Globalization and Football

Richard Giulianotti, Roland Robertson, Author

• Publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd
• Year: 2009
• Print ISBN: 9781412921282, 9781412921275
• eBook ISBN: 9781473903623
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Sociology
• Index: Social Sciences

This timely book provides an engaging, clear view of the interrelationships within key globalization processes and the international sport of football.

Intelligently combining the conceptual and methodological aspects of global studies with the specific cultural conditions of the ?beautiful game? Giulianotti and Robertson illuminate its social history and diffusion, as well as wider cultural, economic, political and social dimensions.

Using football to chart an increasing global connectivity, or globality, the authors explore how the game may be understood as a metric, mirror, motor and metaphor of globalization

Issues discussed include:

- Transnational Identities and the Global Civil Society,

- Cosmopolitanism & Americanization,

- Neo-Liberalism, Inequalities and Transnational Clubs,

- Politics, Nations, and International Governance,

Ideal for students and lecturers concerned with the sociology of sport, globalization and international cultural studies - the book will be of interest to anyone keen to map the intricate ways in which transnational processes may impact upon particular domains of social life.

1

History: The Global Sport and the Making of Globalization

Introduction

The historical interpretation of the world in general, and of global football in particular, raises specific problems regarding method and perspective. The writing of ‘world history’ became particularly prominent in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, but inclined strongly towards a rather Western-centric perspective. From the 1970s onwards, as ‘global history’ developed as a counterpoint, greater attention was directed towards hitherto marginalized voices and non-Western societies (Robertson 1992: 29–30; Schafer 2006). Similar trends have arisen within football studies, wherein relatively national or Eurocentric histories have been displaced by studies that chronicle and indeed celebrate the historical diversity and socio-cultural complexity of the ‘global game’ (cf. Walvin 1994; Armstrong and Giulianotti 1997, 1998a, 2001, 2004; Goldblatt 2004, 2006; Lanfranchi et al. 2004).

The distinction between world and global history has noteworthy parallels in the way in which ‘globalization’ has been understood by particular analysts. Paralleling the ‘world history’ model, some analysts tie globalization historically to the emergence and international diffusion of Western modernization – notably capitalism, industrialism, and bureaucratization – from the nineteenth century onwards (cf. Giddens 1990; Scholte 2005). We might call this the ‘world globalization model’. Conversely, and mirroring a ‘global history’ standpoint, other analysts view globalization as a longer-term, diverse, and multidimensional phenomenon. In this latter perspective, which we might term the ‘global globalization model’, the modern West figures prominently but not exclusively, for crucially we find also an appreciation of how ancient civilizations, Islam, south and east Asia, and Africa, for example, have constructed distinctive forms of globality and have contributed to particular kinds of transcultural interdependence (cf. Therborn 1995, 2000; Robertson 1998a; Hopkins 2002). For example, Pollock (2000) encourages reflection on ancient kinds of globalization, arguing that outward-looking, ‘cosmopolitan’ literary cultures predominated through much of the first millennium, followed by more inward-looking, ‘vernacular’ thinking through much of the second.

This is not, of course, to argue that the ‘global globalization’ model is at odds with the analysis of modernity per se. Indeed, we should note the apparent affinities that arise between the global globalization model and theories of ‘multiple modernity’. This latter perspective posits in part that non-Western societies modernize in distinctive and selective ways relative to the West (cf. Rostow 1960; Arnason 2001; Eisenstadt 2003). For example, as we also note in Chapter 3, many East Asian societies have germinated particular kinds of capitalism or religiosity that are distinct from those dominant models within ‘Anglo-Saxon’ societies (cf. P. Berger 1986; Beyer 1994; S. Berger and Dore 1999; Dore 2000).

In line with these ‘global’ models, our discussion of football’s history seeks to highlight the varied, complex, and reversible ways in which different societies have engaged with and interpreted the game. In clarifying this point, we should make three initial remarks. First, we need to bear in mind the categorical distinctions between the terms global history, global change, and globalization. Global history refers to a particular way of imagining and telling the past of the world. Global change designates specific modifications or transformations in the world that possess some kind of empirical or material referent. And, to reaffirm our statement in the introduction, we understand globalization as referring to the increased concrete interdependencies of societies and to the greater consciousness of the world as a whole (cf. Robertson 1992: 8).

Second, we are not advancing the view that globalization, whether in regard to football or to other socio-cultural forms, constitutes some kind of ‘triumph of the West’ over the rest. Rather, the game displays many historical instances in which the West itself is either socio-culturally divided or ‘left behind’ by other nations and regions. An analogous dispute has recently surrounded the ontological presumptions of the sociology of globalization per se: specifically, that the dominance of a so-called ‘northern’ theory of globalization serves to silence voices and to occlude competing interpretative frameworks from the Global South (Connell 2007). This critique itself builds upon a rather narrower, northern-focused position than that of our own, in defining globalization as ‘the current pattern of world integration via global markets, transnational corporations, and electronic media under the political hegemony of the United States’ (Connell 2005: 72). Nevertheless, and in accordance with our earlier separate works on globalization and football,¹ our focus here is quite clearly on both northern and southern hemispheres, on the fully ‘global’ aspects of the global game.

Third, we are advancing the view that football has been a highly important aspect of globalization processes; indeed, the sport’s significance in this regard is arguably intensifying. To put this in another way, and as we shall see in this chapter and later, football has both reflected and advanced globalization processes in a variety of ways.

Five Historical Phases of Globalization

In the following discussion, we examine in detail the football–globalization nexus across the longue durée. Our analysis is structured by Robertson’s six-phase schema of globalization, which spans the fifteenth century to the early twenty-first century (1992: 58–60, 2007a, 2007b). Our main focus is on setting out briefly the initial five phases that Robertson had extended, before applying these in detail to facilitate a succinct ‘global history’ of football. We then provide an outline, followed by a football application, of the current sixth, ‘millennial’ phase of globalization, as recently advanced by Robertson. Many of the football–globalization processes identified in this discussion are elaborated upon in later chapters.

Robertson’s five general phases of globalization may be summarized as follows.

The first, germinal phase of globalization is focused on Europe, and spans the early fifteenth century through to the mid-18th century. Through this period, voyages of ‘discovery’ occur and are the crucial precondition for early forms of transoceanic connectivity and colonial subjugation. National communities emerge (underpinned particularly by the Peace of Westphalia, 1648) and Catholicism expands internationally. Different kinds of mercantilist economic principles and political strategies come to prevail in Western Europe – for example, through the Colbertist system in France – and are manifested in part through struggles and wars between protectionist nations over available international markets. Contemporary time–space thinking is concretized through the Gregorian calendar, heliocentric thinking, and the proliferation of different geographic projections; ideas of the individual and humanity are accentuated.

The second, incipient phase remains largely European, and spans the mid-18th century to the 1870s. The French Revolution has a near-global and long-lasting impact in terms of concretizing themes of revolutionary transformation and human emancipation for industrializing societies. It also presages an embryonic world conflict, in the form of the Napoleonic wars, and the subsequent crystallization of the international system through the post-war settlement. The Lisbon earthquake of 1755, which effectively destroyed the city and killed up to 100,000 people, was a global ‘moment’ that undermined Portugal’s colonial aspirations while impacting strongly upon Enlightenment thought. A near-global model of homogenous nation states is established, alongside advances in international relations, legal frameworks, and communication systems (for instance, the telegraph system). Conceptions of citizenship and humanity are concretized (notably through the Enlightenment), non-European societies are established, and early international exhibitions are staged.

The third, take-off phase marks the electrification of globalization, spanning the 1870s to the mid-1920s. The four ‘elemental reference points’ of globalization are crystallized: individual selves, national (male) societies (nation states), the world system of societies (international relations), and humankind (Robertson 1992: 104). Thus, personal and national identities become more sharply thematized and defined. Modern national societies become more isomorphic in terms of their juridical, political, and institutional infrastructure. Non-European societies enter an increasingly complex international society – most notably, the USA and Japan. Forms of international culture become more diffuse, for example in the arts and sport. Rapid technological advances help to promote intensive international ‘connectivity’. Ideas of global humanity are formalized, while the first global conflict occurs. Yet each reference point is also constrained by the other three.

Many national museums, international exhibitions, and major sporting events are founded or staged, such as the quadrennial Olympic Games from 1896 onwards. These institutions or occasions serve to construct a global looking-glass for nations while also implicitly enhancing the value of international contextualization and competition. Thus, national claims to being ‘the best’ in particular cultural realms are advanced on the basis of international and cross-cultural comparisons.

During this phase, there is a strong accentuation of principles of national self-determination and identification. The ‘Wilsonian moment’ occurs at the end of World War One, as the principle of the equality of all nations is set out on the global stage, inspiring anti-colonial politics that were to result in nationalist revolutions later in the 20th century (Manela 2007). Meanwhile, throughout this phase, particular national ‘traditions’ are invented, such as through artistic movements, dress, language, and sports. Such ‘forgery in the forging of nations’ connects to rapid social transformations, notably urbanization and mass education (Ascherson 2002: 264; Hobsbawm 1983: Chapter 7). ‘Wilful nostalgia’ also becomes more prominent, as the world is imagined in terms of historical decline, and through senses of loss, homelessness, estrangement, and alienation (Robertson 1990a: 46, 1995: 35; cf. Stauth and Turner 1988). Nostalgia is prominent in culture, through popular literature or the ‘folk’ tropes of European composers. On the other hand, the counter-movement of modernism is also very significant (Gay 2007).

The fourth, struggle-for-hegemony phase spans the mid-1920s to the late 1960s, and continues to be shaped by the elemental reference points. Rival political–ideological frameworks come into sharper and more global conflicts, notably between liberal capitalism, state socialism, and fascism. The League of Nations and then the United Nations reflect moves towards global governance, while concretizing principles of national self-determination and the realpolitik of Anglo-European hegemony (Manela 2007).² The old European empires collapse, the ‘Third World’ is established, and nation states are defined by their Cold War positions. The future of humanity is thematized across cultures, as new technologies of mass destruction are registered by the Holocaust, the A-bomb, and the international stockpiling of atomic weaponry.

The fifth, uncertainty phase spans the late 1960s up to the year 2000. Increased wealth, economic crises and ‘post-materialist’ values arise in the West. The global event par excellence – the moon landing – provides fresh ways of imaging and imagining the world. The world system of societies becomes increasingly fluid and complex, as the ‘Cold War’ ends and militant Islamism emerges as the West’s radical other. An exponential growth occurs in new global and social institutions, notably international governmental and non-governmental organizations (IGOs and NGOs), transnational corporations (TNCs), and new social movements (NSMs). Cultural and social politics become more prominent as ethnicity, gender, sexuality, consumerism, and human rights are deeply politicized. Satellite and digital communication is established, the internet is globalized, and media TNCs are founded. The notions of a global ‘civil society’ and global citizenship are thematized, alongside the status and future of humankind in regard to contemporary ‘risks’ (cf. Robertson 2007a).

Football History: Five Phases

In applying this model to football’s historical globalization, two initial points should be made. First, some empirical and temporal discrepancies inevitably arise between global and football histories, notably up to the mid-19th century. Nevertheless, we retain the terms ‘germinal’ and ‘incipient’ to describe football’s prehistory, with appropriate amendments to the periodization; by the ‘take-off’ phase, football and wider globalization processes are in closer correspondence. In any case, this historical model of globalization was not intended to be applied in a rigid manner (Robertson 1992: 59).

Second, our analysis accounts for the social construction of football’s history. The five-phase model appreciates the interplay of particular themes at relevant historical moments, notably in regard to the four elemental reference points, from ‘take-off’ onwards.

First and second phases: germinal and incipient – up to the 1870s

The first, germinal phase covers football’s prehistory up to the early 19th century. We should begin by noting that some emerging disputes surround the origins of football. As expansion into Asian markets has become a major objective, FIFA literature and press releases tend to highlight the region’s ancient football games.³ One ancient ball-kicking game was tsu-chu, played in China between the second and third centuries BC, while the Japanese game of kemari was practised from at least the 12th century AD (Goldblatt 2006: 5–9). The Florentine game of calcio has been played, particularly by those with social status, since at least the 16th century. Other calcio games were played across northern Italy, according to local rules, serving to maintain forms of civic and regional distinction (De Biasi and Lanfranchi 1997: 88–9). Elsewhere, other nationalistic claims to football’s origin have been advanced, including Stalinist social history which stated the case for Georgian or northern Russian feudal games, named lelo or shalyga respectively (Edelman 1993: 29).

In contrast, while noting these ancient curiosities, most academic histories continue to prioritize direct evidence to emphasize the British origins of modern football (cf. Walvin 1994:11–12; Murray 1996; Lanfranchi et al. 2004:11). In Britain, different ‘folk’ or ‘mob’ football games were contested as early as the 14th century, and possibly extend back to the 8th century (Henderson 2001: 80). Participants were almost entirely male, notably from the lower classes. Games were played according to local customs and often as part of annual festivities such as Shrovetide (the British Mardi Gras), with rival teams differentiated according to village, parish, employment, age, or marital status (Magoun 1938: vii; Elias and Dunning 1986; Holt 1989: 14–15). Given the rudimentary rules and prior tensions between competing communities, broken bones and occasional deaths occurred during play. The authorities regularly sought to ban these games, usually to maintain work and public order (Walvin 1975:16–17).⁴ Some analysts have suggested that two main types of folk football were played, dating back to at least the late 18th century, with different rules that connect respectively to the modern games of rugby and soccer (Goulstone 2000: 135–6, 142). These pre-modern games and pastimes underwent general adaptation, notably during the early 19th century, as Britain underwent protracted industrialization and urbanization.

The second, incipient phase of football’s globalization spans the early 19th century to the 1870s. Shaped by the crucial interplay between educational institutions and residual folk cultures, this phase culminated in the foundation of modern football. From the 1830s onwards, English public schools underwent a ‘games revolution’, as different sports were introduced to dissipate the rebellious, violent, and sexual energies of pupils, and to inculcate new masculine norms centred on leadership, obedience, hygiene, and Christianity, as encapsulated in the sporting myth of ‘fair play’ (Mangan 1981: 129–30, 1998: 182–3). Significant rule differences remained over the football games played by schools; for instance, Eton and Harrow prohibited catching and running with the ball, unlike Rugby. These games subsequently transferred to the universities, where hands-free football made particular headway at Cambridge.

We should also be wary of the way in which this public school story has rather overshadowed a hidden history of football’s working-class origins and organization. Indeed, it has been argued that adapted ‘folk’ games were often more civilized than their public school counterparts, in being more sophisticated in the use of rules, umpires, and club systems, and also involved less violence among participants (Goulstone 1974, 2000; Harvey 2005).

It was the social elites, nevertheless, who were instrumental in establishing football’s rules. As elite teams came into more regular contact, the demand for common rules had intensified. The ‘Cambridge Rules’ were agreed in 1848, regularly updated, and eventually published in 1863. A few days later, the Football Association (FA) was founded in London by various teams committed to a game that banned hacking and handling (Murray 1996: 3–4). The new game of ‘association football’ was sometimes known as ‘soccer’, notably where alternative ‘football’ codes were favoured. In the north, notably Sheffield, a vibrant football culture had initially eclipsed London but by 1877 the FA had secured its authority over the non-handling game (Harvey 2001).

The rulebook distinguished association football from other codes. Rugby’s proponents stayed loyal to handling and hacking, despite player shortages (Birley 1993: 258–60). ‘Australian rules football’ was codified in Melbourne in 1859 by an old Rugbeian and his friends. (Indeed, a little mischievously, some commentators suggest reverse colonialism may have transpired, as the FA’s rules reveal curious similarities to the older, Australian game (Grow 1998: 11–12)). In the United States, the leading colleges battled over football’s rules: soccer-style (backed by Yale) or rugby-style (favoured by Harvard). The Princeton–Rutgers fixture of 1869 was the first intercollegiate football contest. Six years later, several institutions agreed rugby-style rules, but distinctive American innovations, such as block-tackling and f...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• List of abbreviations
• Prologue
• 1 History: The Global Sport and the Making of Globalization
• 2 Culture: The Glocal Game, Cosmopolitanism and Americanization
• 3 Economics: Neo-Liberalism, Inequalities and Transnational Clubs
• 4 Politics: Nations, Neo-Mercantilism and International Governance
• 5 The Social: Transnational Identities and the Global Civil Society
• Epilogue
• References
• Index