Social Context of Immigrant Football Players: Racism, Ethnic Identity and Post-colonialism
As having more than four billion fans around the globe, football still remains without a question the most popular sport of our planet. Since its invention around 2200 years ago, football have never been just a sport. Instead, it had several roles throughout the history such as a manifest of equality and social integration, a medium of propaganda, a safe zone to forget personal sorrows or a way of global integration. In 1928 Olympic Games, football was a manifest of equality as Egyptian team was qualified to the semifinals and thought that they are as good as their British rulers, which consequently lead to the idea of having equal rights. During all times of wars, football and football stadium were always used for political propaganda. In addition to this, football was played to cope with hard times as well, as Nagib Mahfouz, Egyptian winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature, states: “Now we play to forget our sorrows” referring to his childhood (Raab, 2012).
In each of football’s previously mentioned sociological roles, conflicts and problems occur naturally. Throughout this paper, global integration resulted through football will be analysed and elaborated, since the most active and effective role of football in our times is individual’s global engagement and commitment both physically and mentally. Specifically, football players with migrant origins will be examined. In this context, physical engagement occurs due to player’s immigration to the specific country, which is highly related to the phenomena of globalisation and post-colonialization. Mental engagement occurs due to changes in the player’s identity which results in conflicts related to ethnocentrism and racism.
The first step of the whole process is how a football player actually becomes a football player with migrant origin. Usually this happens though two separate ways. In the first way, the players’ family have already migrated. Thus, the player was born in the foreign country and becomes a citizen naturally. The most famous example for Turkey is Mesut Özil, who was born in Germany and has Turkish origins and plays for German national team. The second way is more unorthodox and happens through scouting or football schools around the world. The biggest football clubs such as Real Madrid or Manchester United establish football schools in developing countries or sends scouting teams to these countries. This way, the best young players gain the chance of playing for these clubs even at the ages of 15 and migrate to different places of the world.
Although both situations that are previously discussed have strong connections with globalization, the second way is also highly related to the idea of post-colonialism (Besnier, 2015). In the second way, the player has no single connection to the foreign country prior to his/her football career. The club in the foreign country has the capability to reach the player, which may lead to his/her immigration. There exists a two-way relationship: the club gains a potential star player and the player gains the potential to make his/her dream come true. However, this bilateral relationship has significant consequences in many aspects: First, immigration occurs and problems with immigration follow such as racist behaviors in the foreign country based on ethnocentrism and player’s identity confusion. Secondly, the foreign country exploits the home country’s human capital to a certain extent by disabling the possibility of the player playing in his/her own country. Yet, the paper is focused on the problems about ethnocentrism and identity confusion.
As already referred in the previous paragraphs, the intersection of postcolonialism and football has brought about some problems in the last decades. These problems are frequently about the ethnic identity of football players with migrant background. By their ethnic background they differ from the other players in the country to which they have migrated, therefore their ethnic identity is always questioned by society, sports media, fans and even by their family. In other words, people argue whether these players feel themselves as a member of the country in which they live or their country of origin. The article “Ethnic identity and the choice to play for a national team: a study of junior elite football players with a migrant background” by Klaus Seiberth, Ansgar Thiel and Ramón Spaaij, published 2019 discusses these problems specific to migrant football players living and playing in Germany but with Turkish background. The article is based on interviews which are done with the junior elite players (under 19 age and playing for elite teams in Germany), and these players are asked whether they feel Turkish or German and what kind of criteria they have for the choice of national team. These interviews clarify the problems they encounter as a football player with migrant background; such as parental pressure, racism, plus mobbing by media and fans.
The most significant point in this article is the “social identity” of the players, which consists of ethnic identity, national identity and athlete identity specific to this situation. Unlike ethnicity which is determined by parents’ ethnic background, “ethnic identity implies one’s chosen ethnic label” (Phinney, 1992, 158). On the other hand, national identity “involves feelings of belonging to, and attitudes toward, the larger society” (Phinney, 2001, 497). The interviews with these young players indicate that, ethnic identity and national identity do not have to overlap with each other: Most of the players feel belonging to German society, but they express their ethnicity as Turkish. Moreover, considerable number of players feel German and Turkish at the same time, which is termed as “hybrid identity” (Faas, 2009, 304). In spite of these particulars about migrant German football players with Turkish background, the key factor for their choice for national team is neither national nor ethnic identity, but athlete identity. This identity affects players’ decision “in a functional manner, referring to sportive prospects, future perspectives and the assessment of their own performance level” (Seiberth, Thiel and Spaaij, 2019). Even though most of the decisions are made career-oriented, these choices are explained by media, fans and other football actors as an ethnic or national decision and these decisions are questioned throughout their whole career. Furthermore, whichever national team they choose, they are criticized by the member of other national groups and sometimes they are named as “betrayer”. This situation can be shown as a clear example for the social construction of ethnicity. Even the players can not name their ethnicity certainly, the whole world disputes about their ethnicity and judges the choices, however there is not any certain categorization of the ethnicity of these players. This situation brings about a variety of problems for these migrant players.
The main one can be generalized as “acceptance problem” of these players. They are mostly not seen as a part of both ethnic groups by members of these groups. “If I’m in Germany, or people in the street ask me, ‘What are you? German or Turk?’, of course I answer I’m Turkish. However, if I’m in Turkey, people there say, ‘You’re not a Turk.’ … Sometimes I even ask myself, why I say ‘I’m Turkish’ although Germany offers me everything I want, and I feel comfortable here,” (Seiberth, Thiel and Spaaij, 2019) states one of the interviewees. On the basis of this acceptance problem, immigrant players encounter racist discourses. The most newsworthy and relating to Turkey example is Mesut Özil, German national player with Turkish background. After his photo shoot with Turkey’s President Erdogan, he encountered many mobbing attempts by media, the authorities of German Football Federation and even by some German politicians, namely Bernd Holzhauer who named Özil as “goat-raper” in his social media post. After these treatments, Özil retired from German national team. In his open resignation letter, he states “I am German if we win, but I am an immigrant when we lose … I was born and educated in Germany, so why don’t people accept that I am German?” He further adds that he and his family received many hate mails and threatening phone calls. However, the Turkish side is not entirely different. During the match between Germany and Turkey in 2010, Özil was whistled by Turkish fans as he had chosen German national team. In addition, calling the migrant players who did not choose Turkish national team as “betrayer” is very common in Turkey, especially in social media. Another significant point in Turkish side is the family pressure. Another interviewee points out that “My father and my mother just wanted that I play for Turkey because somewhere there is a bit of pride and honor. For the Turks that’s very important.” Which indicates that choosing Germany could lead to a reaction by the family. These examples make clear that, the acceptance problem of national players with migrant background is two-sided and this problem gives rise to racist abuses, social media mobbing and pressure for these players.
Generally, there are two types of migrant football players, the ones who migrate to play for big clubs and the ones whose ancestors already migrated. Both of them encounter similar difficulties like family pressure, media and fans mobbing and racist discourses. Ethnocentrism and racism are the main reason for these difficulties. Specific to the players whose ancestors were migrants and who have right to play for two national teams, whatever they choose to play for national football team, they are accepted betrayer by the people of other country. As referred in Mesut Özil example, they are seen migrant in country where they born and live but also, they are seen betrayer by people in country of their origin. This situation can be observed in their daily life, as well. On the one hand they are called Turk in Germany; on the other hand they are called as “Alamancı” in Turkey, neither Turk nor German. They can not belong to both countries. In spite of entire these ethnic and identity discussions, the decisions of these players for national team is commonly goal-oriented; they do not suggest any ethnical, national or political justifications for this decision. However, their decisions bring about various ethnic and political discussions and problems, which can be shown as an explicit example for social construction of ethnicity.
İmran Toprak
Boran Sarı
Alpkan İncegön
References:
Besnier, Niko. 2015. “Sports Mobilities Across Borders: Postcolonial Perspectives.” The International Journal of the History of Sport 32 (7): 849–861
Faas, Daniel. 2009. “Reconsidering Identity: The Ethnic and Political Dimensions of Hybridity among Majority and Turkish Youth in Germany and England.” The British Journal of Sociology60 (2): 299–320.
Phinney, Jean S. 1992. “The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure: A New Scale for Use with Diverse Groups.” Journal of Adolescent Research7 (2): 156–176.
Phinney, Jean S., Gabriel Horenczyk, Karmela Liebkind, and Paul Vedder. 2001. “Ethnic Identity, Immigration, and Well-Being: An Interactional Perspective.” Journal of Social Issues57 (3): 493–510.
Raab, Alon. 2012. “Soccer in the Middle East: an introduction.” Soccer & Society13 (5–6): 619–638
Seiberth, Klaus, Ansgar Thiel and Ramón Spaaij. 2019. Ethnic identity and the choice to play for a national team: a study of junior elite football players with a migrant background.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 45 (5): 787–803
