So, that then would prevent a footballer from being taken to court for racial abusing another player because, in itself, it's not a criminal act?
"Racial abuse" isn't a well posed phrase so I'll avoid it.
On a football field, your main dangers are things that are said in the heat, and physical incidents.
For physicality, our sport has disciplinary procedures and (for adult level)
consent. This really stands for the idea that conduct that may result in injury to one another in sport is covered by a sport's governing body themselves, by civil methods (ie; bans, fines, etc). The 'line' between this and grievous bodily harm (section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861) is understood by precedent to be about the role within the game, malice and attempt to injure.
Criminal offences otherwise regarding racial aggravation include such stars as assault, actual/grievous bodily harm, wounding, criminal damage (ie arson etc), harassment (incl. fear of violence, usually after restraining order). If they occur involving racism then there's nothing to stop it going to a criminal court.
Otherwise, the football authority can determine reasonable action for what they'd determine unacceptable. There's nothing to stop a victim seeking compensation through courts, this is done for example in discrimination cases (Race Relations Act 1976) ie; employment, service provision etc.. or, more likely in this field, seeking an injunction which is the step towards aggravated harassment (ie; don't do it again or next time it IS criminal by contempt of court).
I'd suggest looking at R v Barnes (2004) for a decent footballing criminal case.
Games all underway now
