(Doidge and Sandri Citation2019; Llewellyn, Cousins, and

Tyson Citation2020; McElroy, Evans, and Pringle Citation2008) and stadia-

based community mental health services which provide football-themed
support courses (Curran, Drust, and Richardson Citation2014; Curran
et al. Citation2017; Pringle and Sayers Citation2004).

However, despite the reported impact of these interventions, they have

also been subject to certain criticisms around the implementation and
assessment of the health promotion strategies. Firstly, many of these
studies rely on fans’ self-report evaluations of the effectiveness of the
intervention. As Heun and Pringle (Citation2018) outline there is clearly a
need for more robust and longitudinal research methods to assess the
longer-term impact and mental health improvements from such projects,
given the prevalence of mental health issues for those involved in football
(e.g. players, coaches, referees and fans). Secondly, there is a lack of
support in on-going behaviour change so that when these services
conclude or end due to financial constraints, short-term positive changes
may not be sustained longer-term reducing the effectiveness of the
interventions (Crocker, Lucas and Wardle 2012). Moreover, Pringle,
Zwolinsky, and Lozano-Sufrategui (Citation2021) suggest how people who
participate in support programmes of this kind are likely to become
disappointed and de-motivated by the removal of interventions, becoming
sceptical and disillusioned if invited to join new interventions that promise
positive impacts on their health and wellbeing. Thirdly, interventions often
focus on common mental health issues such as depression, anxiety and
self-esteem (Gouttebarge et al. Citation2017; Junge and Feddermann-
Demont Citation2016; McManus et al. Citation2016; Pringle and
Sayers Citation2004). This means that interventions lack psychoeducation-
like approaches concerning specific mental health conditions or diagnoses
(Donker et al. Citation2009). We shall return to these critiques later in
relation to the FA’s Heads Up campaign as it repeated some of these
shortcomings.

Methods

This paper represents part of wider research project examining the links
between professional sports, mental health disclosure narratives and
media coverage (Elsey Citation2019; Elsey et al. Citation2023). The
research draws on ethnographic and investigative methods rooted in the
principles of ethnomethodology and conversation analysis (Heath
et al. Citation2010; Sacks Citation1995). In line with these approaches, this
research explores how the key messages and health promotion activities
of the campaign were made visible and accessible, and how they were
encountered and experienced from a fan or public-facing perspective. The
data utilized in this research is re-produced extensively to provide readers
with the original content in order to assess the analysis shared here.

Data sources
The data used for the purposes of this study was collected using a range
of ethnographic research methods to capture the different platforms used
by the Heads Up campaign (i.e. on-line, in-person, via the media).
Specifically, we focused on how the public health messages were made
visible