You might argue that it was little more than a photo opportunity.
Some will say it has been blown out of proportion.
But there is little doubt that a politician’s stadium tour has caused a huge PR headache for a football club.
And the way it has been handled allowed the reputation impact to grow.
Ipswich Town found itself under the crisis comms floodlights after photos of Reform leader Nigel Farage visiting its ground rapidly spread across social media.
He visited the club after a nearby party rally and was pictured in the Portman Road dressing rooms and media room, and could be seen holding a Farage 10 Ipswich shirt with the pitch in the background.
He also posted a video on social media wishing the club well and joking that he could be the next manager if it does not get promoted to the Premier League.
The posts triggered a huge backlash among section of the club’s supporters, who called it “shameful”, “embarrassing”, “utterly disgraceful” and a "very serious error".
And the fallout has been extensively covered by mainstream media.
It also led to plenty of online mocking.
Well, after allowing the storm to grow with its silence – never a recommended crisis media management approach – it did issue a statement on its social media accounts.
It said: “Ipswich Town Football Club has, over several years, hosted representatives from a range of political parties.
“The club remains apolitical and does not support or endorse any individual or party. The club will continue to engage with representatives from across the political spectrum as part of its role within the community.
“Ipswich Town is proud to be an inclusive, diverse, and welcoming organisation that supports all members of the local and wider community. This commitment remains unchanged.”
The problem for the Championship club is the statement misses the target. By some distance.
The big issue is that it does not address or acknowledge why supporters are so angry.
During our crisis communication courses, we use our CARE model to show how organisations need to communicate when they are under the spotlight.
It stands for Compassion, Action, Reassurance and Examples.
The compassion part is vital. People need to know you care before they care about what you know.
And it is lacking here.
The club opted for a bland, corporate response rather than something that suggests it is listening to what supporters are saying and understands their concern about the club being used for a political stunt and how that association is being perceived.
There is also no hint of what action might be taken to prevent the club from being used as a political football again in the future. And that means it does not reassure.
The other key aim of crisis communication statements is to provide information that fills the void and prevents the spread of misinformation and speculation.
Again, this statement fails to achieve that. Too many key questions remained unanswered, including the key one for supporters – was it an unofficial visit from the political party or one that the club facilitated?
It is a statement that feels deliberately vague and ambiguous when transparency and clarity is needed - and desperately wanted by the fans.
In my experience, that only allows the story and differing narratives to continue. And it typically results in further clarifying statements and more reputational damage.
I understand the club was keen to be seen not to take sides with its response. But I’d argue that when photos have been manipulated to show endorsement or association, perhaps that is the time not to be quite so apolitical.
So, it came as little surprise that Ipswich issued a further statement a few days later. This time, it took the form of a video message from the club's chairman, Mark Ashton, showing visible leadership.
In it, he said: "I’m fully aware that this has been a very difficult week for all of us. The staff are hurting. Elements of the fanbase are hurting. So are elements of our local community.
"That upsets me immensely. Unreservedly, I want to apologise and say I’m sorry."
He also said the club would review its policy on engaging with politicians.
This was much better crisis communication. But should it really take two attempts to get right?
Because of the vagueness of the initial statement, it was hard to understand just how much the club knew in advance of the visit.
The East Anglian Daily Times reported it understood that Reform did not use the party or Farage’s name when it booked the private tour online and that the shirt was bought in the club shop – information you might think should be included in the club’s statement.
Let’s assume that’s accurate and the club was blindsided, although the Reform leader has said he “received an invitation from Ipswich”.
It’s still hard to believe that no one became concerned about how the visit might play out when the party leader turned up with an entourage that appears to have included a camera crew.
Could a decision not have been made at that point about what could happen during the tour?
Were the comms team asked how they thought this visit might land with supporters if photos and videos were shared across social media?
Did people not become concerned as photos were being taken that made it look like the politician had signed for the club or had been appointed its manager?
It all seems a bit careless and flatfooted. And it feels like there was a worrying lack of policy around political visits and how to escalate things that don’t feel right.
At the very least, once it became obvious that this was no ordinary stadium tour, statements should have began to be drafted that explained what happened and why to try and get ahead of the fallout.
We should say the version reported by the East Anglian Daily Times varies significantly from what The Atlantic has said. It reported that an invitation to visit the club was made by "an associate" of Mr Ashton, and that the tour included a private lunch. It also reports that the club presented the Reform leader with six Farage 10 shirts and that one was signed for Mr Ashton.
Not only does this contradict the East Anglian Daily Times story, but it also undermines the version the club presented in its first statement.
As we said earlier, a lack of transparency only fuels speculation and intrigue. And, in this example, it has led the club to publicly lament that "there are a number of mistruths out there about what’s actually happened."
Politicians using football as a publicity stunt is, of course, nothing new - the game has long provided a useful stage.
Old footage of Kevin Keegan and Tony Blair playing head tennis recently popped up on my socials.
But the world has moved on, and the political landscape appears more divided than ever.
The fallout from this visit reminded me of the time Boris Johnson visited the Heck sausage factory and triggered a crisis media management incident.
The then Tory leadership favourite was photographed making and packing sausages and was shown holding two packs of ‘Boris Bangers’, which had been made in his honour.
But the pictures left an unpleasant taste for many who felt they implied support for Mr Johnson, and they used the #BoycottHeck on Twitter, as it was then, to voice their displeasure.
And the backlash was picked up by mainstream media.
When the company eventually responded, it issued a long, rambling statement, which aimed to clarify it did not have any political affiliation. But its reputation had been butchered.
Regular readers will know I recently mentioned the value of newsjacking in a blog about a viral video from the boss of McDonald’s.
And this story provided another great example of it being done well on social media.
Norwich City jumped at the opportunity to make the most of its great rival’s uncomfortable time in the spotlight.
It took to its social media accounts to promote its stadium tours with the line “Terms and conditions most definitely apply.” Nicely done.
And I make that 1-0 to Norwich in the East Anglia derby thanks to an entirely avoidable Farage own goal.
Media First are media and communications training specialists with more than 40 years of experience.
We have a team of trainers, each with decades of experience working as journalists, presenters, communications coaches and media trainers.
Find out more about our crisis communication training courses.