Footballers and Politics

The passing of the Brazilian soccer great Socrates not only leaves the world without a real footballing icon but neglects us from a passionate and illuminating sporting politician. Socrates will be remembered on the pitch as a highly technical and illustrious player, captaining the national side in the 1982 World Cup Finals, yet he also led an interesting life off the pitch. Socrates was not only a qualified medical doctor but a political activist. He openly campaigned against the military government in charge of Brazil during his time as a player, speaking at pro-democracy campaigns. He also highlighted the plight of children living in poverty and pushed for greater rights for players whilst playing for Brazilian club Corinthians. It leads me to question about footballers today, do any of them have any political will and would any of them be willing to challenge existing codes of practice in regards to politics, poverty or human rights?

Footballers traditionally are the role models that all young boys aspire to be. Not only do they fulfil every fan’s dream of scoring the winning goal or lifting the cup, but they also get paid handsomely to be a part of the club’s history and be adored by supporters. Fans go to extreme lengths to exalt their heroes through tattoos, naming children after them and creating shrines. The adoration is perfectly replicated in Ken Loach’s 2009 film Looking for Eric. Fans remember goals like childhood memories and the likes of Zola, Bergkamp, Shearer, Gazza were all childhood friends. Yet do supporters really care what a player thinks politically and would it really have an effect?

It is impossible to pigeon-hole any footballer’s political preference, but it would perhaps be acceptable to assume that with their great wealth, most would vote for the party that promises the lowest rate of tax. That is not to say that footballers are not politically astute, Chelsea’s Frank Lampard has a reputation with British journalists for his intelligence and admitted he votes Conservative. On the continent many footballers have publically declared their political affiliations, former West Ham and Lazio striker Paolo Di Canio confessed his admiration to Italian fascist Benito Mussolini, whilst Italian striker Cristiano Lucarelli is a card carrying member of the Communist party. Most famous of all is the World Cup winning French defender Lilian Thuram, who openly campaigns for better rights for ethnic minorities in France.

Finding players who openly admit to their political tendencies is only interesting because they are few and far between. How many athletes go on to write an autobiography after their career has finished yet end up writing rather insipid and lacklustre tomes? They often discuss key incidents or retell stories but rarely furnish it with thoughts on politics or leadership. It is unfair to say that all footballers are boring and lack intelligence but there are so many reasons why people admire them on the pitch yet look elsewhere for intellectual inspiration. Many footballers today tend to come from what we call the ‘working classes’ and though a horrible generalisation, put more effort into their football than their Maths and English. It doesn’t make them stupid but it does change their priorities. Making it into the first team takes precedence over which party is in power.

Football clubs are massive marketing machines and players play their part to oil the PR wheel. Players do not visit children’s wards for hedonistic purposes but because it fulfils contracts and charitable obligations. All charities, not just football clubs, are aware that by having a high profile patron helps promote a good image and generates donations, and in return it gives good PR to the patron. Certainly, some players front campaigns through goodwill e.g. Rio Ferdinand and his work to reduce knife crime in inner-city London, but all the while be certain he is well advised.

If you watch any press conference with a footballer, you can see they are briefed as if it were a police interview, all awkward questions are immediately rebuked by the communications team. Even in the dressing room they will follow the instructions from the manager, it is in an environment where saying nothing does you no harm. Think what Sir Alex Ferguson does to players who do not toe the line. The monosyllabic and cliché ridden responses stem from media training and the ‘I was only doing what the gaffer told me’ mentality. It is more than likely that many have interesting political opinions but either do not want the media hassle or the wrath of generating bad or unnecessary press for the club.

In a country where Premier League players earn on average over £20,000 a week with some easily earning over £200,000. It appears ironic to think that Robbie Fowler, Britain’s fourth richest footballer, once raised his shirt to reveal a vest in support of the Liverpool Dockers. Can players really have any loyalties when they live a life so far apart from ordinary fans? It is simply a fact British footballers live in a country where there isn’t a strong Labour movement and old sympathies no longer exist. Footballers earn enough so they don’t have to worry about these things.

Football's money men

Over the past few weeks there have been several stories in the back pages that have caused a great deal of comment regarding football finances and an inevitable look into how the game is run. Stan Kroenke, the reclusive majority shareholder of Arsenal said to several football journalists that the Glazer family, the controversial owners of Manchester United, had done a good job in running the football club. The American family, who bought the club through a leveraged takeover in 2005, have faced opprobrium from fans that have seen ticket prices soar and millions of pounds worth of debt secured against the club. Kroenke, who like the Glazers owns a National Football Team (NFL) in America, said that United fans should be thankful to the owners for their recent success the club has had domestically and in Europe. Last week, Newcastle United fans were venting further fury at owner, Mike Ashley, who has renamed the 119-year-old St James’ Park to the Sports Direct Arena. Ashley has never endeared himself to club’s fans and has openly been looking to sell the club to the highest bidder for the past few years; to fans, neglecting the club. Stories like this are not new to English football, yet fans continuously feel they have an axe to grind against corporate ownership, so what vision do they expect of English football and how is it supposed to work?

Some football commentators reserve certain clichés for different clubs, Everton are often dubbed a ‘well-run’ club. Most Premier League fans have an admiration for the Liverpool club and certainly believe their manager David Moyes has done a fantastic job for almost a decade. In the early years of the Premier League, Everton flirted with relegation on a number of occasions, yet under Moyes, the club attracted quality signings, reached the FA Cup Final in 2009 and most notably finished fourth in the Premiership in 2005. Put into perspective, Everton, one of England’s most dominant teams in the 1980s, have continuously punched above their weight. Yet, the club are stagnating financially compared to other clubs around them. They do not have an Arab Sheikh or Russian Oligarch bankrolling them, Goodison Park lacks corporate facilities and is in a location that would prevent it from being redeveloped. Current owner, the impresario Bill Kenwright, is openly looking for new investment but compared to other clubs, Everton are seen as unfavourable. Long gone are the days when the local rich man owned and bankrolled the club e.g. Jack Walker (Blackburn) and even the modern day comparisons like Wigan’s Dave Whelan are more realistic in what they can spend. Several years ago Kenwright, prevented the club from being sold to a Russian tycoon called Alexander Gaydamak. Eventually Gaydamak bought Portsmouth on the South Coast and with his funding they were able to spend freely on the transfer market and won the FA Cup in 2008. Portsmouth have subsequently faced administration, the first Premier League side to do so, after Gaydamak withdrew funds from the club. It is perhaps ironic that Kenwright has received criticism from Everton fans because he is more frugal on transfer policy, yet the sensible policies are seen as backward and unadventurous.

The English and the Scottish leagues are the most historical in the world and each club has a deep sense of community spirit within it. Yet, through the mass television deals that open new markets to clubs, cosmopolitan owners that come from different backgrounds and teams that do not feature a local youngster, it does make a difference to what the club means. Although it wouldn’t work, it is not crazy to believe that many of the owners would prefer an American style franchise system where clubs are relocated to different parts of the country after a boardroom meeting, the size of the UK and amount of clubs that already exist would have an effect. The issue for clubs is that prize money for the Champions League is enormous and clubs would be foolish not to chase such golden tickets. This has meant selling their history to the largest bidder, either to finish in the top four or to stay in the Premier League. Most clubs in the top two divisions of the English football league have either moved or improved their stadium infrastructure over the past two decades. Games cost between £40-£80 to watch rather than 50p at the turnstile. The sponsors are no longer the hi-tech Japanese electronic brands of the 1980s but from the Gulf Arab states. The change from what fans saw when they were growing up is profound and only highlights the difference new investment has made, yet for footballing institutions like Everton and Newcastle new money is the only way to survive.