Montpellier. Firecracker throwing at Mosson: why the MHSC is demanding €515,000 from two supporters

A trial was eagerly awaited, that of the two MHSC supporters aged 23 and 25, formally identified and arrested six months ago at the Mosson stadium, Montpellier where a firecracker thrown from the stands injured the goalkeeper of the club Clermont Foot 63during the Ligue 1 match.

On October 8, while the referee called stoppage time and Montpellier was leading 4 to 2, Mory Diaw, the Senegalese international goalkeeper from Auvergne, was hit by an explosive F3 category Bulldog in the 91st minute and collapsed, hurt. He was evacuated on a stretcher. The MHSC had been sanctioned: match replayed behind closed doors, two subsequent matches with closure of La Tribune Étang de Thau – from where the firecracker had been thrown -, one point less in the standings, and another point suspended.

Requisition time

This Thursday, May 2, 2024, during the hearing where the Clermont Goal, the Professional Football League -LFP-, the National Union of Professional Footballers and the MHSC were civil parties, the public prosecutor requested six months in prison with suspended probation against the person suspected of having thrown this big firecracker, as well as 200 hours of community service -Tig-, this last sentence being only requested from the accomplice. The prosecution also requested the obligation to report to the police station or gendarmerie geographically competent, at half-time of all MHSC matches and during three years ban from the Mosson stadium.

The alleged perpetrator of the firecracker throwing was on trial for violence with use of a weapon resulting in a total interruption of less than eight days and use of a rocket or fireworks in a sports venue, his accomplice for having introduced the explosive device into the stadium and passing it to him.

The civil parties jointly claimed record damages against the two defendants, twenty-somethings who were childhood friends, putting the financial losses at €515,000. This is, in fact, the sum set by the MHSC, which the lawyer calculated: €18,000 for the organization of a “replay” behind closed doors, €13,000 for the partial closure of a stand during two matches and €484,000 to compensate for TV rights that the club did not receive by slipping one place in the Ligue 1 ranking after this episode, the rights being distributed according to the ranking. The Clermont-Ferrand club claimed €4,000 for its goalkeeper and 36,000 euros for the costs incurred by his additional travel.

A cold shower for the two Montpellier supporters and for their lawyer, one of whom argued that, “We have to come back to earth, it’s the trial of stupidity”. His colleague warned: “The sums requested are excessive and will condemn these two young people to work all their lives.”

The alleged author of the projectile admitted his act, but, sheepishly at the bar of the criminal court, explained that he had thrown it with his back to the lawn, over his head and that his aim was for it to fall behind the cages of the Clermont goalkeeper. He added that his goal was to celebrate the victory that had already been achieved. On the other hand, his co-defendant was not cooperative, denying having provided the prohibited explosive device to his inseparable friend, denouncing that the content of his interview report by the police officers from the central police station, during his custody view, did not conform to the version he had delivered.

A detail which may be important in the judges’ decision was revealed at the hearing: the person who is designated as having introduced this large firecracker and who denies it is a fan of pyrotechnic devices, which he often detonates in Woods. The judgment, reserved, will be rendered next Thursday, May 16.

There remains this question that many supporters are asking themselves: while searches take place at the entrances to the Mosson stadium during each match, how do some manage to transport firecrackers, fireworks and other smoke bombs into the stands? A well-informed Source reveals Metropolitan that these prohibited devices are, in reality, very often discreetly introduced into the Mosson enclosure before the doors are opened and public checks are carried out…So, by whom?

Follow all the news from your favorite cities and media by subscribing to Mon Actu.