Bars,drugs and football thugs: Alcohol,cocaine use and violence in the night time economy among English football firms

Introduction

Although, violence in the night time economy (NTE) has become a burgeoning area of criminological inquiry, it has not yet reached the scale of research on football violence which, some argue, now constitutes an over-researched subject (Frosdick and Marsh, 2005). Unlike other work in this area, this explorative study does not seek to augment the vast array of literature underpinning and explaining football violence. Instead it seeks to examine the cultural function that cocaine (used in conjunction with alcohol and on its own) plays in the extreme violence characteristic of this specific criminological subculture, and how their subcultural activities correlate to the violent interactions that have become an intrinsic aspect of Britain’s NTE.

The article offers some initial, broad observations on the pharmacological effects of concurrent cocaine and alcohol use, and subsequently its metabolite, cocaethylene. It then considers the part that these substances play in the performance of violence in the specific cultural milieu of the football firm using ethnographic data. Using the narratives of football firm members, it was found that concurrent use of cocaine and alcohol fulfilled three main functions: the facilitation of extreme violence; the acquisition of ‘time out’; and the construction of a (hyper-)masculine identity. However, these functions were not confined solely to the subcultural context of the football firm, but had also become an integral component of their more mainstream leisure pursuits within the NTE. Therefore, these findings should contribute to a more nuanced appreciation of the characteristics of perpetrators of violence in the NTE (Finney, 2004).

In this article we specifically focus on young adult men who seek to participate in subcultural football violence (we specifically use the term violence rather than football hooliganism, because our concern is with fans who are members of football fighting firms). ¹ Although there is an abundance of literature from subcultural youth studies concerning football hooliganism, the various academic studies which followed sought to explain football violence from anthropological, sociological and psychological standpoints (Dunning et al., 1987; Finn, 1994; King, 2001; Marsh et al., 1978; Robson, 2000). While this literature is largely united in its approach in seeking to explain the aetiology and the emergence of football hooliganism in the UK, it has also reached something of an impasse between fiercely polarized camps (which in truth, may have as much in their arguments which unites them as it does divide them; see Frosdick and Marsh, 2005). However, this piece is not an attempt to revisit or expand on this literature, but rather to use the subject and the setting to explore an alternate aspect of it, specifically the functionality of licit and illicit drug use and its links with violence in this context. This specific segment of violence-seeking football supporters have long been the subject of qualitative studies, and are frequently found among the patrons of the NTE. However, these violent individuals receive scant attention in the literature on the NTE and its violence beyond the occasional passing mention (Winlow, 2001). Like other regulars within the NTE they are also ardent consumers of drugs such as amphetamines, ecstasy and cocaine (cf. Armstrong, 1998; Chester, 2004). However, there is little research examining the role of drugs or alcohol within the specific confines of this group, or their role in facilitating the violence of members in the immediate context of football, or in the NTE more generally. While the role of alcohol in the football firm subculture has largely been overlooked by research (although see King, 2001; Palmer, 2010), it has been historically blamed as both a direct cause and as an aggravating factor in much of the violence. However, research on illicit drug use, or concurrent drug and alcohol use in this context is non-existent despite their use being well documented (see Armstrong, 1998; Chester, 2004), which provides one of the rationales for this research.

The blaming of violence and disorder on alcohol is a historical phenomenon which has re-emerged as a contemporary moral panic due to the disproportionate levels of alcohol related violence found in the NTE (Dorn, 1983; Harrison, 1994; Hobbs et al., 2000). The blaming of alcohol for violence is not confined to the liminal arena of the NTE but is used to explain much of the violence played out in the arena of sports spectatorship, particularly football hooliganism. Despite the ambiguous relationship between violence and alcohol (see Parker and Auerhahn, 1998) a connection between alcohol and football violence has been officially recognized in legislation such as the Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol) Act 1985 following the loss of life at the Heysel stadium in May 1984 which aimed to control the alcohol consumption of football fans at domestic games. However, like many initiatives implemented to tackle football related disorder evidence suggests these are premised on erroneous foundations and a stereotypical perception since research also indicates the opposite is true. Some football hooligans refrain from drinking before partaking in disorder to keep a clear head and avoid hampering their ability to fight (Dunning et al., 1988). Consequently, some suggest that alcohol restrictions have only exacerbated disorder (see Boyes and Faith, 1993).

Although, some commentators attribute the increased use of illicit drugs to the alcohol restrictions (see discussion in Frosdick and Marsh, 2005: 133), others suggest that the drug consumption of violent football fans merely reflects trends evident in the wider socio-cultural milieu. For example, in Armstrong’s (1998) study of members of Sheffield United’s football firm (the Blades Business crew) he encountered both the use of amphetamines in the 1970s and ecstasy during the 1980s and 1990s, reflecting other drug genre research conducted in these periods (see Hammersley et al., 2002; Wilson, 2007). Interestingly, Armstrong also acknowledged the increasing popularity of cocaine during this time but noted that, due to its relatively high cost, its use by his participants was uncommon and infrequent. However, since violent football supporters’ drug use tends to reflect wider cultural trends, it is not unreasonable to assume that cocaine has become progressively more popular among violent football firms, just as its use has become increasingly widespread in the general population.

The use of cocaine in the general population has substantially increased since Armstrong’s research, as price (and purity) has fallen (see Schifano and Corkery, 2008). Cocaine is now the second most popular drug after cannabis in terms of last year and last month use (Hoare and Moon, 2010), particularly among patrons of the NTE (Measham and Moore, 2009). The growing popularity of cocaine, particularly when used in conjunction with alcohol, has seen concurrent use of alcohol and cocaine blamed for increased incidents of violence within the NTE, particularly among males (Schnitzer et al., 2010). However, it has also been identified as the driving force behind the reporting of football violence in the media (Jackson, 2010). There is limited evidence of the interplay between violence, alcohol, cocaine and leisure. However, statistics gathered by the Greater Manchester Police of people arrested for violent assault in the seven months prior to March 2008, found that half tested positive for drugs and, of these, almost two-thirds (62.5%) tested positive for cocaine only (cited in Daly, 2009). However, like much of the research in this area, the relationship between alcohol, cocaine and violence is both contentious and inconclusive. Although there is a statistical correlation, there is less research on the specific social and cultural contexts influencing this interaction, particularly in the NTE; an urban criminogenic environment characterized by excess, pharmacological oblivion and violent, aggressive hedonism.

Indeed, much of the research on violence in the nocturnal economy sees it as synonymous with alcohol and occurring between strangers, usually males provoked by masculine rivalry or sexual competition, and exacerbated by situational factors (i.e. bouncers, the physical layout of the venue) evident in the NTE (see Homel et al., 1992; Wells et al., 2009). However, that does not elucidate on the cultural nuances underpinning this violence. Rather it regards the NTE as an arena where alcohol, violence and youth are symbiotic features (Finney, 2004; Hobbs et al., 2005). This also reflects the notion that those who enter into the NTE as consumers are often represented homogeneously as ‘youths’, rather than as the product of more complex processes of subcultural affiliation (Nayak, 2006). This is particularly problematic since the NTE is a space where people from different subcultures (Goths, bikers, criminals and drug users) converge in the pursuit of leisure and pleasure. Alcohol (cocaine) and violence might be conditional on certain factors being present in spontaneous violence in the NTE, but were superfluous to the incidents of violence highlighted in this study. Those involved in violent football firms are a socially distinct subcultural group who sometimes seek out cocaine and alcohol fuelled violent confrontation in the liminal ² context of the more mainstream NTE; a conducive arena for their form of extreme sporting leisure.

Cocaethylene, Capital Consumerism and Extreme Violence

The relationship between alcohol and violence is widely acknowledged – particularly the phenomenon of binge drinking – not only by the media, but also by academia (Richardson and Budd, 2003). The same is also true for cocaine hydrochloride, more commonly known as powder cocaine, which is also linked to violence, particularly among male users (Miller et al., 1991). Although, there are a number of confounding variables affecting these relationships, research shows that independently both substances are disproportionately connected to violence. However, when used together the violence tends to be exacerbated and becomes more volatile: the heavier the use, the more severe the violence is likely to be (Chermack and Blow, 2002; MacDonald et al., 2008). These findings have serious implications since research examining the consumption of substances in the NTE indicate that two of the most popular drugs being used within this context are alcohol and cocaine (Hoare and Moon, 2010; Measham and Moore, 2009).

Alcohol and cocaine are commonly combined in the pursuit of pharmacological leisure and pleasure as people endeavour to escape from the banality of everyday life into one of pharmacological oblivion. Cocaine facilitates the consumption of alcohol far beyond normal limits, with some users reporting double their usual alcohol intake (Boys et al., 2002); a desirable attribute in Britain’s binge drinking culture of determined intoxication (Measham, 2004). The co-dependent relationship between the two substances is further enhanced as they not only counteract the unpleasant side-effects when each drug is used individually, but they also interact inside the body to form a substance known as cocaethylene (Harris et al., 2003).

Cocaethylene not only lasts longer, making it pharmacologically a more desirable product that is better value for money, but it produces a greater euphoric high than either drug alone (Andrews, 1997; Farré et al., 1997; McCance-Katz et al., 1998). However, cocaethylene also increases the propensity for violence and violent (homicidal) thoughts (see Pennings et al., 2002). Although undesirable in the wider social context, cocaethylene’s potentiating effect on violent ideation and extreme violence indicates why these two substances were consciously used by football hooligans in this study; an issue that will be discussed in more detail in the research findings.

The extreme violence associated with simultaneous usage of cocaine and alcohol may be more common than the literature highlights. Yet the tendency to see alcohol and a reduction of problematic binge drinking as the primary solution to decreasing violence in the NTE (cf. Hayward and Hobbs, 2007; Hobbs et al., 2005), clearly ignores the fact that alcohol is not the only substance fuelling hedonism in this context. Cocaine has seemingly become an integral aspect of the consumption orientated NTE, used by some people in pursuit of determined intoxication and a ‘controlled loss of control’ (Measham, 2004: 343).

Consequently, cocaine and alcohol are a functional part of contemporary ‘mentalistic hedonism’ (Campbell, 1987: 89) and the ‘work hard play hard’ lifestyle (Parker and Williams, 2003). Consumption of alcohol and cocaine allows people to purchase the desired time out in a society where citizens are over controlled and yet without control (Hayward, 2004). This may explain why they have become a functional aspect of specific subcultures like the violent football firm as well as the more mainstream NTE. However, before focusing on the functionality of cocaine to the specificities of football violence, a brief overview of the literature examining the phenomenology of drug use will be provided to contextualize subsequent discussions.

Functionality of Cocaine (and Alcohol)

The phenomenology of drug use has been studied by Annabel Boys and her colleagues (2001) who found that young people used drugs to fulfil specific functions in their lives. Although their research focused on youth, research conducted on adult drug users (aged 30 to 50) has found similar results (see Pearson, 2001), illustrating that drugs like cocaine have become a functional component of many people’s lives in contemporary society. Boys et al. examined the functionality of six substances, including alcohol and cocaine; the main focus of the ensuing discussion. Function was proposed to mean the ‘reasons for, or purpose served by, the use of a particular substance in terms of the actual gains that the user perceives they will attain’ (Boys et al., 2001: 458). The most popular function fulfilled by cocaine was the facilitation of social events, particularly the pursuit of leisure and socializing in the NTE. Cocaine was mostly used to improve aspects of users’ leisure and recreation, especially social interactions with both friends and strangers. However males reported more hedonistic reasons; cocaine was used to enhance the effects of other drugs, including alcohol. Interestingly, the functions said to be performed were not always in accordance with the pharmacology of the drug. Boys et al.’s (2001) drug use functions model therefore provides the theoretical framework for this research examining the functionality of cocaine (in conjunction with alcohol) among football hooligans. Although, some of the functions identified overlap, particularly those relating to leisure pursuits in the NTE, each will be discussed individually.

Methodology

Access stemmed from a previous project based on ethnographic research that sought to understand the contemporary character of English football violence (Treadwell, 2010). Existing research contacts were used to provide a small sample of individual narratives; therefore opening it to the criticisms sometimes levelled at this type of qualitative research. Space and expediency here prohibits a fuller discussion of methods (a fuller explanation is provided elsewhere; see Ayres and Treadwell, forthcoming). However, it is well known that such ethnographic endeavours have been criticized for lacking scientific rigour and empirical credibility, merely relying on anecdotal evidence gleaned from informal chats that represent the subjective stories of a small and very specific group of people that cannot be generalized or extrapolated to explain the behaviour of anyone else. However, the purpose of the material presented here elucidates on the functionality of cocaine and alcohol in the culture of football violence in a manner and depth that can only be done by asking the actors themselves. Only the participants knew why they used cocaine, partook in violence and chose to be involved in a football firm. Although, some of the broader research already discussed could be extrapolated to explain much of what this research intends to examine, the subtle cultural and emotional nuances exposed by ethnographic fieldwork is absent from the existing literature. Humans are not a homogenous group and research needs to reflect this by placing its subjects in their apposite cultural contexts if criminologists are to understand fully or explain certain behaviours. Only by utilizing their narratives and going ‘inside the immediacy of crime’ (Ferrell, 1997: 11) can a meaningful understanding ever be obtained.

The research draws on field notes, overt participant observation and 20 interviews (unstructured and semi-structured) with young men (aged 18–35) actively involved in football violence as members of two different firms. Much of the fieldwork was undertaken at football matches, organized meets where violence ensued and in the pubs and nightclubs frequented by these groups. This meant that not only was their individual behaviour observed, but the interactions between group members, strangers and rival firms were also witnessed in both the subcultural context and the NTE. The researcher observed substance use and violence in some of its most extreme forms in and around the NTE. The ‘beatings’, ‘slashing’ and ‘glassing’ perpetrated by those under the influence of alcohol and cocaine against those similarly intoxicated was frequently unreported to the police.

The data presented below allowed three functional models to be identified: (1) the facilitation of violence; (2) purchasing of ‘time out’ hedonism; and (3) creation/reinforcement of masculine identities and status. It is under these headings that we intend to discuss the concurrent use of alcohol and cocaine in this violent subcultural setting. In doing so we will make some further observations about the more complex dynamics of the interplay between maleness, intoxication and violence that are present in England’s contemporary night time leisure arenas.

Facilitation of Violence

Cocaine, alcohol and their metabolite, cocaethylene, are all associated with an increased propensity for more intense violence (Pennings et al., 2002). Since extreme violence is symbolic in this conflict orientated subculture, it was immediately apparent why concurrent use was very popular. Violence in this context was symbolic of the football hooligan identity. Overt displays of masculinity and physical supremacy over their opponents was a core aspect of the football violence we encountered, where dominance and shame acted as key emotional drivers (Armstrong, 1998). Yet in the bars and pubs and streets where we spent time, and in the violence we witnessed, we saw little of what Peter Marsh and colleagues regard as non-violent and ritualistic ‘aggro’ with its own ‘rules of disorder’, that broke down into ‘real’ violence only very infrequently as a result of inappropriate intervention (Marsh et al., 1978). Instead we saw some pernicious violence that left individuals badly hurt (and often in need of hospital treatment):

Des: The way it is coke and ale have a lot to answer for, lads are on both and they just are up for it, they are just mental for a fight, they love to fight, and when they are on the gear … well you know at some point, somewhere it’s going to go off.

Aaron: The violence has got much worse now there is a lot of coke taking, lads don’t give a fuck when they are on it, they don’t think and that, it’s battering the fuck out of one another really seriously, and for some like Nelson … it’s like fucking blades, tools and that too.

Violence was not only about inflicting physical harm and beating the opposing firm, but creating and maintaining their social and self-identities. Extreme and vicious violence helped to maintain their social and cultural status of themselves as individuals and the football firms with which they were associated; violence was a specific marker of masculinity (see Armstrong, 1998; cf. Winlow, 2001). For example, a member of the firm who ran from a violent confrontation with a rival firm while his ‘friends’ stayed and were physically beaten, was later glassed (a pint glass smashed over the top of the head) by a younger male who was under the influence of alcohol and cocaine. The individual who administered this extreme and violent assault later admitted with hindsight (and a more sober reflection) that his state of intoxication had influenced his actions:

Nelson: it was a bit out of order maybe, but he deserved something … I went a bit far cos of what I had been on today [a quantity of alcohol and cocaine] and that just made me lose it. I went further than normal perhaps, he deserved a dig [punch] but maybe that was a bit much.

The semiotic level of violence seemed important and ubiquitous in this research, reflecting other studies in this area which also note how domination over opponents results in the individuals achieving hyper-masculine supremacy (see, for example, Maniglio, 2007). It is perhaps not surprising, then, that respondents suggested that alcohol and cocaine were purposefully selected to help them perform as better and more ferocious fighters, while providing the courage and clarity of mind needed to engage in confrontation:

Richie: When it comes to football, coke is where it is at really, isn’t it, because it gives you confidence and that. You don’t wanna be smoking spliffs all chilled out if you are looking to go fucking have it with their lads; you need something to charge you up, give you a bit of confidence and that.

Ricky: If you are just on piss [alcohol] all day, and you are lagged and you are all over the place you can’t have it if it goes can you, so you snort a few lines and then it’s back on. That is why a lot of lads will use coke as well as drinking, to keep them ready for it when it goes off.

It would seem that both masculinity and status was constituted either through ability to employ violence while under the influence, or ability to consume large quantities of drugs and alcohol and still function (see the subsequent discussion on masculine identity and status). The concurrent use of alcohol and cocaine was extremely popular and the vast majority of those interviewed used alcohol and cocaine together at all meetings of the firm, and often claimed rarely to use one substance without the other. Those involved in organized football violence, in some part, recognized the benefit of blending licit (alcohol) and illicit (cocaine) substances, both pharmacologically and economically:

Ryan: I think it’s just, like ching [cocaine] and lager work properly well together, taking the bad things off each other away. When you are just on coke it’s like you will do a gram and be chewing your face off, chatting shit into someone’s ear all night, it happens when you drink, but the two like take away the worst of the other and you get on the best of both worlds, plus like £20 on half a gram, then five pints and that is all you need.

However, there was a widespread acknowledgement of the effects concurrent use of cocaine and alcohol had on levels of violence:

Luke: I am bad for the Charlie around football me, I always do at least a G (gram), but often I will go out on a match day with a Henry (an eighth of an ounce, 3.5 grams) and smash most of it. I think that’s a part of football now, most of the lads do it, but I do more Charlie than I drink. I think that has made the violence worse cos when you are on the Charlie you don’t think, you don’t give a fuck you just are there.

Aaron: I think the coke has made things worse, when you are on it you just do more stupid things, what you wouldn’t do otherwise. It makes you more confident don’t it.

Although, there was an acknowledgement that cocaine and alcohol improved their ability to fight (made them ‘madder’), helped get the adrenaline pumping and numbed much of the physical pain associated with fighting, there was also consensus that cocaine and alcohol did not cause the fighting. Its function was merely to enhance an activity they were going to take part in anyway:

There were also reports of using alcohol and cocaine separately, which were related to different social contexts, such as staying at home with partners or going out for a meal, although this clearly caused division. For some of the participants cocaine use was restricted to the context of the football firm, whereas for others it had a wider hold over their recreational leisure time:

Nathan: Like me, I will do coke at the football, but I wouldn’t when I am not at football, like out with me missus, I would have a few drinks, but Charlie, nah. I don’t want to be kicking off or glassing some c*** when I am out with her. At football I do it because I know I am going out for a row, and it gets me in the right place, it gets my head on straight.

The concurrent use of cocaine and alcohol, therefore seemed to provide a dual function; the facilitation of violence and socializing in both the subculture and the NTE. Although the facilitation of violence was an integral function associated with cocaine and alcohol use, particularly the more extreme and vicious levels of violence, it was also important in winning the participants supremacy over rival firms and achieving masculine honour (Maniglio, 2007). The other key function was to enhance socializing and, although the context varied between participants, it all tied in with their pursuit of pleasure through liminoid leisure activities (Turner, 1982).

Time Out: A Release; Escapism

Participants suggested that drinking, drug use and violence were a means of offsetting the banalities of everyday life, which acted as a release from the pressures these young men found themselves under. Violence, alcohol and drug use were a way of letting off steam and having a blow out; a controlled loss of control that was a necessary component of their weekend leisure. Most reported that cocaine fuelled meets between rival firms at the weekends are an escape from conventional constraints and an adoption of the ‘work hard play hard’ lifestyle characteristic of contemporary society (see Parker and Williams, 2003). The majority held legitimate or quasi-legitimate employment, but lived life on the peripheries of criminality.

While they were variously employed in the service sector, labouring jobs or in statutory education rather than holding lifestyles wholly committed to criminal activities, most had criminal records for violent and non-violent offences. Yet while variously involved in scams, thefts, fights and frauds, they did not for the most part regard themselves as exceptional (or indeed criminal), standing in stark contrast to other studies of such groups where criminal identity is accepted and internalized (Collison, 1996). Rather, for these young men, football violence and involvement in the firm provided the setting for the hedonistic pursuit of intoxication and violence against more regular, routine and legitimate activities and pressures:

Matty: It’s just what you do on a weekend, after sweating your bollocks off all week. You just want to go out and have fun don’t you, see all your mates, down the match, load of drinks and a few lines to relax, and if it’s a match day, sort something out with their firm and have a fucking good row like at Huddersfield. It’s just a way to relax at the weekend; it’s nothing odd it’s just what lads do.

Steve: You look at it we all work for shit money, or go college and it’s all pressure and stress, so at the weekends you want to chill out a bit and forget all those other pressures. That is it really. It’s just weekend release.

Other research also highlights that separately alcohol, drug use and violence fulfil the ‘time out’ function (Kerr, 1994; Parker et al., 2002; Tomsen, 1997). For many of those interviewed, partaking in these activities (drinking, drug taking and fighting) was an integral aspect of their weekend leisure and relaxation. Interestingly Boys et al. (2001) also found that some of their respondents reported using cocaine to relax (29%), despite its contradictory pharmacology as a stimulant drug. Despite cocaine and violence seeming to contradict the definition of relaxing, according to those who partook in it, it was form of escapism:

Nathan: I think now lads need to get fucked up, it’s like there is more pressure and that. It’s like; nowadays it is what everyone does to deal with pressure. Having a drink for most people is a release, but we take it that bit further, we want to have a drink, do a bit of Charlie, have a fight and get a bit of adrenaline going. For us we just take it up a notch. It’s like how you deal with everyday pressures.

Despite the obvious dichotomy ‘relaxation’ was the broad banner under which many participants talked about drug use, since many were using cocaine and alcohol for the stimulant and violent inducing effects, which in itself was a means of ‘chilling out’:

Nelson: Lager and Charlie [cocaine] go together, especially with fighting. You have a few beers, a few lines and you are ready for it … You have a mental row, and then you feel chilled out again, ready for the next week.

Aaron: They don’t give a fuck cos they are on a gram of coke and eight pints and they just don’t think … The only time you see them chilled is after they have had a proper row.

For all the young men quoted here, these substances were all constituents of the carnival of football violence which was sometimes located in the NTE. Alcohol, cocaine and violence were about pushing the conventional boundaries and enjoying the pleasure of transgression (Presdee, 2000) in extreme ways. The act of carnival and overt rituals of violence were part of this group’s quest for hedonism, excitement and liberation from reality: where violence and pleasure were mentally connected in the liminal space of the NTE:

Jason: I hit this kid with a fucking Budweiser bottle outside of ******** [names a city centre bar] it was about 10 at night and we hadn’t got the row through the football, and I had been snorting Charlie all night … the c*** had a problem with it, he kept staring at me, so when he went out for a fag [cigarette] I went out and did him. He wanted it and he fucking got it, the prick … I feel better now. It was like a release [laughs].

The functionality of cocaine and the subsequent violence provided two opposing roles found at opposite ends of the spectrum; from relaxation and the release of tension to the pursuit of hedonistic excitement, both of which were played out in the football firm subculture and the NTE. In both contexts the two main driving forces behind the determined implementation of violence were the immediate excitement and adrenaline rush, which has been described as one of the ‘sensual dynamics of violence’ (Winlow, 2001), and the post-euphoric relaxation and release of tension built up during the working week. The pressures of contemporary society and the decline of more traditional outlets for maleness and the construction of masculinity have led to violent transgressions becoming a reaction to, not only the changing labour market (see Lyng, 1990), but also to a society obsessed with social control and the minimization of risk. The violence undertaken by these men was about breaking free from the restraints of the working week and losing control, in an effort to reassert their identity and regain some autonomy over their lives. For some it also encapsulated the pressures of dealing with the drudgeries of unemployment or the uncertainty of irregular work, or being locked in areas of precarious uncertainty that characterize some of Britain’s fragmented, post-industrial landscapes (cf. Hall et al., 2008; Winlow, 2001). However in the subcultural context of the football firm, violence was also about raising the ‘spectre of terror’ (Katz, 1988) that intimidated opposing firms, earning them respect, supremacy and a reputation for being hard; it determined their identity as a football firm (King, 2001). Beyond that in accordance with Finn (1994), it crafted ‘peak’ experiences; a descriptor used to capture the intense, emotional experiences not usually encountered in everyday life, but one where performance of violence, domination and creation of a ferocious, competitive self-perception of manliness, served as a break to the established routine and regimentation experienced more commonly by our participants.

Masculine Identities and Status

While some commentators have suggested that drugs and violence are the ‘deviant leisure of the oppressed and dispossessed’ (Rojek, 1995: 99) the young men documented here were for the most part socially incorporated, rather than socially excluded as previously noted in relation to their occupational status. Although some had been in prison and were unemployed, the majority were like those encountered in studies of semi-included members of what would formerly have been called the working class (see Hall and Winlow, 2006). In this context the liminal setting of the NTE or football firm intertwines new and old cultures, providing the arena for spectacular displays of traditional masculinity and hardness. Arenas where cocaine, alcohol and violence are combined, in their quest for hedonistic pleasure while demonstrating and reaffirming their traditional masculinity through weekend rituals of excessive consumption and violent expression (for a discussion of liminal performances, see Turner, 1982):

Jake: I don’t do the coke to make me fight, I do it cos I love it, the buzz of coke is just wicked isn’t it. I fight cos I like fighting and I do coke cos I like the buzz off coke.

Carl: I do the coke when I am out cos it’s the perfect drug when you are out drinking. It’s like, coke makes you chatty and sociable and that, know what I mean, and it takes the edge off of drinking. You can stop out longer … and not be lagging.

Cocaine (like alcohol) has become an integral aspect of people’s leisure and socializing, particularly in the NTE’s pubs and night clubs where the young men in this study spent the majority of their time on match days. When gathering as the firm, they would often begin the day in chain pubs at 10am, and still be found out and about in city centres making full use of the NTE at 1am the next morning. Unlike other NTE regulars the traditional demarcation between day and night leisure did not apply (see Hobbs et al., 2000), instead they delineate between the working-week and the liminality of the weekend. A great deal of the violence they were involved in took place in the immediate vicinity of bars and clubs, and seemed little different to outside observers to that of young men who were not involved in football firms, but who became embroiled in the disorderly conduct characteristic of the NTE. In the NTE participants in this research both fought with rival firms and with other random groups of young males.

Being out together, drinking, taking drugs and socializing helped to reinforce male solidarity and togetherness; an integral aspect of establishing the ‘collective memory’ of social, often violent, interaction and group solidarity (King, 2001); providing a sense of communitas (Turner, 1969) and habitus (Bourdieu, 1986). The sociability associated with cocaine facilitated these conversations, allowing the participants to cultivate strong self- and social identities through their collective memories. Recalling their victory in fights against other firms often cemented the reputations of the older members, which not only reinforced their hyper-masculinity, but conferred on them a particular status:

Timmy: I think a lot of younger lads, ³ they aspire to be like the older heads, you know it’s them what they look up to and they see them, like snorting coke, drinking, making good money, wearing top gear [expensive designer clothing] and that, and they want the same … younger lads see the status and that, and they want those things too.

We would argue that it is clear from our participants that using cocaine, drinking and being able to fight were all trappings associated with the crafting of a specific culturally elevated form of masculine identity and status; specifically the individual project of crafting a strong personal and collective masculine identity. For the lads documented here, football violence – coupled with the capacity to consume alcohol and cocaine – reaffirmed their masculine identities because it conformed to specific cultural practices of conspicuous consumption. The more alcohol and drugs consumed the more of a man you were and the more respect you earned. Since cocaine not only increases the amount of alcohol people are able to consume, but also exacerbates violence, it was understandable why our participants chose to use both to construct a particular social identity and thus enhance their status within the firm:

Jimmy: If you look at **** [names another member of the firm] he is only, what, 15 years old, but he is a fucking maniac when it comes to having a row. He is bad enough when he is normal, but you give him a line of sniff or a beer, straight away he is off on it, fucking going mental battering some c***. He doesn’t care; he is as fucking hard as nails, the mad little fucker.

Luke [of one of the other lads]: He is mental him, he can drink all day, snort lines all day more than anyone, yet he is still there when you need him

However for some, the creation and maintenance of a (potentially) violent, hard-man image and reputation did not just provide symbolic or cultural capital, but was also a means of acquiring specific social capital relevant to this setting. Yet all this was only available if the individual was occasionally willing to implement violence:

Steve: You can make a lot of money selling gear, a lot more money than just working, but most lads I know are smart and combine the two … the lads are normal lads that like to have a row and can handle themselves for sure, don’t let anyone fuck with them.

Carl: The other thing is they know me, and know not to take the piss and try and put me off if they owe me money, so it’s good all round.

Except for the facilitation of violence, the functions fulfilled by cocaine (and alcohol) tended to overlap and were all intrinsic aspects of socializing, including the construction of a hyper-masculine identity. Many if not all of these behaviours, both separately and collectively are indicative of hedonistic motivations (Hayward, 2004; Presdee, 2000). Yet for others, the reputation and status cultivated through their place and prominence in the firm was also clearly connected to more instrumental drivers (Winlow, 2001).

Concluding Comments

Contrary to popular perception and media hype, those who partake in football firms are not mindless thugs but individuals whose behaviours have distinct meaning to them and fulfil specific functions in their lives, both in the subcultural context of football hooliganism and the mainstream NTE. Excessive cocaine and alcohol consumption, and violence, irrespective of context, were part of their weekend ritual of liminality. In the subcultural context the functionality of cocaine and alcohol facilitated the extreme violence needed to maintain the supremacy of the firm. It also facilitated aspects of socializing integral to enhancing the firm’s solidarity (i.e. establishing a collective memory by recalling tales of victory) and constructing a hyper-masculine self- and social identity. In the contextual milieu of the NTE the concurrent use of cocaine and alcohol fulfilled similar functions indicative of the wider culture of determined intoxication characteristic of the aggressive macho club culture (Hutton, 2006). However, unlike others frequenting the NTE they were also intent on determined violent confrontation and the pleasure obtained from transgressive acts of violence aptly suited to the hedonistic arena of the NTE.

It would seem that often the distinctions and separations may be less obvious between members of specific violence orientated subcultures and those who get caught up in the instrumental violence characteristic of the NTE. It also illustrates that such purposive acts of violence are not dependent on the traditional factors (i.e. door staff, patron type and venue) identified as contributing to violence in the NTE (see Homel et al., 1992). Violence among the football hooligans occurred in spite of these factors. In this study those who were violent in the NTE were also violent in other, more subcultural contexts and were different from other patrons of the NTE because they entered the NTE intent on violence, rather than simply being desensitized to the possibility of its occurrence (Hall and Winlow, 2006). However, they were not much different from those who go out on a weekend looking for a brawl (see Jackson-Jacobs, 2004). Indeed, several suggested that if they had not become embroiled in fighting during the course of a weekend, they considered it a ‘write off’ or a ‘waste of time’, and this was not necessarily restricted to confrontations with rival football firms, but any ‘lads who are looking for it’. Hayward’s (2004: 150) description of those involved in football violence as engaging in ‘the original urban extreme sport’ probably best captures the essence of some of their violence although, in this case, it was not simply restricted to football and involved a complex interplay of emotions. Drawing on the work of Jack Katz (1988: 137) the violence was seductive, not only because of the direct pleasure (excitement and the post-euphoric relaxation) obtained from its implementation, but also the allurement of sustaining the supremacy of the firm; ‘an essential element in the project of elite rule’.

Violence has become a salient feature of the NTE (Hall and Winlow, 2006) and although the participants of this research regarded themselves as subculturally affiliated with groups associated with ‘football violence’ that very term may have lost some of its resonance. Stripped from the context of football, two groups of young men in designer clothing fighting one another look simply like any other disorderly confrontation in the NTE, but such surface appearances hide the cultural complexity of football violence as a salient feature of the violent NTE. For that reason we would endorse more quantitative club-based poly drug use focused research, like Measham and Moore’s (2009) study to recognize the function drugs play in precipitating violence in the NTE. However, we also echo the suggestion that more qualitative research challenging the essentialist connection that alcohol consumption and violence are simplistically linked is necessary if we are to gain a more considered and nuanced understanding of their role in the NTE. Furthermore, understanding the psychological associations and functionality of specific decisions to seek out and engage in violence is perhaps the most pressing problem if we are to begin seriously to craft a more convivial NTE. To that end, we hope we have illustrated that listening to the voices of participants still retains value and offers an invaluable insight into the highly complex and hidden pleasures of transgression not only within a distinct subculture like football hooliganism but in the wider cultural milieu of the NTE, as they partake in what can only be described as subterranean edgework.