'Extremely disappointed' - Official statement released after Newcastle United & Sunderland decision
Newcastle United and Sunderland supporters have slammed the decision to make December’s Tyne-Wear derby a ‘bubble’ match.
A prominent Newcastle United supporters’ group has called for an urgent review of the decision to impose mandatory coach travel on Sunderland fans attending the Tyne-Wear derby at St James’ Park on December 6.
The ‘bubble arrangement’ was last in place when Newcastle were handed a 6,000 allocation for their FA Cup tie at the Stadium of Light in January 2024. With away allocations significantly lower for Premier League matches, such an arrangement was not in place last season.
But following a recommendation from Northumbria Police, the Safety Advisory Group (SAG), chaired by Newcastle City Council, has decided that Sunderland fans must travel from Wearside to St James’ Park on club-arranged coaches.
We have launched a new NUFC YouTube channel to bring the latest Newcastle United news and analysis. Click this link and subscribe to NUFC Press Box.
Newcastle United Supporters Trust (NUST) has “strongly opposed” the decision, describing it as “extremely disappointing”, and is demanding that the relevant authorities provide evidence to justify the restrictions.
It comes after Newcastle fan group Wor Flags also labelled the restrictions “absolutely pathetic”, while the Red & White Army supporter trust and the Branch Liaison Council vehemently slammed the decision
‘Extremely disappointed’
A NUST statement, sent to SAG, read: “Newcastle United Supporters Trust (NUST) strongly opposes the decision to impose mandatory coach travel on Sunderland supporters attending the Tyne-Wear derby at St. James' Park on 6 December 2026.
“We are extremely disappointed that such a restrictive measure has been introduced without meaningful consultation with the supporter groups representing those directly affected.
“We understand the decision to impose mandatory coach travel has not been made by Newcastle United Football Club; the club were made aware of the requirement following the recommendation from the independent Safety Advisory Group (SAG), chaired by Newcastle City Council, acting on advice from Northumbria Police.
“Responsibility for explaining and justifying this decision must rest with all parties involved in the process: the Safety Advisory Group, Newcastle City Council and Northumbria Police.
What makes this decision particularly difficult to understand is that recent Tyne-Wear derbies have taken place without the need for such blanket travel restrictions. Indeed, following the derby at St. James' Park in March, Northumbria Police themselves reported that the policing operation had passed largely without incident, while acknowledging the overwhelmingly positive behaviour of the vast majority of supporters.
The Gazette has launched a WhatsApp NUFC channel to bring the latest news, analysis and team & injury updates directly to your phone. Simply click this link to join our NUFC WhatsApp channel.
‘So what has changed?’
“Has there been new intelligence or evidence that now justifies removing the freedom of thousands of law-abiding football supporters to make their own travel arrangements? If so, this should be shared with supporter groups for discussion and explanation.
“Given the well-documented concerns surrounding the management of previous Tyne-Wear derbies, why is the response to impose additional restrictions on supporters rather than address the shortcomings in the planning and management of these fixtures? Why are supporters being subjected to increasingly restrictive arrangements rather than those responsible demonstrating that they can effectively manage one of English football's biggest fixtures?
“If the issue is the ability to safely manage the movement of visiting supporters from Newcastle Central Station to St. James' Park, then surely the responsibility lies with the police and relevant authorities to develop an effective policing and crowd-management operation.
“Football supporters should not be treated as a collective problem to be contained simply because a fixture presents additional policing challenges. We fully recognise the importance of public safety and accept that the Tyne-Wear derby requires careful planning and appropriate policing. However, restrictions must be proportionate, evidence-based and justified. The actions of a small minority should never be used to impose unnecessary restrictions on the overwhelming majority who simply want to attend a football match.
“It is equally concerning that supporter representatives appear to have been excluded from the discussions that led to this decision. Why were these arrangements allowed to progress without meaningful dialogue with supporters from either club? This is a question for every organisation involved in the decision-making process. Supporters are the people most directly affected by these arrangements, yet their views have seemingly been considered an afterthought. Consultation should be a fundamental part of the decision-making process, not something that happens once restrictions have already been imposed.
Five points
“NUST is therefore calling on the Safety Advisory Group, Newcastle City Council and Northumbria Police to:
“1. Explain and provide evidence of what has materially changed since the previous Tyne-Wear derbies to justify mandatory coach travel.
“2. Publish the evidence and risk assessment underpinning the recommendation, subject to legitimate operational sensitivities.
“3. Explain why less restrictive alternatives, including managed walking escorts and proportionate policing arrangements, have been deemed insufficient.
“4. Explain why meaningful consultation with supporter representatives from both clubs did not take place before these decisions were reached, and commit to genuine engagement going forward.
“5. Urgently review the decision and reconsider the requirement for mandatory coach travel.
“This is not about Newcastle supporters versus Sunderland supporters. It is about the rights and fair treatment of football fans, regardless of which club they support. Any restrictions imposed on supporters must be necessary, proportionate and based on a clearly identified risk. The authorities should demonstrate why mandatory coach travel is required and why less restrictive measures would not adequately address the concerns identified. Public safety is paramount, but it cannot be used as a blanket justification for increasingly restrictive measures without clear evidence, proper accountability and meaningful supporter consultation.
“Until those questions are answered and the decisions properly justified, NUST cannot support these restrictions.”