A West Ham United season-ticket holder has been handed a five-match ban after displaying what the club has described as an 'oversized' banner during a recent home fixture. The supporter, Joshua Wood, was penalised for breaching stadium regulations by holding up a banner that called for the club's owners to sell their stake.
Banner Incident at London Stadium
The incident occurred during West Ham's home game against Sunderland last weekend at the London Stadium. During the first half, a banner bearing the message "Time 2 Sell – Name Your Price" was unfurled in the stands, clearly targeting the club's board and ownership.
This protest forms part of a broader wave of discontent among West Ham supporters this season, with many matches witnessing demonstrations against David Sullivan, the majority shareholder, and Karren Brady, the vice-chair. The anti-board sentiment has been growing steadily among the fanbase.
Regulations Breach Cited
In a letter to Wood, West Ham United stated that the 27-year-old film-maker had breached ground regulations related to items permitted inside the stadium. The club specifically cited regulations prohibiting "any flags or banners larger than those maximum dimensions permitted by the Club from time to time (or, in the absence of such stipulations, 2 metres x 1 metre) and/or of an offensive nature".
The letter made no reference to the actual content of the banner, focusing instead on its physical dimensions and the manner in which it was brought into the stadium. Wood was informed that he had been "observed reaching down to retrieve a banner which breached the permitted dimensions".
Fan's Account of Events
Wood has provided a different account of how he came to hold the banner. He told journalists that while getting a drink in the concourse before the match, he was informed that a banner had been left by his seat and that supporters were being asked to display it.
"I was informed when I was getting a beer in the concourse that a banner had been dropped off by our seats and someone wanted us to hold up a flag," Wood explained. "I'm not too sure who that was but we're all protesting against the board so we were happy to do so."
Wood estimates that approximately eight people helped lift the banner during the match. He maintains that he had no part in bringing the banner into the stadium and was unaware of its exact dimensions before displaying it.
Safety Concerns and Club Policy
West Ham United have indicated that the banner posed safety concerns because it exceeded maximum permitted dimensions, had not been certified as fire retardant, and was passed over the heads of other supporters. The club's published sanctioning policy recommends bans of up to three home matches for possession of prohibited items.
Wood's ban extends to five matches – covering two home fixtures and three away games. The club has stated that other supporters who simply held the banner as it was passed along were not penalised, as it was deemed unfair to take action against those who had merely come into contact with it.
Fan's Response and Appeal Plans
Wood has expressed frustration with the club's handling of the situation, suggesting that the ban represents an attempt to suppress fan dissent while using technical regulations as justification.
"They've been clever in how they've approached it because they're not saying I've been banned for protesting," Wood commented. "They're saying I've been banned for bringing up a banner which doesn't fit the regulations of their dimension sizes. I have no doubt that if it said: 'We love you, Brady and Sullivan' we wouldn't be talking today."
The supporter has confirmed his intention to appeal against the ban, arguing that he was not responsible for bringing the banner into the stadium and was merely participating in what he understood to be a lawful protest.
Club's Position
West Ham United have stated that they are unable to comment on what they describe as a live investigation. However, sources close to the club have indicated that the ban was not intended to stamp out fan dissent but rather to enforce stadium safety regulations.
The club maintains that it has made no attempt to thwart peaceful and lawful protest throughout the current season. According to club sources, Wood was deemed to be in possession of the banner because CCTV footage showed him as the first person to pick it up, which constituted a breach of stadium regulations.
This incident highlights the ongoing tension between football clubs and their supporters regarding protest methods and stadium regulations, particularly when such protests target club ownership and management.
