After I'd made yesterday's post I read the previous one - the one where I really went for it. Anyway, at the bottom of that one I'd promised that I'd do another post explaining how football has "become weaponized." Obviously I never quite got round to that. The issue of lock down itself putting anything football related firmly on the shelf.
Seeing as how it was a promise I think I better actually do it. So here goes;
W e a p o n i z e d F o o t b a l l
Normally when we go to a football match, or simply go and play football ourselves, it's for the sheer enjoyment. We enjoy doing it. It's a break from the grind and stress of the normal everyday world.
However, increasingly we've seen politics and other social issues creep in. Normally this happens with the best intentions, and often for good reason. Campaigns to kick racism out of football for example were not only good, but
needed. Racism was a huge issue in football and a huge amount of action was necessary to deal with it. Similarly with football hooliganism and other problems.
We now see an endless number of other political and social issues tacked on to football that don't necessarily relate to it directly though. Health issues are a common one. Mental health campaigns, campaigns relating to serious illnesses, etc. In fact, it's very rare that you go to a football game these days and some issue or cause isn't being highlighted. Of course, it's great that footballers and football clubs do charity work and raise awareness. Especially when it's done locally and sincerely. However, we're beginning to reach a point where we're bombarded with "raising awareness" campaigns every time we watch a game. And again, people generally go to football to escape serious issues. They pay their money to do something they enjoy in their spare time. Not to be weighed down by life's woes.
The "rainbow laces" campaign, which relates to LGBT+ issues, is another common one in modern football. Similar to the issue of racism there are without a doubt serious problems within football that need to be addressed. No one would argue against the fact that it has been extremely difficult for gay people, particularly gay men, in the world of football. Likewise traditionally there have been many barriers to girls and women in football and other sports. However, these campaigns are often so heavily pushed within football and by the media surrounding it that they become overbearing. Meaning they cease to be personal choices on the part of the individuals taking part and become something more like a religion that everyone must buy into.
Some of the issues concerned are clearly political in nature. Meaning people will often have differing views. The various debates about transgender issues being an especial case in point. With the blanket promotion of such causes in football it means that anyone not fully onboard with the message, even just in the slightest of ways, either has to pay lip service and keep quiet. Or express their opinion and risk denouncement and alienation.
Again, there's nothing necessarily wrong with these campaigns, and the intentions are good. It's just that the sheer scale is often so large that you feel like you're going to a political rally or workshop rather than to an actual sporting event. Coupled with the general advertising and sponsorship from big business that also plays such a huge role in football it often feels like there's little space left for the simple game itself. Plus the big businesses often couple themselves to the "awareness" campaigns for kudos, adding another layer of preaching and sentimentality.
International Issues
We saw slightly similar things regarding the Brexit divide. With famous faces from football like Gary Lineker very much taking the
remain point of view. To be fair this was generally kept out of the football coverage in general, and of course it must be remembered that people are allowed to have their personal views outside of their profession. However, it's hard to imagine that anyone on the pro-Brexit side of the argument would have been allowed to have such a prominent platform. So it felt quite one-sided and a little preachy at times.
This then goes further when you consider the role people like Gary Lineker often play on the international footballing stage. Most notably when the rights to host major tournaments are contested. Not to mention the accompanying power struggles within and surrounding organisations like FIFA and UEFA. (You'll no doubt remember the many allegations of corruption). Again, these things are often highly political. I'm sure there has no doubt been a fair bit of corruption over the years. However, the reaction to Russia and Qatar being awarded World Cups stemmed from things well beyond just football.
The media criticism of Russia in the run up to the 2018 World Cup was plain to see. It was even claimed that Russia would use the World Cup like Hitler used the Olympics.
(Boris Johnson as Foreign Secretary,
whatever happened to that guy?)
Now whether you like Russia or not is a little bit besides the point. It's football. Is it really the end of the world if Russia host a major football tournament (a tournament that actually turned out to be very successful in the end). I have major criticisms of China (as you may have noted from my other article lol), however, when China hosted the Olympics I didn't kick and scream and seek to undermine the event. I, like most other people, put politics to one side and enjoyed the world coming together to watch some sport.
In contrast to Russia hosting World Cup 2018 we now have Euro 2020 (now Euro 2021 thanks to the virus) taking place across Europe, having games hosted in all the various European capitals. Instead of having the whole tournament in just a single country as is usual. The way this fits neatly with the idea of a single federal European Union shouldn't escape anyone.
Likewise the 2026 World Cup has been awarded to Mexico, USA and Canada combined. Again, fitting in very nicely with the idea of a North American Union (something now very much on the back burner with Trump in the White House). Surely any one of those large countries could've held the event on their own, but no, instead we see a chance for a continental, border-crossing event. An event that will no doubt require many levels of integrated planning. Maybe even special visas for fans that will allow them to cross between countries freely and easily to watch games. Further dissolving the idea of borders.
Again there's nothing necessarily wrong with these European, or indeed North American, unions. It's fine to believe in that vision if you so choose, but either way it's easy to see how politicised football has became. You might say it's being used as a "political football"
- ba da boom :)
*Football is Cancelled*
Now with the virus you could say we're seeing the ultimate politicisation of football. Of course, views on how to deal with the virus differ. However, it's now becoming clear that we're seeing a distinct divide between those that want to keep football closed "until it's safe" and those that want to reopen and get things going again. With that divide beginning to split along left/right, remain/leave type lines.
In some ways this all had its precursor with the events from the last year or so where players have walked off the pitch and stopped games. Be it for racism or other abuse. The racial abuse was appalling of course. However, walking off the pitch, in my opinion, was the wrong way to deal with it. As it sets a precedent where games can be stopped and abandoned at the drop of a hat. Who decides what's bad enough to be worthy of that response? And what if it's the wrong judgement? Or a mistake is made?
Also it's a form of collective punishment where everyone loses out. Surely with cameras and other available resources it's possible to catch the individuals responsible.
It likewise creates a vicious cycle where people become more and more afraid to speak out against such decisions as they fear that they too may be accused of racism or other wrongdoing. Someone reading this article could perhaps accuse me of such things for not siding with the players that have walked off the pitch. It's not too hard for me as I'm just a blogger with very little influence. However, if you're a manager, player, pundit or club owner it could have serious repercussions for your career or business.
Likewise with the virus. No one wants to look like they don't care about the health and safety of players and fans. And they know full well that if they do suggest players go back out onto the field there'll be plenty of people, especially on social media, quick to make judgement and denounce them as horrible heartless people.
Football has a big problem if it continues like this. It will end up becoming so weak and politicised that any issue will be able to bring it to its knees at any time. Meaning it will become economically unsustainable. Much like how entire businesses became unsustainable because of constant striking back in the 70's and 80's.
And of course it will become much less enjoyable to watch and follow.
