What would the British media do to Zinedine Zidane?
On Sunday night, the World Cup of football- or soccer, for those of you that way inclined- was won by Italy. This, however, is not even the main story of the night. Nor is the fact that it is the fourth time "the Azzuri" have won it, putting them one win behind Brazil. No, the night's intrigue centred, as so many times before, on Zinedine Zidane.
Universally regarded as a genuis, voted the player of the tournament by FIFA's committee, darling of the French people- he managed to score his nation's only goal in the first 90 minutes of play, and then get himself sent off for what amounted to a pretty grave physical assault on an Italian player. A running head-butt to the chest was delivered with sickening force to the sternum of Marco Matterazzi, who coincidentally had scored Italy's only goal just a few minutes after Zidane had scored his.
The issue I wish to discuss here is not whether he did was right or not; not whether Matterazzi's blatant mischievious baiting of Zidane was as reprehensible as the subsequent attack, or whether Zidane, in his last ever match, has ruined his own legacy and tainted his own career. Even now, only two days after that fateful night in Berlin, the French people are rallying to support Zidane- the Champs d'Elysees bore numerous messages of adoration for Zidane, whose role is now of fallen hero, rather than the pantomime villain you would expect had be been the English captain. The English captain of this tournament was, of course, David Beckham. Back in 1998, as a precocious youngster, he was sent off for a petulent flick-kick at a nearby standing Argentinian player, while Beckham himself was prostrate on the ground.
This dismissal, warranted or not, earned him the position of Public Enemy number one for a long time. Voodoo dolls were created and burned while the national tabloid media orchestrated an effective hate campaign against him for allegedly ruining England's chances of winning the World Cup that year. Beckham himself has come full circle, of course. Just two years after his ordeal and subsequent trial by tabloid, he was named England captain in a surprise move that stuck well, and can on balance be considered a success. Yet Zidane, by physically attacking an opponent three-quarters of the way through a World Cup Final, as Captain, disgraced himself on a far larger stage, with a much higher stake- his crime (and it was a crime, against football, sportsmanship, and his nation's hopes) was all the more disgusting for that; and more to the point, far more serious than Beckham's was.
What, had it been England and Beckham in that final and not France and Zidane, would have become of the disgraced captain? The answer is simple. Our snide red-topped arbiters of national mood would have banded together once again to form a journalistic lynch mob; pulling the strings like cowardly puppeteers hiding behind their by-line, and letting the passion of the nation's supporters do their work for them. In short, "Beckingham Palace", as Beckham's country pile is known, would have been burned to the ground. It wouldn't be safe for him to return for quite some time. Maybe there is more than a hint of resentment over Beckham's shrewd playing of the fame game, he being the pioneer of "image rights" in football contracts, and using himself and his own sporting profile as a marketing tool on a scale hitherto unseen. Footballers from the 60's onwards have been used for advertising- Brut, Brylcreem, all stalwarts of Sunday League changing rooms, have used footballers- but never quite like Beckham.
Contrast this with Zidane; not only did he perform such a reprehensible act on the biggest stage in the world, but as he was dismissed and walked to the dressing room, showed nothing in the way of emotion. He had the same arrogant look in his eye that he has always had; the same one he had while lifting the World Cup Trophy in 1998, and the same one he still wore while headbutting a Champions' League opponent a few years later, earning him a five-match ban.
The British media would have pilloried him even more for the sheer arrogance of his appearance as he left the field- at least Beckham would have had the decency to cry or at least look disappointed. Zidane yesterday enjoyed a reception with the French President, where he was treated still as a national treasure, and told he was a "man of the heart". Only a handful of French commentators have come out in open criticism of Zidane, even then preferring to bemoan the "shattered dreams of a nation" rather than pursuing an open campaign of targeted blame.
While this sickly adoration of their talismanic Captain seems misplaced given his track record of nastiness and the gravity of his most recent and terminal act, we must surely reflect that it would be preferable to the vicious attack-mode thatwould have swept England had the same happened. And no Englishman would like to admit it- but perhaps the French are simple better losers than we are?
Universally regarded as a genuis, voted the player of the tournament by FIFA's committee, darling of the French people- he managed to score his nation's only goal in the first 90 minutes of play, and then get himself sent off for what amounted to a pretty grave physical assault on an Italian player. A running head-butt to the chest was delivered with sickening force to the sternum of Marco Matterazzi, who coincidentally had scored Italy's only goal just a few minutes after Zidane had scored his.
The issue I wish to discuss here is not whether he did was right or not; not whether Matterazzi's blatant mischievious baiting of Zidane was as reprehensible as the subsequent attack, or whether Zidane, in his last ever match, has ruined his own legacy and tainted his own career. Even now, only two days after that fateful night in Berlin, the French people are rallying to support Zidane- the Champs d'Elysees bore numerous messages of adoration for Zidane, whose role is now of fallen hero, rather than the pantomime villain you would expect had be been the English captain. The English captain of this tournament was, of course, David Beckham. Back in 1998, as a precocious youngster, he was sent off for a petulent flick-kick at a nearby standing Argentinian player, while Beckham himself was prostrate on the ground.
This dismissal, warranted or not, earned him the position of Public Enemy number one for a long time. Voodoo dolls were created and burned while the national tabloid media orchestrated an effective hate campaign against him for allegedly ruining England's chances of winning the World Cup that year. Beckham himself has come full circle, of course. Just two years after his ordeal and subsequent trial by tabloid, he was named England captain in a surprise move that stuck well, and can on balance be considered a success. Yet Zidane, by physically attacking an opponent three-quarters of the way through a World Cup Final, as Captain, disgraced himself on a far larger stage, with a much higher stake- his crime (and it was a crime, against football, sportsmanship, and his nation's hopes) was all the more disgusting for that; and more to the point, far more serious than Beckham's was.
What, had it been England and Beckham in that final and not France and Zidane, would have become of the disgraced captain? The answer is simple. Our snide red-topped arbiters of national mood would have banded together once again to form a journalistic lynch mob; pulling the strings like cowardly puppeteers hiding behind their by-line, and letting the passion of the nation's supporters do their work for them. In short, "Beckingham Palace", as Beckham's country pile is known, would have been burned to the ground. It wouldn't be safe for him to return for quite some time. Maybe there is more than a hint of resentment over Beckham's shrewd playing of the fame game, he being the pioneer of "image rights" in football contracts, and using himself and his own sporting profile as a marketing tool on a scale hitherto unseen. Footballers from the 60's onwards have been used for advertising- Brut, Brylcreem, all stalwarts of Sunday League changing rooms, have used footballers- but never quite like Beckham.
Contrast this with Zidane; not only did he perform such a reprehensible act on the biggest stage in the world, but as he was dismissed and walked to the dressing room, showed nothing in the way of emotion. He had the same arrogant look in his eye that he has always had; the same one he had while lifting the World Cup Trophy in 1998, and the same one he still wore while headbutting a Champions' League opponent a few years later, earning him a five-match ban.
The British media would have pilloried him even more for the sheer arrogance of his appearance as he left the field- at least Beckham would have had the decency to cry or at least look disappointed. Zidane yesterday enjoyed a reception with the French President, where he was treated still as a national treasure, and told he was a "man of the heart". Only a handful of French commentators have come out in open criticism of Zidane, even then preferring to bemoan the "shattered dreams of a nation" rather than pursuing an open campaign of targeted blame.
While this sickly adoration of their talismanic Captain seems misplaced given his track record of nastiness and the gravity of his most recent and terminal act, we must surely reflect that it would be preferable to the vicious attack-mode thatwould have swept England had the same happened. And no Englishman would like to admit it- but perhaps the French are simple better losers than we are?
Labels: Sport / Media
posted by Matt at 5:33 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home