European Nationalism and Football since the 1970s

The rebirth that the Dutch football team went through for the 2006 World Cup is interesting because instead of looking to the outside to help fix the team, the Dutch federation selected in-house talent.  They decided that their team was going to become the best by being entirely Dutch instead of the now traditional model of having players and coaches from different countries form a national team.  The joint commitment the team expressed about their “way of playing is more important than the result is” is an interesting philosophy in sports, especially for a team who was trying to return to their global dominance in the World Cup.  The Netherlands wanted to be able to have a sense of nationalism and feeling of true Dutch unity.  By using only in-house players and coaching, they sought to bring back a Dutch identity and answer the “who are we?” question.

After their loss in the finals of the 1974 World Cup to Germany, the Dutch team did not return home as losers but were welcomed home as champions.  By defeating traditional powerhouse teams like Argentina and Brazil and making it to the finals with Germany showed the people of the Netherlands that their tiny country could compete on the world stage with the best of them.  The 1974 team became a symbol of what the Netherlands could really do.  

The Dutch example is a lot like the US national team right now.  Football is getting more attention than it ever has in the US because its team has come out on top of strongholds of football like Mexico and are in the famous “group of death” for their first draw of the 2014 World Cup.  Even if they do not come out of the group “alive”, I am sure that they will be welcomed back in America much like how the 1974 Dutch team was.  Just by getting to the “group of death” and playing against the best teams in the world is an incredible achievement for a country whose professional league is just starting to gain traction.

Alex Law looks at football in a very different light.  He looks at the sport in a formal way and highlights the formation and growth of rivalries and violence.  He claims that:

“In the narrow context of the nation, globalized sporting competition no longer helps to contain violence or channel it – as academics such as Norbert Elias and Eric Dunning believe – but rather generates and maintains it, spreading it everywhere. “

Especially now with media coverage of sporting events available instantly around the world, the spread of violence is expedited as fan bases grow overseas.  He cites the violence and racial discrimination at the post-Soviet era games with the Football Union of Russia.  Even today, the issue of racial slurs and discrimination at sporting events is still present especially with the rise in openly gay players.

I do not view sports and football in this light, rather I believe that it is in human nature to fight and judge one another and confrontations would occur no matter what the environment was.  By identifying themselves with a particular team, fans are able to release some of that innate tension through loud behavior supporting their team at games.  While violence and discrimination are still present at some events, it pales in comparison to the wars being fought between rival nations.