In my view Simon Kuper writes some of the most interesting reflective essays about contemporary football. He surpassed himself with an article in last weekend’s FT Magazine. I’m not sure I agree with everything he said, but it is certainly thought provoking.
He starts with the notion that the whole idea of following a particular club is central to the personal identity of many fans. Certainly when I think of my friends and acquaintances, I know which club they follow. That includes the women, by the way.
In my view Simon Kuper writes some of the most interesting reflective essays about contemporary football. He surpassed himself with an article in last weekend’s FT Magazine. I’m not sure I agree with everything he said, but it is certainly thought provoking.
He starts with the notion that the whole idea of following a particular club is central to the personal identity of many fans. Certainly when I think of my friends and acquaintances, I know which club they follow. That includes the women, by the way.
However, Kuper challenges the idea that fans who go to the stadium are more authentic than those who watch on television, often thousands of miles away. He argues, ‘There is still an outdated notion of the real “fan”: typically a European man who has a season ticket for the club his dad took him to as a child.’
I am, indeed, one of those sad individuals. It has condemned me to a lifetime of following Charlton. I console myself with the remark of a famous football historian who once said that you suffered for your club rather than it being an enjoyable leisure experience.
Even so, I enjoy the uncertainty of a football game. If I go to the theatre, the reviews give me some idea of the quality of the production and the Royal Shakespeare Company down the road has never let me down yet.
Of course, one could enjoy that uncertainty while watching television. However, all I watch on television are highlights programmes and the occasional international. The local council bans satellite dishes anyway so I can’t have Sky.
Kuper points out that social media has transformed the experience of watching a game on television. Even if you are watching on your own, you can share your thoughts and jokes with others on Twitter, Facebook and other platforms. Kuper goes so far as to argue that ‘TV fans have become a force that unites the world if little else does.’
Kuper cites Stanford professor Ulrich Gumbrecht who does sound a bit like Heinz Kiosk. He argues that the television viewer’s experience is absolute, what philosophers calling das Ding an sich, ‘the thing in itself’. I must admit I never did get my head round German philosophy.
Kuper points out that tv no longer provides a shared national experience any more. Thirty years ago I can recall going out and people would greet you with a catchphrase from a popular programme. Now, the audience is much more fragmented and many people watch programmes ‘on demand’.
The one type of programme that reliably draws a big audience is a major football match. For example, the Germany-Argentina cup final drew an average German TV audience of 35 million with another 10 million watching on big screens which is a truly collective experience.
Lobbying for fans, Kuper points out, involves the smaller group of match going fans, e.g., reducing the cost of away tickets. Even before the new TV deal, a third of British TV subscribers surveyed by Oxera Consulting for Virgin Media said they struggled to pay their subscription. Now Sky is raising its ‘sports bundle’ for British viewers to £47 a month. That is quite a lot for a hard pressed family, although so far there is no sign of a mass exodus of subscribers.
It also needs to be borne in mind that in warmer parts of the world, especially Africa, it is possible to watch a screen outdoors at a bar which enhances the experience. Kuper makes a good case in defence of television fans, but I am not sure that they are under threat.