As England’s World Cup performance inspires another rush of young footballers, London Sport, Play England and Playing Out are urging Andy Burnham to ban no ball games signs and restore children’s freedom to play close to home.
It is an awkward contradiction. A country can celebrate football with considerable noise, colour and expensive replica shirts, yet remain remarkably efficient at preventing children from kicking one outside their own front doors.
A coalition of more than 40 organisations and specialists working across sport, health, play and children’s rights has called for three national reforms intended to make informal outdoor play easier.
The proposals focus on removing blanket restrictions, expanding resident-led Play Streets and modernising the rules governing parks and public spaces.
The central argument is simple: inspiration is of limited use when the nearest patch of grass comes with a prohibition nailed to a post.
A football nation with nowhere to kick a ball
Campaigners say screens are not the only reason children spend less time outside. Traffic-heavy streets, restrictive signs and outdated local rules can all prevent them from playing in the places closest to home.
That matters because organised sport cannot reach every child.
Formal clubs require facilities, volunteers, time and, frequently, a parent capable of providing transport. A football against a wall requires rather less administration.
The coalition argues that children living in areas with fewer gardens, safe streets and accessible green spaces are disproportionately affected. Those same communities may also have less access to affordable organised sport.
The humble kickabout therefore becomes more than an idle way of irritating a neighbour’s hydrangeas. It offers physical activity, social contact, independence and a first encounter with sport that costs nothing.
Three reforms for the first 100 days
The letter asks Burnham to support three measures:
- Introduce a national prohibition on “No Ball Games” signs and comparable blanket restrictions on children’s play.
- Establish a clear national framework allowing resident-led Play Streets across the country.
- Modernise byelaws so that children’s play, informal recreation and active travel are prioritised in parks and public spaces.
These are not proposals for a nationwide construction programme. They are largely concerned with rules, permissions and the removal of restrictions that campaigners believe no longer reflect children’s needs.
That distinction is important. New pitches and leisure centres have value, but children also need ordinary places where movement does not require a booking system, a membership card or an adult with a free Saturday morning.
Ingrid Skeels, co-founder of the Playing Out movement, said: “Children are desperate to play outside and we need to make that possible for them – especially those who have no garden or access to organised activities. Enabling all children to play in their shared doorstep space for free is one of the best ways to get them off screens, active and connecting with friends in real life.
Kicking a ball around or riding your bike around the block near home is also the most democratic and inclusive foundation for informal sport and nurturing future talent. Creating these conditions for healthier, happier childhoods has never been needed more, when children who have the least are stuck in a spiral of worsening health. It’s time for ‘No Ball Games’ signs and other barriers to be removed from children’s local environments so they can play out every day.
These immediate, low-cost measures would help to address physical inactivity, loneliness, poor mental wellbeing and the loss of children’s independence”.
The health argument begins outside the school gates
The coalition says children spend around 80 per cent of their waking hours outside school. Its conclusion is that schools, physical education and organised clubs cannot carry the entire burden of improving children’s activity levels.
Movement must also be possible during the unstructured portions of the day: after school, at weekends and during the long gaps in which children are neither in lessons nor wearing a team shirt.
This is where doorstep play earns its keep. It is immediate, informal and adaptable. Children can join in without being selected, registered or assessed. Nobody needs to explain the tactical system before somebody boots the ball under a parked car.
Emily Robinson, CEO of London Sport, said: “This World Cup has reminded us of the joy, inspiration and sense of belonging that football can create. But once the final whistle blows, every child should have somewhere safe to kick a ball around close to home.
Too many children are still being told they cannot play where they live. Children shouldn’t need access to a formal pitch, an organised club or parents who can drive them across town simply to be active. The spaces outside where they live should be where they play, move and belong.
These are practical, affordable changes that could be delivered quickly. They would send a powerful signal that the Government is serious about tackling the children’s health crisis through prevention and giving every child the freedom to play”.
From national ambition to postcode lottery
The campaign follows the Government’s response to the Culture, Media and Sport Committee’s Game On report.
According to the coalition, that response included an ambition to remove unnecessary “No Ball Games” signs and create more opportunities for children and young people to play.
Campaigners now want the principle turned into national policy rather than left to individual councils, housing associations and landowners.
Without a consistent framework, they argue, one child may be permitted to play outside while another living under a different local authority or landlord faces a blanket ban. Childhood freedom should not depend quite so heavily on the enthusiasm of a committee several streets away.
National rules would not remove the need to manage genuine problems involving safety, damage or persistent disturbance. They would, however, require authorities to treat play as a legitimate use of shared space rather than an inconvenience to be prohibited in advance.
Revisiting England’s play strategy
Burnham co-launched England’s previous National Play Strategy in 2008. The strategy was later cancelled by the coalition Government in 2010.
The new letter asks him to revive that ambition through three immediate measures rather than waiting for a more elaborate policy programme.
Its timing is deliberate. Major tournaments are unusually effective at making children want to imitate what they have just watched. Goals are recreated, celebrations borrowed and every available jumper pressed into service as a goalpost.
Yet sporting enthusiasm does not survive on television pictures alone. It needs somewhere to go.
Removing every “no ball games” sign would not solve the children’s health crisis by itself. Nor would every shared courtyard instantly become a nursery for international footballers. The coalition’s argument is more grounded: children are more likely to move when the spaces around them allow it.
England has never lacked instructions on how football should be played. The more pressing question is whether its children are still permitted to play it.
