Football Leagues
|
"Image is a powerful force in football and, once cemented in people's minds, can linger far longer than reality, even when that reality is at complete odds with the mythology" Rohan Connolly A theory known as self-categorization theory (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher & Wetherell, 1987) proposes that if a social group is given a label that distinguishes it from another social group, then the human mind will try to give the label a justification for existing by creating a stereotype for it. As far as the mind is concerned, if there is no difference in substance, why is there a difference in label? In practice, such cognitive processes can be seen in everyday life. When people think of a BMW, a certain image comes to their mind. When people think of a Liberal party voter, they have an idea about what things the Liberal voter feels is important. When people think of a policeman, they have an idea of the type of duties he performs and the attitudes he is likely to hold. By giving social groups an image, the mind is better able to make an educated guess how it should react in novel situations. For example, when hosting a dinner party where one of the guests is a policeman, the stereotype that police officers are law abiding citizens will dissuade people from talking about how much they enjoy using drugs. Likewise, one may hold a stereotype that St Kilda fans are a self-depreciating bunch. Thus when one encounters a St Kilda fan, one will feel comfortable making a joke about the club's latest wooden spoon. On the other hand, one may hold a stereotype that Richmond fans don't come to terms with losing quite so easily. Thus upon meeting a Richmond fan, one may wisely avoid making a joke about another inept performance by the Tigers. Of course, not all St Kilda fans are comfortable with losing nor are all Richmond supporters so emotionaly shattered by a loss that they dump chicken manure on the club's doorstep. But the respective stereotypes help the mind better guess how Richmond fans as a collective are different from St Kilda fans as a collective. As a result of the guess, the mind is better able to predict how it should behave around Richmond and St Kilda fans. The steretype may also help new understand how they should behave if they join the group. The stereotype that Richmond fans are passionate should guide the behaviour of any individual that chooses to pull on a Tiger jumper. The new Richmond supporter should know that his or her fellow Richmond fans expect passion to be displayed.
Although marketers like to think their club's image comes from their press releases, in reality it is a summation of the behaviour of the barrackers, history of the club, moniker, current players, geographic associations, club icons or club presidents. Once these are all mixed together, the human mind seeks to interpret each aspect in a way that will distinguish it from other social groups. In Sydney, to make the culture of the Aussie rules more distinguishable from Rugby League, League fans exaggerate the effeminate connotations of the Swan's moniker so that by comparison to Rugby League, Aussie rules appears like an effeminate sport known as 'aerial ballet.' For their part, Swan fans seek points of reference that portray League as a 'meathead' sport. The different respective images of the two codes are somewhat of a distortion considering both are extremely tough and both have working-class foundations. Both images are also in stark contradiction to the 'family' stereotype promoted by the marketers of the respective codes.
As the old saying goes 'birds of a feather flock together'. People choose to support a club that reminds them of themselves. The character of the fans subsequently reinforces the club's image. Furthermore, as people conform to the social sterotypes, the stereotypes can become self-fulfilling prophecy. For example, if Collingwood gains a stereotype that its fans are die hard, then fair-weather fans who are made aware of this image may conform to the Collingwood stereotype and thus strengthen it. Because stereotypes exert conformity pressures, they are often used to persuade fans to behave a certain way. After their second Grand Final defeat in as many years, Collingwood president Eddie McGuire calmed dissent by evoking the stereotype that Collingwood is a unified club: " But this club will not turn on itself or founder like we’ve seen some other clubs do. The great thing about this football club is we celebrate together, we cry together, we love together and we hate together but as our theme song says ‘side by side we stick together" Similarly, when trying to persuade fans to embrace the move from Victoria Park, the club released a mock anthem that evoked the stereotype of passionate Magpie fans following the club to its new home: "
We're dyed in the wool, completely one-eyed, *Considering that so many Collingwood fans have spent time in Pentridge Prison, it is a mystery as to why they were unable to spot the con.
Sports psychologists have long noted the link between a club's identity and the manner a club plays. The ability of identity to influence performance is the very reason why sporting teams started associating themselves with ferocious animals 150 years ago. Aware of this psychological appeal, smart coaches evoke the spirit of the club's culture in order to persuade footballers to play in a traditional style. Ex-Kangaroos coach Denis Pagan used to evoke the cliché of Shinboner tradition to improve player performance: "Pagan's much-loved Shinboner spirit was a phrase that often had the cynics rolling their eyes, but which reinforced over and over the impression that the Roos would never offer anything less than an honest contest. " The same technique is also used at an amatuer level. Coaches may try to motivate their players with Rocky music such as "Eye of the Tiger". Alternatively, they may evoke the sterotype of the club's traditional strengths. There also seems to be a correlation between the connotation of the moniker and a history of failure. In their nine years in the VFA, the South Melbourne Bloods won five premierships. They were a foundation club of the VFL and won premierships in 1912 and 1918. In the thirties, the club reached its zenith and won its third premiership in 1933. It was then that they decided to change their name to the Swans. For the next 50 years, they only twice appeared in finals. In 1982, the club moved to Sydney and in 25 years since, they have never risen above mediocrity. (A leadership consultant has now suggested to the playing group that they think of themselves as Bloods not Swans.) Contrasted to Sydney, the Port Adelaide Power has only been in the AFL for eight years but has won three McCelland Tropies, two night premierships and a grand final. It achieved these feats without the benefit of salary cap and recruiting concessions that the Swans enjoy. Although both Port and the Swans have different cultures, their moniker is the visual representation of this culture. Power is indeed more intimdating than Swans. Hawthorn began its existence in 1925 as the Mayflowers. Only once in the next 25 years did it manage more wins than losses for the season. In 1950, the club became the Hawks and started to find some form. In 1961 it won its first premiership. More successes followed in 1971, 1976, 1978, 1983, 1988-89, and 1991. In the 90s in particular, it was tough, mean and very un-maybloom like in character.
Although culture can be subject to a self-fulfilling prophecy, it can be changed. One club that has experienced a change in its image is Carlton. Over the last two decades, the suburb has been gentrified thus associating the word "Carlton" with restaurants rather than factories. More change came with the growing importance of television which often gave fans an impression of Carlton that was tainted with the views of dubious businessmen John Elliot. Of course Carlton is not the only Melbournian working-class suburb that has been gentrified and the Blues are not the only club which has had an outspoken corporate club president. But Carlton has assumed a corporate identity because it has some points of reference that makes it more worthy of the title "corporate club" than say Collingwood, St Kilda or Richmond. Corporate points of reference include the Blue's history of success, financial health and its high profile supporters. Furthermore, although navy blue is a working-man's colour, it is also associated with the American corporate banking system.
Prejudice between clubs can be explained using Tajfel, H. and Turner, JC (1986) - "The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour." One aspect of the theory is that individuals will raise the significance of group characteristics that increase the group's relative status. For example in Sydney, as Aussie rules gets the biggest crowds, Rugby League fans increase the relative status of their code by stressing the value of television ratings. For their part, Aussie Rules fans increase the relative status of their code by arguing that television is the domain of the fair-weather fan. The predictions of social identity theory can also been seen in the insults of AFL fans. Collingwood fans have a reputation for being die hard thus will demean rival Essendon fans for lacking passion. Essendon fans may return fire with Colliwobble insults; citing the Magpie's psychological problems that keep them from winning Grand Finals. Each insult has an element of truth but respective fans either exaggerate or diminish the significance of each insult as they attempt to gain status over a rival club. Of course, an insult can only cut if the target shares the view that it is derogatory and usually they don't. For example, Collingwood fans may say Melbourne fans are upper-class toffs who head of to the snow during the footy season. But for the Melbourne fans who are proud of their 4WDs and enjoy skiing, this is not an insult, but a source of pride. On their way to the snow, Melbourne fans may even wave to Collingwood fans waiting at the centrelink bus stop. When they return from the snow, Melbourne fans are not concerned about Collingwood fans insulting them for owning a 4WD. However, they are concerned about Collingwood fans making plans to steal their 4WD.
Although diversity will always lead to prejudice, it doesn't always lead to hostility. A notable feature of the AFL is that the hostility is greatest between clubs that share a similar image. For example, traditionally Collingwood's greatest rivalries were with Carlton and Richmond, both fellow inner-city, catholic, working-class clubs. It lacked rivalries with the middle-class protestant clubs such as Essendon and Melbourne. In recent years, although Collingwood has lost two Grand Finals to Brisbane, it hasn't built a strong rivalry with the club. As Collingwood coach Mick Malthose explained: "Although the AFL is a national competition, the truly passionate rivalries remain largely local affairs. Richmond haven't won a premiership for more than 20 years, but whenever Collingwood play the Tigers there's an almost tangible energy around the place. " Similarity breeds conflict because fans seek clearly defined boundaries between each club's respective image. By making insults, they are putting social distance between themselves and the rival club. In the words of American poet Robert Frost, "good fences make good neighbours." Conflict emerges when boundaries are not clearly defined. As one Collingwood fan explained his hatred for Richmond: "I firmly believe that we all hate them 'cause they are like us - passionate, feral and complete nuts!"
The Fremantle Dockers is WA's working class club. However according to market research surveys, Fremantle supporters have always had a very high average income. The contradiction between the stereotype and the reality can be explained as stemming from people having an ideal conception of themselves that may not be consistent with reality. For example, a rich person living in Perth might identify themselves as egalitarian, or a man of the people and so choose to support the Dockers. In much the same way, Victoria Bitter has a very strong working class image, yet is mostly drunk by people who are not working class. In this regard, a stereotype can be a more factual representation of a club's supporters than a Roy Morgan survey. A stereotype is a reflection upon a belief structure that shapes behaviour. A survey may not be.
There is a stereotype that psychologists understand the human mind. On the back of this stereotype, psychologists are paid to testify in court, paid to provide consultancy to advertising agencies, paid to solve people's problems and even paid to help market football teams and inspire the players. But is the stereotype an accurate one? Do psychologists really know more about human psychology that say a professional football coach who has to get into the mind of his players on both an individual and group level? Day in and day out, the coach is having his theories tested and refined accordingly. On the other hand, psychologist are disconnected from the real world. Why aren't football coaches paid to testify in court on issues affecting the mind? One thing is certain, for every one psychologist that knows about the mind, there are 19 who do not. In psychology, there is almost no agreement upon anything, and one psychologist has a habit of saying the complete opposite to another. Both psychologists can't be right. And if both psychologists say the opposite to the other, how can the stereotype that psychologists be mind experts be an accurate one? Psychologists even disagree on the very stereotypes that benefit them. Some psychologists see stereotypes as distortions of the mind caused by the brain needing to conserve cognitive resources. Like good scientists, they have experimental evidence to back them up. Other psychologists see stereotypes as a way for the brain to deal with its lack of information. They argue that stereotypes help the brain navigate novel situations, make sense of labels, and even provide social esteem. Like good scientists, they have experimental evidence to back them up. So are stereotypes a mental distortion or do they exist to serve a purpose? Perhaps the moral of the story is that it doesn't really matter. The evolution of human history has shown that there are no facts, only ideas. And these ideas are strung together to form beliefs that guide people's behaviour. Psychologists have ideas that contribute to belief formation. They sit in their office reading other people's ideas, and with time, they may develop some ideas of their own that might be unique. Even if the psychologists ideas are stupid (as they often are), the stereotype that psychologist are experts will probably have a placebo effect and still contribute something to belief formation. For a football team, ideas are used to win a premiership and increase the number of fans. Whinging about inconsistencies, incorrect facts, inaccurate stereotypes or the folly of stereotypes is not conducive to achieving these aims. On the other hand, exploiting the stereotypes to belittle the opposition, inspire one's own team and win new fans is conducive to these aims. It is not important as to whether stereotypes are true or false. The only thing that is important is that stereotypes affect behaviour and thus can be exploited to achieve the club's aims.
In modern times, club identity has become more confused due to so many different cooks spoiling the broth. As sponsorship has become more important, marketers have gained an unhealthy influence in the formation of a club's identity. Acting in accordance with their training, such marketers try to create an image that appeals to sponsors, rather than an image that is consistent with the club's players, history or fans. In the 90's the Kangaroos' marketers tried to promote the image of an "innovative club." Unfortunately, this image was in contradiction to the dour, no-nonsense 'shinboner' image promoted by coach Dennis Pagon. It was also in contradiction to the behaviour of fans, who although created some innovative insults such as throwing marshmallows at Essendon, on the whole acted like traditional football fans. The end result was that the innovative image didn't stick and the Kangaroos were instead seen as souless. In Rugby League, the Parramatta Eels are another club trying to pretend they have an innovative image. In reality, there is nothing innovative about the players or the fans. Arguably, Parramatta fans are the most generic out of all fans in Sydney; neither bottom feeders like the Bulldogs nor arrogant silvertails like Manly. On the field, Parramatta are generic performers, neither finishing with the wooden spoon, nor the premiership. They are middle of the road, average performers. Appointing coaches from outside the club's culture can also be problematic. When he was the Geelong coach, ex-Hawthorn backman Gary Ayres, tried to instil a Hawthorn culture onto the Geelong playing group. Hawthorn was a club with a strong sense of stoic teamwork while Geelong was famous for its cult of hero worship. With a coach dragging players for being flamboyant, and 25,000 fans cheering the player for being flamboyant, Geelong players perhaps became confused about which master to obey. In any case, Ayres was neither successful on the field nor in changing the culture. Today, Geelong fans are still as wrapped up with hero worship, as they have always been and perhaps, always will be. |
Invention of Australian sports Cricket
|
|
What
is used to define the image?