Comments on: Editorial: A plague on both your houses

By: ursus arctos

ursus arctos — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:25:58 +0000

Excellent piece, and two excellent comments.

Gracias a todos.

By: Noe

Noe — Sun, 12 Aug 2007 04:00:21 +0000

Being 0:40 Argentina time, I can tell you that River’s match against Newell’s has been suspended, to avoid any kind of problem (Clarín online is the source) And I agree with you, Justin. This is not a society problem. This is, in a very strict way, a River issue. It’s clear that Aguilar’s silence is a message. He knows there’s something wrong with this people, but he doesn’t seem to find a way to stop them fighting. It’s been a rumour that some guys of Barrabrava get money from the passes of the players. How can journalist say that? When Higuain went to Real Madrid, barrabravas got into a huge fight inside the club. And now, Carrizo has been sold and we have even a worse kind of trouble between these people. The club’s president can’t pretend nothing happened. Now, Justice attributed a responsability on Acro’s crime to the Schlenker brothers but I don’t think it’s gonna end just blaming the Schlenkers. However, and it’s not a way to justify them, making a comparison between Di Zeo and Schlenkers brothers isn’t quite accurate. The social origins aren’t the same. Di Zeo wanted some kind of “famous” treatment. The Schlenker are far beyond that. They come from a middle-high class, both with good jobs and social statement. They don’t need any special treatment, ‘cos they already have it, naturally. The continuos fights between Rousseau and Schlenkers is, in other words and making a very ordinary example, when cats spray to mark their territory. River is a huge organisation and they’re fighting to get the most of it. Let’s just hope they don’t keep killing each other, and that all this problem don’t affect the team.

By: justin

justin — Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:27:05 +0000

Excellent article Sam.

I have one problem with the idea that this sort of hooligan trouble is “just” a reflection of society. I think it’s gone beyond that in recent years, as leaders of the big firms have become famous. The fact that we are talking about these people by name (along with Rafa Di Zeo etc) is clearly an indication that becoming a top hoolie is a way to become “important.” This might be the same mindset as the childhood playground power struggle, but the rewards are now more tangible. And this is football’s fault, not society’s.

“Ordinary” street violence does not make its perpetrators famous, allow them to hobnob with Diego Maradona or Ariel Ortega, give them a level of status in their neighborhood. This is football’s problem. It is ingrained in football culture now that the barras brava are important, when in fact they are not. They have no talent or skill. They are not special. Anyone desensitized to violence can do what they do. They do create a fantastic atmosphere at matches, but unfortunately it’s become accepted that violence and atmosphere are mutually inclusive. There is no reason this has to be true.

The sad truth is, hooligans have an element around the world that admires them, or at the very least has a morbid fascination with them. One need only look at the number of books published by reformed hoolies in England, or various documentaries about them. While these don’t exist soley to celebrate hooliganism, neither do they outright condemn it. Or they wait until the last paragraph or closing scene to do so.

Obviously the clubs in Argentina have to find a way to deal differently with the barras brava. But in the greater context, as long as these people are considered special and important in the football world, they will never stop what they do. I recognize it’s not so simple, but I can certainly hope the day comes when I can be a River fan without knowing the names of these wastes-of-space who “run” the terraces.