Indoor sports arenas have eye on security

The security cameras scanning the soccer fields and basketball courts at Fore Kicks, a large indoor sports facility in Norfolk, cost nearly $50,000 when they were installed four years ago.

It's an investment that Fore Kicks' chief executive Tom Teager said he's glad he made, especially in light of a soccer match at a similar facility in Milford that dissolved into a melee last month. It involved dozens of players and fans and left five people injured and five more facing criminal charges.

''We've had good luck," said Teager, who believes his cameras help deter disorderly behavior. ''We haven't had many problems. But we do monitor things carefully. We're able to detect things before they hit a flash point."

Surveillance cameras, a fixture at shopping malls, subway stations, and highway toll booths, are now being wired into the walls of local sports facilities. The devices watch and record what's happening on the playing surface and in the stands. Owners such as Teager say the cameras have become a necessity after a spate of violence at professional, college, and youth games, including a Dec. 18 brawl at an indoor soccer match in Milford.

But some privacy activists and sports facility owners disagree. The presence of surveillance cameras, they argue, rarely subdues angry parents or prevents violent outbursts from players.

Cedric Laurant, of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a Washington-based lobbying group, said video surveillance can impinge on the privacy of athletes, spectators, and employees who may not even know the cameras exist.

''There are more and more cameras in more and more places," he said. ''People have a right to know how that information is being used. It's the owner of the cameras' responsibility to list on each camera what it is being used for. Is it being used for surveillance in case of a criminal act, or is it being used for some other purpose?"

Security at high school and youth sports events is nothing new. Most local high schools hire police and have faculty members on hand to supervise. The Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association, the organization that oversees high school sports in the state, recently increased security at its state tournament games.

Some sports facilities and high schools are stepping up their security, installing surveillance cameras, and drafting strict conduct rules, after a series of violent events at venues across the state.

The latest incidents:

Five teenagers are scheduled to be arraigned today in Milford District Court on assault charges stemming from the Dec. 18 soccer brawl at the John Smith No. 1 Sports Center in Milford.

A Swampscott man is facing assault and battery charges after he allegedly grabbed, shook, and shouted at an 8-year-old player last month at a youth hockey game.

A high school basketball game between Sandwich and Barnstable was marred recently by a postgame fight that left a Sandwich teen hospitalized with stab wounds to the chest and a punctured lung.

Michael Vaughn, general manager of Mass Premier Courts in Foxborough, has heard the stories. He said safety has been one of his top priorities since the 70,000-square-foot multisport facility opened in late November. Vaughn uses a hidden camera system to watch his basketball courts, batting cages, weight room, and front lobby. From his office, Vaughn can watch a live feed from three cameras at once.

''I can see what's going on everywhere except the bathrooms," he said.

The surveillance system at Fore Kicks is more elaborate. Teager has 14 cameras monitoring activity inside and outside his 85,000-square-foot facility. The cameras can be trained on Fore Kicks' two basketball courts, five soccer fields, and on the spectators standing on the sidelines. Teager's system records everything its sees and archives the images it captures for more than a week.

''When you walk into our facility, you can see a monitor right in the lobby," said Teager, who originally purchased his system to provide teams with game tapes but quickly discovered its security benefits. ''The great benefit is that when people know they can be seen, they behave."

Bellingham High School is in the process of installing surveillance cameras throughout the school. Athletic director Dennis Baker said the athletic wing, including the school's gymnasium, is to be wired this summer for video surveillance.

''Our security is good, but we're trying to be proactive," he said. ''If there's a camera and you get caught doing something you shouldn't, guess what? It's candid camera. They got you."

However, Laurant, the privacy activist, does not believe video surveillance is a fail-safe security measure. With the proliferation of cameras in public places, he said, people are becoming so accustomed to being watched that they often miss the presence of cameras altogether.

''Most people are not even aware that they're there at all," he said. ''The deterrent factor can be hard to argue."

Video surveillance is just one way sports venues are trying to maintain a safe environment for their clients. Mass Premier Courts, which draws athletes from many of the 37 cities and towns covered by Globe West, requires players and coaches to sign contracts that give Vaughn and his staff the right to bar anyone who violates the facility's long list of personal conduct rules.

Vaughn said his security policy has also worked well. Aside from an angry parent who briefly confronted a referee after a youth basketball game, Vaughn said Mass Premier Courts has had no major incidents.

''What we're doing helps," said Vaughn, who plans to hire a police detail when his facility holds its first big basketball tournament in April. ''Unfortunately, you can't prevent everything."

At Fore Kicks, Teager holds everyone to a similar ''zero tolerance" behavior policy. Teager said the rules are spelled out in mandatory preseason meetings and in a handbook he gives to all his coaches. Berate an official, throw a punch, or use inappropriate language, and Teager said the message is clear: You will quickly be barred from his facility.

Since Fore Kicks opened in 2001, Teager said the facility has banned one entire soccer team and one individual player for bad behavior. ''We have a reputation of being harder and stricter than a lot of places, but we take pride in that," Teager said. ''Look, this is a recreation facility. You're supposed to have fun and enjoy sports when you're here. Violence and violent behavior have no place."

John Smith, the former New England Patriots kicker who owns the John Smith No. 1 Sports Center in Milford, was present last month when a late-night indoor soccer match between under-18 teams from Millis and Milford erupted into a brawl that allegedly involved players, coaches, and spectators.

Smith's facility, which does not contain surveillance cameras, was criticized for not providing enough adult supervision during the Saturday night game that kicked off at 11 p.m. But Smith, who said four adult staff members were on duty that night, staunchly defended his security measures.

He scoffed when asked if the fight could have been prevented by the presence of security cameras or by a clearly posted set of conduct rules.

''You blinked an eye and they were out there," said Smith, who opened his multisport indoor facility in 1989, one of the first of its kind in New England. ''Gillette [Stadium] security couldn't have stopped what happened."

Smith banned the Portugal 05 team from Milford for the rest of the year, while the Millis Mohawks dropped out of the league. Smith said he will also no longer allow Milford fans to watch games in "large numbers."

After what he called the first and only large-scale fight he's had at his facility, Smith said he has no plans to hire police details for future games or install cameras like the ones at Fore Kicks.

''We don't need them," he said. ''This was a onetime incident. I've been doing this for 15 years. We have better security than anyone."

James Whitters can be reached at whitters@globe.com.