:30 to 7:00. Weight training sessions are also
organised at Walthamstow YMCA with referrals from a range of criminal
justice and drug and alcohol treatment agencies on Tuesdays between 2:00
and 4:00. Beyond these coaching sessions LOCSP organises twenty seven
different football teams, many of which have emerged as a direct
consequence of the organisation's estate based work.

Table 3: LOCSP Football Teams - 2003/2004

Team name Locality Level League Age
Eastside Open Intermediate

& Junior
Essex Business
House
Essex Business
16+

16+
Leyton All
Stars
Waltham
Forest
Junior Ilford District
All Nations

Wanstead Flats
16+
U16s

U14s
St Mary's Gascoigne Junior All Nations 16+
Gascoigne
Estate Crew
Gascoigne Amalgamated
Borough League
U13 &
U14
Stratford Stratford Amalgamated
Borough League
U12 &
U15
TAG Tower
Hamlets
Junior Wanstead Flats U11s
Stoke
Newington
Woodbury
Down
Junior All Nations U16s &
U14s
Woodbury
Down
Woodbury
Down
Junior All Nations U16s
RHG Tower
Hamlets
Amalgamated
Borough League
U16s
LOASS Junior Rural Friendly 2x U8s
2x U9s
2x U10s
2x U11s
U14s
Colebrook
Royals
Junior Barking Echo U7s
U10s
U11s

The majority of these teams have emerged in one way or another through the
estate based football sessions linked to local SRB, Positive Futures and
From Offending to Employment programmes. At the pinnacle lies Eastside,
which draws on players from across the estates that LOCSP work in, but
particularly the Woodberry Down, and plays at Intermediate/Senior level in
the Essex Business House League, a Saturday league in the FA pyramid
system.
84

Key issues: LOCSP is responsible for the organisation of an almost
bewilderingly extensive programme of sports activities

From cradle to grave: Negative 'community' labels and the pressure to grow

Through the early part of its development Leyton Orient community
programme's sport development activities were not accorded much regard
beyond those involved with the scheme itself. Rather the activities were seen
to represent a social function, to illustrate the football club's good intentions
and foster good will in the 'community'. Ironically it was with LOCSP’s
movement out of the safer elements of the football in the community scheme
and into the sphere of diversionary and estate based work that a
reassessment of their wider sports development work was prompted.

The movement into estate based work soon revealed the need for LOCSP to
begin organising its own teams and such was the quality of a number of the
players recruited that it soon became imperative to develop progression
routes that would satisfy those players aspirations as well as reinforce the
credibility of the organisation in the face of future generations of players.
Initially there were efforts to link up with the Centre of Excellence at Leyton
Orient where coaches were sent to build links and progression routes on the
basis of their access to unconventional scouting networks and also to
develop their own coaching skills. But the 'community' tag is not one which
carries much weight in professional football, and whilst some youngsters
were taken on, following tip offs, some of LOCSP’s coaches soon found that
their own coaching talents were better appreciated elsewhere. Ironically a
reputation that was leading to the free flow of funds from government bodies
on the one side was also closing off opportunities for progression in the world
of football.

There was the danger that LOCSP’s interventions would be restricted to a
one tier structure despite the emergence of players of undoubted talent
through the estate based teams and the Probation Service sponsored FOTE
programme and the need to provide other avenues for their progression as
they matured. Whilst the pyramid system, which underpins both the amateur
and professional games in England, provides almost limitless opportunities to
play at higher and higher standards, the concern was that other clubs,
particularly as players moved up the system, might not be sensitive to the
needs and circumstances of those that LOCSP had engaged. The
conventional disciplinary regimes of the football hierarchy which does not
afford second chances easily was seen as a danger which might undo the
patient work that had been invested in many of the participants in LOCSP’s
activities.

As such the organisation looked around for a team that they themselves
could run in order that they could ease players into the higher standards of
discipline required at Senior level. Having provided a couple of promising
players to Stansted who play in the Essex Senior League, LOCSP took over
the running of their reserve team and agreed to fund it on the basis that they
could bring their own talented youngsters in and pass the most promising
onto the Stansted 1st team. This development was never going to be a
straightforward business given Stansted's location in the hinterlands of
85
London and the disparity in the cultural ecologies of the areas. Whilst
LOCSP’s players willingly trained for the new club, pressures soon emerged
which were once again related to negative perceptions of community sport
projects and their participants and the exclusive tendencies of traditional
sports structures.

To avoid the potential for the team to become a dumping ground for Stansted
players at the end of their carriers there had been an agreement that only 3
'1st team' players would play for the reserves at any one time. However, in
the face of local concerns about the 'type' of players that LOCSP were
bringing in which suggested both a racialised understanding of who should
represent Stansted and the continuing negative connotation attached to
'community' sport and who it attracts, the club sought to renegotiate the
'quota' of 'their' players up to five. The call came as something of a surprise
but was dealt with true to the traditions of LOCSP. The proposal was flatly
refused. Nobody dictates terms to LOCSP, particularly where there is the hint
of another agenda which conflicts with the underlying principles of the
organisation. ‘Sol’, the team coach and Grant, the LOCSP Director were
against it, made the point clear to their short-term partners and with that the
Stansted experiment was over.

LOCSP remained committed to their idea of internal progression routes, but
the eventual fruition of that objective came as something as a surprise. After
his purchase of the club, even if motivated by commercial expediency, Barry
Hearn had made much of his commitment to the local community and in his
'View from the Top' commentary in the club programme (now pinned to the
wall above 'Ad's' favoured desk in an act of ironic subversion) had
proclaimed not only that the players and management would 'be deeply
involved in the local community' but also that 1st team players would
increasingly be drawn from that local community. Some six years later the
club Chairman's memory must have been pricked as he began to notice the
expertise in coaching and football development that was emerging on his
doorstep under the south stand in the LOCSP offices.

During the course of our research the Programmes Manager has obtained
his full FA badge and is also now qualified to train coaches. He works with
the Arsenal Football Club Academy coaching the under tens and through his
work has developed a degree of expertise and network of coaches which
would be the envy of many lower division clubs. With the recruitment of a
number of well qualified sessional coaches such as ‘Kels’, ‘Kyle’ and ‘Stevo’
there is a recognition that a skills base is emerging at LOCSP which
challenges the conventional understanding of the community sports agency
as a lightweight, social service incapable of developing genuine talent.

The point was confirmed when the club Chairman Barry Hearn called up out
of the blue and asked LOCSP if they would provide a costing to help run the
Leyton Orient Centre of Excellence for the nine to sixteens. Given the
contacts, existing programmes and access to facilities that LOCSP had, it
became clear that they were able to deliver what the club wanted at a fraction
of the cost and were invited to help run certain elements of the operation in
September 2003. Gary Karsa was recruited from Charlton to run things and
such was the impression they made that when the youth team manager
Martin Ling took on the 1st team manager's role LOCSP were invited to
86
expand their role, bringing in the former Arsenal midfielder Paul Davis to
oversee the senior element of the programme.

Accordingly LOCSP now has a comprehensive programme of activity
extending from grassroots work with five and six year olds right through to
professional football club youth team players. Other relationships exist with
non-League clubs such as Boreham Wood, Bishop Stortford, Billericay and
Braintree, whilst players have been offered trials at Northampton Town and
Bristol Rovers in the Football League. There is a sense in which the
organisation is now in a position to realise the aspirations of players at all
levels having painstakingly developed a range of progression routes and
identified appropriate leagues for each of its teams. Indeed LOCSP has been
instrumental in establishing the Amalgamated Borough's League launched in
March 2004 which is open to all of the programmes estate based teams. At
the same time, despite the growth of an increasingly professional football
development programme the organisation remains attentive to the need to
adopt a range of strategies and approaches for working with different groups.
Whilst the GEC may now engage in competitive structures and train as a
team, walk up sessions where the coaches facilitate the participants
organisation rather than impose rigid training structures continue on a weekly
basis.

LOCSP's own approach is then understood to have been reliant on:

• The emergence and growth of LOCSP’s own teams
• The development of internal progression routes
• The development of professional coaching skills
• Access to facilities
• Continuing expertise in youth/community work

These developments present their own dilemmas and problems. The
programme's role at the intersection of 'community' activity and professional
football re-invokes the concept of the cultural intermediary explored in the
previous section but involves the programme in this process in new ways.
Whilst widening opportunities for LOCSP’s brightest talents the elitist ethos of
the Centre of Excellence potentially involves the organisation in the closing
off of avenues and facing participants with the possibility of bringing closure
to their aspirations to play football at the highest level. At the same time
though the range of activity means that other opportunities are always
available across the variety of playing standards as well as the prospect of
developing coaching skills and contributing to the programmes work in other
ways. Indeed LOCSP has been running a Centre of Excellence for girls and
young women for over three years with great success, with one of their
players selected to play for England's under fifteens in 2002.

Nevertheless the prospect does emerge of LOCSP splintering along ever
multiplying lines where the boundaries of one sphere of activity have the
potential to both clash and coincide with others. Whilst the respect and
credibility that goes with the community sports coaches work will undoubtedly
be enhanced by the recognition of their skills in the wider sphere of sports
administration and development, coaches will be forced to wear a greater
variety of 'masks' representing a wider variety of interests.

87
It is however a model that has attracted interest outside the club and six
other professional clubs have already been in touch to find out more about
how their community schemes might take on a similar role. There is a
recognition that sports funding bodies may well be more comfortable putting
resources into development schemes, which have an arms length distance
from the clubs that give them their name.

Key issues: Through the early part of its development Leyton Orient
community programme's sport development activities were not accorded
much regard beyond those involved with the scheme itself. A skills base is
now emerging at LOCSP, which challenges the conventional understanding
of the community sports agency as a lightweight, social service incapable of
developing genuine talent. Accordingly LOCSP now has a comprehensive
programme of activity extending from grassroots work with 5 and 6 year olds
right through to professional football club youth team players.

Tough love: Sport, discipline, self-control and responsibility

Ultimately LOCSP, and particularly its estate based activities remain, by
definition, outreach projects and in accordance with its organisational
philosophy, are organised, funded and monitored independently just as the
football development element is set to become a trading entity in its own
right. As such the estate-based activities themselves tend to reflect the
personality and outlook of the individual coaching staff, whilst being
underpinned by the inclusionary philosophy of LOCSP as a whole.

In addition to the ability to engage which we reviewed earlier, this area of
work relies upon the possession of much sought after skills and the ability to
coach them to others. It also requires a willingness to be flexible; to
acknowledge that what is suitable for those who aspire to the highest
sporting standards may be distinct from those seeking to fill their time or to
extend their social profile. Two episodes illustrate the point.

.../ co|o n|onr |n $roke heu|noron

3lo|e NeW|rdlor ras a (epulal|or. Lordore('s Wro rave reve( oeer lo lr|s pa(l ol
ro(lreasl Lordor '|roW' aooul 3lo|e NeW|rdlor. 3lo|e NeW|rdlor all(acls puo||c
|rveslrerl oecause cerl(a| dove(rrerl oe||eves lre p|ace lo oe |r reed ol '(e-dere(al|or'.
Jusl ac(oss lre (oad l(or 3lo|e NeW|rdlor 3croo| slards lre reW |oca| |e|su(e cerl(e.
Furded ov |olle(v rorev lre ou||d|rd Was seve(a| r||||or pourds ove( ouddel Wrer l|ra||v
corp|eled. Neve(lre|ess |ls everlua| oper|rd Was re(a|ded as ra(||rd a s|dr|l|carl ard
pos|l|ve deve|oprerl |r lre (eou||d|rd ol a supposed|v sralle(ed corrur|lv. Tre exce||erl
spo(l|rd lac|||l|es lral lre cerl(e rad lo olle( We(e oevord douol. wral l(ouo|ed corrur|lv
spo(ls acl|v|sls |ard lrose ro(e dere(a||v corce(red W|lr u(oar dep(|val|or ard |ls urecua|
corsecuerces) Was lre p(|c|rd recrar|sr lral Was pul |rlo p|ace. P(|ces We(e (eda(ded as
oe|rd loo r|dr. lo( lre Waded. lre urWaded. cr||d(er. pers|ore(s. Peop|e rave vo|ced
susp|c|ors lral lre lac|||lv. (alre( lrar se(v|rd lre reeds ol lre l(ad|l|ora||v urde(-p(|v||eded
popu|al|or ol lre oo(oudr. (ep(eserled a suos|d|sed spo(ls cerl(e lo( lre |rc(eas|rd ruroe(
ol vourd p(oless|ora|s rov|rd |rlo lre a(ea Wro a(e olre(W|se lo oe lourd |r lre l(erdv
oa(s ard o|sl(os ol sudder|v r|p Cru(cr 3l(eel.
3lo|e NeW|rdlor scroo| ras a|so all(acled puo||c |rveslrerl. lre asl(o lu(l Wre(e L0C3P
(urs |ls l(a|r|rd sess|ors lo( lre Easls|de lear (ep(eserl|rd a p(opo(l|or ol lre reW
sperd|rd. loWeve( lre scroo| |lse|l |s sl||| (eda(ded as la|||rd. W|lr vourd u(oar
88
p(oless|ora|s exe(c|s|rd cro|ce |r lre|( |rvo|vererl W|lr lre 'corrur|lv'. ov lerd|rd lo serd
lre|( cr||d(er lo oe educaled ouls|de ol lre oo(oudr ol lac|rev. A sla(| (er|rde( ol lre
d|v|s|ors. Wr|cr p(ov|de lre oac|d(op lo L0C3P's Wo(|...
ll's lre r|dd|e ol Noveroe(. Tuesdav r|drl. Zpr - reavv (a|r |s la|||rd d|adora||v. d(|ver
ov a sp|lelu| W|rd. ll's co|d. '3levo'. lre coacr. pa(|s lre r|r|-ous c|ose lo lre dale |ead|rd
lo lre asl(o-lu(l. Tre(e a(e s|x ol us |r lre ous: '3levo' ras oeer (eda||rd us W|lr la|es ol r|s
l|res as a p(o |r No(Wav. le slops lre slo(|es as We pu|| up:
'R|drl le||as. l|ve r|rules lo crarde. ard lrer l Warl vou (eadv lo do. Arvoodv |ale ard
lrev'(e do|rd lo oe (urr|rd lo( sore l|re. You dor'l Warl lo oe (urr|rd lor|drl'.
le opers lre doo( ard srouls lre sare |rsl(ucl|ors lo lrose rudd|ed |r sra|| d(oups
a(ourd lre ca( pa(|. Tre p|lcr al 3lo|e NeW|rdlor scroo| |s slale ol lre a(l. p(olecled ov a
l|ve-rel(e r|dr pe(|rele( lerce. |l d|ears e|ecl(|c d(eer. Tre l|ood||drls a(e or oul lre
crard|rd (oors a(e srul. P|ave(s ra|e do |r lre oac| ol ca(s o( urde( lre sleps. arvWre(e
lral olle(s (e||el l(or lre Wealre(.
'l reed lo Wa(r up rar. Tr|s |s loo co|d vou |roW. l reed lo ||ve soreWre(e Wre(e lre
sur sr|res'.
'3levo' ras a l(a|r|rd sess|or p|arred.
'l a|Wavs rave sorelr|rd p|arred. oul ore ol lre lr|rds lral l've |ea(red s|rce sla(l|rd
lr|s corrur|lv Wo(| |s lral vou've dol lo oe l|ex|o|e. You car rave sorelr|rd a|| rapped
oul |r vou( read oul Wrer vou del lo lre sess|or vou r|drl or|v del s|x ||ds Wrer vou We(e
expecl|rd lWerlv so vou've dol lo crarde eve(vlr|rd. You've dol lo oe ao|e lo lr|r| or vou(
leel'.
0esp|le lre appa|||rd cord|l|ors lre(e |s a dood lu(r oul lor|drl. or|v a coup|e ol lre
(edu|a(s a(e r|ss|rd. Trose l(a|r|rd corpele lo( a p|ace |r Easls|de. L0C3P's rosl ser|o(
c|uo s|de. Varv rave oeer assoc|aled W|lr lre P(od(arre lo( sore cors|de(ao|e l|re.
Trev rave oecore used lo lre (u|es lral '3levo' ard '3o|' |av doWr. Trose Wro r|ss
l(a|r|rd W|lroul arv (easorao|e excuse |roW lral lre sarcl|or |rvo|ves exc|us|or l(or lre
se|ecl|or p(ocess. 3|r||a(|v lrose lral a((|ve |ale a(e lo|d lo do rore ard lo(del aooul
p|av|rd or 3alu(dav.
As rosl ol lre scuad oed|r lo do lr(oudr lre|( Wa(r-up exe(c|ses 'Joe|' jods lo lre s|de ol
lre p|lcr loWa(ds 'Lou|se'. L||e so rarv olre(s 'Lou|se' care lo lre P(od(arre ov
acc|derl. Loo||rd lo( a Wo(| p|acererl lo sal|slv lre (ecu|(ererls ol re( spo(ls sc|erce
ded(ee al ur|ve(s|lv sre a((|ved 'or spec' al 8(|soare Road lo as| Wrelre( lre p(oless|ora|
c|uo cou|d use re( se(v|ces. 0|sappo|rled. oul rol d|srea(lered. ov lre c|uo rav|rd ro reed
lo( re( sre spolled lre s|dr rard|rd ove( lre soulr slard |rd|cal|rd lre erl(arce lo
L0C3P's oll|ce. Nooodv al lre P(od(arre rad eve( lroudrl aooul |l oelo(e oul Wrer
'Lou|se' rad l|r|sred exp|a|r|rd Wral sre cou|d olle( sre Was |rred|ale|v o(oudrl or ooa(d.
Tral Was lWo vea(s ado. Tor|drl sre du|des 'Joe|' lr(oudr a ||drl Wo(|oul. Wr|cr |s
des|dred lo a||ev|ale r|s ca|l |rju(v. lo o(|rd r|r oac| lo ralcr l|lress as cu|c||v as
poss|o|e. 'Joe|' |oo|s |||e re |s |r pa|r. re doesr'l |oo| |||e a rar Wro |s erjov|rd r|rse|l.
eve(v so oller re d(|races. Norelre|ess. re rards or eve(v |rsl(ucl|or lral 'Lou|se' olle(s:
re v|s|o|v sl(a|rs W|lr ello(l Wrer sre as|s r|r lo p|c| up lre pace. 'Joe|' Warls lo oe l|l
ada|r as soor as poss|o|e. 3alu(dav carrol core cu|c||v eroudr.
'3levo's' coacr|rd cua||l|cal|ors sel r|r as|de l(or olre( lear rarade(s |r lre |eadue |r
Wr|cr Easls|de corpele. '3levo' |rs|sls.
'vou do or lrese cou(ses. ard vou rave lo p(ove lr|s ard lral. a|| lecrr|ca| slull. 8ul
Wrer vou l(a|r lrese duvs |l's a|| d|lle(erl. Tre lr|rds lral l rave |ea(rl lral rave oeer rosl
uselu| lo( lr|s ||rd ol Wo(| l |ea(rl l(or '3o|'. l rave dol rv Leve| ore ard lWo coacr|rd
oaddes oul a |ol ol lral slull |sr'l rucr use re(e'.
Neve(lre|ess as ar oose(ve( vou carrol re|p oul oe |rp(essed ov lre au(a ol
p(oless|ora||sr. Wr|cr su((ourds lor|drl's l(a|r|rd sess|or.
89
'F|(sl l|ve r|rules sp(|rl|rd lrer l|lleer r|rules lasl-leel Wo(|. lrer We do lWerlv r|rules
ca(d|o-vascu|a( Wo(|. Fo( lre |asl rou( We corcerl(ale or a pa(l|cu|a( aspecl ol lre dare:
read|rd. delerd|rd. co(re(s. we do lral |r rorlr|v cvc|es. |l's delerd|rd lr|s rorlr'.
Tre (a|r corl|rued lo oe|l doWr lr(oudroul lre r|drl's sess|or. Tre scuad (ar ard
jurped ard lo||oWed corrards. Wrer lrev oecare l|(ed ard Welle( ard co|de( lrev (ar
ard jurped ard lo||oWed corrards.
Tre l(a|r|rd sess|ors rave lre|( oWr (u|es ol el|cuelle. Wr|cr dove(r soc|a| (e|al|ors |r a
Wav. Wr|cr |s d|sl|rcl l(or ralcr davs ard ro(e |rlo(ra| reel|rds oelWeer lre scuad ard
lre coacres. le(e lre(e |s a corp|ele roropo|v ol poWe(. re(e Wral '3levo' savs lre scuad
does. lre(e |s ro a(du|rd |a leW d(oars Wrer re le||s lrer lo do arolre( |ap ol lre p|lcr).
Tre(e |s ro (oor lo( oarle(. lre(e |s ar acceplarce lral lr|s |s ra(d Wo(| lral ras lo oe
dore. lral |l |s a|| |r eve(voodv's oesl |rle(esls oolr al ar |rd|v|dua| ard lear |eve|. '3levo'
sraps oul r|s |rsl(ucl|ors.
'la|l-Wav ||re. 3PRlNTl'.
'3levo' puls aWav lo( lre l|re oe|rd lral pa(l ol r|s cra(acle( lral (eve|s |r le|||rd lurrv
slo(|es aooul r|s pasl |'lre l|(sl l(a|r|rd sess|or l d|d |r No(Wav |l Was r|rus e|drleer. l dol
oac| lo rv role| (oor ard l c(|ed |||e a ||ll|e oaov'):
'Core orl l reed ro(e ello(l. You'(e vourd rer. vourd srou|d oe l|l'.
Trev jod (ourd lre p|lcr ||l up ov lre e|ecl(|c ||drls. lo lre s|de 'Joe|' rops loWa(ds 'Lou|se'
or r|s |rju(ed |ed. ll |oo|s a|| ve(v p(oless|ora|. lre '(ea| lr|rd'. |l |oo|s |||e ra(d Wo(|.
'Jav' le||s re lral a |ol ol p|ave(s Wro core lo lre l(a|r|rd sess|ors soor d(op oul ol lre
scuad.
'Trev dor'l |||e '3o|'. lrev dor'l |||e r|s Wav ol do|rd lr|rds. lrev lr|r| re |s loo loudr. lral
re rasr'l dol arv (especl lo( lrer. Trev'(e loo|s oecause lrev dor'l urde(slard lral re |s
do|rd |l lo( lre|( oerel|l. 0rce re oarred re ard 'LeW|s' ard '0arrv' lo( s|x dares
oecause re caudrl us do|rd oul lre r|drl oelo(e a dare Wrer We We(e |r lral lou(rarerl
|r lo||ard. l Was p|ssed oll W|lr r|r al lre l|re oul l care lo |ea(r lral vou rave lo rave
lre d|sc|p||re. lral |l's dood lo( vou |l re|ps vou deve|op ard rove lo(Wa(d'.
w|lr ler r|rules ol lre l(a|r|rd sess|or |ell '3o|' a((|ves lo |oo| ove( lre scuad lral re ras
oeer so |rsl(urerla| |r deve|op|rd. le Walcres W|lr a lulo(ed |oo|. wrer '3levo' ca||s ar
erd lo lre sess|or lre spe|| ol suose(v|erce |s o(o|er.
'A|(|drl '3o|' vou cor|rd lo Walcr us or 3alu(dav'.
'You ca|| lral (urr|rd l seer rv ||ll|e lWo vea( o|d d|(| (ur lasle( lrar lral'.
'lev '3o|' vou srou|d see lr|s lac|rev d|(| l'r see|rd'.
'You see|rd a d|(|? 3re car'l oe see|rd vou p(ope(|v'.

.../ nor alrernoon |n wa|rnamsrou

ll's dol lo oe lre rollesl dav ol lre vea(. 3coll|sr '0oud' a((|ved al lre oll|ce ea(|v. 3coll|sr
'0oud' or|v cores lo lre oll|ce or a Tuesdav ard eacr Tuesdav re a((|ves ea(|v.
'Arvore lo( a o(eW?'. re as|s as re sW|lcres or lre |ell|e.
Tr|s |s lre usua| Tuesdav (oul|re. 3coll|sr '0oud' ras o(oudrl a l(|erd W|lr r|r. sre ras
core oelo(e oul sre |sr'l as (edu|a( as r|r. 3re W||| core lo( a coup|e ol Tuesdavs or lre
l(ol ard lrer We r|drl rol see re( lo( a rorlr o( so. 3coll|sr '0oud' ard r|s l(|erd dor'l
|oo| |||e lre (edu|a( ||rd ol L0C3P 'c||erl'. Ce(la|r|v re|lre( ol lrer W||| ce|eo(ale lre|(
lo(l|elr o|(lrdav ada|r. oul allerpl|rd lo duess lre|( ade |s d|ll|cu|l oecause lrev oolr rave
sa||oW corp|ex|ors ard raurled eves lral le|| ol ra(d ||v|rd ard p(eralu(e ad|rd.
'F|ve r|rules duvs'.
'3o|' |s la|||rd lo a reW (ec(u|l lo lre (erao|||lal|or p(od(arre Wr|cr roW la|es (ele((a|s
l(or Lordor's or|v (es|derl|a| c(ac| delox ard a |ess (ed|rerled a|coro| p(ojecl |r lac|rev
as We|| as lrose Wro eslao||sred corlacl lr(oudr L0C3P's looloa|| p(od(arres. 'A|ex' |s
aooul lWerlv. re ras sro(l-c(opped ra|(. re |s aooul s|x lool ore W|lr a |ear We||-lored
l(are. 'A|ex' dol oul ol p(|sor lWo Wee|s ado: re rad oeer lre(e lo( lWo vea(s. '3o|' |s
90
le|||rd r|r aooul Easls|de. Wrer lrev l(a|r. Wrer lrev p|av. 'A|ex' p|aved lo( lre p(|sor
looloa|| lear.
we del |rlo '3o|'s' ca(. lre lr(ee 'c||erls' scueez|rd |rlo lre oac|. 3coll|sr '0oud' ard r|s
l(|erd la|| aooul a rulua| accua|rlarce lral ras la||er oll lre Wador. 'A|ex' po|rls oul a
voulr c|uo ard le||s us lral re used lo oox lo( lre|( lear.
wrer We a((|ve al lre YVCA 'Za|d|e'. '0av'. 'Te|' ard a coup|e ol olre(s a(e Wa|l|rd lo( us
or lre sleps.
'Core or '3o|' We've oeer Wa|l|rd ler r|rules'.
'3o|' |oo|s al r|s roo||e. urpe(lu(oed:
'Tre sess|or sla(ls al lWo o'c|oc|. |l's l|ve-lo lWo'.
'3o|' d||des ov '0av' ard co ard savs re||o lo lre Worar al (ecepl|or.
'll's a rol ore lodav'. sre savs lar|||a(|v ard rards '3o|' a sel ol |evs. 3coll|sr '0oud'
reads lo( lre crard|rd (oors. eve(voodv e|se |s a|(eadv d(essed lo( lre dvr. 3coll|sr
'0oud' |s ar ar|ao|e so(l. re a|Wavs as|s roW vou a(e ard re a|Wavs seers cu|le corlerl.
oul corve(sal|or reve( does oevord lre |r|l|a| 'ra va dae|r?'
3coll|sr '0oud' a|Wavs la|es r|s oad |rlo lre lo||el cuo|c|e ard crardes oer|rd a |oc|ed
doo(. l|s dvr oull|l cove(s r|s |eds ard a(rs. 3coll|sr '0oud' d|ves lre |rp(ess|or lral re
ras sorelr|rd lo r|de.
ll |s a sra||e( lu(r-oul lrar usua| lo( lre (edu|a( Tuesdav alle(roor dvr sess|or. oul lr|s
(ea||v rusl oe lre rollesl dav ol lre vea( ard ever lroudr lre lar |s or rax|rur speed l'r
corp|ele|v soa|ed |r sWeal oelo(e dell|rd c|ose lo lre exe(c|se o||e. Trose Wro a(e
r|ss|rd rad p(ooao|v dec|ded lral lre(e We(e oelle( Wavs ol sperd|rd a surre('s
alle(roor. '3o|' doesr'l seer pa(l|cu|a(|v lazed. lre dvr sess|or ras a|Wavs oeer a la|(|v
casua| alla|( l(or r|s pe(specl|ve: c||erls d(op |r ard oul or a (edu|a( oas|s. ever |l lrose or
lre (es|derl|a| p(od(arre a(e Walcred ove( ov lre|( supe(v|so(s. 3arcl|ors do rol lo||oW
aoserces |r lre Wav lral lrev do W|lr la||u(e lo ra|e a looloa|| coacr|rd sess|or. |l |s as |l
lr|s |s ar add|l|ora| exl(a ava||ao|e lo a|| lrose Wro Warl lo ra|e use ol |l.
'Te|' |s s|ll|rd or lre cresl-p(ess racr|re. le |s rude. '3o|' |audrs ard jo|es |r
adr|(al|or. re la||s aooul 'per|lerl|a(v rusc|es'. Jusl |||e 3coll|sr '0oud'. 'Te|' |s or|v lo oe
seer or a Tuesdav alle(roor. le doesr'l p|av looloa|| oul re ve(v (a(e|v r|sses lre dvr
sess|or. 'Te|' l(a|rs ov r|rse|l. re Wo(|s lr(oudr lre racr|res relrod|ca||v oelo(e rov|rd
or lo lre l(ee-We|drls. le (a(e|v spea|s lo arvoodv: re jusl dels or W|lr r|s ous|ress. ||ll|rd
|rp(ooao|v reavv p|eces ol rela|. ou|||rd-up ar a|(eadv cors|de(ao|e l(are. '3o|' as|s r|r
roW re |s. '3o|' ras a|(eadv lo|d re lral 'Te|' |s due |r cou(l sro(l|v ard lral re arl|c|pales a
cuslod|a| serlerce. Per|lerl|a(v rusc|es.
'3o|' |eads 'A|ex' lr(oudr ar |rducl|or. re exp|a|rs aulro(|lal|ve|v roW lo use lre
racr|res p(ope(|v ard sale|v. 'A|ex' |roWs roW lo use lre We|drls p(ope(|v ard sale|v. re
|ea(rl a|| ol lral |r p(|sor. ar alr|el|c l(are ard We||-del|red rusc|es pav l(|oule lo
|roW|edde pul lo dood ellecl. 'A|ex' |s dusr|rd W|lr erlrus|asr. re reeded sorelr|rd lo do
roW lral re Was oul. le |oves lre dvr ard re (ec|ors lral re W||| l|l eas||v |rlo lre
Easls|de sel-up.
'l've dol dood s||||s. l'r lasl'. le |s a ||ve|v ard oourcv cra(acle(. we reve( see 'A|ex'
ada|r.
l ar dv|rd a dealr or lre exe(c|se o||e. Eve(v l|re |l l(|es lo la|e re up |ls v|(lua| r|||s rv
|eds d(|rd lo ar |rpolerl ra|l ard rv eves sl|rd srul ada|rsl lre (|ve(s ol sWeal. To rv s|de
a(e 3coll|sr '0oud' ard r|s lera|e l(|erd. Trev la|e lre|( l|re ard cral derl|v aooul peop|e
ard lr|rds lral lrev rave |r corror.
3coll|sr '0oud' sl|r|s. le (ee|s ol oad ||v|rd. 3la|e r|col|re (urs lr(oudr r|s po(es ard
assau|ls ou( rosl(||s. ll |l rad oeer arvoodv e|se lre olre(s Wou|d rave oeer re(c||ess |r
lre|( corderral|or. 8ul '0oud' ard r|s l(|erd seer lo rave oeer allo(ded spec|a| slalus.
soreroW (eda(ded as d|lle(erl. ce(la|r|v 'rol ore ol us'. lr lre sare Wav lral a serse ol
'decercv' Wou|d reve( a||oW corderral|or ol lre sp|ra o|l|da sulle(e( Wro spal Wr||e lrev
la||ed. 3coll|sr '0oud's' lou| slercr |s po||le|v ur(era(|ed upor oecause We a|| duess lral |l
91
|s pa(l ol r|s p(oo|er ard re carrol (ea||v re|p |l. Tre derl|e cral oelWeer re ard r|s l(|erd
|s urde(-sco(ed ov a (es|dred sadress. ll |s aooul l(|erds Wro d|d rol ra|e |l lo lre olre(
s|de. l(|erds Wro rade |l lo lre olre( s|de oul Wro lrer lu(red oac| ard d(oWred. rosl ol
a|| |l |s la|| ol a reW (ea||lv lral Was |rpove(|sred ard roWre(e rea( as rucr lur as lre 'o|d
l|res' - reve(lre|ess ore lral rad lo oe adre(ed lo |r o(de( lo su(v|ve.
l rove or lo lre l(ee-We|drls ard lear up W|lr 'Za|d|e'. '0av' ard '3o|'. Za|d|e ras jusl
corp|eled a sel ol |ed exe(c|ses.
'0olla ou||d 'er up lo( speed or lre p|lcr.
'Za|d|e' ras (ecerl|v rad l(|a|s W|lr No(lrarplor ToWr. re lee|s lral re |s or lre cusp ol
'ra||rd |l' as a p(o. a|| lral |s reeded |s sore l|re-lur|rd. we rove or lo oercr p(esses.
3la(l|rd W|lr a sel ol ler (epel|l|ors ol ê0|d We |rc(ease lre We|drl url|| a '||ll' |s oevord ar
|rd|v|dua|'s capao|||l|es.
Ercou(adererl |s srouled Wrer soreore oed|rs lo la|le(.
'Core or. sl(erdlr. 0o or vou car do |l. Tral's |l - do or. do orl'
As We sla(l lo la|| ov lre Wavs|de 'Za|d|e' does pasl 100|d's. ll |s ov arv slarda(ds ar
|rc(ed|o|e ello(l: al rosl re rusl oe or|v l|ve lool r|re ard ro ro(e lrar ler ard a ra|l
slore. le |s |rc(ed|o|v locused:
'l reed ro(e sl(erdlr rar. '3o|' vou dolla so(l lr|s oul. ore l|re a Wee| |sr'l ro dood. l'r
rol dorra del arv o|dde('.
3ore oarle( |s sra(ed aooul o|dde( rusc|es ard sexua| corcuesls oul lre(e |s ro
r|sla||rd Wrv 'Za|d|e' |s re(e. re sees lr|s as ore ol lre |asl lr|rds lral re reeds lo del
(|drl oelo(e re roves |rlo lre o|d l|re.
Fo( lre |asl ler r|rules '3o|' (urs a s|l-up sess|or. ll |s lre or|v l|re lr(oudroul lre
alle(roor lral lre(e ras oeer a sl(uclu(ed. coacr-|ed. exe(c|se. 3coll|sr '0oud' ard r|s
l(|erd |eave lo del crarded:
'3ee va '3o|''.
'Te|' oerds |ader duroe||s a(ourd r|s o|ceps. Eve(voodv e|se allerpls lo |eep up W|lr
'3o|'. l d|ve up alle( a coup|e ol r|rules. olre(s |eep or do|rd. d(oar|rd oul |r pa|r:
'eroudr '3o|' rarl'.
A ou(sl ol despe(ale |audrle( p(orpls '3o|'s' adror|srrerl.
'll vou'(e l|l lo |audr vou'(e l|l lo Wo(|. Arolre( ler.'
wrer eve(vlr|rd |s l|r|sred l (eso|ve lo do sorelr|rd e|se rexl l|re |l |s lr|s rol.

In these two contrasting episodes the commitments to flexibility and
credibility that underpin the engagement strategies discussed in the previous
section are allied with both the practice and the prospect of a disciplinary zeal
derived from a more conventional sporting discourse. In this sense the kind
of community development work LOCSP applies emerges, at least partially,
out of the tradition of the street based boxing club, Boys Club and any
number of more traditional activity based youth interventions. It places an
emphasis on the need for discipline, 'good' behaviour, respect for others, an
absence of foul language and the importance of listening. Misbehaviour is
met with sanctions and the withdrawal of privileges. There are no fixed
disciplinary codes but rather individual, adaptable approaches, which are
'true' to the coach's outlook and based in long established codes of respect
and honour associated with the working class 'habitus' of East London.

In the sporting context discipline is demanded in return for the coaches own
organisational discipline and commitment, with benefits accorded to those
who take on board the mantra. Away from the sports field there is an easing
of relations, a willingness to talk, to befriend and offer advice which owes
much to the model of the 'patriarchal family' that characterises successful
football clubs and their manager's at the elite level.
92

In many respects the approach borrows from the Social Responsibility model
developed by Don Hellison in the United States which suggests the following
criteria for the development of activity based youth development
programmes:

1. Treat youth as resources to be developed. Build on the strengths they
already possess, and emphasize their competence and mastery.
2. Focus on the whole person-the emotional, social and cognitive as well
as physical dimensions of the self.
3. Respect the individuality of youth, including cultural differences and
developmental needs.
4. Empower youth.
5. Give youth clear, demanding (but not unreasonable) expectations
based on a strong explicit set of values.
6. Help youth envision possible futures for themselves.
7. Provide both a physically and psychologically safe environment.
8. Keep program numbers small and encourage participation over a long
period of time, emphasize belonging and membership.
9. Maintain a local connection.
10. Provide courageous and persistent leadership in the face of systemic
obstacles.
11. Provide significant contact with a caring adult.

(Hellison & Cutworth (1997)

The trip to Berlin provided the clearest indication of LOCSP’s collective
philosophy towards the management of sporting practice within its estate
based projects, which can be considered in terms of the need for meticulous
organisation, the provision of opportunities for social development, a
professional commitment to sporting excellence and unforgiveness of
indiscipline. Through our observations on that trip we consider those
elements here in turn

1. Organisation

'Ad' rad o(dar|sed lre l(|p. FC ur|or 8e(||r rad |lse|l l(ad|l|ora||v all(acled a Wo(||rd
c|ass suppo(le( oase. Fo||oW|rd lre d|v|s|or ol 8e(||r alle( lre 3ecord wo(|d wa(. lre
deod(apr|ca| |ocal|or ol lre c|uo's verue d|claled lral lre c|uo p|aved |r lre Easl 0e(rar
|eadue. Tre suosecuerl co||apse ol lre 8e(||r wa|| ard lre (e-ur|l|cal|or ol 0e(rarv ard
lre 0e(rar looloa|| |eadue dele(r|red lral lre lear lourd lrerse|ves (e|edaled lo ror-
|eadue slalus. lr (ecerl vea(s lre c|uos lo(lures rave |rp(oved d(aral|ca||v ard alle( a
ruroe( ol successlu| p(orol|or carpa|drs. al lre l|re ol lre l(|p lrev We(e p|av|rd |r lre
0e(rar ecu|va|erl ol lre Erd||sr Nal|orW|de d|v|s|or ore W|lr ar ouls|de crarce ol
p(orol|or lo lre lop l||drl. 'Ad' rad Wo(|ed W|lr lre 8e(||r oll|ce ol lre 8(|l|sr Courc|| ard
ler(v lause|e(. cr|el ol voulr deve|oprerl al FC ur|or. loWa(d a((ard|rd lr|s l(|p.
L0C3P We(e serd|rd oul a (ep(eserlal|ve lear l(or lr(ee ol lre eslales or Wr|cr lrev
Wo(|. 3e|ecl|or lo( lre (ep(eserlal|ve lear Was oased or a ruroe( ol c(|le(|a: Eacr eslale
srou|d rave (oudr|v ecua| (ep(eserlal|or: as sl(ord a lear as poss|o|e srou|d oe serl: oul
or|v p|ave(s Wro We(e sl||| p(eserl|v acl|ve ard corr|lled lo lre|( |oca| lear Wou|d oe
cors|de(ed.
Tr|(leer p|ave(s rade up lre scuad. F|ve reroe(s ol slall rade up lre (esl ol lre pa(lv.
As We|| as 'Ad' ard '3o|' lre olre( slall reroe(s We(e 'Ke|s'. '0av' ard '0(arar'. '0(arar'
93
|s a lu|| l|re L0C3P deve|oprerl coacr Wro rad oeer coacr|rd lre (ep(eserlal|ve lear |r
lre |ead up lo lre l(|p ard Was lo acl as lear rarade(.
0r lre l||drl. Wr|cr 'Ad' rad raraded lo ooo| lre p|ave(s orlo lo( lre sur ol £1 eacr ov
srapp|rd up a |oW cosl a|(||re dea| or lre |rle(rel. ou( 'l(ave| aderl' |s |eer lo 'l||| us |r' or
o(dar|sal|ora| dela||s lral We a(e vadue/r|sla|er aooul. w|lroul W|sr|rd lo do so. l|||ed or|v
ov r|s oWr erlrus|asr ard lasc|ral|or W|lr a|| lral re |s |rvo|ved W|lr 'Ad' car ra|e sore
ol lre pa(l|c|parls lee| a ||ll|e aW|Wa(d |r lrese s|lual|ors. appea(|rd a ||ll|e loo ove(oea(|rd.
le rad Wo(|ed r|s soc|s oll lo del lr|s l(|p up ard (urr|rd. le oe||eves |r lr|s Wo(|. re
oe||eves |l's a 'p(ope(' lr|rd lo do. ll's jusl lral lre Wav re ard '3o|' do aooul do|rd |l
'p(ope(|v' |s d|lle(erl oecause lre|( (especl|ve (o|es a(e d|lle(erl Wr||sl corp||rerla(v.
Alle( dea||rd W|lr sore corp||cal|ors al passpo(l corl(o| We a(e everlua||v ra(sra||ed
orlo a coacr lral W||| la|e us lo FC ur|or's slad|ur Wre(e a l(a|r|rd sess|or |s lo la|e
p|ace. 'Ad' la|es a ||ll |r ler(v's sra(l reW 8Vw. A coup|e ol lre p|ave(s as| Wre(e re ras
dore ard '3o|' c(ac|s sore jo|es aooul 'us ard lrer' ard p(ele((|rd lo sl|c| W|lr lre oovs
(alre( lrar 'se|||rd oul'.
Tre slad|ur |s sel |r Wood|ard. d(|v|rd lr(oudr lre l(ees We see lral lre d(ourd |lse|l |s
su((ourded ov l(a|r|rd p|lcres ard va(|ous ou||d|rds oe|ord|rd lo lre c|uo. Fars ol lre c|uo.
Wea(|rd sca(ves ard (ep||ca sr|(ls. a(e Wa|||rd aWav l(or lre d(ourd c|ulcr|rd oads l(or
lre c|uo's souver|( srop. Tre(e |s ar urr|sla|ao|e lee||rd lral We a(e d(|v|rd |rlo
sorelr|rd o|d.
wrer We a((|ve '0(arar' |eads a coacr|rd sess|or lo( ar rou( ard lrer We del oac| or
lre coacr lo d(|ve lo lre rosle| Wre(e ler(v ras a((arded lo( us lo slav.
Tre rosle| |s sel |r deep Wood|ard or lre s|de ol a |a(de |a|e. ll |s a lvp|ca| sov|el
corsl(ucl|or. a d(ev corc(ele o|oc|. lurcl|ora|. ce(la|r|v rol oeaul|lu|. 8elo(e lre la|| ol lre
wa|| |l se(ved as lre l(a|r|rd carp lo( Easl 0e(rarv's |rle(ral|ora| Wale(-spo(ls
corpel|lo(s. Tre Wa||s ol lre love( a(e cove(ed |r p|clu(es ce|eo(al|rd lo(re( (es|derls'
v|clo(|es.
'0(arar' d|sl(|oules lre |evs lo lre (oors. le ras dev|sed a ||sl ol Wro W||| sra(e W|lr
Wror. re Warls lo r|r|r|se ro|se ard arv polerl|a| l(ouo|e ra||rd. 3ore ol lre p|ave(s
oojecl lo lre|( (oor a||ocal|or:
'No rar l Warra oe W|lr .....'. oul '0(arar' |s l|(r:
'Tral's Wro vou'(e W|lr. vou Warra p|av loro((oW?'.
VearWr||e ler(v |s d(oW|rd |rc(eas|rd|v (esl|ess:
'we a(e |ale a|(eadv lo( lre rea|. We srou|d oe lre(e roW'. '3o|' ru((|es lr|rds a|ord:
'R|drl |ads l reed vou oac| re(e |r ra|l ar rou(. ro |ale('.
...Tre (eslau(arl Was pe(cred |rp(ooao|v |r lre r|dd|e ol lre lo(esl. Appa(erl|v |l Was
ro(ra||v c|osed al lr|s l|re ol vea( oul rad opered espec|a||v lr|s ever|rd lo leed ou(
d(oup.
ler(v rad o(dar|sed lre seal|rd a((ardererls. 0re lao|e Was lo( lre lear. ard lre olre(
Was |a|d oul lo( L0C3P slall. ler(v. ard lWo (ep(eserlal|ves ol lre 8e(||r oll|ce ol lre
8(|l|sr Courc||. ll Was oecor|rd c|ea( lral ler(v rad ve(v l|(r ard l|xed |deas aooul slalus
ard (ar|. 'Ke|s' Was rol pa(l|cu|a(|v rappv aooul oe|rd d(added l(or lre p|ave(s' lao|e. re
sal al lre la( erd ard spo|e ro(e oller lo lrose or lre olre( lao|e lrar re d|d lo lrose
c|ose( lo r|r. ler(v exp|a|red lral eve(vlr|rd rad oeer pa|d lo( ard peop|e cou|d o(de(
Wral lrev |||ed lo d(|r|. '0(arar' |oo|ed re(vous ard jurped up lo (epeal orce ro(e lral
lr|s Was a 'd(v' r|drl. ler(v ard lre olre( lWo 0e(rars o(de(ed oee(s Wr||sl We sluc| lo lre
reru ol soll d(|r|s...

Here the role of LOCSP as cultural intermediary is put to good effect through
its organisational thoroughness. The individual aspirations of staff which fuel
'Ad's' fascination with Germany, and the concept of international exchange
opened up the possibility of the trip whilst the confidence that participants
have in their coaches and the Programme Manager ‘Sol’ made possible their
94
involvement. Whilst individual attributes are the key at each juncture it is the
combination of skills, which makes the whole process possible. The
arrangement of low cost travel, the European network of football contacts,
the support of the British Council, the familiar authority of the estate based
coaches and their ability to navigate paths through the alien hierarchical
authority of passport control and elitist German football structures, the
sporting know how of the squad manager and willingness to read the
etiquette of the squads hosts. Each of these elements contributes to a
relatively painless adventure, where the security of the travellers enables
them to absorb knowledge of the world and different ways of living without
feeling alienated or isolated – ‘excluded’.

2. Opportunities for social development

lav|rd reve( oeer ao(oad oelo(e. lo( rosl ol lre corl|rderl lre l(|p lo 0e(rarv Was |r
|lse|l sorelr|rd ol ar adverlu(e Wr|cr rad lre capac|lv lo sal|slv lre|( |a(de|v rurdare
lou(|sl des|(es. As We pu||ed up ov lre 8(arderoe(d 0ales rurd(eds ol lou(|sls r|||ed
urde(realr lre |rpos|rd d(ardeu( ol lre sl(uclu(e. Tre usua| suspecls We(e a|| lre(e. A
Cr||ear p|pe oard p|aved aWav Wr||e ore ol lre|( l(oupe |rv|led or|oo|e(s lo loss co|rs |rlo
ar uplu(red soro(e(o. Ar arc|erl |oo||rd o(dar d(|rde( ard r|s la|lrlu| ror|ev oe|led oul
l(ad|l|ora| 0e(rar oorpar oeals. Tre lar|||a(|lv ol lre lou(|sl parrard|e(s s|ls eas||v W|lr
eve(voodv. ever lre 'soc|a||v exc|uded' rave oeer lo Coverl 0a(der. 8|za((e|v 'Ad' |s |r
corve(sal|or W|lr a l||r c(eW Wo(||rd or a sal|(|ca| 0e(rar T\ sroW. Wr|cr re (ecodr|ses
l(or lre le|e. A ruroe( ol lre lear a(e |rl(|dued ard v|s|o|v exc|led ov 'Ad's' assoc|al|or
W|lr lrese peop|e ca((v|rd le|ev|s|or care(as. rude lu((v sourd (eceplo(s ard r|c(oprores
ever lroudr |l |s re(e|v r|s oWr |ac| ol |rr|o|l|ors Wr|cr |ed r|r lo app(oacr lre c(eW lo
d|scuss lre sroW re rad seer:
'wral's do|r' or. roW does re |roW lrese? we do|rd lo oe or le||v? lev 'Ad' We do|rd lo
oe or le||v?'
Fou( o( l|ve ol ou( ruroe( a(e la||rd |l |r lu(rs lo rave lre|( p|clu(es la|er rexl lo a cra||
Wr|le rarrecu|r Wro ra|es r|s rorev ov rov|rd |r s|oW (oool|c je(|s. 'Jo' poses lo(
arolre( p|clu(e W|lr a (olurd ard jo||v |oo||rd po||cerar Wrose ass|drrerl lo lre lou(|sl
oeal seers lo su|l r|s oul|oo| ard pe(sora| cua||l|es.
we rove lr(oudr lre dale |rlo lre lo(re( ro-rars-|ard ol lre c|lv's d|v|s|or. we slop ov
a rorurerl correro(al|rd Russ|ar l(oops Wro le|| |r Eu(ope's |asl oall|e ol lre Wa(.
F(esr|v |a|d W(ealres ra(|ed lre (ecerl arr|ve(sa(v ol lre corl||cl. 'Ad' l(ars|aled lre
rares ol Russ|ar scuad(ors. Tre lear a(e |ess |rle(esled |r r|slo(v |essors lrar lrev a(e
|r lre poss|o|||lv ol a dood prolo oppo(lur|lv. Trev sc(aro|e ove( wo(|d wa( TWo carors
ard lar|s pos|l|ored or lre co(re(s ol lre rero(|a| lo (er|rd us ol roW lre l|drl Was
loudrl. Tre 'As|ar sersal|or' s|ls asl(|de lre sever rele( oa((e| ol lre caror W|lr r|s a(r
rusc|es lersed |r a Popeve pose. '0av'. 'Jav' ard olre( l(|erds p(eserl W|de sr||es ard
ur|||e|v poslu(es lo( lre pu(pose ol oac|d(ourd. Nol lral rucr |rle(esled |r r|slo(v oul pa(l
ol |l a|| lre sare: Lordore(s l(or A|oar|a. N|de(|a. Jara|ca. Vo(occo p|av|rd lre lou(|sl
ard dool|rd oll Wre(e lre Tr|(d Re|cr orce slorped.
95


we Wa|| ove( lo lre Re|crslad. 'Ad' la||s as re Wa||s lo lrose Wro Warl lo ||sler. l|s
erlrus|asr lo( lre r|slo(v ol ou( su((ourd|rds |s urr|sla|ao|e Wr||sl 'Jav' correrls:
'l jusl Warl lo del lo lre ralcr v'|roW. l Wou|dr'l rave ever core |l l |reW |l Was do|rd lo
oe a|| lr|s. l jusl Warl lo p|av looloa||'. 'Jav' seers re(vous.
'll's rol lral l dor'l |||e a|| lr|s cu|lu(e. l |||e lre cu|lu(e: r|slo(v slull v'|roW. ll's jusl...l
durro'.
we Wa|| ov a sra|| souver|( srop. lvp|ca| souver|( la(e: poslca(ds. r|r|alu(e (ep||cas.
eroossed ruds ard so or. 3|rce ou( a((|va| a pe(err|a| ca|| rad oeer:
''3o|'. We do|rd sropp|rd?' Tre |azv assurpl|or rad p(ev|ous|v oeer lral lre (ecuesl rad
oeer rol|valed ov a des|(e lo corp|ererl sl(eel-W|se Wa(d(ooes ard (a(e d(oove (eco(d
co||ecl|ors. Eve(voodv p||es |rlo lre srop. creap |ev (|rds oecore lre suojecl ol realed
deoales aooul va|ue lo( rorev. '0u( oovs' a(e la|||rd aooul lre|( d|(|s. lre|( rurs ard
dads: aooul roW la( a ||ll|e rorev W||| do.
'Vv Worar dorra |||| re |l l core oac| W|lr rolr|rd'. '0arde(ous' sl(eel-W|se Lordore(s
or lre p(oW| lo( rass-p(oduced lal.
we sperd Wral seers ar ade |r lre srop. ler(v |s ouls|de corsu|l|rd r|s Walcr. re
paces re(vous|v.
'we rave lo do roW lo( lre |urcr: We carrol do lo lre 0|vrp|c 3lad|ur. ll |s loo |ale roW'.
we a(e |ale ada|r. Ever '3o|'s' |eade(sr|p cua||l|es a(e pul lo lre lesl Wrer re
corrur|cales lre reed lo do:
'lr a r|rule. dol lo del lr|s'.
'l dol loo rucr rorev |ell v'|roW'.
'Lerd us lr|(lv eu(os'.
'we do|rd lo arv ro(e srops. '3o|' rar?'
...we sel oll oac| lo lre rosle| lo( |urcr. 3a|ad ard pasla. ar alr|ele's |urcr as popu|a(
W|lr ou( lear as eve(vlr|rd e|se lral ras oeer pul oelo(e lrer |r 0e(rarv.
'3l(a|drl lo lre cr|c|er srop Wrer l'r oac| lo Lordor.' 8(ead (o||s a(e popu|a(:
'0or'l la|e a|| ol lrer. lral's a|| l'r eal|rd'.
Al lre erd ol lre rea| '0(arar' laps r|s lo(| ada|rsl lre (|r ol r|s d|ass ard s|dra|s lre
corrercererl ol ou( lo(ra| se(v|ce ol d(al|lude. '0(arar' la||s ol lre d(eal oppo(lur|lv ol
expe(|erce lral ler(v ard r|s c|uo rave pul oelo(e us. 'Jo' la|es r|s cue al lre erd ol
'0(arar's' ror||v ard (|ses l(or r|s seal lo p(eserl sorelr|rd spec|a| l(or us lo sav lrar|
96
vou lo r|r lo( a|| lral re ras dore. l|s speecr |s sro(l oul pe(lurclo(v ard We|| (ece|ved
reve(lre|ess.
ler(v (espords. re la||s aooul r|s jov al oe|rd ao|e lo o(|rd r|s lear ard ou( lear
lodelre(. ard roW lre lulu(e srou|d cererl ou( (e|al|orsr|p. ler(v savs lral re |s so((v lral
ou( slav |s so sro(l. roW re Wou|d rave |||ed lo rave sroWr us ro(e ol r|s c|lv. Tr|s |s We||
(ece|ved:
'Year '3o|'. We reed ro(e l|re'...
...As lre coacr Was due lo la|e us oac| lo lre a|(po(l 'Ad' raraded lo corv|rce ler(v
lral lre lear Warled lo do |rlo lre FC ur|or c|uo srop. Tre p|ave(s p||ed |rlo lre srop W|lr
lre sare erlrus|asr lral lrev rad dore Wrer lrev d|scove(ed lre lac|v souver|( srop |r
cerl(a| 8e(||r. A pe(err|a| ca|| du(|rd lre l(|p rad oeer:
''3o|' We dorra do sropp|rd?'
ll Was as |l W|lroul sore lo(r ol corre(c|a| corsurpl|or. lre pu(crase ol sore
rererlo. lre expe(|erce Was |||ed|l|rale. '3o|' jo|ed aooul lre FC ur|or d-sl(|rds oe|rd
esserl|a| p(eserls lo( d|(|l(|erds. rolre(s. d(arr|es.
'l've dol lo del rv Worar sorelr|rd'.

Whilst in their own neighbourhoods many of these young men are incredibly
street wise, trips of this kind expose a kind of naivety, which enables
participants to be enriched in the most banal and everyday fashion. For
some, school trips, family holidays maybe taken for granted whilst others
have not had the same opportunities and experiences as 'Ad' comments:

That might be a thing about the schools round here that they just don't
have the opportunities to go on trips. They just don't have that. I
mean...when I was at school every year, apart from the secondary
school which was different, but certainly at primary school, we'd go
away every year, to go somewhere - Bristol or the west country or we
went up to Derbyshire, the Bakewell area, and we would do whole
weeks and go and explore things, and I don't know that stuff's now
been cut from the curriculum that you just don't do that any more. You
don't go outside of your own area on organised things...I mean it was
just interesting how many didn't have passports, had never been out
the country - five or six of them. I mean they might have traveled,
moved around London, but outside of that they were very limited.
Which is part of it, quite rewarding really, that they've now been
somewhere else.

Even if the principle focus of attention outside of the football match had been
on the opportunities for souvenir collection, photographs and gazing at
German women, such trips do open eyes, enable events, places, people and
history to be located and generate confidence. On another occasion, the
prospect of sitting at a foreign dinner table or conversing with a customs
official may not be so daunting, having witnessed ‘Sol’ navigating his way
through the troubled waters. Confidence may come from experience, but
experience is best gained in the company of someone who already has it and
is something that grows with time. As 'Ad' went on:

I mean some of it's confidence, some of it's seeing new things and I
think what we found was that before the kids went they were...It hadn't
really sunk in what they were doing. I think it more sunk in when they
came back and certainly ‘Kyle’ found that the guys that went from his
little team, when they've come back talking to their friends, that there's
97
a sort of new credibility for them, that they went to Germany and they
did this.

3. Sporting excellence

0r oe|rd se|ecled lo( lre (ep(eserlal|ve lear lre p|ave(s We(e Wa(red lral lre|( l|ra|
|rc|us|or or lre l(|p Was deperderl or (edu|a( allerdarce al lre spec|a| coacr|rd sess|ors
lral '0(arar' Was |ead|rd. A|lroudr lrese sess|ors We(e add|l|ora| lo lre (edu|a( l(a|r|rd
corr|lrerls lral p|ave(s rad lo( lre|( |oca| lears |l Was le|l lral lrev We(e a v|la|
p(epa(al|or lo( lre dare |r 0e(rarv oecause lre p|ave(s rad reve( p|aved as a ur|l oelo(e
ard a|so oecause |l Was arl|c|paled lral lre oppos|l|or Wou|d oe ve(v sl(ord. 0u( lear
Wou|d p|av FC ur|or's urde(-19 scuad. Wr|cr suddesled a lear ol |rd|v|dua|s W|lr polerl|a|
p(oless|ora| capao|||l|es. Tre(e Was a ce(la|r |eve| ol arx|elv arordsl lre slall lral a rude
deleal |r lre dare Wou|d p(ove a d|sp|(|l|rd expe(|erce Wr|cr cou|d poss|o|v rave |ord-le(r
redal|ve corsecuerces or lre p|ave(s' deve|oprerl ard corr|lrerl |'Zad|e' se(ves as a
dood exarp|e ol roW lr|s car rapper. r|s ea(|v corr|lrerl Wared lo||oW|rd a ruroe( ol
(ejecl|ors lo||oW|rd l(|a|s W|lr p(oless|ora| ard ser|-p(o c|uos). 0esp|le lre (al|ora|e lral
urde(p|rred lre l(a|r|rd sess|ors. ard a|so (epealed lr(eals lo ror-allerde(s lral lre|(
p|ace or lre l(|p Was |r jeopa(dv. lre sess|ors We(e poo(|v allerded. '0(arar'. |r pa(l|cu|a(.
Was exl(ere|v l(usl(aled ov lr|s.
'l dor'l lr|r| lrev urde(slard roW |uc|v lrev a(e. 0od |l l'd oeer d|ver ar oppo(lur|lv |||e
lr|s al lre|( ade.....'
Pe(raps lre s|ze ol lre cra||erde rad rol vel sur| |r.
...Jusl oelo(e lre dare |r cuesl|or '0(arar' po|rls lo r|s l||p cra(l. le la||s lr(oudr lre
lacl|cs lral lre lear srou|d adopl. le savs rolr|rd ol ou( ea(||e( corve(sal|or W|lr ler(v.
Wrer re (evea|ed lral lre oppos|l|or rad oeer p|av|rd lodelre( as a lear s|rce lre ade ol
ler. lral lrev l(a|red lodelre( al |easl lr(ee l|res a Wee|. lral ore ol lre p|ave(s p|aved lo(
lre ral|ora| urde(-19 lear. wrer ler(v rad lo|d us a|| ol lr|s |r r|s ca(. We rad excrarded
re(vous d|arces. Ea(||e( lea(s lral ou( rasl||v assero|ed scuad Wou|d oe rur|||aled ov ar
oppos|l|or W|lr la( supe(|o( s|||| ard lecrr|ca| ao|||lv (elu(red as a v|s|or ol ar |rr|rerl ard
|rev|lao|e corsecuerce ol p|av|rd oul a rope|ess|v r|s-ralcred corlesl.
'Tr|s |sr'l do|rd lo oe easv oul lr|s |s Wral We a|| care lo(. Tre 'o|d ore'. Nore ol vou a(e
eve( |||e|v lo p|av a ra(de( o( ro(e |rpo(larl dare |r vou( ||ves'.
'0(arar' la||s s|oW|v ard de||oe(ale|v. le casls r|s eves a(ourd lre d(ess|rd (oor
derard|rd l(or eacr ol lre p|ave(s a rod ol d(ave corp(erers|or.
'we |roW lral lrese duvs a(e do|rd lo oe dood. 8ul (ereroe(. eacr ard eve(v ore ol
vou a(e re(e or re(|l. You a|| dese(ve lo oe re(e.'
Tre p|ave(s a(e suodued: |rd|v|dua|s srull|e re(vous|v ard sla(e corce(led|v al lre space
oelWeer lre|( leel.
'l dor'l Warl arv ore ol vou lo del oac| lo Lordor ard lr|r|. 'l cou|d rave dore oelle('.
0o oul lre(e ard p|av as We|| as l |roW vou car. Core aWav l(or lr|s dare W|lr p(|de. ll
dor'l ralle( |l We |ose as |ord as We sroW lrer lral We car p|av. l dor'l Warl ro ore
sav|rd lral lrev We(e jusl a lear ol courc|| eslale coWoovs. l |roW vou car do |l. vou car
do |l. 0o oul lre(e ard erjov vou(se|ves. l |roW |l seers a s|||v lr|rd lo sav. alle( Wral l've
jusl sa|d oul lre(e a|r'l ro po|rl |r arv ol us oe|rd re(e |l We dor'l core aWav l(or |l
lr|r||rd lral Was a d(eal expe(|erce.'
'0(arar' rad p|c|ed up lre lerpo al lre |asl: re Was roW c|app|rd r|s rards |r (rvlrr|c
accorpar|rerl lo r|s up||ll|rd Wo(ds ol ercou(adererl ard la|lr. lr rarv Wavs |l Was
lvp|ca| ol rure(ous p(e-ralcr la||s W|lressed ard rea(d ove( lre rorlrs ard vea(s ol ou(
(esea(cr. Tre (esporse l(or lre p|ave(s. roWeve(. Was d|lle(erl. lr ro(e lar|||a(
su((ourd|rds vou cou|d (e|v or ore o( ro(e lo p|c| up or lre serl|rerls ol lre rarade(
ard add lre|( oWr (a||v|rd ca|| lo( so||da(|lv ard se|l-oe||el. lo||oWed ov a corrura| sroul lo(
v|clo(v. NoW. eve(vlr|rd Was cu|el. '3o|' rarded oul sr|r-pads ard jo|es. (eda(d|ess ol
98
Wr|cr lre lear |ell lre d(ess|rd (oor. as r|drl a l(oop ol corderred pa(verus
app(oacr|rd lre scallo|d. Wr|cr roc|ed lre|( |rposs|o|e aro|l|ors.



ler(v Was |eer lo do eve(vlr|rd p(ope(|v. Tre lWo lears We(e ca||ed l(or lre|( Wa(r-up
or lre p|lcr lo a pos|l|or oer|rd lre s|de||res so lral lrev cou|d ||re up lodelre( ard lo||oW
lre (ele(ee ard lWo ||resrer loWa(d lre cerl(e-c|(c|e |r lre lar|||a( l(ad|l|or ol p(oless|ora|
|rle(ral|ora| corlesls. Tre 0e(rar lear Wa||ed |r l||e as lrev sroo| eacr ol ou( p|ave('s
rards |r lu(r. A p(eserlal|or Was rade ov lre 0e(rar capla|r lo r|s oppos|le ruroe(.
'0(arar' pul ore rard or r|s read.
'l've slulled lral ore up. raver'l l?'. le Waved ove( lo ler(v. Wro Was slood a leW va(ds
aWav l(or us or lre s|de ol lre p|lcr:
'ler(v. We've dol sore reda|s lo d|ve vou( lear. oul We We(e do|rd lo do |l al lre erd ol
lre ralcr'.
'll's rol a p(oo|er'. ler(v (eassu(ed r|r urcorv|rc|rd|v.
Courc|| eslale Warraoes eroa((assed ov ar aWlu| (ea||sal|or lral lre|( Wea| d(asp ol
el|cuelle ard p(oless|ora||sr Was oe|rd pa|rlu||v exposed.
As lre (ele(ee o|eW r|s Wr|sl|e lo sla(l lre dare 0(arar jo|ed W|lroul rurou( lral |l We
|osl ov ler lral |l Wou|d oe a '(esu|l'. Tre 0e(rars |rred|ale|v sel aooul lre|( r|ss|or W|lr
a se|l-oe||el lral suddesled a (oul Was |rev|lao|e. Tre p(e-ralcr re(ves ol ou( oWr lear
roW corsp|(ed lo p(oduce a rope|ess|v d|sjo|rled lear ello(l Wre(eov eacr |rd|v|dua| p|ave(
le|| rope|ess|v oul ol pos|l|or cras|rd |ord dore sradoWs. Alle( ler r|rules ol (e|erl|ess
ors|audrl lre 0e(rars sco(ed. lrev r|drl eas||v rave a|(eadv sco(ed lr(ee ro(e. F(or lre
s|de||res |l le|l |||e a le((|o|e rorerl ol (ea||sal|or. lral lre l(|p rad oeer poo(|v lroudrl oul.
lral Wral Was lo lo||oW |r lre rexl e|drlv r|rules o( so Wou|d se(ve or|v lo rur|||ale ard
a||erale ar oulc|assed s|de ol vourd Lordore(s.
ll Was d|ll|cu|l lo |roW Wrv lrev d(|lled oac| |rlo pos|l|or. Wrv lre|( se|l-oe||el care
l|ood|rd oac|. Wrv rarv ol lrer sla(led p|av|rd aoove ard oevord lrerse|ves. Tre
0e(rars sl||| |oo|ed lre oelle( lear oul lre ra(d|r ol supe(|o(|lv v|s|o|v ra((oWed. '3az'
sco(ed ar |rp(ooao|e doa| alle( 'Joe|' ard 'Jav' coro|red lo ra|e a suo||re (ur up lre |ell
s|de ol lre p|lcr. ...T(a|||rd roW ov or|v 3-2 lre lear crased alle( ar |rp(ooao|e (esu|l W|lr
a lu(|ous pass|or. C(ue||v. W|lr |ess lrar ler r|rules ol lre dare (era|r|rd. lre 0e(rars
sco(ed a lou(lr.
99
ll seered ar |rc(ed|o|e (esu|l. or pape( al |easl. Tre 0e(rars srou|d rave Wor ov a
courl(v r||e. Tre lear We(e |ess erlrus|asl|c aooul lre (esu|l lroudr.
'we cou|d rave Wor vou |roW'.
'Trev We(er'l a|| lral'.
'll '3az' radr'l oeer as|eep.'.
'Tral o|d sl(||e( Was ro Wav r|releer. rave vou seer r|r re's do|rd oa|d'.
0lre( corce(rs We(e vo|ced. '3az' Warled lo |roW |l l rad raraded lo del sore dood
acl|or srols ol r|r du(|rd lre dare. '0(arar' correrled lral lre (easor lrev We(e so
desporderl Was lral lrev We(e or|v roW oed|rr|rd lo (ea||se Wral a o|d dare lrev rad
oeer |rvo|ved |r ard lral lrev We(e d|sappo|rled W|lr lrerse|ves oecause lrev le|l lral |l
lrev rad pul lre exl(a Wo(| |rlo p(epa(|rd lo( |l lrev rav rave Wor. '0(arar' dave ar alle(-
ralcr la||. Wr|cr allerpled lo ||ll l|add|rd sp|(|ls:
'lrese duvs rave oeer p|av|rd lodelre( lo( vea(s: vou've core lodelre( |r lre |asl leW
Wee|s ard pul up a d(eal oall|e. You've dol lo la|e lre pos|l|ve lr|rds aWav l(or lr|s.
You've dol lo do oac| rore ard ou||d upor lr|s. 3av lo vou(se|ves lr|s |s Wral l've dore
ard lr|s |s Wre(e l car do l(or roW or. You srou|d oe p(oud ol vou(se|ves. You car |oo|
arvore |r lre eves alle( lodav. we|| dore |ads.'
'Ke|s' Was |ess erlrused:
'You cou|d rave dore lrer lodav. ll Was vou( l|lress. Yourd oovs dell|rd c(arp. 8ac| |r
lre dav vou Wou|dr'l rave seer re ard r|re (o|||rd or lre l|oo( |||e a pussv. You a|r'l l|l
rar. wrer vou del oac| lo Erd|ard vou've dol lo del vou(se|ves l|l. You We(er'l p|av|rd lo(
re ard '3o|' vou We(e p|av|rd lo( vou(se|ves. You dolla del l|lle( Wrer vou del rore o( vou
a|r'l dorra oe rov|rd or ard deve|op|rd.'
8olr '0(arar' ard 'Ke|s's' po|rls We(e We|| (ece|ved:
'Year rar sorel|res We We(e |oo||rd dood oul We We(e dell|rd oealer loo rucr. a|| |l
Was Was lral lrev We(e sl(orde('.

As we have suggested in the earlier parts of this section LOCSP are serious
about their football and wider sporting activities. Whilst their programmes are
intended to be inclusive, to engage regardless of ability, gender or age, the
best are encouraged to excel. The staff set the tone, not through any desire
to live out faltering youthful dreams of football stardom of their own on the
back of the achievements of others but through their own determination to be
better at what they do. The coaching staff are keen to develop their
qualifications and broaden their experiences every bit as much as they seek
to provide the opportunities to do likewise to those they work with. ‘Sol's’
qualifications and work with the Arsenal academy is part of his own trajectory
onto higher standards, just as ‘Graham’ was presented with the challenge to
lead the team in Germany in response to his desire to stretch himself out of
the sports development comfort zone.

The commitment to doing things right that this implies extends to all aspects
of the programmes work and was manifest in the desire to present the best
possible image of LOCSP, the wearing of jackets and ties, the alcohol ban,
the careful planning of rooming arrangements and the incandescence at
failing to present a memento to their German opponents before the match. It
is also reflected in the professionalism of the preparations, with structured
training programmes, physiotherapy, tactical awareness, camaraderie and a
variety of motivational tactics all geared towards achieving the best possible
performances. This is not a programme that believes in non-competitive
sport, although there is a recognition that such activities have their place.
Such an attitude would be irreconcilable with the backs to the wall mentality,
which has sustained its development over the last fifteen years. It is an
100
attitude born out of defiance, that estate kids and community programmes
need not be second best, looked down upon.

Whilst sensitive and non-judgmental about those that come into contact with
the programme, from a sporting perspective such an attitude also demands
discipline.

4. Dealing with indiscipline

lr lre Wee| oelo(e lre l(|p se(|ous cors|de(al|or Was d|ver lo d(opp|rd sore ol lre
p|ave(s Wro rad la||ed lo allerd lre add|l|ora| l(a|r|rd sess|ors lral '0(arar' rad pul or lo(
lre l(ave|||rd scuad. lr lre erd lre p(acl|ca| ard l|rarc|a| |rp||cal|ors |ed. rav|rd lo
o(dar|se reW p|ave(s. ooo| l||drls. a((arde passpo(ls) ol (e-j|dd|rd lre lear We(e
cors|de(ed loo ore(ous. 3ucr cors|de(al|ors rad rol slood |r lre Wav ol lre (esl(|cl|ors
|rposed or lre o(|d|ra| cro|ce ol p|ave(s roWeve(. 'Zad|e' Was rol cors|de(ed oecause
a|lroudr re rad oeer ore ol lre rosl corr|lled ard d|lled p|ave(s lo rave ere(ded l(or
lre woodoe((v 0oWr lear. (ecerl ||leslv|e crardes. oecor|rd a 0J. sro||rd. la|||rd lo lu(r
up lo( l(a|r|rd ard ralcres We(e |rle(p(eled as |rcors|slerl o( |rdeed oppos|l|ora| lo lre
L0C3P elros ard Was ce(la|r|v rol lo oe (eWa(ded ov a l(|p lo 0e(rarv.
Tr|s 'loudr |ove' Was roo|||sed orce ard ada|r lr(oudroul lre l(|p as ello(ls We(e rade
lo |eep lre lear lodelre(. (a|se ro(a| slarda(ds ard p(olecl lre p(oless|ora| |rade ol lre
o(dar|sal|or.
'0(arar's' p(or|o|l|or|sl corrardrerls We(e sl(|cl|v dua(ded a|lroudr po||c|rd lrer car
oe a sers|l|ve ralle(. Wr|cr (ecu|(es lre '(especl'. Wr|cr lerds lo oe rosl (ead||v acco(ded
lo lre coacr|rd slall. 8elo(e d|rre( or lre eve ol lre dare lou( ol lre lear We(e dell|rd
crarded |rlo lre|( 'do|rd oul dea('. Trev We(e ouzz|rd.
'we do|rd oul lor|drl alle( lr|s'.
'8e(||r 'as dolla 'ave sore Worer v'|roW'.
'l'r 'urd(v rar. oesl 'ave sore p(ope( lood lo( us'.
'Ad' |s |eer lo pul lr|rds sl(a|drl. c|app|rd r|s rards lo( allerl|or:
'0aWd Wral a(e vou |ol |||e |cruc||e). We'(e jusl do|rd lo( a cu|c| rea| ard We'(e sl(a|drl
oac| re(e lo( oed. 8|d dare loro((oW |ads. core or'.
'0(arar' o( '3o|'. 'Ke|s' o( '0av' Wou|d rave corrur|caled rucr lre sare ressade |l
lrev rad oeer lre(e. oul lrev Wou|d rave corrur|caled |l d|lle(erl|v ard lre p|ave(s Wou|d
rol rave ||ssed lre|( leelr.
'Ke|s' |s ro(e d|(ecl |r r|s derards ard a(l|cu|al|or ol slalus as soreore la||s aooul
l|drl|rd. |eer lo pul lr|s pud|||sl |r r|s p|ace:
'wral vou la|||rd aooul vou pussv. vou eve( pul ore rard up lo re l'r dorra pul vou
ups|de doWr so cu|c| vou a|r'l dorra |roW Wral's rappered. You'(e a pussv rar.'
Vo(e c|(curspecl oul ecua||v v|d||arl or lre ro(r|rd ol lre ralcr '0(arar' |s or lre |oo|
oul. corce(red lral lWo ol lre p|ave(s rad d|sappea(ed. le le||s '3o|' lral re lr|r|s re sre|l
sro|e or ore ol lre|( o(ealr |asl r|drl. '3o|' ard '0(arar' sla(l lo as| reroe(s ol lre lear
|l lrev |roW Wre(e lre lWo r|drl oe. Nooodv seers lo |roW. arsWe(s a(e vadue ard
ur|rlo(ral|ve. '0(arar' |eaves lre ra|| lo crec| oed(oors.
...0esp|le '0(arar's' lea(s ard ler(v's pe(err|a| ard appa(erl|v |rapp(op(|ale corce(rs
ove( l|re |eep|rd lr|rds re|d lodelre( (e|al|ve|v We|| ove( lre cou(se ol lre l(|p ard Wrer
We a((|ved oac| al lre a|(po(l ler(v sroo| ou( rards ard sa|d doodove.
'Lel us rope lral lr|s |s lre oed|rr|rd ol a |ord (e|al|orsr|p. You rusl core ada|r lo
8e(||r ard rexl l|re vou rusl slav lo( a |orde( l|re so lral vou car p(ope(|v see ou( c|lv'.
ler(v |ell ard We sal (ourd Wa|l|rd lo( crec|-|r lo oed|r. P|ave(s sla(led lo d(|ll oll lo see
Wral lre a|(po(l rad lo olle( ov Wav ol d|ve(s|or ard erle(la|rrerl. '3o|' ard 'Ad' sa|d lral
lrev Wou|d |oo| alle( lre oads. so lre (esl ol us Werl lo lo||oW lre olre(s. Vosl ol lre lear
101
We(e |r lre (eslau(arl. Trev We(e corsu|l|rd lre rerus ca(elu||v ard dec|d|rd Wral oesl
lre|( |asl Eu(os We(e sperl or. Vosl opled lo( e|aoo(ale |ce-c(ear surdaes.
'll jusl ra|es vou (ereroe( lral lrev'(e or|v ||ds (ea||v. lo( a|| lre o|d la|| lrev'(e jusl a
ourcr ol ||ds'.
A d(oup al lre erd ol lre lao|e We(e d(|r||rd oee( l(or |a(de sle|r d|asses. ro(e
su(p(|s|rd|v a coup|e ol lrer We(e sro||rd. Trev sal W|lr ar a|( ol re(vous se|l-corl|derce:
lrev spo|e |oud|v aooul lre dare ard aooul |oo||rd lo(Wa(d lo dell|rd oac| lo Lordor.
wrer We (elu(red lo lre crec|-|r cueue '3o|' Was |((|laled.
'Trar|s lo( cor|rd oac| lo |el us do lo( sore lood. 0or'l Wo((v aooul us We'(e a|(|drl.
3e|l|sr rar.'
we sluro|ed apo|od|es oul le|l lral We rad |el lrer doWr. we roved lr(oudr lo passpo(l
corl(o| ard lre secu(|lv crec|po|rls. 3ore ol lre |ads Wro rad oeer d(|r||rd oee( sla(led
ra||rd |oud jo|es aooul Wro Was l(v|rd lo srudd|e durs oac| lo Erd|ard. '0(arar'
(erorsl(aled W|lr lrer. le|||rd lrer lral lr|s Was ||| adv|sed |r lre secu(|lv oosessed Wo(|d
posl 9/11. We r|drl del de|aved. lrev r|drl del a((esled. Trev (era|red oo|sle(ous ard
|oud. '0(arar' Wa||ed ove( lo '3o|' ard lo|d r|r lral re reeded lo 'rave a Wo(d'. lral lre
oovs rad oeer d(|r||rd ard reeded ca|r|rd doWr.
'3o|'s' rood dele(|o(aled. le pu||ed re lo ore s|de.
'Pal l reed vou lo le|| re Wro ras oeer d(|r||rd. Wro Was d(|r||rd W|lr vou. Fuc||rd re||
Pal |l Wasr'l loo rucr lo as| lo rol d(|r| ard sro|e |r l(orl ol lrer'.
l'r c(usred. l lee| |||e a scroo|oov (ece|v|rd a d(ess|rd doWr lo( |ead|rd ro(e
|rp(ess|orao|e l(|erds |rlo l(ouo|e.
'l car'l d|ve vou rares '3o|'. |l's lre (esea(cr. Trev a(er'l eve( do|rd lo l(usl re |l l d|ve
lre|( rares.'
'Fuc| lre (esea(cr. l've dol a luc||rd joo lo do as We|| vou |roW? Fuc||rd re|| Pal. l |roW
Wro lrev a|| a(e: l jusl Warl vou lo sav lre|( rares'.
'l car'l do |l '3o|'. |l's lre (esea(cr'. ard as l sav |l l lee| slup|d ard corlused. As We a(due
lWo ol lre cu|p(|ls pass ov ard '3o|' ca||s lrer ove(. l Wa|| aWav oul Walcr as lre|( laces
scu|(r |r d|scorlo(l al lre ve(oa| allac| lral '3o|' |s ur|easr|rd. Tre|( ea(||e( sWadde(
|rslarlareous|v dore. lre l(a||lv ol voulr aW|Wa(d|v exposed.
l s|ur| |rlo lre sradoWs ard corlerp|aled lre (ar|l|cal|ors ol rv la|| oul W|lr '3o|' l(or
lre slardpo|rl ol lre (esea(cr. Wr||sl or a ro(e pe(sora| ard |rl|rale |eve| l le|l lral l rad
|el soreoodv doWr Wro l rad vasl (especl lo(. ls lr|s roW lrev lee| Wrer |l rappers lo
lrer? ls lr|s pa(l ol '3o|'s' |0(arl's elc) poWe(.

In many other circumstances the players’ determination not to offend ‘Sol’
and their desire to share his values has been illustrated despite the powerful
alternative attractions on display to young men from the city away from home
with their friends.

0r lre l(|p lo 0(eal Ya(roulr |l Was c|ea( lral sore ol lre pa(l|c|pal|rd lears We(e rol
la||rd lre lou(rarerl loo se(|ous|v. W|lr c(ales ol |ade( sal rexl lo ||l oads al lre s|de ol lre
p|lcr. Easls|de p|ave(s We(e rol |rp(essed:
'Loo| al lrose loo|s'.
Ar oul|oo| (e|rlo(ced ov 'Pele's' l(|p |rlo loWr or lre l|(sl ever|rd lo allerd a reel|rd ol
lre |oca| o(arcr ol A|coro||cs Arorvrous lo re|p sl(erdlrer r|s (eso|ve Wr||sl. desp|le lre
(aucous all(acl|ors ol lre pac|ed ard cave(rous (eso(l oa( lre Easls|de p|ave(s We(e
corsp|cuous ov lre|( aoserce. lrslead ol d(|r||rd lrev rad slaved |r lre|( cra|els ard
p|aved ca(ds. coo|ed eacr olre( lood. la||rd p(|de |r lre|( cu||ra(v ao|||l|es:
''3o|' lasle lr|s rar. lr|s |s p(ope('.
'le's ar |d|ol vou |roW. d|dr'l ever pul arv da(||c |r o( arvlr|rd'.
Ever Wrer '3o|' ard 'Cr(|s' Werl oac| lo lre cra|el ard a sp||ll Was (o||ed |l Was ar|dsl a
du||lv ard srea|v alrospre(e. rol oecause arvore le|l du||lv aooul sro||rd ra(|juara oul
102
oecause |r o(de( lo do so '3o|' rad rol lo |roW. lr lacl or|v a coup|e ol p|ave(s rad o(oudrl
arv d(uds or lre l(|p. (especl lo( '3o|' rav|rd dele((ed lre (esl. lre |(orv p(ov|ded ov lre|(
rav|rd lo 'sco(e' l(or ore ol lre Po(lsroulr vo|e|s.

Some might criticise the sporting elements of LOCSP’s work in Hargreaves
terms (1986) as representing a straightforward disciplinary regime which acts
as a means of social control through the schooling of bodies to reproduce
specific class, gender and ethnic divisions. However their approach
resonates with many of those participants who stick with LOCSP, who
recognise its value in broader terms than merely sport. As 'Jay' reflects:

Sometimes when you come training late he was like, go back, go
home. So next time they know that to come training late I'm sure when
they go for a job interview or anything like that, they'll know that things
like this could happen anywhere else you know. It's not just about
football. If you're late to a job interview they could say, oh sorry. They
say you should come there at nine o'clock, you are coming there at ten
past nine, that's no good so I don't think you're ready for this job, you're
not the right man for this job. They'll send you away...So you learn from
football and take it other places.

In some respects this account reflects a long tradition of no-nonsense
discipline, collective values and anti-individualism within working class
communities associated with the work ethic and principles of mutualism and
collectivism that underpinned the emergence of the labour movement. As E.
P. Thompson records in his seminal work on the history of the English
working class:

...by the early years of the nineteenth century it is possible to say that
collectivist values are dominant in many industrial communities; there
is a definite moral code, with sanctions against the blackleg, the 'tools'
of the employer or the unneighbourly, and with an intolerance towards
the eccentric or individualist...It is, indeed, this collective self-
consciousness, with its corresponding theory, institutions, discipline,
and community values which distinguishes the nineteenth-century
working class from the eighteenth-century mob. (1980:463)

With our contemporary times however comes a new celebration of diversity
and relativism in which the market takes over from the State in producing
willing consumers rather than obedient citizens. As such there are those that
‘buy in’ to the project and those that choose other routes. Yet if, as Bauman
(1992) has argued, consumption has emerged, for the masses, as the new
normalising constraint, with consumers bound into the social by seduction –
driven by images of ‘perfect’ bodies, dreams of football superstardom and the
‘coolness’ of the community sports coach - the excluded non-consumers
remain subject to repression.

In this sense sporting interventions are believed to work because they are
seen to provide relief from a criminogenic environment. A romantic image of
conventional sporting certainties is reproduced which is associated with the
interpretation of sports as inculcating a sense of self-discipline, routine and
personal responsibility now enhanced by the seductive glamour of the
celebrity version. Football becomes a metaphor for the positively imbued
103
social values that the ‘healthy’ majority claim as their own and which are
wheeled out to the zones of exclusion in an effort to alter the behaviour and
consciousness of ‘risky’ populations. In this fashion, community sport
operates at the intercedes of the seductive and repressive regimes of social
control. Providing a means of educating those excluded from consumer
society in ‘our way of doing things’, through resort to the cache of social and
cultural capital that goes with contemporary sport.

What this kind of social intervention represents for the mainstream is an
extension of the seductive appeal of its own consumer society. Ultimately it is
the individual reflexive skill and capacity of the cultural intermediary,
alongside the allure of sport, that opens up the seductive potential of that
consumer society and which compels restraint in the face of the more
bountiful potential of the marketplace.

Key issues: The commitments to flexibility and credibility which underpin the
engagement strategies are allied with both the practice and the prospect of a
disciplinary zeal derived from a more conventional sporting discourse which
places an emphasis on the need for discipline, 'good' behaviour, respect for
others, an absence of foul language and the importance of listening.
LOCSP’s collective philosophy towards the management of sporting practice
within its estate based projects can be considered in terms of the need for
meticulous organisation, the provision of opportunities for social
development, a professional commitment to sporting excellence and
unforgiveness of indiscipline.
104
Section 8. Final score: Conclusion and recommendations

Sporting interventions: A typographical framework for analysis

In the second annual report for this research project we discussed Andrew
Scull’s famous essay, Community Corrections: Panacea, Progress or
Pretence (1983) which sought to account for the fundamental shift in the
basis of social control from the 1970s onwards and we offered an evaluative
framework broadly akin to that suggested by Scull. By adapting and refining
Scull’s questioning framework, we offered an initial typological assessment of
the claims that could be made of the work of LOCSP in particular, and
sporting interventions more generally. Ultimately the three ‘claims’ (panacea,
pretence and progress) are considered with reference to six factors, namely:

• Sport
• Community
• Clients
• The State
• Social inclusion
• Evidence

By reference to Table 4 the reader is invited to consider certain
characterisations that have been made of the relationship between ‘claims’
and ‘factors’. For example, when presented as a ‘panacea’ (claim) ‘sport’
(factor) is understood as ‘non-problematic’ and ‘necessarily good’ whilst
under the ‘pretence’ model sport is seen as having ‘rhetorical power’, to be a
‘manipulable’ concept’ and ‘incidental’.

We suggested then that we were drawn towards the ‘progress’ perspective
whilst recognising that none of the characterisations fully reflects the
complexity of the relationships we have been exploring. As such, we wish to
assert the fruitlessness associated with measuring ‘success’ and ‘failure’ in a
context where funding partners and evaluators are seeking assessments,
which are total, fixed and uncontentious. It is our assessment that given
these complexities any honest evaluative framework will necessarily be
partial, contingent and subjective. As will be clear from the preceding section
no one example of work or life history fits neatly with any one of the claims
presented here, as evidence of all three flows across the theoretical
boundaries. Each of them is characterized by clashes, which enable them to
be simultaneously advocated and refuted, illustrated and contradicted.

Having said this we assert that rather than accepting Scull’s ultimately
pessimistic assessment of these claims it is important to understand their
rhetorical force as organizing principles, or agents of change, upon which
interventions are built. Whilst humanitarian ‘progress’ may not be universal,
considerations of what constitutes ‘progress’, and aspirations to achieve it
remain possible at both the organizational and individual level.

With these thoughts in mind we are convinced that LOCSP has produced a
range of tactics, approaches and styles that can broadly be characterised as
compatible with the progressive model illustrated in Table 4. In this final
section we wish to offer some concluding thoughts on the basis of these
105
approaches and the circumstances in which they are likely to lead to the
most progressive outcomes.

Table 4: Sporting interventions – panacea, pretence and progress





Panacea

Pretence

Progress


Sport


• non-
problematic
• necessarily
good
• rhetorical
power
• manipulable
concept
• incidental
• beneficial
• partial
solution


Community


• non-
problematic
• cohesive
• romanticised
• potentially
problematic
• in need of
regulation
• mystified
• complex
• fractured
• in need of
positive
intervention

Clients




• willing
• malleable
• redeemable
• problematic
• in need of
regulation
• cost
considerations
• complex
• chaotic
lifestyles
• in need of
more than
sport

The
State


• benevolent
• pro-active
• progressive
• calculating
• essentially
regulatory
• self-fulfilling
• potentially
progressive
• essentially
political
• re-active

Social
Inclusion




• obvious
• automatic
• speedy
resolution
• rhetorical
power
• unlikely
• incidental
• incredibly
complex
• long-term
goal
• sport’s
contributing
role


Evidence


• easy to discern
• short term
evaluations
• quantifiable
outputs
• cynically
manipulated
• legitimating
• incidental

• thorough
research
• long term
• qualitative

In search of respect

In the book In Search of Respect Phillipe Bourgois (2003) seeks to create a
bridge across the vast social distance between New York's Upper East Side
where he grew up and the Puerto Rican population of East Harlem by
documenting the range of survival strategies of those at the extreme end of
the marginalizing process, the crack dealers of El Barrio.

In his view, drugs and violence are seen merely as symptoms, or symbols of
deeper changes in the culture of modern America. The actions of the young
106
drug dealers he encountered are, for Bourgois, nothing more or less than an
alternative forum for an autonomous personal dignity denied them by
mainstream culture. In this sense they are portrayed as but one end of the
continuum with the ordinary - neither passive victims nor glamorous
gangsters - they are vulnerable active human beings, shaping their own
future. That they 'choose' to do so outside of the framework of the
'mainstream' economy is regarded as an outcome of structural changes in
the economy which deny such groups access to employment in 'honourable'
productive work, closing off avenues to the 'respect' which underpins social
relations. In this context, it is the drug economy, which provides the only
'respectable' alternative to the ameliorating effects of employment in the
'entry level' service sector with its limitless demand for fast food outlet
attendants and office cleaners.

Similarly, in terms of the British 'leisure' sector, we might identify parallels
between the positively regarded properties of sport and the perceived
deleterious impact of drugs and crime. If sport is to be regarded as helping
young people to ‘learn to differentiate between good and bad behaviour’
(Labour Party, 1997:8) we need to ask who’s definitions of ‘good’ and ‘bad’
behaviour we are relying on. Since, from an alternative perspective, drugs,
crime and 'deviant' behaviour might be regarded as providing alternative
routes to adventure and excitement to those provided by sport, whilst being
motivated by the same mainstream values (Rojek, 2000; Presdee, 2000;
Gilman & Pearson, 1999). As such, in seeking to maintain a peaceful and
contented state amongst socially excluded and often criminalised drug users,
inappropriate interventions may well merely seek to replace the excitement,
confrontations and violence associated with drugs and crime with a symbolic,
‘socially acceptable’ and less threatening alternative.

The targets of such interventions, themselves being 'ordinary', vulnerable,
active human beings, shaping their own futures, are nevertheless in many
cases attracted by the prospect of sport and its promise of physical,
honourable, activity in a world where individuals seek to express a sense of
identity and worth through their leisure (Blackshaw, 2002). It is our contention
though that as long as interventions remain restricted to the level of 'leisure'
activity, the impact will be necessarily fleeting, contingent and partial. In this
sense whilst the sports experience and the expertise of those involved in
facilitating it is vital, ultimately interventions are likely to have the most
significant impact where relationships are formed around it and opportunities
created through it for personal development, employment and training. As
such the work that has emerged at LOCSP might be regarded as operating
through the model of the 'participatory community'.

Participatory community

In attempting to make some sense of the work of LOCSP (in terms of its
broader significance and potential as a model for wider applicability) it is
useful to consider the story of the Barlinnie Special Unit (BSU). This is a rare
(possibly unique) success story in the otherwise bleak history of the
‘treatment model’ of detention, where the proper function of the prison was
seen to be to rehabilitate inmates. Opened in 1972 the Unit was primarily
designed to segregate the most violent Scottish inmates from the mainstream
prisoner population. Similar to the way in which contemporary ‘exclusive
107
society’ seeks to essentialise and demonise problematic ‘others’, and
consequently designs strategies to protect itself from these others – placing
safe space between the included and the excluded (Young, 1999) – the Unit
was conceived as a strategic attempt to marginalise and neuter those
individuals who were regarded by the authorities as presenting a
destabilising effect on the Scottish penal System.

To that extent there was nothing particularly new with the model, there had
been many previous attempts to isolate the supposed bad apples from less
'diseased' inmates. However, immediately prior to the establishment of the
BSU the most violent Scottish prison inmates were isolated in the notorious
cages at Inverness prison where each prisoner was held in complete
isolation housed in a cell within a cell (separated by iron bars), denied any
human contact (to the extent that food was passed to the inmate on the end
of a metal pole). This model of absolute exclusion was shattered when the
prisoners quite literally tore it apart. The prisoners burrowed through the
partition walls and gathered in the final cell to confront the prison authorities
in a horrifically violent refutation of an ideology that suggests it is possible to
segregate society by the building of impermeable walls between the 'good'
and the 'bad'. Afterwards prisoners were sent to trial on charges of attempted
murder but this proved to be a spectacular public relations disaster for the
authorities as it provided a public forum in which the inmates could talk about
a brutal and oppressive system.

It was in this context of political confusion and sensitivity that the BSU was
eventually launched. The authorities were sensitive to the worsening
relations between the prison officers union and the government, and in order
to minimise further conflicts the Scottish Prison Service ruled that only
officers who volunteered for the BSU would have to work there. Those who
ultimately volunteered can be seen as non-traditional agents of intervention
in the same way that LOCSP workers differ from probation workers,
policemen, teachers etc. The officers didn’t wear uniforms and insisted that
the inmates called them by their first names rather than ‘MR …’ as was
usually the case. The inmates also did not wear uniforms. Within the unit the
prisoners were allowed complete freedom of movement. Even though the
unit now housed many of those who were involved in the Inverness
confrontations (including the notorious Glasgow gangster Jimmy Boyle,
referred to in those days as Scotland’s most violent man) the inmates were
allowed access to tools and other implements that could be used as
weapons. Great emphasis was placed on encouraging the inmates to
express themselves artistically (Boyle became a renowned
sculptor, his pieces selling for thousands of pounds).

The most innovative feature of the unit were the weekly Monday morning
meetings where staff and inmates discussed issues arising from individuals’
behaviour and the future direction of the unit. Everybody present had an
equal say, memoirs from officers and inmates recount how this meeting
allowed people to develop a sense of responsibility and become self-critical.
Inmates released from the unit confounded critics by not only just staying out
of prison but becoming active community workers (Boyle established a
successful crime diversion programme for young people in Edinburgh)

Peter Young’s assessment of Barlinnie was that it allowed for the formation
108
of what he termed a truly 'participatory community'. In other words the
success of the unit lay in the fact that non-traditional workers (who
supposedly had a complete monopoly of power over the inmates) committed
themselves to allowing the excluded opportunities to eventually re-integrate
themselves within mainstream society. At the same time they encouraged the
inmates to be truly reflexive, this enabled them to account for their own
behaviour in a way which often involved them having to be critical of their
own actions, and having to place their individual actions in the context of how
they helped or hindered the progressive development of the unit as a whole.
From this, Young contests, a truly collective conscience emerged.

The point here is not that the individuals who come into contact with LOCSP
are in any way pathological, in need of some special programme of
behaviour modification, but rather that just as the inmates in Barlinnie
benefited from an intervention which provided a space in their life from the
traditional distinctions of 'inclusion'/'exclusion', 'good'/'bad' so the young
men who play and train with LOCSP are given respite from the daily grind of
contemporary exclusionary processes. Indeed, recent ethnographic studies
of the American ‘underclass’ such as Bourgois' reinforce the point that rather
than the ‘excluded’ being different from ‘us’, with different cultural values and
normative frameworks, they have an over-developed thirst to attain the
cultural goals of mainstream society.

In the context of interventions with those who have come to be understood as
'socially marginalised', 'excluded' and potentially criminogenic then, LOCSP’s
most 'successful' interventions might be considered in relation to the more
organic development of this model by the Delancy Street Foundation in San
Francisco. Founded in 1972 by a former heroin addict the Foundation is a
place to learn and put to use viable social skills. Its founder, John Maher, with
the help of the criminologist Mimi Silbert slowly built a 'participatory
community' of former convicts and drug addicts who live together, teach
together and work together. The residents function as a family, earning their
own incomes while contributing to the overall success of the programme as a
whole. It is underpinned by the following features:

• Residents commitment to the programme.
• Self image enhanced through appearance and 'good living'.
• All residents held responsible for choice and actions and must work
to acquire privileges.
• Goal of self-improvement as well as good of the group.
• Mandatory community service and caring for others in a manner that
promotes family pride.
• Self-discipline is expected with pressure exerted to keep the
community running smoothly.
• Risk-taking and positive change encouraged and supported.
• Community owned and resident-operated business with a $6 million
income.

These features, which can also be identified in the work of the Carlton
Athletic drug and alcohol project in Glasgow, resonate with many of the
principles, which guide LOCSP’s approach even if the organisation generally
works with those at the 'softer' end of the social exclusion spectrum. Whilst
109
no residential 'community', LOCSP does generate a familial environment
whose values and goals are extended outside the core staff team to the
participants in its programmes. The greatest impact being experienced by
those participants who ultimately take on coaching and developmental roles
with the organisation or learn the skills to take LOCSP’s approach
elsewhere. The point being that these participants are not pathological
others in need of a 'cure' but that because of wider exclusionary processes
they have been put out of reach of traditional intervention agencies. When
innovative methods are utilised and ‘spaces’ created we discover that the
'excluded' are just like 'us', just with more limited chances.

Key issues: Fruitlessness associated with measuring ‘success’ and ‘failure’
in a context where funding partners and evaluators are seeking
assessments, which are total, fixed and uncontentious. LOCSP has produced
a range of tactics, approaches and styles, which can broadly be
characterised as 'progressive'. Ultimately interventions are likely to have the
most significant impact where relationships are formed around it and
opportunities created through it for personal development, employment and
training. As such the work that has emerged at LOCSP might best be
regarded as operating through the model of the 'participatory community'.

Recommendations

Ultimately, in terms of the presentation of LOCSP as a 'model' agency in this
sector, we have identified that it:

• Demands organisational flexibility and innovation.
• Has the potential rather than any guarantee of generating positive
outcomes.
• Is necessarily part of a process of social and community development
which is never complete and which always has the potential for
relapse.
• Has the greatest impact upon those who engage with the
organisation's inner 'community' and guiding principles.
• Is underpinned by an egalitarian, non hierarchical organisational
structure.
• Relies upon its staff's ability to present themselves as realisable 'role
models'.
• Gains credibility through its perceived authenticity in the eyes of
participants and funders.
• Depends upon the capacity of its coaches to both engage with target
populations through an intimate awareness of local cultural forms and
style and to deliver sporting excellence.

In relation to these findings in this final passage we seek to draw out a series
of key messages relating to the delivery and management of sports based
social inclusion projects, which might help to guide those responsible for
identifying and funding agencies to 'do' this type of work.

Back to the office...

1. It should be recognised that, other things being equal, there are
110
considerable advantages to be gained in terms of working with an agency
with charitable rather than statutory status. Charitable agencies are in a
much stronger position to attract additional funding from a range of other
sources, particularly in areas that have been identified as in need of
investment. Charitable agencies are also in a stronger position to work with
participants across political and geographical boundaries.

Evidence: Many of LOCSP’s early estate based interventions were small
scale with limited budgets, such as the Drug Challenge Fund project which
spawned the Eastside team, but went on to attract additional funds from a
variety of public and private sector sources enabling expansion of the
organisation's expertise out across the East of London.

2. In this light it is always worth considering, even when a good proposal is
received, whether there might be a better, more credible and flexible agency
to fund than the applicant. This is not to say that the original applicant would
not have an important role in the delivery of a proposed project but just that it
might not be the lead agency. Funders should encourage partnership in such
circumstances and flexibility in acknowledging the track record of other
agencies and be prepared to direct applicants towards appropriate partners.

Evidence: LOCSP staff have been demonstrably more successful in
engaging with young people on estates targeted by social inclusion
programmes than more conventional statutory representatives.

3. In this respect funders should also be concerned about the experience that
agencies have in terms of delivering sports based social inclusion projects
and their willingness to engage with partners where there are identified
weaknesses and gaps in that experience. Equally where there is an identified
lack of experience funders should be willing to back innovative ideas and
committed organisations with smaller grants. In this regard it is important to
ensure that project proposals are realistic and achievable with the available
funds.

Evidence: LOCSP has always been willing to bring in external expertise - in
terms of drug education specialists etc - where staff have not been confident
in their capacity to deliver certain aspects of a programme. In turn this has
led to identification of weaknesses in the programme portfolio which have
then been addressed through staff recruitment, development and training.
LOCSP also began working on social inclusion projects by securing a series
of small grants in the region of £5,000. From this they gained the experience
and confidence to deliver more substantial programmes.

4. In a similar vein it is also important that agencies have the confidence of
potential partners and collaborators and that they are not seen to be
replicating existing programmes of work. Ideally sports programmes should
form one element of a broader social inclusion programme, which involves
agencies that are able to identify and refer young people, but also agencies
that can provide exit routes into the 'mainstream'.

Evidence: Other statutory and voluntary bodies including local authorities
across East London, health authorities, approach Increasingly LOCSP and
111
mainstream government funding sources to take the lead or participate in
social inclusion programmes.

5. If agencies are to have credibility with their target audience it is important
that they are accessible not only at the point of delivery but also in terms of
their administrative centre. Parents and enthusiastic participants should be
able to contact the organisation at other times than when coaches are
delivering sessions on estates, both in terms of good professional practice
and as a means of strengthening relationships.

Evidence: LOCSP’s office under the South Stand at Brisbane Road is located
in the heart of Leyton at a well-known venue where the public is welcome to
wander in. As well as seeking out information on courses visitors are
encouraged to hang around and make use of the magazine rack. The space
has more of the feel of a 'boot room' than a corporate office and gives off an
air of what the organisation is about. Several members of staff have been
recruited following uninvited visits and the office plays regular host to young
people on work experience, whilst team members often meet up there before
and after matches which has contributed to their familiarity with the
organisation and transition onto the coaching staff.

6. In this respect it is vital that agencies can be recognisably effective
'cultural intermediaries', able to operate equally comfortably in the worlds of
their participants and in the wider domain of 'professional practice'. The role
of the agents of social inclusion is to provide gateways between these worlds
and as such funders should look for evidence that agencies have the staff
resources to engage with target groups but also of their ability to open up
pathways into employment and training. The most effective agencies may be
those who can demonstrate that they are also able to share their learning
with others working in the field.

Evidence: Whilst LOCSP staff have demonstrated a capacity to engage with
young people in disadvantaged communities and, more particularly, those
individuals identified by other agencies as being 'most at risk', they have also
developed their own Open College Network courses and consistently helped
participants to pursue other employment and training options. Beyond this
LOCSP staff are consistently represented and indeed often lead local
partnerships, forums, conferences and training events.

7. In the face of the damage that can be done by 'parachute' projects which
raise expectations only to ultimately let down those engaged by the prospect
of a new challenge, agencies must show a long term commitment to
provision which rejects the time-budget model. Whilst acknowledging that
specific funding awards will always be limited to a specified time period,
applicants must show a commitment to extending provision indefinitely. In
this regard applicants need to indicate their succession funding strategy in all
applications. Whilst a project may seek to assimilate participants back into
the wider neighbourhood, mainstream services and opportunities this should
not be regarded as an acceptable starting assumption.

Evidence: On all of the estates LOCSP has worked on, there has never been
a perception that participants, as a group, have been successfully integrated
into mainstream provision and as such programmes have always been
112
extended to ensure continuity and that individual progression routes are
maintained.

Back to the 'community'...

1. Beyond the rhetoric there remains no definitive evidence of a link between
participation in sport and generic positive social outcomes. As such funders
should be wary of organisations that make claims to this effect. Rather,
project aims should be grounded in their capacity to deliver and links should
be made between objectives and assessment. Claims that are likely to
remain unsubstantiated should be avoided even at the expense of ambition.
Given the problems associated with unrealistically heightening ambitions,
objectives should focus on the realistic and deliverable.

Evidence: LOCSP has learned to understand that when working with groups
classified as 'socially excluded', engagement must be regarded as an end in
itself. Assessment can then be made through the success in engaging target
groups in activities and maintaining their contact.

2. It is important to recognise the distinction between sports development
projects - including sports projects targeted at socially marginalised groups -
and sports based 'social inclusion' projects. Projects, which engage young
people in sport, whilst not addressing the range of issues raised in this report,
can still be worthwhile projects. Equally social inclusion projects that do not
have fixed, coherent development plans in place may still be effective in
meeting project aims. Assessment needs to relate project objectives to
project outcomes rather than the rhetoric of social inclusion.

Evidence: Alongside its estate based projects LOCSP has run a highly
successful girls and women’s football development programme that has
engaged significant numbers of women into participation in football as well as
producing some players of outstanding quality.

3. Funders should question why and by whom projects were conceived and
the extent to which plans have been based on local knowledge. In the midst
of the perception of sport and football as a panacea in the context of the
concern with 'social exclusion' there is the potential for areas to be identified
and solutions assigned without adequate consideration of needs.

Evidence: LOCSP have been asked to work on estates where minimal
investigation revealed that local residents were already running 10 football
teams and training sessions 5 nights a week on a voluntary basis.
Replication would only have been likely to generate hostility and
disengagement.

4. Similarly it is important to question whether project plans are too
prescriptive. Where programmes have been planned in too detailed a fashion
or based upon an external model implemented in a location with different
local conditions it may not reflect the more organic nature of successful
community development work. Successful projects are likely to be
professional but flexible, long term and open ended with a recognition that
changes will be incremental and uneven.

113
Evidence: In the 2001 LOCSP annual review the Director recalled that the
best memory of the year had been when 47 of the Eastside squad organised
their own training session in the park because they decided that they were
not fit enough.

5. Funders should be concerned with where projects are to be delivered.
Whilst some projects may seek to raise their credibility and attractiveness
through identification of state of the art facilities, however limited, estate
based resources represent the best place to start any intervention and to
maintain credibility and entry-level access to estate residents. At the same
time it is important to identify accessible facilities of a higher standard for
future use so that teams can be organised and enabled to progress into
competitive structures.

Evidence: Despite running 27 football teams LOCSP continues to organise
estate based football-training sessions on a daily basis throughout the week.

6. Whilst interventions of this type necessarily need to remain flexible at the
micro as well as the macro planning level it is vital to investigate the basic
parameters of football development strategies. Short-term football coaching
programmes will not be successful in terms of a social inclusion strategy. As
interventions of this type are built around the opportunity to make contact and
build relationships they cannot be time bound or skill development driven.
As such, what is important is the provision of a variety of individually tailored
pathways that enable participants to fulfil their potential or explore other
avenues for personal development.

Evidence: In addition to its provision of Open College Network courses and
other training and employment opportunities, LOCSP is able to augment its
estate based work by providing access to an extensive network of teams and
contacts with other clubs suitable for all levels of ability and commitment.


114
References

Amit, V. (ed) (2002) Realising Community. London: Routledge.
Anderson, B. (1991) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and
Spread of Nationalism, 2
nd
edn. London: Verso.
Armstrong, G. (1998) Hooligans: Knowing the score, Oxford: Berg
Atkinson, M. (1990) The ethnographic imagination: Textual constructions of
reality, London: Routledge
Back, L. (1996) New Ethnicities and Urban Culture: Racisms and multiculture
in young lives, London: UCL Press
Back, L., Crabbe, T. & Solomos, J. (2001) The changing face of football:
Racism, identity and multiculture in the English game, Oxford: Berg
Baldry, H. C (1976) in Howarth, J et al (eds.) Leisure and the Community.
LSA
Bauman, Z. (1992) Intimations of Postmodernity. London: Routledge.
Bauman, Z. (1995) Life in Fragments: Essays in Postmodern Morality,
Oxford: Blackwell.
Bauman, Z. (1998) Work, consumerism & the new poor, Buckingham: Open
University Press
Bauman, Z. (1999) In Search of Politics, Cambridge: Polity Press
Bauman, Z. (2001) Community: Seeking Safety in an Insecure World.
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Beck, U. (1992) Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity, London: Sage
Becker, H. (1963) Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance, London:
The Free Press
Blackshaw, T. (2003) Leisurelife: myth, masculinity and modernity, London:
Routledge
Blackshaw, T. & Crabbe, T. (2004) New perspectives on sport and deviance:
Consumption, performativity and social control, London: Routledge
Bourdieu, P. (1962) The Algerians, Boston, MA: Beacon Press
Bourdeu, P. (1978) Sport and social class, Social Science Information, vol.
XVIII, 6, p821
Bourdieu, P. (1980) ‘Aristocracy of culture’, Media, Culture and Society,
vol.II, 3
Bourdieu, P. (1984) Distinction: A social critique of judgement and taste,
London: Routledge
Bourgois, P. (2003) In search of respect: Selling crack in El Burrio, 2nd
Edition,
Brown, M. (2002) Who needs Japan when we've got the Orient?, TES, June
7th 2002
Buhrmann, H. (1977) Athletics and deviance: An examination of the
relationship between athletic participation and deviant behaviour of high
school girls, Review of Sport and Leisure, 2, 17-35
Burr, A. (1987) Chasing the Dragon: heroin misuse, delinquency and crime in
the context of South London culture, British Journal of Criminology, 27,
pp.333-57
Butcher, H. (ed) (1993) Community and public policy, London: Pluto Press
Cabinet Office (2002) Game Plan: A Strategy for Delivering Government’s
Sport and Physical Activity Objectives, London: HMSO
Cassell (not dated) Cassell’s Book of Sports & Pastimes, London: Cassell &
Co
Castells, M. (1977) The Urban Question: a Marxist Approach. London,
Edward Arnold.
115
Castells, M. (1983) The City and the Grass Roots: a Cross-Cultural Theory of
Urban Social Movements. London, Edward Arnold.
Clarke, J. (1973) Football and the Skinheads, Occasional Paper, Centre for
Contemporary Cultural Studies, University of Birmingham
Clarke, J. (1978) Football and working class fans: tradition and change’, in R.
Ingham (ed), Football Hooliganism: the Wider Context, London: Inter-Action
Imprint
Clarke, J. & Critcher, C. (1985) The Devil Makes Work: Leisure in Capitalist
Britain, Houndsmills: Macmillan Press
Coalter, F. (1989) Sport and Anti-Social Behaviour: A Literature Review,
Edinburgh: Scottish Sports Council
Coffield, F. & Gofton, L. (1994) Drugs and Young People, London: Institute
for Public Policy Research
Cohen, A. (1985) The Symbolic Construction of Community. London,
Tavistock.
Collins, M., Henry, I., Houlihan, B. & Butler, J. (1999) Sport and Social
Exclusion. Institute of Sport and Leisure Policy, Loughborough University
Cornwell, J. (1984) Hard-earned lives: Accounts of health and illness from
East London, London: Tavistock
Crabbe, T. (2000) ‘A Sporting Chance?: using sport to tackle drug use and
crime, Drugs: education, prevention and policy, (next edition)
Crabbe, T. (1998) ‘Going for Goals’: An evaluation of the Tower Hamlets
Drug Challenge Fund Project. London: Leyton Orient Community Sports
Programme
Crawford, A. (1997) The Local Governance of Crime: Appeals to Community
and Partnerships, Oxford: Clarendon Press
Crime Concern (2000) Youth Works Plus, Woodberry Down Estate: crime
and Disorder Profile Report, Crime Concern
Cross, M. (1985) 'Flexibility and integration at the workplace', Employee
Relations, 17 (1), p.4
DCMS (1999) Policy Action Team 10: Report to the Social Exclusion Unit -
Arts and Sport, London: HMSO
DCMS (2001) A Sporting Future for All, London: HMSO
DCMS (2002) The Government’s Plan for Sport, London: HMSO
Delanty, G. (2003) Community. London, Routledge.
Department of Health, (1999) Saving Lives: Our Healthier Nation, London:
HMSO
Elias, N. & Dunning, E. (1986) Quest for Excitement: Sport and Leisure in the
Civilizing Process, Oxford: Basil Blackwell
Featherstone, M. (1991) Consumer Culture & Postmodernism, TCS
Feeley, M. & Simon, J. (1992) ‘The new penology: Notes on the emerging
strategy of corrections and its implications’, Criminology, 30, 4: 449-474
Frosh, F., Phoenix, A. & Pattman, R. (2002) Young Masculinities:
Understanding Boys in Contemporary Society, Basingstoke: Palgrave
Gilman, M. & Pearson, G. (1991) Lifestyles and law enforcement, in D.
Whynes & P. Bean (eds.) Policing and prescribing: the British system of
drug control, London: Macmillan
Glen, A. (1993) ‘Methods and Themes in Community Practice’ in H. Butcher
et al Community and Public Policy. London: Pluto Press.
Golder, A. (2003) Crime rates fall, but fear is still rife, The Recorder, 1
st

October, 2003
Hargreaves, Jennifer (1994) Sporting Females, London: Routledge
Hargreaves, John (1986) Sport, Power and Culture, Cambridge: Polity Press
116
Hastad, D., Segrave, J., Pangrazi, R. & Peterson, G. (1984) Youth sport
participation and deviant behaviour, Sociology of Sport Journal, 1: 366-373
Haywood, L. (ed.) (1994) Community Leisure and Recreation: Theory and
Practice. Oxford, Butterworth-Heinemann.
Hebditch, D. (1974) The Kray Twins: A study of a system of closure,
Stencilled Occasional Paper, Birmingham: CCCS
Hellison, D. & Cutworth, N. (1997) Extended day programs for urban children
and youth. From theory to practice in H. Walberg, O. Reyes & R. Wessberg
(eds.) Children and youth: Interdisciplinary perspectives, Thosand Oaks,
CA: Sage
Hobbs, D. (1988) Doing the Business: Entrepreneurship, The Working Class
and Detectives in the East End of London, Oxford: Oxford University Press
Hoggett, P. and Hambleton, R. (1987) Decentralisation and Democracy.
Bristol, Advanced School of Urban Studies.
Holt, R. (1989) Sport and the British. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
LBBD (2001) Barking & Dagenham Audit of Crime & Disorder, Barking &
Dagenham Community Safety Team
Labour Party (1997) Labour’s Sporting Nation. London: The Labour Party
Lash. S. (1994) Reflexivity and its Doubles: Structure, Aesthetics,
Community’, in Beck, U., Giddens, A. and Lash, S. Reflexive
Modernization: Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social
Order. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Lasch, C. (1978) The culture of narcissism: American life in an age of
diminishing expectations, New York: Norton
Lianos, M. with Douglas, M. (2000) Dangerization and the End of Deviance:
the Institutional Environment, in D. Garland & R. Sparks (eds) Criminology
and Social Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press
Long, J. & Sanderson, I. (2001) The social benefits of sport: where’s the
proof?, in C. Gratton & I. Henry (eds) Sport in the City: the role of sport in
economic and social regeneration, London: Routledge
Madden, N. (2002) Last through the turnstiles: Ethnic minority attendance at
Leyton Orient Football Club, unpublished MA dissertation
Maffesoli, M. (1996) The Time of the Tribes: the Decline of Individualism in a
Mass Society. London: Sage.
McDonald, D. & Tungatt, M. (1993) Community development and sport.
London: Community Development Foundation
Mckenzie, D. (1997) Criminal justice and crime prevention, in L. Sherman et
al. (eds) Preventing Crime: what works, what doesn't, what's promising?
Office of Justice Program Research Report, Department of Criminology and
Criminal Justice, University of Maryland
Measham, F., Newcombe, R. & Parker, H. (1994) The post-heroin
generation, Druglink: The Journal of Drug Misuse in Britain, 8, London:
Institute for the Study of Drug Dependence
Mumford, K. & Power, A. (2003) East Enders: family and community in east
London, Policy Press
Neighbourhood Renewal Unit, (2001) New Commitment to Neighbourhood
Renewal: A National Strategy Action Plan, London: HMSO
Nichols, G. (1997) A Consideration of Why Active Participation in Sport and
Leisure Might Reduce Criminal Behaviour. Sport, Education and Society,
2(2) pp. 181-190
O'Brien, M. & Jones, D. (1997) Young People, Family Life and Education in
Barking and Dagenham, Rising East, 1, 1
117
PFA (1999) The Footballers’ Further Education and Vocational Training
Society, Football in the Community, Manchester: PFA
Park, R. & Burgess, E. (1925) (eds) The City, Chicago
Parker, H., Measham, F. & Aldridge, J. (1995) Drugs Futures: chaning
patterns of drug use amongst English youth, London: Institute for the Study
of Drug Dependence
Parker, H., Aldridge, J. & Measham, F. (1998) Illegal Leisure: the
normalisation of adolescent recreational drug use, London: Routledge
Pearson, G. (1987) Social deprivation, unemployment and patterns of heroin
use, in N. Dorn & N. South (eds) A land fit for heroin? Drug policies,
prevention and practice, Basingstoke: Macmillan
Plant (1974) Community and ideology: an essay in applied social philosophy,
London: Routledge
Presdee, M. (2000) Cultural criminology and the carnival of crime, London:
Routledge
Purdy, D. & Taylor, S. (1983) Sport and juvenile delinquency: an examination
and assessment of four major theories. Journal of Sport Behaviour, 6(4),
pp. 179-193
Putnam, R. (1999) Bowling Alone, New York: Simon and Schuster.
Robins, D. (1990) Sport as prevention, the role of sport in crime prevention
programmes aimed at young people. Centre for Criminological Research,
Oxford University
Robson, G. (2000) ‘No one likes us, we don’t care’: The myth and reality of
Millwall Fandom, Oxford: Berg
Rojek, C. (2000) Leisure & Culture, Basingstoke: Macmillan
Schafer, W. (1969) Some sources and consequences of interscholastic
athletics: the case of participation and delinquency, International Review of
Sport Sociology, 4, 63-79
Scull, A. (1983) ‘Community Corrections: Panacea, Progress or Pretence’ in
Garland & Young (eds) The Power to Punish Heinemann Educational
Books
Semler, R. (2001) Maverick: Success Story Behind the World's Most Unusual
Work Place, Random House Business Books
Smith, M. (1983) Violence and sport, Toronto: Butterworths
Snydor, E. (1994) Interpretations and Explanations of Deviance Among
College Athletes: A Case Study, Sociology of Sport Journal, 11, 231-248
Social Exclusion Unit, (2000) Our Towns and Cities: The Future - Delivering
an Urban Renaissance (London: HMSO,
Sports Council, (1986) Football: The Club in the Community Workshop
Report, London: Sports Council
Sprott, R. (2002) Orient express, BlaqSport: A celebration of black sporting
achievement
Taylor, M. et al (1976) Principles and Practice of Community Work in a British
Town. CPF.
Tett, L. (1996) 'Changing Masculinities: single-sex work with boys and young
men' in Youth and Policy Issue 55 14-27.
Thompson, E. P. (1980) The Making of the English Working Class, Milton
Keynes: The Open University
Torkildsen, G (1998) Leisure & Recreation Management, London, ESN Spon
Wagg, S. (2004) ‘With his money, I could afford to be depressed’: markets,
masculinity and mental distress in the English football press’. In S. Wagg
(Ed.) British football and social exclusion, London: Routledge
118
Williams, J. Dunning, E. & Murphy, P. (1989) Hooligans abroad: The
behaviour and control of England fans in continental Europe, Second
Edition, London: Routledge
Wilmott, P. (1963) The Evolution of a Community: A study of Dagenham after
forty years, London: Routledge
Wilson, E. (1980) Only halfway to paradise: Women in postwar Britain, 1945-
1968, London: Tavistock
Young, J. (1999) The Exclusive Society: Social Exclusion, Crime and
Difference in Late Modernity. London: Sage
Young, P. (1999) The Barlinnie Special Unit – a study in social control,
unpublished
Young & Willmott (1957) Family and kinship in East London, London:
Penguin
Yule, J. (1990) Gender & Leisure Policy, Department of Applied &
Community Studies, Bradford & Ilkley Community College.