As a 25-year resident of Dedham and 15-year spectator at Dedham Old Boys Football Club, it was with some bemusement I read the Gazette’s recent report of the ongoing saga over players’ foul language.

Few would condone the use of foul language on the sports field, but I believe the issue of swearing during local football matches has been inflated out of all reasonable proportion.

Some residents have complained about the language used by some players during Saturday afternoon matches, and perhaps during midweek training sessions, but I suspect this is a minority of the 1,800 residents of this village.

The pitch is close to a children’s play area, but only three residences are directly adjacent to the Duchy Field. It is well known within the village that matches take place on Saturday afternoons during the winter months, so those averse to strong language have the option to avoid the area for 90 minutes on those days.

Law 12 of the Laws of the Game states “using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures” is a disciplinary offence. However, it is the responsibility of the referee to enforce this and the term “offensive language” is to some degree subjective.

It seems harsh, therefore, to penalise the club for the behavior of players who may be members of another club when the club has no direct control over the enforcement of sanctions.

Again while not condoning bad language, it is often actually an unfortunate expression of the passion and enthusiasm of the players, which is surely a sentiment to be applauded in sport.

To sanction Dedham Old Boys Football Club for something that is largely beyond their control and is sadly endemic in the wider game, would be harsh.

To do so would potentially deny future generations the opportunity to enjoy a fundamentally healthy activity. That would be a shame and to the detriment of the wider village.

Parish councillors are to be applauded for their voluntary contribution of time and effort to village life. But, with due deference, given the finite nature of that resource, I cannot help but think this issue should perhaps not be top of the council priority list.

For example, greater focus on planning policy, and the social re-engineering consequences of an increasing shift to expensive housing that drives the younger generation out of the village, might be a more worthy, representative and popular use of scarce resources.

Andrew Bell
Bargate Lane
Dedham