Soccer and Ethics
This chapter is about the relationship between soccer and ethics. These days, ethics is a term that is on everyone’s lips, from soccer’s governing body FIFA to military, corporate, and religious officials. Akin to the term democracy in the twentieth century, when even the most authoritarian regimes such as Communist East Germany claimed that they were democratic, today organizations, businesses, states, and non-governmental organizations have found in ethics a new discourse for the age. In the contemporary world, the discourse of ethics pervades all realms of life, from robotics and business to medicine and the military.[1] Aware of changing world consciousness, soccer clubs, players, fans, and FIFA have brought issues related to ethics to the forefront of the sport in recent years.
In an age “when corporations rule the world,” to use the colorful phrase from David Korten’s 1995 book,[2] is professional soccer losing its ethic of fair play? Fans, managers, and soccer administrators complain of excessive diving as players fake fouls in order to win free kicks and penalties. FIFA administrators have been recently embroiled in corruption scandals, which tarnish the image of “the beautiful game.” Some fans, journalists, and academics insist that bribery, match fixing, and favoring elite soccer clubs and nations is endemic to soccer.[3] In 2013, El Salvador banned fourteen internationals for life for match fixing, including some of the country’s most recognized soccer players.[4] Fans are turning away from professional soccer because they insist that it is infected with crass commercialism and game fixing. Why has instant replay been resisted by FIFA for so many years when there are clear errors in judgment by referees?
Recall from chapter 3 that Gramsci pointed out that while soccer was a reflection of competitive and individualistic values associated with capitalism, it was simultaneously wedded to the ethics of fair play, official rules, and “human loyalty.” George Orwell was suspicious about fusing soccer and ethics together: “Football has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealousy, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence: in other words it is war minus the shooting.”[5] This chapter will evaluate Orwell’s powerful proposition. An understanding of basic ethics and what philosophers have said about ethics will allow us to better grasp the relationship between soccer and ethics. Before I do this, I need to pick the number 6 jersey.
My official choice for the number 6 jersey is more unconventional because I need to be inclusive of countries around the world. With this in mind, my official choice for the number 6 jersey is Igor Netto, a legendary former captain and box-to-box midfielder with the Soviet Union in the 1950s and 1960s. Netto came from another less materialistic age in soccer history. Despite the stereotypical Cold War image of the Marxist-Leninist Soviet Union as a state that would do anything to attain sporting glory in order to demonstrate the superiority of socialism, Igor Netto was both a socialist and a soccer gentleman known for his leadership, technical skills, determination, and fair play.
Born on January 9, 1930, in Moscow, Igor Netto was a child when Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin was accelerating his chilling Reign of Terror. Netto was the son of Estonian migrants living in Russia. Mass party purges and executions, the Ukrainian famine, population transfers, genocide, and the gulag system were all part of the Stalinist totalitarian network of state terror. Robert Conquest suggested that at least 15 to 20 million individuals, perhaps 30 million people, died under Stalin’s “Great Terror” from the 1920s until the early 1950s.[6]
Netto’s childhood concerns seemed far removed from Stalin’s “Great Terror.” The website World Football Legends describes his normal childhood and love of two sports:
As a child, he wanted to do little else but play football and regularly spent many hours each day kicking a ball around in the yard. Much to his mother’s displeasure, he wore out football boots at a remarkable rate. As a youngster he also played ice hockey, but eventually turned his back on that game after being on the receiving end of some big hits and worrying that injury would leave him unable to play football.[7]
Netto’s talents were first spotted by Spartak Moscow when he was only nineteen years old. He made his debut with the Moscow-based club in the 1949 season. Historically, Spartak was the first and largest All-Union Voluntary Sports Society of workers of state trade, producers’ cooperatives, light industry, civil aviation, education, culture, and health services. It was officially established in 1935.
Netto began his career at halfback, but he was rather more attack-minded than most halfbacks. He was known for his supreme confidence on the ball, which made him well suited for the role of central midfielder. He was especially critical of the long-ball style of play and encouraged teammates to play a possession game. Netto once said the following to a teammate shortly after the match began, which demonstrated his keen desire to play a possession game: “Straight from the kick off, in front of 50,000 supporters, a player received the ball and hoofed it up field in typically British style. ‘Pass to a man. Not the crowd.’”[8]
Although Netto started out as a defender, he became one of the greatest wide midfielders and box-to-box midfielders the game has ever known. He scored thirty-six goals in 368 league games for FC Spartak Moscow from 1949 to 1966, winning five Soviet championships and three domestic cups. Netto was dynamic, stylish, composed, and technically gifted. He was tireless in defense and in assisting the attack. He was the engine of the great Spartak Moscow teams that were Soviet league champions in 1952, 1953, 1956, 1958, and 1962, as well as Soviet Cup winners in 1956, 1958, and 1963. In line with an ethic of loyalty to the club, Netto played his entire seventeen-year professional career with Spartak Moscow.
Internationally, Netto was also a Soviet Union legend. He was the captain of the Soviet Union from 1954 until 1963. One website called Netto “the heart and soul of the multiracial Soviet team.”[9] He was part of the great Soviet Union team that won the European Championship in 1960, beating Yugoslavia 2–1 in the finals: Lev Yashin (Dynamo Moscow), Givi Tchekeli (Dinamo Tbilisi), Anatoli Maslenkin (Spartak Moscow), Anatoli Kroutikov (Spartak Moscow), Yuri Voinov (Dynamo Kiev), Igor Netto (Spartak Moscow), Slava Metreveli (Torpedo Moscow), Valentin Ivanov (Torpedo Moscow), Viktor Ponedelnik (SKA Rostov), Valentin Bubukin (Lokomotiv Moscow), and Michail Meshki (Dinamo Tbilisi).
Netto also anchored the Soviet Union squad that won the Olympic gold medal at the 1956 summer games. Although he was injured for all but one match at the 1958 World Cup, Netto helped the Soviet Union to consecutive quarterfinal berths at the 1958 and 1962 World Cups, in Sweden and Chile respectively. Netto earned fifty-four caps and scored four goals for the Soviet Union’s national team from 1952 until 1965.
Igor Netto’s great gentlemanly soccer qualities came to the forefront in the 1962 World Cup in Chile. In its first two matches, the Soviet Union tied Colombia 4–4 and defeated Yugoslavia 1–0. They need a tie to advance to the next round. Although there was no Fair Play Award in his day, Netto’s fair play moment in a key World Cup match would have surely earned him a Fair Play Award today:
In the 1962 World Cup Finals played in Chile, Igor Chislenko scored late in the game for the Soviet Union against Uruguay. That made the score 2–1 for the Soviets. The USSR captain, Igor Netto, then reported to the referee that the ball had gone through a hole in the side netting of the goal. The referee then changed his decision and disallowed the goal and the score reverted to 1–1. Later on, the USSR scored again to win 2–1.[10]
Many Fair Play Awards are given to players for which the game has little consequence for the team in question. In contrast, Netto abided by the ethic of fair play, even if it meant that his team could conceivably be eliminated from the World Cup, the most important world soccer competition. Netto’s gentlemanly and fair play moment might be the greatest fair play moment in the history of soccer. Not only was Netto a leader on the pitch, he was also one of the most honest players the game has ever known.
Netto was recognized by the political authorities in his native Soviet Union. He received the prestigious Order of Lenin in 1957. His club side did not forget Netto, too, and they named the Spartak Moscow stadium after the Soviet Union soccer legend. Interestingly, after his retirement in 1966, Netto became an ice hockey coach, thus fulfilling a childhood dream. While Netto was a world-recognized player, as a manager he did not have great results, whether with AC Omonia (Cyprus), FC Shinnik Yaroslavl (Russia), Panionios (Greece), Neftchi Baku (Azerbaijan), or the Iranian national team. Netto later returned to Spartak Moscow, working with their youth team. He also wrote a book about soccer in Russian.
In the late 1980s, Netto began suffering from Alzheimer’s disease. He died in 1999 at the age of sixty-nine. When Netto died, Russian and former Soviet Union fans rated him as the best Russian or Soviet Union midfielder of all time and seventh best player of all time, behind the legendary goalkeepers Lev Yashin and Rinat Dasayev and the strikers Oleg Blokhin, Igor Belanov, Eduard Streltsov, and Andrei Arshavin.[11] After he died, I preferred to remember Netto in happier times: holding the Henri Delaunay trophy aloft in 1960 after defeating Yugoslavia in the finals of the European Championship. Or there is a famous 1962 photograph of Netto and the legendary goalkeeper Lev Yashin immaculately dressed in well-tailored suits laying a wreath in Arica, Chile, at the monument for Chile’s national hero Bernard O’Higgins. Netto and Yashin were both participating in the 1962 World Cup in Chile. We should also remember Netto’s exceptional courage, honesty, and fair play in declining to take advantage of his opponents Uruguay in a crucial World Cup match.
In contrast to Netto’s spirit of ethical fair play, a contemporary English soccer star, John Terry, is the epitome of an anti-ethical player on and off the field. A number 6 with England’s national team from 2003 to 2012, Terry currently wears number 26 for London-based club Chelsea. Terry was the England captain from 2006 to 2010, as well as from 2011 to 2012. Terry is undoubtedly a brilliant talent: a combative and determined defender and a player that scores key goals. He was named UEFA Club Defender of the Year in 2005, 2008, and 2009, as well as the Professional Footballers’ Association Players’ Player of the Year in 2005. In addition, Terry was included in the FIFPro World XI for five consecutive seasons from 2005 to 2009.[12] (Based in the Netherlands, FIFPro is the worldwide representative organization for 65,000 professional soccer players.) To add to his accomplishments, Terry was the only English player named in the all-star squad for the 2006 World Cup. At the club level, Terry is Chelsea’s most successful captain: three Premier League titles, four FA Cups, two League Cups, and a UEFA Champions League title. He is one of only five players to make more than 500 appearances for Chelsea and is also the club’s all time highest scoring defender (thirty-three goals in about 400 appearances since 1998).
Terry’s problems are not directly related to soccer or his skills, but to his unethical behavior on and off the field. Terry is the anti-Netto; the unethical equivalent to Netto’s ethic of fair play. In 2001, Terry and three teammates were fined two weeks’ wages by Chelsea for drunkenly taunting American tourists at a Heathrow airport bar in the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks.[13] In 2002, Terry was caught on camera urinating in a beer glass and was charged with assault after a confrontation with a nightclub bouncer. During the case, Terry was banned from selection for the England team, but was later acquitted of the charges. In the same year, Terry was fined for parking his car in a disabled spot. In 2009, Terry was investigated by Chelsea and the FA for allegedly taking money from an undercover reporter for a private tour of Chelsea’s training facility, but the club cleared him of wrongdoing.[14]
In 2010 and 2011, it went from bad to worse for Terry. In January, after a court injunction was lifted it was revealed that Terry allegedly had a four-month affair in 2009 with Vanessa Perroncel, the former girlfriend of Wayne Bridge, his former Chelsea and England teammate. Bridge is currently a defender with Reading. The swirling rumors about Terry’s unethical behavior toward a teammate and his wife led to former England manager Fabio Capello removing Terry from the captaincy in February 2010. Rio Ferdinand became the new England captain. On February 25, 2010, Bridge announced his permanent withdrawal from international duty following the allegations regarding Terry and Bridge’s former girlfriend Vanessa Perroncel. Terry was reinstated England captain about one year later. In November 2011, Terry was placed under police investigation following an allegation of racist abuse made at a black professional soccer player, Anton Ferdinand, during a match versus Queens Park Rangers. He is the brother of Rio Ferdinand. In December 2011, he was charged with using racist language by the Crown Prosecution Service.
In February 2012, the Football Association stripped Terry of his England captaincy for the second time. The court found Terry not guilty because it could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt the words that were uttered at the time. Yet under questioning Terry admitted that he had uttered the words “fucking black cunt” at Ferdinand, which was confirmed by two expert lip readers.[15] In July 2012, the Football Association charged Terry with using “abusive and/or insulting words and/or behavior,” which “included a reference to the ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race of Ferdinand.”[16] The Football Association had delayed the charge until after the conclusion of Terry’s criminal trial. On the eve of the trial, Terry announced his retirement from the English national soccer team. On September 27, 2012, Terry was found guilty and punished with a four-match ban and a £220,000 fine. Terry’s light four-match ban was contrasted with Luis Suárez’s eight-match ban for repeatedly racially abusing Patrice Evra. Terry’s club, Chelsea, was accused of hypocrisy because of the team’s “zero tolerance for racism” policy. Terry was only fined by the club, but not stripped of his captaincy. In contrast, a Chelsea fan who racially abused Ivory Coast international and former Chelsea star Didier Drogba, was given a life ban.
Recall that John Terry is my anti-ethical choice and Igor Netto is the official and ethical number 6 choice. Soccer is less ethical today compared to the epoch when Netto played, in the 1950s and 1960s. Rampant commercialism, doping, on-field cheating and diving, and game fixing are serious problems in contemporary professional soccer. All this begs the question: What is ethics? In order to assist us with this task, we turn to the world-renowned philosopher Peter Singer.
Peter Singer was born on July 6, 1946. He is an Australian moral philosopher and one of the most important philosophers alive today. Currently Singer is a professor of bioethics at Princeton University, as well as laureate professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne. Singer is known worldwide for his secular and utilitarian approach to applied ethics. He first received notoriety for his book, Animal Liberation (1975), a seminal text in animal rights theory. Other key books penned by Singer include Practical Ethics (1979), How Are We to Live?: Ethics in an Age of Self-interest (1993), Rethinking Life and Death: The Collapse of Our Traditional Ethics (1994), One World: The Ethics of Globalisation (2002), and The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty (2009).
What is interesting about Singer is that his views on ethics have attracted many critics. Advocates for disabled people and right-to-life groups claim that Singer’s utilitarian ethics leads to a position in favor of eugenics. This claim was particularly touchy for Singer as both his paternal and maternal grandparents were killed by the Nazis in concentration camps. What is of interest to us here is that Singer opines on nearly everything under the sun, including the ethics of soccer. Moreover, Singer proposed a useful definition of ethics in the 1985 edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica:
The discipline concerned with what is morally good and bad, right and wrong. The term is also applied to any system or theory of moral values or principles.
How should we live? Shall we aim at happiness or at knowledge, virtue, or the creation of beautiful objects? If we choose happiness, will it be our own or the happiness of all? And what of the more particular questions that face us: Is it right to be dishonest in a good cause? Can we justify living in opulence while elsewhere in the world people are starving? If conscripted to fight in a war we do not support, should we disobey the law? What are our obligations to the other creatures with whom we share this planet and to the generations of humans who will come after us?
Ethics deals with such questions at all levels. Its subject consists of the fundamental issues of practical decision making, and its major concerns include the nature of ultimate value and the standards by which human actions can be judged right or wrong.
The terms ethics and morality are closely related. We now often refer to ethical judgments or ethical principles where it once would have been more common to speak of moral judgments or moral principles. These applications are an extension of the meaning of ethics. Strictly speaking, however, the term refers not to morality itself but to the field of study, or branch of inquiry, that has morality as its subject matter. In this sense, ethics is equivalent to moral philosophy.
Although ethics has always been viewed as a branch of philosophy, its all-embracing practical nature links it with many other areas of study, including anthropology, biology, economics, history, politics, sociology, and theology. Yet, ethics remains distinct from such disciplines because it is not a matter of factual knowledge in the way that the sciences and other branches of inquiry are. Rather, it has to do with determining the nature of normative theories and applying these sets of principles to practical moral problems.[17]
If we summarize Singer’s aforementioned definition of ethics, we can highlight five main points:
Ethics is concerned with appraisals of what is right and wrong.
It connotes a theory of moral values.
It is a discipline that opines about how humans should live in relation to other human beings.
Ethics is linked to practical decision making in that it contains reflections about the “nature of ultimate value” and a set of standards to judge human actions.
The discipline of ethics includes many other disciplines under its ambit from politics and economics to theology. Yet ethics is a unique and autonomous discipline, attempting to apply ethical principles to “practical moral problems.”
From the above, it follows that we may use ethical principles to resolve moral problems associated with professional soccer. So, for example, can coaches turn a blind eye when their players are doping? Can FIFA administrators speak about “cleaning up the game” when they are stealing from the organization’s coffers? In this respect, I recommend that all soccer fans read Andrew Jennings’s Foul! The Secret World of FIFA: Bribes, Vote Rigging, and Ticket Scandals, which details FIFA’s corrupt practices from nepotism and shoddy accounting to kickbacks and theft of funds.[18]
In an age of greater democratization worldwide, FIFA may no longer be able to turn a blind eye to authoritarian regimes hosting World Cup contests. Instant replay technology for controversial goals or penalty calls is probably a good idea. There is a perception by many fans that big nations and clubs are favored by referees. Or that the punishments for game fixing are not harsh enough. Do soccer players make too much money? Do players have an obligation to point out their own rule violations when they are missed by referees? Have the ethics of soccer changed since the days of Igor Netto? What can modern soccer stars teach young people? Should soccer players promote social change? Recall that in chapter 2 I highlighted the relationship between soccer and dictatorships and in chapter 4 I examined initiatives for social change associated with professional soccer. From liberal and left-wing perspectives, professional soccer organizations should take a stance against dictatorships that host international soccer competitions. From this perspective, FIFA and soccer clubs should be involved in more social change initiatives related to undermining poverty, environmental protection, or gender equality.
Perhaps the greatest number 6 to ever play the game was the England international Bobby Moore. As a result of his gentlemanly qualities, Moore helps us to better understand the relationship between soccer and ethics. Born on April 2, 1941, Moore was such a distinguished English defender that he received the Order of the British Empire (OBE) title. A West Ham United player for twelve years from 1958 to 1974 (544 appearances and twenty-four goals), Moore was also captain of the England team that won its only World Cup in 1966. Moore made a whopping 108 appearances for his country and scored two goals. In his 108 appearances, Moore amazingly played in every minute of every game! This was a record in appearances for England, until it was broken by the gifted goalkeeper Peter Shilton and later David Beckham. Moore is regarded by learned soccer fans as one of the greatest players of all time. Pelé gave him a fantastic honor when he dubbed Moore the “greatest defender” that he had ever played against.[19]
Moore battled testicular cancer in 1964, but in that year still led West Ham to a 3–2 FA Cup finals triumph against Preston North End. In 1965, he lifted the European Cup Winners’ Cup trophy after West Ham defeated 1860 Munich 2–0 in the finals. In 1966, Moore scored his first goal for England and captained the national team as it won the World Cup on home soil.
Moore also captained England in the 1970 World Cup and played a leading role in England’s progress beyond the group phase. In the second game against favorites Brazil, there was a wonderful moment when Moore tackled Jairzinho with such precision that it became known as “the perfect tackle.”[20] Brazil won the game 1–0, but England advanced to the next round. After the game, Moore swapped jerseys with Pelé. Moore was voted runner-up behind West Germany’s Gerd Müller for the 1970 European Footballer of the Year award.
In 1993, Moore announced that he was suffering from bowel and liver cancer. On February 24, 1993, Moore died at the age of fifty-one. The first West Ham home game after his death was on March 6, 1993. The West Ham ground became a shrine to the legendary Moore, with flowers and memorabilia from both West Ham fans and even other clubs. His number 6 shirt was officially retired in 2008, fifteen years after Moore’s death.
The legendary Bobby Charlton, a member of England’s World Cup-winning squad in 1966, took Moore’s death to heart. In a 2012 BBC documentary entitled “Hero: The Bobby Moore Story,” after a long pause and plenty of reflection Charlton said: “Well, I only ever cried over two people, Billy Bremner and Bob. . . . He was a lovely man.”[21]
In 2007, Moore received another honor posthumously. The Bobby Moore Sculpture was unveiled by Sir Bobby Charlton outside the entrance of the newly refurbished Wembley Stadium. The words attached to Moore’s bronze sculpture are a testament to the great love for Moore both on and off the field: “Immaculate footballer. Imperial defender. Immortal hero of 1966. First Englishman to raise the World Cup aloft. Favourite son of London’s East End. Finest legend of West Ham United. National Treasure. Master of Wembley. Lord of the game. Captain extraordinary. Gentleman of all time.”[22] The words “gentleman of all time” makes one wonder: How many modern soccer stars are gentlemen? Certainly John Terry was no gentleman, if we remember his unethical actions and racist comments on and off the field. In chapter 11, I further discuss how the Moore sculpture and other forms of art immortalize soccer stars.
Tributes for Moore came pouring in from around the world. Alf Ramsey, England’s manager at the 1966 World Cup, paid the highest tribute to Moore: “My captain, my leader, my right-hand man. He was the spirit and the heartbeat of the team. A cool, calculating footballer I could trust with my life. He was the supreme professional, the best I ever worked with. Without him England would never have won the World Cup.”[23] Sir Alex Ferguson called him “the greatest defender” he had ever seen, while Franz Beckenbauer went further when he said Moore was “the best defender in the history of the game.”[24] Pelé alluded to Moore’s moral compass and called him an “honorable gentleman” and “one of the greatest footballers” in the world.[25] Even the former British prime minister Tony Blair showered Moore with great praise by suggesting that children could look to him for moral inspiration: “He was a superb footballer. If you wanted a role model from public life, Bobby Moore is a pretty good one to take.”[26]
Recall that in the introduction I pointed out that the French writer Albert Camus was deeply touched by his experiences with respect to soccer, particularly his time with the Racing Universitaire Algérios (RUA) junior team that Camus played for in goal. Camus was a real soccer fan and his friend, Charles Poncet, once asked him if he preferred soccer or the theater. Camus unambiguously replied, “Football, without hesitation.”[27] As a goalkeeper playing a unique position in soccer, Camus also learned lessons: “I learned that the ball never comes when you expect it to. That helped me a lot in life, especially in large cities where people don’t tend to be what they claim.”[28] Finally, Camus made this profound statement with respect to soccer and ethics: “After many years during which I saw many things, what I know most surely about morality and the duty of man I owe to sport and learned it in the RUA.”[29]
Camus is correct. The soccer ethic of fair play is something we should admire. Netto and Moore embodied the ethic of fair play. Terry was unethical due to his racist comments, cheating on his wife with a teammate’s girlfriend, drunken fights, and wildly inappropriate behavior after the tragic events of September 11. If a player is down and injured, you kick the ball out of play. You should not purposefully dive in the penalty area in order to win a penalty kick. It is a nice gesture to shake hands with your opponents and the officials at the end of a match. Selling a soccer match is morally wrong. Children see the players as gods and they should conduct themselves respectfully on and off the field. At least, these are our hopes.
In Singer’s aforementioned definition of ethics, the philosopher asks: “What are our obligations to the other creatures with whom we share this planet and to the generations of humans who will come after us?” Similarly, Camus insists that what he learned about “morality and the duty of man” he owes to sport and his soccer experiences. In addition, as a result of his soccer experiences, Camus was making judgments about morality, soccer, and more broadly sport. Similarly, Pope Benedict XVI could see the moral power of soccer: “The sport of football can be a vehicle of education for the values of honesty, solidarity and fraternity, especially for the younger generation.”[30]
Yet the ethical framework proposed by Camus is certainly different from Singer’s. Singer is concerned with those that cannot speak for themselves, or individuals without a voice in a more self-interested age: animals, nature, or the poor. Camus, on the other hand, is proposing a universalistic ethics born out of his soccer experiences, which is more simple and straightforward. In his early books such as The Myth of Sisyphus (1942), The Outsider (1942), and The Notebooks (1935–1942), Camus hinted at a simplistic morality. While Camus understood that modern man was faced with a crisis of meaning in an age where faith was increasingly a private matter, Camus was no nihilist. Rather Camus sought to find meaning in the simple actions of life, like Sisyphus pushing the heavy boulder up the mountain each day, even with the knowledge that it would fall and the task of pushing the boulder up the mountain must begin each day anew. Also, Camus saw in soccer a simple morality: the principle of siding with and defending your teammates (friends), valorizing bravery (especially in the goalkeeper), and subscribing to the ethos of fair play. Camus understood that political and religious authorities complicate moral questions, or issues related to the way human beings should live and how they should act. In contrast, in soccer Camus saw a simple and universal game with a basic moral code, which is applicable to all peoples from different cultures throughout the world.
For Igor Netto and Albert Camus, soccer teaches us lessons that are helpful both on and off the pitch. In 1960 Camus’s life ended in tragedy when he died in a car accident at the age of forty-six. He had lived a difficult life in French-controlled Algeria. Born into poverty, he never knew his father, as he had died in the First World War when Camus was merely one. His mother raised him and his grandmother beat him often. This might explain his love for street soccer as an escape from his difficult life. One writer viewed the decision by Camus to become a goalkeeper using the author’s philosophical framework:
But there is something appropriate about a philosopher like Camus stationing himself between the sticks. It is a lonely calling, an individual isolated within a team ethic, one who plays to different constraints. If his team scores, the keeper knows it is nothing to do with him. If the opposition score, however, it is all his fault. Standing sentinel in goal, Camus had plenty of time to reflect on the absurdist nature of his position.[31]
The same writer also insisted that Zinedine Zidane’s dramatic head-butt in the 2006 World Cup finals could be analyzed using a famous character from Camus’s novel The Outsider:
Take the last World Cup final. Zinedine Zidane was France’s finest player, a brooding, enigmatic, yet hugely talented individual. Towards the end of the game, without apparent provocation, he headbutted an Italian opponent. In doing so, Zidane behaved uncannily like Meursault, the anti-hero of Camus’s finest work, L’Etranger, who, for no obvious reason, one day shoots an Arab he encounters on the beach. And like Meursault, with whom the reader instinctively sides despite the indefensible nature of his actions, Zidane was lauded by the French public.[32]
I do not know that Camus would have “lauded” Zidane’s head-butt after Marco Materazzi had insulted Zidane. Camus would have probably chastised both Materazzi and Zidane for abandoning the soccer ethic of fair play. What would Camus say about a five-meter-high statue of Zinedine Zidane’s head-butt on Marco Materazzi unveiled outside the Pompidou Centre in Paris in 2012?[33] The bronze statue was sculpted by the Algerian artist Adel Abdesseme and has attracted praise and moral outrage. Alain Michaud, the exhibition organizer, insisted that the statue “is an ode to defeat” rather than victory.[34] Or, had Igor Netto or Bobby Moore been alive today, they might have lamented what soccer has become: racism in the stands, doping, game fixing, excessive diving to win free kicks and penalties, an abundance of yellow and red cards, a win-at-all-costs philosophy, massive salaries, drinking and partying off the pitch, and the demise of the ethic of fair play.
Recall that Singer argued that ethics deals with “fundamental issues of practical decision making” and its key concerns include “the nature of ultimate value and the standards by which human actions can be judged right or wrong.” In the age of modern soccer, we can think of lots of practical cases that “can be judged right or wrong.” In particular, we are reminded of Diego Maradona’s infamous “hand of God” goal against England in the quarterfinals of the 1986 World Cup.
In 2009, Thierry Henry of France handled the ball, and shortly after William Gallas scored a winning goal against Ireland, thus allowing France to qualify for the 2010 World Cup. After the game, Henry was honest enough to admit his handball, yet he opted for a different ethical framework related to the referee’s responsibilities: “I will be honest, it was a handball. But I’m not the ref. I played it, the ref allowed it. That’s a question you should ask him.”[35] Giovanni Trapattoni, Ireland’s Italian manager at the time, advanced a different ethical perspective: Henry should be given the opportunity to admit his offense.[36] Trapattoni elaborated on his position: “All European people saw the situation. I am sure that, if the referee had asked Henry, he would have admitted to the handball. I would prefer to go out on penalties than this. I am sad because the referee had the time to ask the linesman and Henry.”[37] Yet the Ireland manager saw ethical implications in the Henry handball beyond the soccer field: “I am upset for fair play because we are told many times about fair play. We didn’t change the rules three months ago. I go into schools to talk about fair play and tell the young kids that it’s important for their life.”[38] The Irish captain Richard Dunne was less magnanimous than Trapattoni in defeat and blamed the match officials: “I think it was quite blatant that he cheated. The linesman was in line with the incident, it wasn’t even a hard decision to make.”[39]
William Gallas, the French scorer of the controversial goal, claimed innocence: “It all happened so quickly. I received the ball from Thierry, but I couldn’t see. I saw Thierry’s pass, the Irish were surprised and I put my head and my chest out.”[40] The French coach Raymond Domenech reacted angrily to the Irish complaints of cheating: “I didn’t see the hand. You people [media] are talking of this after seeing it from 80 yards. The referee gave the goal, but I couldn’t see anything from where I was. I didn’t see the replay.”[41]
Geoff Hurst scored three goals in the finals of the 1966 World Cup for England against West Germany. He scored the perfect hat trick, one with his head, another with his right foot, and the third with his left foot. England won the match 4–2. Yet Hurst will always be remembered for the third goal that modern technology clearly shows was not a goal. Many years later in a second round match at the 2010 World Cup, England met Germany. England’s Frank Lampard was denied a goal as England was trailing 2–1. Lampard hit a rocket from twenty yards near the end of the first half. The shot looped over German goalkeeper Manuel Neuer. Instant replay clearly showed the ball hitting the bar and crossing the line. In a reverse of historical fortunes for England, Germany won the match 4–1 and the referee denied a legitimate England goal.
As he has written about soccer, Peter Singer can enlighten us about the Maradona, Hurst, and Henry goals, as well as Lampard’s no-goal. Singer was asked the following question after Lampard’s no-goal: Does a soccer player have a duty to own up to his or her knowledge about the “right” outcome of a given play? Should the German goalkeeper, Manuel Neuer, have told the referee that Frank Lampard’s shot had crossed the line? Singer’s answer is unambiguously in the affirmative:
Yes, we can deal with the problem to some extent by using modern technology or video replays to review controversial refereeing decisions. But, while that will reduce the opportunity for cheating, it won’t eliminate it, and it isn’t really the point. We should not make excuses for intentional cheating in sports. In one important way, it is much worse than cheating in one’s private life. When what you do will be seen by millions, revisited on endless video replays, and dissected on television sports programs, it is especially important to do what is right.
How would football fans have reacted if Neuer had stopped play and told the referee that the ball was a goal? Given the rarity of such behavior in football [soccer], the initial reaction would no doubt have been surprise. Some German fans might have been disappointed. But the world as a whole—and every fair-minded German fan too—would have had to admit that he had done the right thing.
Neuer missed a rare opportunity to do something noble in front of millions of people. He could have set a positive ethical example to people watching all over the world, including the many millions who are young and impressionable. Who knows what difference that example might have made to the lives of many of those watching? Neuer could have been a hero, standing up for what is right. Instead, he is just another footballer who is very skillful at cheating.[42]
From Singer’s perspective, the players themselves should jettison cheating, speak out honestly when they see rules being broken (irrespective of the team in question), and do what is right because they are in a society consisting of billions of other soccer fans. Like Camus, Netto, and Moore, Singer calls for fair play, simplicity, and individual responsibility. Yet Singer admits that while modern technology and video replays of controversial plays or goals “will reduce the opportunity for cheating,” it will not eliminate cheating completely. Singer also points to a rare incident in 1996 that the German goalkeeper Manuel Neuer could have used as his model:
Liverpool striker Robbie Fowler was awarded a penalty for being fouled by the Arsenal goalkeeper. He told the referee that he had not been fouled, but the referee insisted he take the penalty kick. Fowler did so, but in a manner that enabled the goalkeeper to save it.[43]
Similarly, in 2012 the German international and SS Lazio striker Miroslav Klose confessed that he used his hand when scoring a goal against Napoli. After scoring in the fourth minute of the match, Klose went to inform the referee that the goal should not stand because he handled the ball. The goal was disallowed. Klose’s team Lazio lost the match 3–0. On his Twitter account, FIFA president Sepp Blatter praised Klose: “Bravo Miro Klose. With your gesture you have shown yourself to be a champion and a proper player.”[44] Inter Milan’s Argentinean midfielder Esteban Cambiasso also heaped praise on Klose as a role model for children and future professional soccer players: “We should praise the honesty of Klose. We must honor this gesture. It is an example for all children to follow.”[45]
The French paper Le Monde claims that in the course of investigating Operation Puerto in 2006, a doping bust primarily related to professional cycling, extensive documentation was discovered of “seasonal preparation plans” for Real Madrid and FC Barcelona players that include notes suggesting doping practices.[46] Probably the highest-profile case of doping in world soccer is of Diego Maradona at the 1994 World Cup in the United States, who was suspended and sanctioned for eighteen months for taking ephedrine. In 2005, Middlesbrough’s former Portuguese international defender Abel Xavier was banned from soccer for eighteen months by UEFA for taking anabolic steroids after a UEFA Cup match on September 29, 2005, thus becoming the first player in English Premier League history to be banned for using performance-enhancing substances.[47]
Singer has opined on doping in soccer. It is rather surprising and disappointing that while Singer seeks to uphold an ethic of honesty and individual responsibility with respect to soccer cheats, he simultaneously supports doping in sports. Julian Savulescu, who leads the Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics at Oxford University, insists that “we should drop the ban on performance-enhancing drugs, and allow athletes to take whatever they want, as long as it is safe for them to do so.”[48] Singer agrees with Savulescu’s solution. Singer thus controversially argues that the use of drugs in combination with intense training levels the playing field for “those with the best genes have an unfair advantage.”[49] While I subscribe to Singer’s ethics with respect to technology and goals, I cannot accept it when it comes to doping. We might ask Singer: Are not billions of soccer fans watching when players are doping and do the players not have any obligation to those fans? Moreover, it is rather troubling that Singer, who lost family members in the Nazi Holocaust because of Hitler’s twisted notion of Aryan superiority, chillingly argues that “those with the best genes have an unfair advantage.” Netto, Moore, and Camus would have seen such mental gymnastics as a clear effort to skirt the ethic of fair play. It is true that in soccer doping does not mean you win the match, because soccer is more than merely training, fitness, or genes. It is about tactics, skill, accuracy, luck, spirit, character, teamwork, and even individual genius. Yet recall that the soccer ethic highlighted by Camus is universal and thus applies to all peoples worldwide, irrespective of the game’s result.
Singer’s inconsistencies with respect to soccer ethics should alert us to the idea that we should not merely rely on expert knowledge in the realm of ethics. Moreover, using Singer’s definition of ethics highlighted earlier, the Australian philosopher asked two relevant questions: “Can we justify living in opulence while elsewhere in the world people are starving?” and “What are our obligations to the other creatures with whom we share this planet and to the generations of humans who will come after us?” If we apply these insights to soccer, we might ask how players with astronomical salaries for major clubs such as Real Madrid, Barcelona, Manchester United, or Bayern Munich can justify “living in opulence,” while “people are starving” in Africa, Latin America, Asia, and sometimes even in the players’ backyards in Europe? Do professional players, FIFA administrators, club officials, and coaches not have “obligations to the other creatures with which they share this planet”? Can professional clubs treat their players like “property,” as former USA international and Club Tijuana star Hércules Gómez claimed with respect to Mexican soccer clubs?
Cognizant of the role of morality and soccer on and off the pitch, FIFA created the Fair Play Award in 1987. It is designed to recognize good sporting behavior, or “fair play” actions, by people or organizations involved in soccer around the world. Individuals, teams, fans, spectators, soccer associations, and soccer communities have all won the award. The award choices have been interesting and diverse. In 1987, the German professional Frank Ordenewitz won the award after admitting to a handball in a penalty situation. In 1989, the award went to the Trinidad and Tobago fans for their sporting behavior, despite a narrow 1–0 home loss to the United States in their final World Cup qualifying match. A tie would have sent the island nation through to the World Cup tournament in 1990. In 1990, the great English striker Gary Lineker won the Fair Play Award after fifteen years as a professional soccer player without receiving a yellow or red card. In 1997, the Slovak amateur player Jozef Zovinec won the award after playing sixty years of soccer without receiving a yellow card. The USA and Iranian Soccer Federations jointly shared the Fair Play Award in 1998 for good sportsmanship during a World Cup match, despite the fact that the two countries have hostile relations and broke off diplomatic ties in 1980 in the aftermath of the 1979 Islamic Revolution. In 2000, Paolo Di Canio, a pro-Fascist Italian soccer star we encountered in chapter 1, won the award after taking the ball out of play with his hands when goalkeeper Paul Gerrard was injured on the ground. A year earlier the former South African international and Leeds skipper Lucas Radebe won the award for his excellent anti-racism work.
In addition, FIFA created a Fair Play Trophy in 1970, awarded to the cleanest team that progresses past the second round of the World Cup. The first winner was Peru in 1970. England won the trophy in 1990 and 1998. Brazil won the trophy four times in 1982, 1986, 1994, and 2006. Spain won the trophy in 2010. Other winners have included Argentina, France, and Belgium.
While FIFA officially promotes fair play and fair play awards, its own record is far from fair for many soccer fans. In 2006, Andrew Jennings wrote Foul! The Secret World of FIFA: Bribes, Vote-Rigging and Ticket Scandals. It details an international cash-for-contracts scandal after the collapse of FIFA’s marketing partner ISL. Jennings insisted that some FIFA officials had been bribed and there was extensive vote rigging as FIFA president Sepp Blatter sought to maintain control over the organization.
In 2010 and 2011, a series of major corruption scandals rocked FIFA, which confirmed some of Jennings’s allegations. One claim was about Russian kickbacks of cash and gifts given to FIFA executive members, who secured Russia’s 2018 World Cup bid. When Qatar received the 2022 World Cup instead of Britain, there were serious allegations by the Sunday Times: FIFA officials Issa Hayatou of Cameroon and Jacques Anouma of Ivory Coast were paid by Qatar’s government.[50] At the time of writing, Qatar’s hosting of the World Cup is in doubt because more FIFA officials are being investigated for the corruption surrounding the Arab state’s bid. In addition, there are reports of forced Qatari labor of foreign workers and even deaths, especially from Nepal.[51]
As a result of the corruption scandals, on May 25, 2011, FIFA announced that it had opened an investigation to examine the conduct of four key officials: Mohamed bin Hammam, Jack Warner, Debbie Minguell, and Jason Sylvester. FIFA executive committee member Chuck Blazer, who is also the general secretary of CONCACAF (North America including Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean), alleged that violations were committed under the FIFA code of ethics during a meeting organized by bin Hammam and Warner. Warner, a former vice president of FIFA, president of CONCACAF, and the owner of Trinidad and Tobago club side Joe Public FC, was accused of wanting kickback money for a World Cup 2018 vote in relation to the 2011 FIFA presidential election. Bin Hammam, who played a key FIFA role in the Qatar 2022 World Cup bid, allegedly offered financial incentives for votes cast in his favor during his presidential bid to oust Blatter. Bin Hammam and Warner were suspended by FIFA.
Warner did not go gently. He claimed that FIFA secretary general Jerome Valcke told him in an e-mail that Qatar “bought” the 2022 World Cup. Bin Hammam, too, did not go without a fight. He wrote to FIFA, claiming “unfair treatment” by both the FIFA Ethics Committee and its administration. In May and June 2011, further evidence of FIFA corruption surfaced as Fred Lunn, vice president of the Bahamas Football Association, claimed that he was given $40,000 in cash in order to vote for FIFA presidential candidate Mohamed bin Hammam. Louis Giskus, president of the Surinamese Football Association, alleged that he was given $40,000 in cash for a “development project,” with the understanding that he would vote for bin Hammam and against current president Sepp Blatter.
In June 2011, João Havelange, the seventh president of FIFA, from 1974 to 1998, as well as the longest-serving member of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), from 1963 to 2011, resigned after an ethics committee was formed to investigate whether Havelange received a bribe of $1 million. Citing ill health, Havelange resigned as a member of the IOC and the investigation was strangely closed.
Scanning Havelange’s record, one realizes that the Brazilian represented all that was unethical about FIFA. It was under Havelange’s reign in 1982 that Carlos Lacoste, a president of Argentina during the military junta, became vice president of FIFA. Lacoste was a key member of the organizing committee for the 1978 FIFA World Cup in Argentina. He was also the cousin of President Jorge Rafael Videla, the man responsible for the brutal policy of “disappearances.” Recall that this was a theme I dealt with in chapter 2. Havelange also once signed a character reference and was an associate of Brazilian criminal Castor de Andrade, who was sentenced to six years in prison in 1994 for racketeering. Finally, Havelange had a turbulent relationship with Pelé. It turns out that João Havelange’s daughter, Lucia, was married to Ricardo Teixeira for thirty years until 1997. Teixeira was president of the Brazilian Soccer Confederation (CBF) between 1989 and 2012. Pelé was upset that his television company was rejected in a contest for domestic rights and he accused Teixeira of corruption in 1993.[52] Havelange took his revenge, yet was roundly criticized for banning Pelé from the 1994 World Cup draw in Las Vegas.
Despite charges that FIFA’s current president Sepp Blatter is a “dictator” leading a corrupt organization that pockets billions of dollars, the Swiss administrator shrugged off allegations of corruption within FIFA and was re-elected as president for a fourth time in 2011. Blatter took the FIFA reigns from Havelange in 1998 and was re-elected without much of a struggle in 2002, 2007, and 2011. Blatter is not much better than Havelange in terms of transparency and corruption within FIFA. There are swirling allegations that Blatter intimidated or paid off potential opponents.
Sepp Blatter’s lack of moral compass was clear during the FIFA corruption scandals in 2010 and 2011. Blatter is merely concerned with his hold on power and the effects that the corruption scandals are having on corporate sponsors such as Visa, Coca-Cola, and Adidas. These companies pay large sums of money to have their logos advertised at World Cup soccer matches. Commenting on FIFA corruption allegations, a Visa spokesman opined that “The current situation is clearly not good for the game.”[53] Or, as Adidas chief communications officer Jan Runau insisted in relation to the FIFA corruption scandals, “The negative tenor of the public debate around FIFA at the moment is neither good for football nor for FIFA.”[54]
Instead of taking this as an opportunity to “clean” FIFA’s house, Blatter could merely state the following at a press conference: “We are not in a crisis, we are only in some difficulties and these can be solved inside our family.”[55] “FIFA is strong enough to deal with our own problems,” added Blatter, shortly before elections by the FIFA Congress.[56] Although Blatter was cleared of any wrongdoing, the scandals are hurting FIFA and the image of professional soccer. FIFA and Blatter are increasingly seen as outdated in their desire to cling to power. Australian senator Nick Xenophon accused FIFA of “scamming” his country of the A$46 million it spent on the Australia 2022 FIFA World Cup bid.[57] Dick Pound, a former vice president of the IOC, accused FIFA of lacking any real transparency.[58]
All these scandals within FIFA raise the following questions: How can FIFA stop match fixing, doping allegations, or the undue power of major sponsors and clubs in soccer when it does not have its own house in order? In 2006, a terrible match-fixing scandal rocked top Italian professional soccer league teams in Serie A and Serie B. The scandal was uncovered by the Italian police. The league champions Juventus were one of the key culprits. The club lost its 2005 and 2006 Serie A titles, was forced out of the 2006–2007 UEFA Champions League, and was relegated to Serie B after it appealed its original relegation to Serie C1. Other major teams involved in the scandal included AC Milan, Fiorentina, Lazio, and Reggina. Secret telephone interceptions revealed a shady network of relations between team managers and referee organizations. The various teams were accused of rigging matches by selecting favorable referees. The Canadian journalist Declan Hill suspects that the 2006 World Cup second round match between Ghana and Brazil was fixed.[59] In 2009, fifteen people were arrested and an investigation initiated in Bochum, Germany about alleged game fixing of about 200 European matches, including many lower league matches in which there is no official oversight.[60]
Sensing public disdain over soccer and match fixing, UEFA president Michel Platini opened an anti-corruption department in 2009. How can players, coaches, referees, and administrators be told to advance the ethic of fair play when the world’s soccer governing does not play kosher? And given all these corruption scandals, more fans are asking: How can we be certain that players who put on the national colors are not ever bribed by nations with major funds at their disposal? The soccer show must go on, we are told, but at what price? How many soccer fans no longer watch the game because of its rampant commercialism and corruption? Or is it too few for the major clubs, corporations, and FIFA to really care?
Furthermore, FIFA is accused of inflicting light penalties on racism, like CSKA Moscow fans’ racial taunting against Manchester City’s Ivory Coast international Yaya Touré in 2013, which resulted in a one-match partial closure and a full stadium closure with a fine of €50,000 if there is a second offense. Terry paid a heavy price for racial abuse with his England career, but his club and the Football Association could have taken more severe measures. Former England international John Barnes suggests that England should target its racism fight at home with respect to talented blacks denied management positions in soccer or young blacks suffering from poverty and discrimination in inner-city Brixton (a district in South London with a high percentage of the population of African and Caribbean descent, made infamous by riots in 1981, 1985, 1995, and 2011), rather than focus on “rich guys” that have a lot in common such as Touré, Terry, Suárez, or Anton Ferdinand.[61] “A millionaire getting booed in Russia is nothing compared with generations of people never getting the chance to better their lives and those of their children,”[62] insists Barnes in reference to disenfranchised blacks in England. Writing in The Guardian, Barnes opted for a measured response against racism in soccer, which he views as a reflection of racism in British society and not merely a problem in Russia or Eastern Europe:
Personally, I don’t blame Suárez or Terry for what they did—they are simply products of a society and environment that allows them to think it is OK to speak about certain people in a certain way. It would be far better if instead of banning them and demonising them, the Football Association aimed to educate them and make them see that black people are undeserving of racial abuse.[63]
What about the perception that there is no longer any ethics or beauty in contemporary soccer’s win-at-all-costs philosophy? Players should play to entertain as much as to get results. What would George Orwell have said about the demise of fair play in soccer, a trend he already witnessed in 1945? And if Albert Camus, Igor Netto, or Bobby Moore were alive, what would they say to help us out of professional soccer’s moral darkness?
Colin Allen and Wendell Wallach, Moral Robots: Teaching Machines Right from Wrong (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008).
David Korten, When Corporations Rule the World (West Hartford, CT: Kumarian, 1995).
Declan Hill, Juego sucio: Fútbol y crimen organizado, trans. Concha Cardeñoso Sáenz de Miera and Francisco López Martín (Barcelona: Alba, 2010).
Yahoo!Sports, “El Salvador ban 14 internationals for life for fixing,” Reuters, 20 September 2013, http://sports.yahoo.com/news/el-salvador-ban-14-internationals-life-match-fixing-211930119--sow.html (23 September 2013).
George Orwell, “The Sporting Spirit,” Tribune, December 1945, http://orwell.ru/library/articles/spirit/english/e_spirit (22 July 2013).
Robert Conquest, The Great Terror: A Reassessment (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), xvi.
World Football Legends, “Igor Netto,” World Football Legends UK, 2012, http://www.world-football-legends.co.uk/index.php/urs/115-netto-igor (25 October 2012).
Pes Stats Database, “Igor Netto,” Pes Stats Database, 2012, http://pesstatsdatabase.com/viewtopic.php?f=182&t=9435 (25 October 2012).
Ibid.
Bruce Henderson, “There is Fair Play in Soccer,” OSA, n.d., http://www.ssra.ca/there_is_fair_play_in_soccer.htm (25 October 2012).
Rankopedia, “Best Russian-Soviet Soccer Player Ever,” Rankopedia, 2011, http://www.rankopedia.com/Best-Russian/Soviet-soccer-Player-ever/Step1/14794/.htm (25 October 2012).
BBC, “Ronaldinho regains FifPro crown,” BBC Online Network, 6 November 2006, http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/internationals/5414328.stm (6 November 2013).
Jonathan Clegg and Bruce Orwall, “Last Taboo in English Football: Playing Footsie With Mate’s Mate,” The Wall Street Journal, 4 February 2010, http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748704259304575043212033975040 (6 November 2013).
Ibid.
BBC, “Summary of the reasons for John Terry’s FA ban,” BBC Online Network, 5 October 2012, http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19845841 (6 November 2013).
BBC, “John Terry fights FA charge over Anton Ferdinand,” BBC Online Network, 3 August 2012, http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19021184 (6 November 2013).
Peter Singer, “Ethics,” Encyclopædia Britannica, 1985, 627–648, http://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/1985----.htm (23 September 2012).
Andrew Jennings, Foul! The Secret World of FIFA: Bribes, Vote-Rigging and Ticket Scandals (London: Harper Collins, 2006).
The Guardian Blog, “From the Vault: Remembering the life and football of Bobby Moore,” The Guardian Blog, 22 February 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2013/feb/22/vault-remembering-life-football-bobby-moore (30 July 2013).
Rory Smith, “World Cup 2010: Top 50 World Cup moments,” The Telegraph 25 June 2010, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/world-cup-2010/6151657/World-Cup-2010-Top-50-World-Cup-moments.html (30 July 2013).
BBC, “Hero: The Bobby Moore Story,” BBC Online Network, 12 June 2010, http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0074r86 (30 July 2013).
FIFA, “Bobby MOORE England’s captain incomparable,” FIFA, 2012, http://www.fifa.com/classicfootball/players/player=174780/index.html (16 November 2012).
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Albert Camus Society of the UK, “Albert Camus and football,” The Albert Camus Society of the UK, http://www.camus-society.com/camus-football.html (13 May 2011).
Ibid.
Ibid.
CNN, “Pope: Football a moral guide,” CNN, 10 January 2008, http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/01/10/pope.football/index.html (26 September 2012).
Jim White, “Albert Camus: thinker, goalkeeper,” The Telegraph, 6 January 2010, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/6941924/Albert-Camus-thinker-goalkeeper.html (23 September 2012).
Ibid.
ESPN, “Statue of Zidane’s WC head-butt unveiled,” ESPN Soccer, 26 September 2012, http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1171942/paris-museum-erects-statue-of-head-butting-zidane?cc=3888 (27 September 2012).
Ibid.
Mark Ogden, “Thierry Henry admits to handball that defeated Ireland in World Cup play-off,” The Telegraph, 19 November 2009, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/republic-of-ireland/6599687/Thierry-Henry-admits-to-handball-that-defeated-Ireland-in-World-Cup-play-off.html (23 September 2011).
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Peter Singer, “Why is cheating OK in football?” The Guardian, 29 June 2010, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/29/cheating-football-germany-goalkeeper (25 September 2012).
Ibid.
Miles Chambers, “Klose handball confession draws praise from FIFA president Sepp Blatter,” Goal, 27 September 2012, http://sports.yahoo.com/news/klose-handball-confession-draws-praise-170500776--sow.html (27 September 2012).
Ibid.
Hedwig Kröner and Shane Stokes, “Spanish soccer clubs linked to Fuentes?” Cycling News, 8 December 2006, http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2006/dec06/dec08news (6 November 2013).
The Independent, “Football: Xavier hit with 18-month ban for steroid use,” The Independent, 24 November 2005.
Peter Singer, “Is Doping Wrong?” Project Syndicate, 14 August 2007, http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/is-doping-wrong- (23 September 2012).
Ibid.
BBC, “Caf’s Hayatou and Anouma accused of taking Qatar bribes,” BBC Online Network, 11 May 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/13345669 (25 September 2012).
Pete Pattisson, “At 16, Ganesh got a job in Qatar. Two months later he was dead,” The Guardian, 25 September 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/sep/25/qatar-nepalese-workers-poverty-camps (27 September 2013).
Paul Darby, Africa, Football and FIFA: Politics, Colonialism and Resistance (London: Frank Cass, 2002), 110.
CNN, “Ethics scandal hurts soccer, Visa and other sponsors warn,” CNN, 31 May 2011, http://edition.cnn.com/2011/SPORT/football/05/31/soccer.fifa.corruption/index.html (23 September 2012).
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Mirror Football, “Australia senator calls for FIFA ‘red card,’” Mirror Football, 30 May 2011, http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Australia-senator-Nick-Xenophon-calls-for-FIFA-red-card-after-latest-corruption-scandal-article742679.html (25 September 2012).
The Australian, “IOC’s Dick Pound says FIFA not transparent,” The Australian, 4 October 2011, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/iocs-dick-pound-says-fifa-not-transparent/story-e6frg7mf-1226157992722 (30 July 2013).
Hill, Juego sucio: Fútbol y crimen organizado.
Ibid.
John Barnes, “Racist abuse of Yaya Touré is a smokescreen, real problem is at home,” The Guardian, 4 November 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/nov/04/racist-abuse-yaya-toure-john-barnes (7 November 2013).
Ibid.
Ibid.