I have never been a fan of football, and I have never really understood what it is about football that attracts people. I mean, people chase a ball and kick it around. People are insane about football, especially in Argentina where people would go out on streets and rob stores and start fights after winning or losing a match. Moreover, I have never understood why is there so much money in football? I simply can’t understand why we are willing to pay these ball chasers sh*tloads of money while for example essential workers are barely making it.
Anyway, those were my thoughts around football before reading this weeks article “Soccer in Sun and Shadow”. I thought it was quite cool how the entire sport was broken down into pieces, and suddenly football wasn’t just a sport – it was performance, gender, language, history, money, work and so much more. In other words, the simple sport of football carries so much meaning for everyone involved, even for the ball itself. Something I found interesting was that the meaning conveyed in this article wasn’t a glorious one, it was rather filled with misery for basically everyone involved. The players were contrasted with human trafficking and forced labour, the goalkeeper is said to take the blame for every lost match, the referees were subjects of public hate, managers were disposable and the fanatics are people unable to find fulfillment in their jobs and everyday lives. Moreover, it is said that some have argued that football has been used as a political tool to distract from politics to keep the people “unable to grow”. The portrayed reality in Galeanos writing is something we would rather not see when we think about football, because in our minds football involves endless fame and money. This must be the “shadowy” part of the soccer in the sun, the price you have to pay in exchange for the money and fame.
Question: Why do you think the reality of each agent in football is being portrayed negatively, even if the author himself is a fan of football?
Hi!
Great post 🙂
To answer your question, I think the author was critical of the capitalist consumption of football. He is a fan of the game, not the business. When he is portraying the agents negatively, he is doing so under the larger theme of how our socio-economic world can stain something positive. The idol is not generally a negative role, however, under the profit motive it ends up harming the individuals who take on that role.
Hello!
I think it’s really funny how many of us started this weeks blog post off with the big disclaimer that we don’t really like sports/football/soccer or know much about it in general. And I thought I was going to be alone in that! Ha! Anyways, I’m with you on the whole why do we pay them so much thing. I’ve never understood that either, but I definitely know some intense fanatics who are all about the game. I was similarly impressed by the different potential significances of football, and that’s actually what I wrote my whole blog post on. I thought it was interesting that so much of it was being portrayed negatively as well, but I’d have to agree with Maiya in saying that I think a lot of it comes from a critique of football as a capitalist endeavour. Or maybe it’s just a really serious love-hate relationship. I guess it could even be both.