The Great English Sulk

Last week FIFA chose host cities for the World Cups of 2018 and 2022. Russia was chosen for 2018, and Qatar for 2022. Russia looks a good choice to me, a nation with a decent soccer heritage, the scale to host the event and a chance of a good legacy in the form of stronger infrastructure and growth of the game there. Qatar seems a bit stranger, having none of the above advantages, and the further problem of forty degree temperatures to contend with.

It has been embarrassing to witness the outcry in England over the Russia award. Russia beat off bids by Spain/Portugal, Holland/Belgium and by England. England suffered the ignominy of being eliminated in the first round of voting, with only two votes out of twenty two, including its own vote. This despite a national expectation, and the presence in Zurich of David Cameron and Prince William.

England has retreated into an ugly sulk. The Russians have been accused throughout of dodgy practices, with the electorate fore the award branded opaque and buyable. Various parties supposedly promised England their vote only to change their mind at the last minute.

The English media had done a typically good job of journalism in the months leading up to the vote, exposing the whole ethos of FIFA and some allegedly corrupt officials within the process. While many deny that this had any negative impact on the result for the English bid, it can hardly have helped, and one official this week came out and admitted it had influenced his vote. I hope that doesn’t lead to the conclusion that the journalists should have kept quiet, as such exposes play an important role in life, and these ones might in the end have lasting positive effects.

By the way, what do you think of the Wikileaks story? I find it fascinating, and indicative of a changing world that a tiny organisation can bring to heel the mightiest establishment on earth. This will lead to major changes to how diplomacy is conducted. On the whole, I love it, but then I do wonder a little at the choice of cable to leak. For example, the list of critical sites is hardly exposing anything untoward, yet could be argued as Google Maps for terrorists. This story might be the biggest news of the whole year, and it will be fascinating to see it play out.

Back to FIFA and England. As the exposes showed, FIFA and its processes could do with reform. Sepp Blatter is not an appealing character, with his little homilies and blatant love of power, resembling an unaccountable African dictator in some ways.

But I find the reaction in England says a lot about that country. Firstly, the English invented underhand tactics, and use them liberally when it suits them. A number of other sports (snooker? Cricket, at least until recently?) have been run by English versions of Sepp Blatter. The IOC is hardly a paragon, yet not a word of protest was uttered when Britain won the 2012 Olympic games. Even last week, it was suggested that Prince William was handing out wedding invitations as inducements. There are clearly degrees of corruption, and it is quite possible that England were relatively clean. My point is that England only complain when they lose, and that is a childish time to do it.

Bill Bellichick, coach of the New England Patriots NFL team, has it right. “When you win, say little. When you lose, say less”.

Amid all the complaining, and theories about why England lost, there was also something completely absent. No one asked “maybe they didn’t like us. I wonder why?” At least, if the question was asked, the journalists were the knee jerk answer, am answer well within the national comfort zone.

Here are some less comfortable answers. First, they don’t like us because we are arrogant. England never tired of pointing out that we invented the game (wrong), and nurtured its international growth (even more wrong, actually England arrogantly refused to recognise FIFA between the two world wars). Other nations went in with joint bids, building goodwill as a consequence, but the English did not even embrace Scotland (but expected Scottish representatives to back our bid). The sneering at the opposition never helps – indeed one official had to resign for a blatant and unsupported attack on Russia. Maybe Prince William, wedding invitations or not, might just remind some voters of past colonial misdemeanours? All the interviews I saw suggested an attitude of entitlement for the England bid, which for sure will have put the backs up many voters. We are quick to observe and condemn arrogance from the USA, but we fail to see it in ourselves.

Second, they might not like us because we are insular. Few English bother with anyone else’s language or culture. (I confess I am as bad as most, living abroad for many years with precious little attempt to integrate). And we should not be surprised if the nasty little attacks on foreigners day in day out in the British press (and, sadly, on the British street) do not endear us to other nations. The EU is a dark, evil force, currency and border union is a threat to our superior way of life, and immigrants have criminal and scrounging tendencies…yet these nations should love us nonetheless, and wish us to stage their football tournaments. Sorry guys, things don’t work like that. And this small humiliation (and the Eurovision song contest year after year) gives us a chance to learn that lesson. Will we learn it? Don’t hold your breath.

So, FIFA, please reform, soccer deserves a more modern and accountable leadership than you currently provide. British journalists, please continue to make that reform more likely with your great exposures. And English people, including different, lazier journalists, please look more critically at our own nation, and see the downsides of imperial arrogance and popular insularity.