Exclusive:Sunderland issue clear response to Northumbria Police amid Newcastle United derby travel row
Sunderland have outlined their stance on derby travel restrictions and called for further talks involving Newcastle United
Sunderland say they want to explore alternatives to mandatory coach travel for December’s Tyne-Wear derby at St James’ Park, including measures to make organised transport more attractive to supporters.
In an exclusive statement to The Echo following Northumbria Police’s latest comments on the arrangements, the club outlined its desire to bring the authorities, Newcastle United and supporter representatives together to find a solution.
The Echo understands Sunderland are keen to work closely with supporter groups from both clubs as part of those discussions, with the aim of finding a safe and practical approach that takes fans’ concerns into account. Sunderland supporters face compulsory escorted coach travel for the December 6 fixture, with the away allocation reduced to 2,200. The club has now confirmed it wants to examine whether practical steps, including support for subsidised travel, could help avoid the mandatory arrangement.
A Sunderland AFC spokesperson told The Echo: “Sunderland AFC remains committed to working with the relevant authorities, Newcastle United, the SAFC Supporter Collective and wider supporter groups to explore all possible options for facilitating safe and accessible travel for Sunderland supporters attending the fixture at St. James Park on Sunday 6th December.
“While recognising the importance of managing the risks associated with the fixture, the Club is keen to explore whether practical measures could help avoid the need for a mandatory coach travel arrangement. This could include supporting subsidised travel and working with partners to make organised transport more attractive to supporters.
“We believe there is value in bringing all parties together, with sufficient notice, to consider potential solutions collaboratively and ensure supporters’ views are heard. Our focus remains on finding a safe, proportionate and workable approach that protects the interests of supporters and meets the expectations of the relevant authorities.”
What Northumbria Police have said about derby travel
Northumbria Police previously defended the arrangements on public safety grounds, saying the walk to St James’ Park before last season’s derby had presented risks they did not believe could be sufficiently addressed by repeating the same approach. In correspondence dated October 24 and published by the Red and White Army Supporters’ Trust, Chief Inspector Dean Hood said police had worked with public transport providers to assess alternatives to a coach-only operation.
He said: “The resulting supporter walk-up presented significant public safety issues which, in our assessment, cannot reasonably be mitigated through the same arrangements. These included missiles being thrown, including glass bottles and full drinks containers, as well as fireworks being discharged in close proximity to police horses operating within dense crowds.”
Hood acknowledged that the overwhelming majority of supporters were well behaved, but said those fans were also exposed to potential harm. He added that police concerns reflected both the most recent derby at St James’ Park and the wider history of the fixture.
Police said they had been unable to identify an alternative arrangement that sufficiently addressed their safety concerns. Hood also explained that the Safety Advisory Group provides advice and recommendations, while decisions about the stadium’s safety certificate ultimately rest with Newcastle City Council.
“For the same reasons, I do not consider there to be a basis for the police to ask the Safety Advisory Group to revisit the decision,” he said. “Our assessment of the identified public safety risks has not changed, and no alternative arrangement has been identified which, in our view, sufficiently mitigates those risks.”
In that correspondence, Hood said the purpose of the planned supporter engagement was to explain the reasoning and reduce the inconvenience caused by the arrangements, rather than reopen the decision. RAWA has opposed the restrictions and called for meaningful discussions in which supporters have a genuine opportunity to influence the outcome.
What are Sunderland and Newcastle fan groups saying?
The Red and White Army Supporters' Trust (RAWA) and Newcastle United Supporters Trust (NUST) have both challenged the decision to introduce mandatory coach travel, questioning the evidence behind the restrictions and the absence of meaningful consultation with supporters.
RAWA, alongside Sunderland's Branch Liaison Council, initially described the decision as an "absolute disgrace", arguing that thousands of law-abiding supporters were being punished unnecessarily. NUST subsequently backed those concerns, stating: "We are extremely disappointed that such a restrictive measure has been introduced without meaningful consultation with the supporter groups representing those directly affected."
Both organisations have questioned why restrictions are necessary after Northumbria Police previously described March's derby at St James' Park as having passed largely without incident, with only three arrests recorded. In an unusual show of unity between the rival fanbases, RAWA and NUST also wrote jointly to North East mayor Kim McGuinness, requesting her assistance in securing greater transparency.
"This is an unprecedented step. It will be the only Premier League fixture subject to bubble restrictions, setting aside the FA Cup anomaly in 2024; it is the first bubble in the long history of the Tyne–Wear derby," their letter stated. "Bubble matches punish every supporter for the actions of a tiny minority and significantly alter the matchday experience for thousands who have done nothing wrong."
Join The Echo’s WhatsApp SAFC Channel for the latest news, team & injury updates direct to your phone. Simply click this link to join.
Despite their opposition, both trusts have emphasised that supporter safety remains paramount and have offered to work constructively with the relevant authorities. However, they maintain that any restrictions must be proportionate, supported by clear evidence and subject to genuine consultation rather than being imposed without supporter involvement.