THE UNSATISFYING SOUND OF SILENCE
Our sporting heroes, for long, have stood up as real heroes, advocating for causes we hold dear, yet we find ourselves too inconspicuous to champion. But now they are silenced.
Might the arena, with its pulse of competition, mend the shattered heart? Could it, perhaps, serve as an antidote to the self-inflicted afflictions our world seems all too eager to inflict upon itself? The prowess of sport as a force of unity has been chronicled for long, and love-lost forlorn figures have often sought sanctuary in the communal ecstasy that a match bestows upon us. Their problem and loss, if only momentarily, dissolve into the jubilation woven by a troupe of stranger athletes into our lives.
Sports presents us with a rare opportunity to revel in the collective triumphs of exceptionally skilled and devoted individuals, prompting a sense of self-affirmation through the vicarious thrill of our favourite teams and athletes. However, the inherent purity of sport — the sacred connection between its enthusiasts and the game itself — finds itself besieged daily at the altar of corporate greed. No longer merely a pastime, sport has morphed into a gargantuan moneymaking entity, siphoning the very essence of the game.
The stance taken by cricket’s governing body, an irrational prohibition against Usman Khawaja wearing a pair of shoes emblazoned with the words “all lives are equal” and “freedom is a human right,” strikes at the core of our fundamental rights as liberated citizens. Khawaja’s footwear surely committed no transgressions against the International Cricket Council’s regulation forbidding any exhibition of political or religious messages on team gear or attire.
Our sporting heroes, for long, have stood up as real heroes, advocating for causes we hold dear, yet we find ourselves too inconspicuous to champion. Indian great Vijay Merchant declined to tour England to protest the imprisonment of Mahatma Gandhi and other freedom fighters in 1932, while Jesse Owens used the Olympic podium to throw light on Hitler’s evils and the ills of segregation in his own homeland [the USA] four years later.
Yet, today, those resonant voices, once defiant and unyielding, find themselves stifled as associations and clubs look to protect their financial interests.
FIFA, the custodian of global football, was equally guilty of getting entangled in a web of compromises, succumbing to the desires of its oil-rich hosts.
Boardroom champion of equal rights and justice, the
FIFA president swiftly betrayed its lofty ideals when it prohibited the display of ‘Onelove’ rainbow armbands at the 2022 World Cup. Seven European teams had planned to wear anti-discrimination armbands during their matches in Qatar. But FIFA, wielding the threat of sanctions, coerced them to abandon their cause, with the team captains warned of receiving straight yellow cards.
Seemingly learning from the public relations disaster, Gianni Infantino allowed the use of eight armbands with messages of gender equality, inclusivity, and peace at the Women’s World Cup in Australia and New Zealand. “It’s not just about what happens on the pitch,” the then FIFA secretary general, Fatma Samoura, said. “We are committed to using football’s power as a force for good. United, we can make a difference.”
But FIFA, though, promptly scored a self-goal as it brought in Visit Saudi as one of its sponsors. Players, coaches, and, thankfully, the host associations rightly questioned the wisdom of associating with a nation-state widely condemned for its treatment of women and LGBTQ+ communities.
The irony of FIFA’S noble aspirations once again glaringly clashed with the stark realities of its sponsorship choices.
Incidentally, Visit Saudi is also the principal sponsor of the Board of Control for Cricket in India’s cash cow [read Indian Premier League].