For the love of the game, Liverpool football fans came to the stadium in droves, ready to defend and support their team. United, the crowd brought high levels of emotions to the event. Optimistic and enthusiastic they stood bound together on the terraces. Shankly's comments glorified the game he, and millions of others, loved so much (Shankly, Life and Death).

Bootle II's look at Liverpool football aggression in the 1960's, uncovered a group of fans consumed and devoted to a common sport. Forty years after the KOP opened to thousands of fans, football hooliganism remains a male phenomenon around the world. No matter how universal, according to our research it is unlikely that football hooliganism is a psychopathology. In essence, football aggression is a symptom and pragmatic characteristic among many complex variables. Over-stimulation of the senses, overcrowding, high levels of emotion, not to mention high identification to the game, fan and player loyalty. In our conclusion, most fans were very passionate about football, but only a number of men behaved in a very aggressive manner.

The only mention of illness, are the references to the "English or British Disease" label. They both describe English loyalty and passion, however, most often defining a volatile, angered mob of fanatics seen at football games. This label was exceedingly promoted, hence given special attention by the media. People watching the game on television learned to stereotype and expect certain behavior at football matches. The fights looked quite dangerous, but in reality few serious injuries occurred (Marsh et al., 1996). The majority of the people in the stadiums were relatively peaceful and law-abiding fans of the games, while hooligans were the minority group (Haley & Johnston). Between 1960 and 1965, incidents of football violence had doubled when compared to the previous twenty-five years (Marsh et al., 1996).

Liverpool football was the working-class sport (New Internationalist, 1985). "Football, the club and the game, allowed expression of courage, fighting skills, group loyalty and control of territory, all qualities highly prized in male, urban working-class culture" (New Internationalist, 1985). "The traditional blue collar audience saw the team as an extension of themselves, local boys who managed to escape the factory through their skill with the ball" (English Premier). They followed their local football club as a means or expressing their pride in their own town and region (English Premier).

We assert that Liverpool football aggression affected those who participated, as well as those who witnessed it. Although a significant event, to say that it was a psychopathology would be unjust. The passionate football fans were guilty of loving the sport, but not pathologically ill. When asked to comment on our research question, Dr. Richard Stalling from Bradley University supports our findings by saying, "My opinion? It's not psychopathology, so I guess that leaves sport. Violence, hostility, especially between groups, just seems to be part of being human" (email conversation, January 15, 2002).

While the relevance of Deindividuation and Crowd Violence was observed, the researchers now question the application of Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis as an alternative explanation of football aggression. Furthermore, Frustration-Induced Criminality may also apply to the socioeconomic status and social issues related to crime in Liverpool (Bartol, 2002). To extend on this research, another group could examine the effects of frustration on Liverpool football fans of the 1960's. 

 Part 6: References