Algerian players aid a fan injured during violence in Khartoum
It’s been a difficult few years for Old Grey Ladies and Old Ladies alike, but in both cases there still remains the capacity for that certain flash of brilliance. Juventus beat league-leading Inter last weekend (though they promptly went kaput in the Champs League), and the New York Times showed why it’s still essential reading with this piece on the aftermath of Egypt’s loss to Algeria in their World Cup play-in match.
The nut of the story is that parts of the Egyptian public, especially the more politically engaged kinds in Cairo, have come to comparing the Pharaohs loss in to Khartoum to the united Arab nations’ beatdown at the hands of Israel in 1967. Their point is that like in ’67, the defeat was more than its practical loss, but rather a dent in the greater Egyptian sense of self. This stuff, abstract catnip for us Western types, is clearly more profound, more visceral in that part of the world.
Like after any national sporting disaster, and I don’t think anyone here, reading this site, would contend with that choice of words, people split into two camps. There are those who would blame the opponent, the “perpetrator,” no matter how fairly the score was settled. Hence, multiple anti-Algerian protests, some violent. Others, the people I find more interesting, break out the mirrors. Such is Egypt’s perceived crisis of confidence that President Hosni Mubarak had to stand up in front of parliament to remind his countrymen how special they were, are, and will continue to be. The streets of Cairo are lined with “Proud to be Egyptian” signage.
A calming presence…
But back to the row with Algeria for a moment. If you’ll recall, before the nations’ first meeting—Egypt’s 2-0 home win, the one that made the trip to Sudan necessary– there were reports, legitimate as they come, that rocks were rained upon the visitors’ bus, causing injuries to at least one key player. The hubbub over that incident led to a full-on diplomatic donnybrook, with all the recalled ambassadors and somesuch you’d expect. And now, according to the Times pieces, it’s gotten so bad that none other than The Colonel himself has been called in by the Arab League to talk some sense into everybody. Yea, read back that last sentence. Moammar Qaddafi is now the Pan-Arab “voice of reason.”
While Qaddafi sorts out the professionals, there seems to be some growing anger on the Egyptian street. Anecdotal evidence provided by the NYT reporter to go along with some stark, overwrought editorials in the Cairo papers (“Our dignity is here and not in Khartoum and we must seize it now before we bid it farewell forever.” Yea…) indicate that with the World Cup dream dead, there is a growing vacuum; with no football to focus on or, perhaps, to be distracted by, the public has turned its attention to a crooked government.
There was a movement to boycott the ’78 finals, but not from inside Argentina
So what happens when the football goes away? The topline is that a loss like that suffered by the Egyptians can be destabilizing, it can inspire anger. The target of that anger and frustration varies. Sometimes it results in ethnic or nationalist violence. No one wants that. But what about the kind that makes a people question the power structure in their country. Is it a bad thing that some Egyptians (and I keep up with that qualifier, cos I don’t want to overstate what’s happening there) are a bit more concerned with their dire economy today?
Argentina in 1978 may be the most perfect example, or at least the most extreme, of the ugly side of football’s unifying powers. In the case of the ’78 World Cup, an entire nation, with small dissident and victims’ groups excepted, willingly suspended all awareness of the regime’s ongoing atrocities. With government thugs punting dissidents out of low-flying planes into the Atlantic, it was more comfortable to focus on defeating a Cruyff-less Holland.
Football as unifying force for good, peaceful, co-existence; Football as opiate. It cuts both ways. Maybe Qaddafi can settle it…
Algeria did not call back his ambassador and did not accept the mediation of Qaddafi ; the Algerians refused to play in this farce written by Moubarak !
@Mhamed there were, initially, the recalled ambassadors. im not commenting on whether or not qaddafi was, in fact, allowed to intervene– but the simple fact that his intent was reported says something.
also, the “farce by mubarak” is somewhat the point. did it take a poor footy result to get the public’s attention?
@The Likely Lad sorry my english is too poor!
By the “farce by mubarak” I mean that the Egyptian president wanted to assure a peaceful succession to his son Gamal by offering to Egyptians a beautiful qualification for South African World cup!
The problem for them is Algerians also waited for a qualification for 24 years!