Political Football

 

Political Football

In sixth century Constantinople, capital of the Byzantine empire, chariot racing was followed with as much passion as football is today. The great Hippodrome used for the sport could hold 150,000 spectators and the evolution of the teams who took part in the races has some parallels with the development of football. The four main teams were known by their colours; Greens, Blues, Reds and Yellows. It seems uncanny to note that the Greens and Blues came to dominate and built huge fan bases which historians think had political and religious undertones. The rivalry was bitter and often violent. It is recorded that in the year 501 the Greens ambushed the Blues supporters on their way to the stadium and a battle ensued which left 3000 dead. Indeed, some years later when the Greens and Blues for once united against the unpopular Emperor Justinian, he waited until they were in the stadium, sealed the exits and had his loyal soldiers massacre the crowd. Some 30,000 died in the Hippodrome on that day. It seemed in those ancient times that sport and politics were a volatile mixture.

This week I watched Al Jazeera’s documentary ‘The Fans who make football: Celtic.’ It was a very interesting look at the history, culture and politics surrounding Celtic as viewed by people from a very different culture. The documentary discussed the roots of Celtic, the laudable intent of the founding fathers, the ingrained support of Irish nationalism among many of their supporters down the years and how a new generation of Celtic supporters is as politicized and aware of the struggles of peoples such as the Palestinians as their fathers and grandfathers were. The documentary isn’t flawless but it is nonetheless interesting.

It got me thinking about the place of politics in sport and in reality, football is probably the most politicised of all sports growing as it did out of working-class communities around the world. Each club has its narrative, its foundation story and its unique culture. There are sub-groups within supports and the growth of the ultra-movement has added a keener edge to footballing rivalry. Politically, clubs such as Livorno, St Pauli. Hapoel Tel Aviv, Rayo Vallecano, AEK Athens and of course Celtic have left leaning elements among their support while others such as Lazio, Real Madrid, Zenit St Petersburg, Beitar Jerusalem, Rangers and even the England national side have elements who exhibit right wing or even fascist tendencies.

In the case of Celtic, history looms large in the formation of social and political attitudes. The founding generation of Celtic were children of An Gorta Mor and the trauma of the so called ‘famine’ was a living reality to them. Brother Walfrid himself was born in 1840 and his early years saw death, disease and emigration reduce his country’s population by 25%. That was combined with that blatantly hypocritical attitude of Victorian rulers and landowners who professed Christianity, but in many cases seemed not to care a jot about the poor Jesus embraced.  The experience of the Irish in Scotland was, for many, one of exploitation, prejudice and poverty. It is hardly surprising that a community dealing with such things had opinions about the structures of society which kept them, for the most part, on the bottom rung of the ladder. Perhaps it explains the empathy many Celtic supporters have with those less fortunate and those feeling the weight of oppression.

Over the years the expression of political and cultural identity has taken many forms. Kenneth Wolstenholme, that grand old football commentator who uttered the immortal words, ‘some people are on the pitch. They think it’s all over, it is now,’ had a soft spot for Celtic and said that their fans with their ‘revolutionary songs’ were exceptional. The songs I heard at Celtic Park in my boyhood were a mixture of Celtic club songs and Irish folk songs with a distinct political flavour. Among them were On Erin’s Green Valley, Sean South, the Wild Rover and The Soldier’s Song. There were, and remain, many Celtic folk who are comfortable with those songs whilst others would rather it was kept to Celtic songs. The advent of the conflict in Ireland in the late 1960s would add some more militant songs to the mix.

Banner displays have become increasingly complex and sophisticate. Where once lads like me made our own out of a Subbuteo pitch, banners are now commercially designed and produced to the highest standards. Political statements like the Bobby Sands/William Wallace display caused great debate among Celtic fans particularly as the conflict Sands was involved in was in living memory. Some fans thought it a splendid display while others thought it went to far. UEFA saw it as political, which it was, and handed out another fine.

The visit of Lazio to Glasgow in 2019 saw something of a clash of ideologies as Lazio fans marched through Glasgow replete with fascist salutes and singing the anti-communist song ‘Avanti Raggazzi di Buda.’ (Lead on Youth of Buda) The song commemorates the Hungarian uprising against communist control in 1956 which was brought to a bloody end when the Soviet Union sent its tanks into Budapest. Ironically it is a song about fighting occupation and oppression which in other circumstances Celtic fans might quite like but its adoption by the right-wing elements at Lazio mean it is now tainted by association. At the match itself, Celtic’s Ultras displayed banners showing Mussolini hanging after his execution in 1945 and one which said in Italian ‘F*ck you Lazio.’ There was no love lost between the more political elements among both supports and some Celtic fans argued that the Mussolini display only ensured that there would be trouble in Rome at the return tie and endangered other Celtic fans. A huge Police operation in Rome kept problems to a minimum but four Celtic fans still returned home with stab wounds.

A lot of football supporters go to games to back their team and have little interest in political posturing. Not all Lazio fans fascists, not all Celtic fans are left wing in their outlook but enough are to generate a sub-culture within the club which has a huge impact on how Celtic are viewed around the world. The flag display in solidarity with the Palestinians during a game against an Israeli side was beamed around the globe as was the fundraising for Palestinian charities which followed the inevitable UEFA fine. It has been argued that the gentrification of football in recent decades has driven a desire to eradicate much of the working-class political culture which surrounds certain clubs but it seems a forlorn hope at clubs like Celtic.

There is a lot of hypocrisy around about political displays or messages at football. During a recent match at St Mirren there were adverts around the field for the SNP and the Labour Party yet both parties would argue sport is no place for politics. But it always has been and it always will be. From the 1968 Olympics when Tommie Smith and John Carlos gave the clenched fist, Black Power salute on the winners podium as the US national anthem was played, to the modern Black Lives Matter, anti-racist taking a knee of the modern era, politics is there. From the ‘blood in the water’ polo final at the Sydney Olympics in 1956 when the Hungarians met the USSR just months after Soviet tanks crushed the uprising. Players exchanged taunts and punches in perhaps the most brutal water polo game of all time. Again, politics was seen in sport in a most blatant way.

Countries have boycotted the Olympic games, refused to play football matches and even gone to war over sport. Sporting teams represent communities, cities or countries and as such will have an identity which marks this out. Celtic FC has a very strong identity and surrounding culture which can rile up some in their home country. To see them so successful in the recent past is hard for some to take but the majority of Scots took great pleasure in their win in Lisbon in 1967 and the club has gone from the one described in early reports as ‘the Irishmen’ to a Scottish club proud of its Irish roots.

Can we picky and say one display is acceptable because we happen to agree with it, whilst others aren’t because we don’t? Obviously overt displays of racism, sectarianism, homophobia, etc would rightly be thought of as unacceptable by most right-thinking people. But what of ‘Tories not welcome’ or ‘F*ck you Lazio’ on banners? The place of politics in sport will always be contentious and the debate will rumble on.

Football supporters are not a homogenous mass and there will always be a variety of opinions among fans of each club about the place of politics in football. It will always be there and as long as it doesn’t reach the point it did in ancient Constantinople when the Green and Blues fought it out in pitched battles, is that such a bad thing?