My relationship with football, or I guess sports in general for that matter, is quite minimal and insignificant in nature, but that doesn’t mean I can’t understand the appeal for billions of others around the world. Both of the readings for this week’s topic opened up some avenues of thought for me that I hadn’t given much attention to prior- the beauty, the ugliness, the glory, the history, the evolution and the commercialization of a sport that seemingly unites the world through a cup every four years (give or take, in cases of global pandemics). Admittedly, my fleeting moments of connection to the sport have essentially consisted of playing for five months when I was six years old, and every so often the glimpse I catch of a game being religiously watched by my dad and brother. Nonetheless, I seem to know enough about the game, its iconic players, and the culture surrounding it to understand the extent to which it arguably dominates the world of sport.
Sant’Anna in his piece “In the Mouth of the Tunnel”, makes a fascinating comment on how “with videotape football entered into the History of Art… and the goals and the passes became museum pieces” (58). Without thousands of fans lining the stands at games, every moment, and every play captured and internationally televised, what is modern football? Of course, the sport, at its core, exists simply with a ball and feet to kick it, but it’s interesting to think about how our definition of football has been transformed into something that concocts images of merchandise, sports betting, wealth and celebrity status’. The fact that someone who has never played a game in their life can sport a team jersey or bet their life savings on the outcome of a match is quite telling in itself.
The commercialization and professionalization of sport is argued to have transformed football into something quite distant from children kicking a ball around on a street, as put forth by Galeano, “when the game stopped being a game and professional soccer required a technocracy to keep people in line” (11). Whether or not football is still a game outside of Galeano’s terms is up for debate, but I do think there is a point to what he is trying to say. Football’s value lies in what the game means to those who watch and those who play it, and the game in itself has undeniably formed the fabric of a much larger, global culture or phenomenon…
My question: Has football changed, or have the ways we view it, follow it and think of it changed? Is the game still the same game, whether it is played casually on a street or professionally in a stadium?
Hi Natalie- great post!
In terms of your question I do believe that football itself has changed. It has a new meaning for billions of people in terms of the commercializing of games and merchandise. Along with little girls/boys dreams about one day being able to train hard enough and make it to the big leagues with the support of many fans. Before people might have felt just the same about it however it has taken on a new meaning in my mind. I think that it is a different game in terms of being played in the street and stadium as in my mind it would be more authentic and raw playing in the street with friends/family versus more of a performance and defending certain reputations in stadiums.
Great post and interesting question!
Yes! I think soccer has changed. Precisely, capitalism tries to transform soccer into a product for mass consumption. As a result, players became commodities, and the priority is profit. I think this capitalization on soccer changed the way fans and especially players, see the game.
My mom once told me that one game made her completely changed her view about professional soccer. Two important Brazilian national teams (Corinthians and Ponte Preta) played the final of a major internal competition in the game. The entire team of Ponte Preta played very well in all the games of the championship. However, in this final, Ponte Preta’s goalkeeper played terribly. He let Corinthians score many goals and win the game. The following day, my mom learned that Corinthians bought Ponte Preta’s goalkeeper, who had already moved to Corinthians. For my mom, professional soccer died that day. She told me she believed the players were playing for passion for the sport and their teams, but in the end, it was for money (Corinthians paid a higher salary to the goalkeeper). For me, this story shows how capitalism can negatively affect professional soccer. The sad reality about this story is that it reflects our capitalist society, where the money is considered more important than basically everything else.
This could not happen in a street game between friends. Thus, for me, it can easily reflect people’s passion for soccer.