Racism Persists in International Soccer

Next week's league match between Italian football giants AS Roma and Juventus, to be held in Juventus' Stadio Olimpico in Turin, will be marked by a closure of a part of the stadium not for violence, or hooliganism, but for racist chants directed at Inter Milan's Mario Balotelli.  Last Wednesday, a group of fans seated in the Stadio Olimpico's South End started the chants during halftime of Juventus' home win against Napoli.

Two important elements of context. First,this area of the stadium - called the Curva Sud - is typically where the team's most intense and right-wing fans (called "Ultras") sit for games.  Second, the game where these chants took place was between Juventus and Napoli. Keep in mind Balotelli plays for Inter.

Yet, it was strange for me to see the Huffington Post attempt to contextualize the news with this photo:

The seats aflame have nothing to do with the serious issue of racism in international football. So, why? What is the narrative portrayed by the juxtaposed photograph? "Arsonists likely to be racists"?

But I digress.  Last week, Balotelli voiced his frustrations at the jeers he received when he was substituted in a game played against AC Chievo in Verona, Italy.  In his post-game comments, Balotelli said, "Every time I come to play in Verona, the city disgusts me even more." For that reaction, Balotelli earned a $10,000 fine and later issued an statement on his website apologizing:

"...to those who were innocent and whom I offended through my expressions, which were conditioned by the boos I received during the game.  I should have made it clear that the fans in Verona and around Italy who boo me disgust me...I am tired of always hearing racist chants when I'm on the pitch.  It doesn't happen just at Verona."

Unfortunately for Balotelli, this sort of treatment has indeed become commonplace for him as he has risen in prominence in the top division of Italian football (this season, he has 5 goals in 15 Serie A appearances).  Born in Palermo, Italy, the 19 year-old Balotelli is of Ghanian descent and has made numerous appearances with the under-21 Italian national team.

Inter fans call him "Super Mario"

Just last year, the governing body of Italian football threatened to close Juventus' stadium after a game between Juve and Inter featured the following chants:

• "Non ci sono negri italiani" - "There are no black Italians."
• "Negro di merda" - (roughly) "Sh*tty n*gger."

These, coupled with frequent monkey chants, can be heard in a number of fan-created YouTube videos.  The video below was taken from a game last year between Juventus and Inter Milan.

When the former of the two chants were heard during last week's game at Juventus' Stadio Olimpico, Italian football quickly issued the ban of the "Curva Sud" (South Stand) for the game on the 23rd of January.  Apparently, Juventus will not appeal the ban.

The Ultras at the Stadio delle Alpi (home stadium 1990-2006)

The Ultras at the Stadio Olimpico (2006-current)

Today, considering the life of Martin Luther King, Jr.,  I think it is critical for us to maintain an awareness of racial issues in all walks of life.  When it comes to racism in soccer, the sad thing is that there are still some individuals out there who are ruining the beautiful game.

Which seats in this stadium are Personal Seat License-free?

If you guessed the green ones, you'd be right.  For the following amounts, the Cowboys offered fans the opportunity to pay them upfront or finance the amount for 30 years.  Also, these prices are per seat and do not include the cost of tickets (which, for the Cowboys, are roughly twice the league average) or parking.

• Red seats = $2000 PSL
• Light blue seats = $4000 PSL
• Dark blue seats  = $5000 PSL
• Tan seats = $5000 PSL
• White seats in sections 409-415 and 440-446 = $12,000 PSL
• Founders Club seats (sections C210 and C235) = $150,000 PSL

Regular Club seats (in white above)...detailed here:

• Red club seats = $16,000 PSL
• Green club seats = $35,000 PSL
• Yellow club seats = $50,000 PSL

Of course, these seating plans do not include Cowboys Stadium luxury suites (which includes Field-Level suites that are closest to the action).  Depending on the location, these suites cost between $100k-$500k annually, and contracts require a 20-year lease.

Is a stadium such as this, praised by ESPN/NBC (the latter called it the "Taj Mahal" of sports and a "modern day marvel," while Bob Costas introduced it as "the palace in Dallas"), and the NFL, elitist in that it prices out the common man?  What is troubling is not that there are different prices for different seats in stadiums - I understand that better seats have always cost more money than nosebleeds.  Furthermore, I realize that colleges and universities have recently introduced donation programs where contributions to the athletic fund grant access to the best seats in their stadiums.  What is troubling is that the Cowboys Stadium physically separates the haves from the have-nots and that it is being praised as an archetype - a model for future stadiums.  Is this really a trend that the NFL should be applauding?

In the end, no matter how big of a Cowboys fan you are, if you aren't able to afford these prices, then your only option is to fight for those green nosebleed seats ($59 a ticket) or enjoy your time in the proletariat zone of the stadium, a standing-room only section of the stadium where  "Party Passes" cost just $29.  Party, indeed.

Did I mention that the taxpaying citizens of Arlington are partially funding this Mahal?  To the tune of $325 million?  How 'bout them Cowboys!

The World Cup is Coming to the US, but not Chicago or SF...

The US had to submit its final sites to FIFA for consideration for the 2018 or 2022 World Cup.  Of the 18 nominated cities, 21 stadiums were nominated.  Sadly, the qualifications for bid cities and stadiums had very little to do with anything besides stadium size and thus, the ability to sell a boatload of tickets - and at premium prices (the more suites the better - US Soccer thanks you, Jerry Jones!).  The map looks like this.

When If the USA's bid is accepted by FIFA, 9 to 12 venues will make the final cut.  So, which cities are likely to make it?  Here is my guess for the ten cities that will make it:

Seattle (Qwest Field - 68,056)

Los Angeles (Rose Bowl - 89,109)

Denver (INVESCO Field - 75,165)

Phoenix (Univ. of Phoenix Stadium - 71,362)

Dallas (Cowboys Stadium - 91,600)

Miami  (LandShark Stadium - 80,240)

Washington, D.C. (FedEx Field - 89,690)

Philadelphia (Lincoln Financial Field - 69,111)

New York (New Meadowlands Stadium - 84,046)

Boston (Gillette Stadium - 73,393)

Average stadium seating capacity = 79,177 = $$$$

It's hard to imagine any of the domed/turfed stadiums (Indianapolis, Houston, Atlanta) making the cut, even though several of those are fairly new.  I also ruled out San Diego, Tampa Bay, Nashville, and Kansas City for less-than-ideal and not-so-new stadiums (especially when compared to Phoenix and Dallas).  I was tempted to add Miami to that list since LandShark Stadium will be ancient by the time 2022 comes around, but it seems that Miami will be a sporting mainstay for a long time (see this year's NFL ProBowl and SuperBowl).  I also wished that I could add Baltimore to that list, but I cannot picture any scenario in which the Capital is snubbed.

When FIFA last visited the States in 1994, the tournament featured just 24 teams (now up to 32) and set a total attendance record of 3.6 million - a record that still stands to this day.  Estimates place this future World Cup (the US is favored to be named as host of the 2022 Cup) as breaking all sorts of attendance records (somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 million), as just about all of the stadiums in the above cities can seat 70,000 or more fans.  By contrast, just two of the ten World Cup 2010 venues in South Africa surpass the 70,000 seat mark.

According to US Soccer, these cities and their stadiums offer "unique distinctions for the United States bid...[including] new venues with retractable roofs that offer climate certainty and the newest amenities catering to fan experience and game performance such as Cowboys Stadium."

My, what a big stadium you have...

What's uncertain about the climate in an American summer?  Or, by 2012, will there be such a constant string of tornadoes, hurricanes, mudslides, and any number of natural disasters plaguing the globe that the availability of playing indoors would deliver genuine relief in the form of climate certainty?

Well, at least the US Bid Committee was upfront with their presentation.  There was no hiding the rationale behind these stadium selections, because as most bid countries (whether for the World Cup or Olympics, etc.) have realized about the bidding process with international sports organizations like FIFA or the IOC, it's all about the benjamins, baby.

Let's Go Outdoors

In just the past two weeks, three very successful outdoor hockey events have taken place - two in Boston and one in Sweden.  Check it out.

On December 28th, a European-record 31,144 fans packed the Ullevi Stadium in Sweden to watch the Frolunda Indians play Farjestads BK.

Just a few days later, on January 1st, Fenway Park was sold out to capacity (roughly 40,000) for a regular season matchup between the hometown Bruins and the Philadelphia Flyers.

Then, a week later in the same venue, rivals Boston College and Boston University, NCAA champions the past two years, respectively, staged their own outdoor game (another 40,000 fans) and added an incredible new chapter to what is one of the best sports rivalry in America.

The BC-BU tilt (which BU won 3-2) will not be the only outdoor college hockey game this year, however, as the University of Wisconsin and the University of Michigan will square off at Camp Randall Stadium next month.  Then, later this year, Michigan will host Michigan State at The Big House, in a repeat of of 2001's "Cold War," played at Spartan Stadium in East Lansing.  Dubbed "Cold War II," the game should once again be a tremendous success (74,000 fans).  Returning to the pro game,  rumors recently surfaced about the NHL allowing two Canadian teams to play outdoors next year in addition to the now-annual Winter Classic on New Years' Day 2011 (which will likely feature two States-based teams).

BU fans went home happy

That's a lot of outdoor hockey.  But why?  While I've done some extensive research on the subject - notably targeting the nostalgia of these events as well as the savvy marketing schemes that promote these commodified events as "returning to hockey's roots" - a recent documentary entitled "Pond Hockey" does a fine job extolling the magnanimous virtues of playing outdoors.  The documentary has now been released on Hulu, which means if you have a 120 minutes to spend, you can watch it for free.  I highly recommend this star-studded film (Gretzky!), which has received quite a good deal of critical acclaim.

Tottenham's New Stadium

Let's talk a bit about stadiums.  Not that the following information should surprise you, but I think it's interesting to consider the ramifications of corporate naming of stadiums across the world.  We know of the thousands of examples in the States, where corporate names attached to stadiums is so commonplace that venues such as Cowboys Stadium or Giants Stadium or Camden Yards are the exception to the naming rights deals rule.

This brings me to North London, England, home to the Tottenham Football Club.  I will begin by stating that this is a classic team with a classic logo (and color scheme).

Formed in 1882, the team has resided in its current grounds, White Hart Lane, since 1899.  White Hart Lane holds approximately 36,000 fans and, as a result of the stadium's history and capacity, Tottenham has been compared to the Boston Red Sox and historic Fenway Park (built in 1912 with a capacity of 37,000).

Both teams feature beautifully old stadiums that have been consistently upgraded throughout the century and each team offers a rich history in their respective sports as a counterpart to the incredible structures.  That is why it disturbed me to find out that Tottenham are currently developing a plan to build a new stadium on the same property as their current grounds.  And not just a new stadium, but a 58,000 seat monster that would look something like this:

Apparently, with over 70,000 fans on a waiting list for season tickets, Tottenham couldn't prevent the development of a new stadium any longer.  The especially sad thing, however, is that this new sport/entertainment/residential complex (there will be housing, retail, a hotel, and a 'public square') will literally have corporate naming rights written all over it.  In fact, the development team from Tottenham was so certain that "White Hart Lane" would be no more that they digitally imprinted the new stadium with as-yet-unknown title "Naming Rights" in what is the first image of the new design.

To think, would the designers for a new Fenway Park - if ever it was built - be so brazen as to implant a blank space for a corporate name on the new stadium design? Wouldn't people, as my North Shore cousins are wont to say, be ripped?

Turns out that in the top flights of English football, Tottenham is not alone in their attempts to cash in.  Much like stadiums in the 'States, the steady stream of corporate naming began in the early 1990s and has slowly spread.  In late 2009, Newcastle FC decided to rename their 117-year old stadium, St. James Park, to the following mouthful:"Sportsdirect.com@St. James Park."

A stadium which opened in 1892 now has a website-dot-com address preceding the title it held for over a century.  The corporate takeover trend does not end there as another London-based football club, Chelsea FC, also recently announced plans to sell the naming rights to its stadium, Stamford Bridge.  Named for the bridge that connects the Chelsea area of London to neighboring rival Fulham, "The Bridge," has been affectionately known as such since 1877.

Take a look at how long these stadiums have been around and to contemplate a name change, for any of them, is just sad (teams with/or considering corporate naming are highlighted).

• 1860 - Deepdale Stadium; Preston North End FC
• 1877 - Stamford Bridge; Chelsea FC
• 1882 - Ewood Park; Blackburn FC
• 1883 - Turf Moor; Burnley FC
• 1884 - Anfield Park; Liverpool FC
• 1889 - Molineux Stadium; Wolverhampton FC
• 1892 - St. James Park; Newcastle FC
• 1892 - Goodison Park; Everton FC
• 1896 - Craven Cottage; Fulham FC
• 1899 - White Hart Lane; Tottenham FC
• 1900 - The Hawthorns; West Bromwich Albion

To use another parallel, Lambeau Field is - and will always be - Lambeau Field...and it's only been open since 1957!  To seriously entertain the idea of something GoDaddy.Com@Lambeau Field is disheartening and I can only feel bad for Tottenham fans, who must be looking forward to 2012 when Naming Rights Stadium opens.

...I realize this is not new information, it just shocks me to see how easily we are overcome by corporations in what is supposed to be our strongest devotion (let's see corporations sponsor churches, synagogues, mosques, etc.)  Is it fan weakness or corporate strength or both?  Either way, and on the precipice of the Citi BCS National Championship Game, I miss the original bowl games: the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, and Orange.  (Don't talk to me about the Citi, Tostitos, Allstate, or FedEx games...)

Where is Landon Donovan?

On the heels of his 2 month transfer to Liverpool-based football club Everton FC (home of fellow Yank Tim Howard), comes this from Landon Donovan and, to be honest, I'm not sure where to start.

Should I address the trifling nature of the advertisement to trivialize the current border struggle, or should I investigate just one more example in a long line of Mexican stereotyping (Landon's garb and the sleeping guard slacked up against a wall), or should I express just how incredible it is that a US soccer player (and long considered the nemesis of the Mexican national soccer team) is a featured endorser of the Mexican national lottery?

There's room for all three, but I'm most flabbergasted by the latter...

SocImages Gives Me Some Props...

Over at the quite good Sociological Images blog, run by two tenured sociology professors, they gave my insight on the FSU Women's Basketball team some props here: link.

Worth checking out.

Blog will be back up and running soon.