Police Chief Under Pressure to Resign Over Maccabi Tel Aviv Fan Ban
West Midlands Police Chief Constable Craig Guildford is facing intense pressure to resign following a controversial decision by Pro-Palestinian lobbying efforts which effectively banned Jewish and Israeli supporters of the football club Maccabi Tel Aviv from attending a Europa League match in Birmingham. The incident has prompted political criticism, community concern and a damning watchdog report that has shaken confidence in the force’s senior leadership.
In November 2025, West Midlands Police advised the local Safety Advisory Group (SAG) that attending fans posed a significant safety risk. The SAG subsequently recommended that supporters travelling from Israel should not be permitted to attend Aston Villa’s match at Villa Park. That advice has since been the subject of scrutiny and criticism.
Report Highlights Serious Failings
A review by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services, commissioned after national concern, found significant failings in how West Midlands Police assessed and communicated the risks associated with the Maccabi fans’ attendance.
The watchdog’s findings, described by Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood as “damning”, concluded that the force exhibited confirmation bias, seeking evidence to support a pre‑determined view rather than evaluating information objectively. The report noted that there was little engagement with the Jewish community in Birmingham before the decision was taken, and that key risk assessments were overstated or inaccurate.
Crucially, investigators found that some evidence cited by the force to justify the ban was incorrect or fabricated. The police had referenced a match between Maccabi Tel Aviv and West Ham United that had never taken place. This error stemmed from the use of an artificial intelligence tool, Microsoft Copilot, which produced a “hallucination,” an invented result, used as part of the security rationale. Guildford has admitted to providing erroneous evidence to MPs over this point and apologised for the mistake.
Mahmood told Parliament that the force “conducted little engagement with the Jewish community, and none with the Jewish community in Birmingham before a decision was taken.” She said the watchdog found that the police “sought only evidence to support their desired position” rather than following the factual record.
Debate Over Antisemitism in the Decision
The decision to bar Maccabi Tel Aviv fans also drew commentary about possible antisemitic implications, even as official investigations found no evidence the force acted with discriminatory intent. Jewish community groups had warned authorities before the ban that excluding supporters of an Israeli club “could be perceived as antisemitic”, and expressed concern that the policy could damage trust between police and local Jewish residents.
Critics outside law enforcement argued that the optics of banning Israeli fans during a period of heightened sensitivity around antisemitism in Britain risked reinforcing fears of bias, even if the stated rationale was public safety. The contrast between the absence of identified antisemitism in the watchdog report and the concern voiced by community representatives highlights the complexity of perceptions around policing decisions affecting religious and ethnic minorities.
Political and Public Reaction
The fallout from the report has been swift. The Home Secretary has said she no longer has confidence in Chief Constable Guildford’s leadership, although current legislation means she cannot directly sack him. Powers to dismiss senior police officers were transferred in 2011 to locally elected police and crime commissioners. Mahmood has indicated plans to revisit the rules to give future home secretaries more authority over such appointments.
Calls for resignation have come from across the political spectrum, including from the leader of the Conservative Party, Kemi Badenoch. Badenoch described Guildford’s position as “untenable” and criticised the force for mis‑leading Parliament and capitulating to inappropriate influences during the decision‑making process.
Some MPs have also raised questions about the involvement of local officials and advocacy groups in discussions that preceded the ban, though West Midlands Police maintains that there was no political interference in its operational assessment. Guildford has repeatedly defended the decision, acknowledging mistakes while insisting that the force’s assessments were based on the intelligence it had at the time.
Community Response and Consultation Issues
Jewish community leaders have expressed frustration over the handling of the issue. Representatives criticised the police for inaccurately claiming that local Jewish groups supported the ban, a claim later retracted by West Midlands Police leadership in communications to the Home Affairs Select Committee. There is broad consensus among board members and Jewish organisations that the ban was unnecessary and mishandled.
Critics argue that proper consultation with diverse community stakeholders, including Jewish leaders in Birmingham, was inadequate or absent prior to public announcements. That failure has heightened concerns about trust and transparency in policing decisions that affect community relations.
AI and Intelligence Use
The revelation that artificial intelligence played a direct role in producing flawed intelligence has widened the debate. Guildford initially told MPs that the inaccurate information came from a basic internet search, but later acknowledged it was the result of using Microsoft Copilot, raising questions about the use and oversight of AI tools in sensitive policing contexts.
This has prompted broader discussion about the risks of relying on unverified or automated tools in intelligence gathering and risk assessments that can have serious social and legal consequences.
What Happens Next?
With both political and community pressure rising, Guildford has so far refused to resign. The authority to remove him rests with Simon Foster, the West Midlands Police and Crime Commissioner, who has postponed decisive action pending further evidence to be heard at a public meeting scheduled for late January.
The ongoing scrutiny of this case is likely to influence future policy discussions around how police assess risk, engage with communities, and validate intelligence, especially where fan safety intersects with broader issues of diversity, faith and public order.
Wider Debate on Policing and Accountability
The controversy has ignited a wider debate about police accountability, the proper use of technology in investigations, and how law enforcement balances operational independence with community trust. Government officials have signalled interest in reforming the regulatory framework for chief constable appointments and dismissals, partly to ensure political and public confidence can be upheld in similar circumstances in the future.
As the situation develops, it is clear that the episode will have lasting implications for how policing decisions are made and scrutinized, particularly where sensitive inter‑communal dynamics are involved and pro-Palestinian community leaders play a detrimental role.
