SINGAPORE — The silhouette of a football player, red line running diagonally across him, is an image familiar to most Singaporeans.

Plastered on walls of void decks at Housing Board estates all over the island, and often unaccompanied by words, its meaning is clear: No football allowed.

Though it was not enough for Sembawang Town Council, which recently reinforced this rule by temporarily barricading the void deck of Block 638 Woodlands Ring Road. A photo of the closed up space, first posted by The Monitor SG on Nov 23, drew a host of reactions online.

Many netizens were critical of the town council's action. Facebook user Sang Chua said: "This is really too much. Kids need space to grow up." A user on Reddit, meanwhile, called the move making "a mountain out of a molehill", and said the sight was "depressing".

The image also stirred discussion online about whether Singapore had become too homogenised and restrictive about public spaces, and whether there was still room for spontaneous play and gathering. Some suggested Singaporeans were becoming less tolerant.

After all, this was not the first time such measures have been taken at community spaces in the heartland.

After the photo of the barricade in Woodlands went viral, netizens said they had seen similar ones were set up at void decks in Jalan Kayu and Tampines.

In May, Singaporean actress Pam Oei railed on Instagram against people who had called the police on two children, aged nine and 11, for playing football in an "alfresco multipurpose hall" in an unnamed neighbourhood.

In 2016, three 3.5m-long railings were erected at a block in Queenstown to prevent the playing of football, and in 2004 an even more extreme action was taken when some 100 blocks in Tampines and Hougang had nails and barbed wires installed on walls.

In many of these instances, municipal bodies acted after complaints from residents about the noise, danger posed by stray balls, or dirty markings on walls as a result of children playing football at the void deck.

When ST visited the block on Dec 1, the barricade had been removed. Sembawang Town Council did not respond to queries that ST sent before and after the removal.

But the town council had said in a written notice dated Nov 3 that the area had been closed off after complaints from residents of "school children kicking ball and shouting while playing, creating noise nuisance", adding that the town council and grassroot leaders had "advised (the children) but they still continue to play".

Experts that ST spoke to said that community spaces like void decks remain vital for fostering social cohesion. And despite increased structure and formalisation, and the odd instance of deterrents like in the Woodlands case, these spaces and opportunities to utilise them — be it for football or other recreational activities — have not necessarily diminished.

These spaces, which include neighbourhood fitness corners, open fields, basketball courts, all represent "something bigger", said Dr Aidan Wong, Assistant Professor of urban studies in Singapore Management University.

"These are spaces of interaction, spaces of encounter, and more importantly, spaces that break the monotony of an otherwise purely residential area," he said.

Dr Wong recalled how Housing Board void decks used to be places where people played football, catching and capteh as he grew up.

"It was a ruckus and caused the walls to be slightly discoloured, yes, but the space was there for people from different blocks to interact with each other," he noted.

He added that although void decks are still used for community gatherings such as weddings and funerals today, they miss the regularity with which youth and children utilised them in the past.

Associate Professor Ho Kong Chong, head of urban studies at Yale-National University of Singapore, said that he felt the Sembawang Town Council's actions were an "exception", and added that the increasing structure over existing community spaces is understandable.

"This is essential, as it provides some order to a high density environment like Singapore," Dr Ho said, adding that it allows for more efficient use of space.

However, he said that the usage of heartland recreational facilities that require booking, for example, reduces conviviality, or the warmth and friendliness among people.

"You are forced to leave once your booking is up, and because of this, relationships do not span beyond those you enter the booked courts with," Dr Ho said.

Associate Professor in the School of Social Sciences at Nanyang Technological University Laavanya Kathiravelu echoed this point, and said that the booking system decreases the instances of more spontaneous play, particularly among children who must rely on adults to mediate play on their behalf.

This could lead to less interaction with a diversity of people, as private spaces of the home tend to be ethnically and racially more homogeneous, added Prof Laavanya.

Individuality in the community then starts to permeate, she said, which could be the reason for the low level of tolerance for noise and disturbance.

"People are generally more concerned about their own well-being and comfort rather than the needs of the community," said Prof Laavanya.

Urban planners are in fact aware of the importance of these spaces for social cohesion, she added, but they also need to balance the competing needs of the population.

One example of what achieving this balance may look like, said Dr Ho, is the dual-use scheme (DUS) under the ActiveSG programme run by national agency Sport Singapore.

This scheme allows for over 40 fields in Ministry of Education schools to be used by the public after school hours, some of which do not even require booking. The scheme also includes the usage of other school facilities like indoor halls for badminton, and basketball courts.

Dr Ho believes the scheme fosters a "reciprocal relationship" between the school and the neighbourhood it is situated in, and explained: "This means that residents living near the school should be able to use its facilities, and the school can contribute to the development of the neighbourhood."

Weekend warrior Koh Eu Beng, 60, plays football at these DUS pitches, although he noted that he and his mates often have difficulty securing venues as many of the bookings are "taken up within a minute". They did not face such issues when they had kickabouts at the pitches at Farrer Park, which has since made way for redevelopment.

"At Farrer Park, we could always join any pick up games, no need any fancy jerseys, shoes or even boots," Mr Koh, an administrator, reminisced.

Dr Wong said infrastructural development - both of new estates and updates of old ones - provides opportunities to develop more spaces and facilities for the community. He pointed to a rooftop basketball court that was built on a multi-storey carpark in a 40-year-old estate in Bukit Batok as a positive example.

"With development, which is necessary to our urban renewal, how do we continue to allow for free access public spaces to be deeply entrenched in the planning and the DNA of it?" asked Dr Wong.

"That makes the argument become more of a clarion call for greater effort aimed at building and remembering what is our essential value in public housing is, (which is) as a repository of Singapore shared values."

ALSO READ: No ball game: Cordoned-off void deck in Woodlands sparks online debate

This article was first published in The Straits Times. Permission required for reproduction.