UEFA pyrotechnics report author on the 'myth' of 'safe pyro'

His detailed study has since been updated and European football’s governing body will - amid growing calls across the continent for “safe pyro” sections to be introduced at grounds from those who believe that bangers, flares, rockets, smoke bombs and strobes enhance a match day atmosphere - publish his latest findings this year.

UEFA’S zero tolerance stance, however, will not be changing.

Dr Smith, an Oxford-educated chemist who is internationally renowned and respected in his field, described pyrotechnics as “explosive devices” not fireworks in his 2016 report and cannot envisage any circumstances whatsoever in which fans could be allowed to handle them at games. 

READ MORE: Well Society director calls for adult debate on safe pyro in Scotland

“They are not designed for use in that environment,” said Dr Smith. “They have safety distances on them which far exceed the distances which are available in a stadium. They produce lots of heat, light, gas, smoke and toxins. That is fine if you are in the middle of a field on Bonfire Night, but not when you are surrounded by lots of people.

“There is a misguided assertion that you can’t have an atmosphere at a football match without pyrotechnics. People will say that it promotes the colour of their team or intimidates the other side. That may or may not be true. But if you set off a firework in your back garden you don’t do it with somebody standing right next to you.”

Norwegian football clubs have allowed their supporters to use pyrotechnics in designated areas of stadiums at specific times during matches since 2011 in a bid to crack down on their illegal use in the stands and reduce the risk of injury and fire.

However, Dr Smith described the suggestion that they can be set off safely by fans inside grounds as “a myth”. 

“The smoke that is produced doesn’t know there is a specific pyrotechnics section,” he said.  “It spreads around inside the stadium wherever the wind happens to take it. Even if trained people, firemen say, set off the flares it still doesn’t get around the smoke issue.

“The toxicity of the smoke is significant. It’s not a problem for most people. But what if you have bronchitis or asthma? What if you go to games week after week? What if you are a steward, match official or a player who is repeatedly exposed to this? The health consequences can be quite severe.

“The toxicity is a bit moot and a lot depends on what the devices are. But we did some research on this. If you let off 10 average pyrotechnics in a stand and look at the sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide levels that are created in the area where they are lit, they are 10,000 times the permitted levels.

“Even when the smoke spreads out across a stand, you are still talking five or 10 times the permitted levels. Even on the other side of the stadium, it is not at the permitted level. That is because they were never designed to be used like that.

“We get very exercised, quite rightly, about the problems caused by pollution from cars and industrial pollution. But people seem to dismiss the issues that pyrotechnics cause when they are used in a football stadium.”

READ MORE: Dialogue is needed if Scottish football is to address its pyro problem

Dr Smith added: “Temperature is also a big issue. Can you imagine standing in the stands with a thing that is burning at 1,500 degrees Celsius or 2,500 degrees Celsius next to you? It is hot. It also drops dross everywhere which can catch people.

“Having sections where fans are allowed to set off flares doesn’t get around the fundamental problem of a pyrotechnic. The definition of a pyrotechnic is a self-sustaining, exothermic chemical reaction. Exothermic means it is hot. If it goes off in a wrong direction or falls back in the crowd it is hot.

“Self-sustaining is really important. It means it doesn’t need atmospheric oxygen to burn. Once you have lit it, it won’t go out. So putting sand on top of them or dousing them in water won’t put them out. It puts a person in the proximity of the pyrotechnic while they are trying to do that in danger.”

Orlando City in the United States have, like several other MLS franchises, “Capo stands” inside their stadium where trained followers of “The Lions” can ignite specially selected flares and smoke bombs which they are supplied with before kick-off. 

Officials insist they only approve the use of non-toxic and non-carcinogenic pyrotechnics which can be used safely within their 25,500 capacity ground without endangering spectators. But Dr Smith is sceptical of their claims.

“I don’t think that’s a runner,” he said. “Where have they got the test data from? How valid is the data? If they are not CE (Conformité Européene) marked, they are potentially dodgy. And even if they are approved under European standards, they still have a safety distance on them of at least five metres.

“There is also the liability question. Are they technically competent and able to authorise products? I would suggest not. Are they technically competent and able to authorise users? I would say: ‘No’. What then happens if there is an incident? They immediately become liable because they have authorised their use.

“I have seen videos of approved users using an approved product in an area of the stadium approved for smoke use. Well, as soon as the wind blows the smoke moves around. That can still cause serious issues for other fans in other parts of the stadium.”

Danish pyrotechnician Tommy Corsden invented a so-called cold flare which burns at a far lower temperature than distress flares in 2019. It was trialled by Brondby fans at a Superliga match against Midtjylland that year. But Dr Smith does not feel his creation offers any kind of solution either.

“It is a well-known case,” he said. “Corsden and his cohorts are saying: ‘Look, this is a lower temperature device’. But it is still burning at 500 degrees Celsius. It is not low temperature it is just lower temperature.

“There is a You Tube video online of a fan passing his hand through the flame. Well, I can do that with a candle. And if I hold my hand steady over a candle it still hurts! It also legitimises the use of flares and that is dangerous.”

READ MORE: How football in Norway has pioneered safe pyrotechnic areas in grounds

Dr Smith is concerned that the pyrotechnics which are used by supporters at matches in Scotland are often imported illegally, fall some way short of accepted standards within the regulated firework industry and carry a greatly increased risk of malfunction. 

“We are lucky in the United Kingdom because we are an island,” he said. “It is more difficult to get the stuff here than it is across the continent. But there are still illegal channels which these things get in by.

“It is illegal to send pyrotechnics by the post. But if you go online and find some dodgy website they don’t care. They will take your money and put it in a plain brown box and send it out to you. If their website gets shut down they can just start up again the next day under another domain name.”

Dr Smith, who is the secretary of the British Pyrotechnists Association and has acted as a safety adviser to the organisers of the Commonwealth Games, Olympic Games and Paralympics in the past, has seen first hand the horrific injuries which illegal pyrotechnics have caused at football matches.   

“Very sadly, a few years ago in Croatia a fireman who was fully kitted out in Kevlar gloves and the proper PPE lost three of the fingers on one of his hands shortly after I had been there because he had picked up a pyrotechnic which he thought was a flare,” he said. “It blew up in his hand.

“You can’t tell what they are going to do. The advice we give to everybody – players, stewards, the emergency services and fans – is very simple. You don’t know what it is going to do so leave it alone, move away and let it burn out. We have seen some horrendous incidents.”

So if he is of the opinion that cold flares and safe pyro sections would not solve what is becoming a serious problem in the Scottish game then how does he believe it can be tackled? Dr Smith reckons that clubs, supporters and the media all have a role to play in an important battle.

“The Scottish parliament passed legislation last year to try and clamp down on it even more by making it an offence to be carrying pyrotechnics to a stadium not just in a stadium,” he said. “But lots of things are illegal and it doesn’t stop people doing them.

“The ultimate answer is not legislation. It is certainly not in searching fans in a Draconian way at the stadium gates, because you will never find it all. It is peer pressure. It is similar to drink driving or passive smoking. If educated people knew what the dangers were they would say: ‘No, I don’t want this. I will vote with my feet and stop going to the match’.

“Clubs could encourage other forms of supporters interaction. There are lots of other things people can do to create an atmosphere at a game. The Women’s Euro 2022 finals in England last year were fantastic and there wasn’t a single pyrotechnic set off.”

READ MORE: Safe pyro gains support in Germany amid anger over police 'repression'

Dr Smith added: “There are positive and negative things the clubs can do. I have done some work recently with the English FA and the Premier League and have stressed to them the importance of not glorifying pyrotechnics. Don’t have pictures on websites of fans holding flares.

“They could also try to persuade the broadcast media not to show pyrotechnics in the stands and to read a prepared script saying how awful they are and what terrible accidents there have been when they have been used. Give the right message, not the wrong message.

“It is exactly the same as pitch invaders, homophobic chanting, missiles being thrown. They should all be treated the same.”

Dr Smith certainly feels strongly that everything possible must be done to extinguish the increasing use of pyrotechnics by supporters at football matches and reduce the risk of injuries, fires and even fatalities.

“The problem at football matches in the United Kingdom isn’t as bad as it is in some of Eastern European countries,” he said. “But it is heading in the wrong direction.”