At the World Cup, one question has been a recurring theme over the past week. When asked at a press conference about the situation in Qatar regarding human rights, one footballer – one of the most skilled on the planet – dismissed it.
"It's a delicate subject. Our team believes in human rights, workers' rights and equality, but we're here to represent our country," said Bernardo Silva, two days before Portugal's World Cup debut. A few days later, French midfielder Mattéo Guendouzi echoed him: "We're not insensitive to the situation, but we're here to play football."
Having begun their match against Japan by mimicking being gagged, in reaction to FIFA's banning of the "One Love" anti-discrimination armband, not one German player took advantage of the end of the match interviews to speak out on the subject. "We wanted to show that we stand up for our values and human rights," said captain Manuel Neuer, without specifying the values in question.
In this highly political World Cup, everything that happens in Qatar is seen through a magnifying glass. Many observers – from politicians to artists – are quick to give their opinion. However, the players' silence is deafening.
But should this be any different? "It's a sensitive issue," said Jonas Baer-Hoffmann, general secretary of FIFPRO, the world footballers' union, who said that he is "annoyed by the fact that there's so much pressure on players to take a stance on every issue". He added: "Players must have the freedom to express themselves if they choose to do so, like anyone else."
Moreover, Mr. Baer-Hoffmann finds the often contradictory statements on whether sports stars should voice their opinions frustrating: "Either people expect them to say nothing" – for example, the cry of "shut up and dribble" thrown at American basketball player LeBron James in early 2018 by a conservative TV anchor – "or, and this is the case here, they're criticized for not having an informed opinion on human rights or a fairly complex geopolitical situation."
Silence interpreted as guilt
Captain of Finland until his retirement at the end of 2021, Tim Sparv is one of the few footballers who has spoken out about the 2022 World Cup. "We need to talk about Qatar," he said in September 2021 on the US website The Players Tribune. After inquiring about the issue after one of his colleagues – "a good guy" – refused to attend a national team training camp held in Doha in 2019, the defensive midfielder highlighted the difficulties for a player in expressing themselves on these sensitive subjects. "You're expected to give elaborate answers on the spot on all those sensitive topics, like a diplomat or a politician. It's extremely uncomfortable."
Why demand of these (often very young) players what is not asked of others: to take firm and decisive political positions? "On the question of Qatar, to criticize footballers for their silence is to assume that they should take sides. Their silence is interpreted as guilt," observed the philosopher Thibaud Leplat, author of numerous books on football. According to him, things aren't so simple. "Footballers are more cautious than politicians. They've understood the extent of our ambiguities with regard to this geographical area."
Immersed in an environment fuelled by funds from the Middle East – such as in the case of PSG with Qatar – the players live daily on the shifting sands on which political leaders sway, depending on the price of gas or the international climate.
A few days after French Sports Minister Amélie Oudéa-Castéra called on Les Bleus to "continue to express [their] commitment to human rights," French President Emmanuel Macron wrote a series of tweets on Saturday, November 26, highlighting the "tangible changes" in Qatar and reassuring the Gulf country of his support. To protect their players, many agents have only confirmed interviews on the condition that political questions about Qatar are not discussed.
"Football has taken a very important place in our society, and there's increasing pressure on the players," admitted the French captain, Hugo Lloris, before the World Cup. In the words of Paris Saint-Germain legend Rai: "Football gives such visibility that it creates expectations." Sponsor of the Ballon d'Or's Sócrates Award named for his older brother – a new addition to the ceremony this year which rewards "the best solidarity work carried out by committed champions" (in association with the organization Peace and Sport) – the Brazilian has followed in the footsteps of his older brother, "football's Che Guevara" and an icon of the fight for democracy in the 1980s.
"When I arrived at Sao Paulo, my first big club, I was still very young," said Rai. "But because I was Sócrates' brother, people expected me to have an opinion. I had to educate myself and take an interest in political and economic issues, which might have interested me later on." The 1994 World Cup winner believes it's not wise to demand that players speak out. However, he encourages them to stay informed. "That way, they will feel more comfortable to give their opinion when the time comes, if they want to."
Similarly, FIFPRO "supports the players who wish to express themselves, by giving them the information we have so that they can make an informed opinion," underlined Mr. Baer-Hoffmann. He insisted: "It remains an individual choice, one that must be respected, both for those who choose to speak out and those who don't."
'Sport has entered another dimension'
Is there such a thing as good or poor stances among sportsmen? "They talk about democracy and the like, but when someone has a different opinion, they're attacked by the very people pushing for democracy. Go figure," said Brazilian star Neymar in late September. After showing his support for the incumbent president, Jair Bolsonaro, before the October election which he lost to Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, the Seleçao's number 10 came under heavy criticism.
While Rai is a Lula support – to the point of being part of his sport transition team – the former PSG star defended his compatriot's right to express himself, finding it positive that footballers "take an interest in sensitive issues." He said: "Even if he defends an opinion that's different to mine, the simple fact that Neymar is interested in politics and is taking a stance is positive."
But if the players are increasingly being expected to react, "this expectation hasn't always existed," said Jean-Michel De Waele. A professor of political science at the Free University of Brussels, he belives that: "Sport has entered another dimension, and so have the athletes."
For him, a shift occurred with the Black Lives Matter movement and the 2020 demonstrations linked to George Floyd's death in the United States. "From now on, just as the cultural and academic movement and artists are expected to take a stance on social issues, it affects sportsmen and women who, with the Black Lives Matter movement, have shown a willingness to intervene."
This year's Sócrates Award went to Sadio Mané for his investment in the development of his native village in Senegal – a cause, like the fight against racism in Europe, where players don't risk being punished for their stance, as was the case with American footballer Colin Kaepernick.
"A commitment implies that it's made either against our own interests – this is the definition of civil disobedience – or against the dominant opinion. That's when there's risk taking; everything else is communication," concluded philosopher Mr. Leplat. In this regard, by refusing to sing the national anthem during their first game of the World Cup in support of protests against Tehran's regime, the Iranian players have taken a stand. Even if they didn't say anything either.