One rotten apple or a rotten tree: football leaders’ perceptions of racism in European football

ABSTRACT

Despite efforts by key stakeholders to address racial discrimination in international football, racially charged behaviour persists, particularly in the European context. To explore this phenomenon, our paper employs Critical Race Theory as a central framework and links empirical research to racism and inclusion while keeping institutional football and policy concerns at the forefront of its investigation. Primary questions underlining the study concern practices and actors that enable or sustain exclusionary practices in the football industry. To better understand the nature of racial discourse among football leaders and how it potentially facilitates or acts as a barrier to inclusion in football, qualitative interviews were conducted with leaders from eight European countries. The interviews revealed conflicting tensions in the football industry. Tensions between corporatized football practices and equality policymaking, discrepancies in views on discriminatory actions and their connections to larger structural issues and resistance to change from predominantly White, male leadership.

KEYWORDS:

• Football
• Europe
• racism
• diversity
• inclusion
• race

Introduction

The English saying, “one rotten apple spoils the barrel”¸ is often used to caution against the threat that an individual’s foul behaviour may have on a larger collective. In the case of racial discrimination in professional football, the expression can be used to distinguish an individual’s racist conduct from that of the football community or the isolation of racism in any form from the larger football culture. This is illustrated through the way football leaders distance the football community from acts of discrimination. An example of this is illustrated by La Liga’s President, Javier Tebas’ response to racial abuse that took place during a match between Valencia FC and Real Madrid FC. In Spring 2023, Real Madrid forward, Vinícius José Paixão de Oliveira Júnior, popularly known as Vinícius jnr., was subjected to racist abuse in the form of monkey chants and was repeatedly referred to as a “monkey” by fans at Mestalla Stadium in Spain (Kirkland 2023). After the game, the Brazilian player released a statement on his social media expressing his disappointment and exposing the state of racism in Spanish football: “This wasn’t the first time, or the second, or the third. Racism is normal in LaLiga. The competition thinks it’s normal, the federation does too, and opponents encourage it” (Vini Jr. [@vinijr] 2023).

This incident and Vinícius’ statement sent shockwaves through the football world and beyond. It received widespread media coverage reflecting the social power of professional football to reach diverse global audiences (Azzoni and Douglas 2023). It also shows how racism in Spanish football may have a structural character and cannot be easily dismissed as an isolated incident. It was Tebas’ response that further revealed the unacknowledged systemic nature of racism in football culture. In a series of Twitter posts, the Spanish football leader suggested that Vinícius was ill-informed about racism cases and portrayed the player as uncooperative. He went on to say:

Before you criticise and slander La Liga, you need to inform yourself properly @Vinijr … Neither Spain nor @LaLiga is racist, it is unfair to say this … We always identify the thugs responsible and take the complaints all the way to the relevant bodies who have power to punish them. (Javier Tebas Medrano [@Tebasjavier] 2023a; 2023b).

Tebas’ words suggest that the “thugs” (racist fans) are the “rotten apples” in this case and, thus, if they are disciplined accordingly or removed from the proverbial “barrel”, the problem would be removed. Within this reasoning, racial discrimination would be a “question of individual morality, rather than being structurally engendered” (Lentin 2020, 63) in the football world, while research shows how structural forms of racism permeate football culture (van Sterkenburg et al. 2023). What this case illustrates is the reluctance among some key stakeholders to recognize acts of racism as potential symptoms of structurally engendered racial discrimination (Fletcher and Hylton 2016). Furthermore, the abuse faced by Vinícius showcases the potential consequences of Tebas' and La Liga's lack of acknowledgment of systemic racism. If systemic racism is a commonly unavowed reality both within and beyond Spanish football, what harm does it do in effectively addressing racial discrimination or in creating an inclusive football culture? How do football organizations address racial discrimination within an industry that considers itself race-neutral? The purpose of this paper is to explore these questions through the intersections of leadership, language, football culture, and racism in a European context.

In order to examine the meanings that football leaders – as key decision-makers within football institutions – give to race and racism, this paper draws on interviews, focusing on their experiences and perceptions in managing race-related discrimination. To interrogate these meanings and what they reveal about how racial discrimination is perceived and addressed a central research question is asked:

What do leaders’ experiences and perceptions in addressing race related discrimination reveal about how racial discrimination is administered in football and how do these experiences and perceptions facilitate or limit effective anti-racism practices in European football?

Given La Liga and Tebas’ reaction to the abuse faced by Vinícius and how common it is for football leaders to eschew institutional racism (Bradbury 2013; Hylton 2008) this paper critically explores racial discourses among European football leaders and their potential impact.

Literature review

Race, leadership and football

In any organization, leadership plays a crucial role in modelling acceptable values and behaviour, hence the importance of diversity (Neto, Miragaia, and Ibáñez 2021; Walter et al. 2017). A lack of diversity in an organization runs the risk of racialized institutional processes going unchallenged (Hylton 2010; Walter et al. 2017). This often results in continued discriminatory practices where race as a “‘floating signifier' is used to mark boundaries and dictate the rules of inclusion and exclusion based on historically specific circumstances” (Ferriter 2016, 24). Commonly observed barriers that enable mechanisms of exclusion in football include colour-blind narratives adopted by leaders, narratives that are centred in egalitarian notions of sport as a levelling practice (Bradbury 2013; Fletcher and Hylton 2016). Evidence contradicting race-neutrality in modern football institutions can be observed, for example, through the undermined professional development and mobility of leaders from racialized backgrounds in comparison to their White counterparts. Institutionalized forms of racism are exemplified through research findings which reveal that White men hold most of the leadership roles in European football with approximately 87 per cent being senior governing positions and 87 per cent being senior operational roles (van Sterkenburg et al. 2023). Research in both sports and organizational fields illustrate a relationship between the lack of diverse leadership and the perpetuation of discriminatory practices (Parnell et al. 2023; Walter et al. 2017). Like most social institutions, calls to acknowledge the role of race within football are primarily heard as “accusation[s] of racism rather than a critical analysis of how racialized power structures operate” (Lentin 2020, 102).

Previous studies (Bradbury 2013; Carrington 2011; Hylton 2010) have investigated different aspects of structural barriers imbued by racialized processes in sports – particularly in football – and have provided a foundation to further critically examine racial ideologies that inhibit progress in the football industry. Scholars like Bradbury (2013) illustrate how racialized recruitment processes contribute to a lack of diverse leadership in football. Further studies have linked these discriminatory recruitment patterns to a closed network approach which suggests that leaders or employers are more likely to hire individuals based on referrals from close ties who are often people with shared characteristics like racial background (Parnell et al. 2023). What is not fully explored are the discursive resources employed within football governance that potentially enable or limit racially discriminatory practices across different European countries. Our current study addresses this and aims to contribute to the growing critical academic knowledge on racism in football leadership.

Theoretical lens: cultural studies and critical race theory (CRT)

Understanding racial ideology through CRT

What discursive resources do football leaders draw on to give meaning to race and racism in football, within the context of football governance? The interdisciplinary field of cultural studies is a suitable starting point to answer a question concerned with meaning-making in a popular sporting tradition. Born out of a bricolage of disciplines, cultural studies offers a framework committed but not limited to the study of cultural practices, power relations and discourse (Grossberg, Nelson, and Treichler 1991; Hall, Morley, and Chen 1996). Among cultural studies’ main contributors is Stuart Hall who has shown how language is a key medium through which discourses are articulated. It is within the discursive realm of language that meaning and knowledge on a particular phenomenon such as racism is constructed and ultimately understood (Hall, Morley, and Chen 1996). We consider discourse as “ways of referring to or constructing knowledge about a topic” (Hall 1997, 6). Discourse is always contextual and defined by social and political life that is situated within a historical context (Hall, Morley, and Chen 1996). This suggests that football as a cultural practice is a site for signification – meaning making – because “cultural practices are signifying practices” (Hall, Morley, and Chen 1996, 157). Suggestively, football leaders and other industry actors are both products and facilitators of specific discursive practices. In this research paper, we use this theorization to examine which discourses football leaders draw on in their framing of race and racism in football and what knowledge of race and racism in football gets reproduced through discourse.

In addition to employing this theorization of ideology, Critical Race Theory (CRT) as theoretical framework will be used to conceptualize racial meanings. CRT as a theoretical approach challenges commonly accepted notions of racism as anomalies, as questions of subjective morality or as realities locked up in events of the past, which are commonly held perceptions in football (Hylton 2008; 2010; Lentin 2020). These challenges, among others, inform some of the basic themes of CRT which stipulate that racism is so intricately etched into the marrow of society that its arcane nature makes it difficult to always identify. CRT also acknowledges that racialized social structures secure privilege for White populations, in particular, and thus results in material benefits and power for this social group (Delgado and Stefancic 2017). This privilege is afforded through the normalization and invisibility of hegemonic Whiteness within football as in all social institutions (Fletcher and Hylton 2016). Additionally, under the guise of the liberal tradition that is pervasive in a post-colonial world, CRT reflects critically on discourses around race-neutrality and meritocracy which are rampant in most areas of civil life, including football (Hylton 2008). Considering this paper’s concern with understanding the meanings given to race and racism from the perspective of European football leaders, CRT provides a suitable theory to identify racial meanings and reflects critically on how these connect to wider discourses on “race” and the reproduction of racial hierarchies. While cultural studies provides a map for the meaning-making process through language and for further exploring the discursive reservoir European football leaders draw on in their meaning-making, CRT supplies theoretical coordinates for specifically locating and reflecting on the leaders’ racial meanings.

Football culture and institutional racism

As a popular mediated cultural practice, football plays a significant role in defining and reproducing meanings given to race (Carrington 2011; van Sterkenburg, Knoppers, and De Leeuw 2010). These meanings are secured through systemized processes that result in what we come to understand as a culture. In discussing football culture, this paper adopts Hall’s definition of culture as a signifying practice that can be understood in its historical, political, economic, and ideological context (Hall, Morley, and Chen 1996; 2003). Emphasis is placed not only on the individual but on the conditions in which the individual finds themselves, placing significance on the structures that constitute the conditions of being a part of a society.

Shaped and influenced by structuralism, materiality can be given to the concept of culture by “seeing people as spoken by, as well as speaking their culture” (Hall et al. 2003, 30). Therefore, discourses constructed through language act as evidence of an “orderly, patterned and enduring” (Jenks 2005, 26) relationship between structures and social agents. In the context of football, this relationship can be linked to football stakeholders like fans, players, and leaders, as agents of football culture. Arguably, a culture becomes institutionalized when behaviour or social processes become regulated and so entrenched within a community that they become resistant to change (Guala 2016; Jenks 2005).

A vital component of institutionalization as a process is the role of hegemony in normalising cultural practices and masking these practices as common sense. Common sense “represents itself as the traditional wisdom or truth of the ages “but in fact, it is deeply a product of history”, (Hall, Morley, and Chen 1996, 431). We explore and unpack these “common sense knowledges” on race and racism. This will help in identifying the main underlying discourses that inform perceptions and “thinking” of race and discrimination in European football amongst leaders in management positions.

What race means in Europe

Understanding manifestations of race and racism, particularly in the European imagination, requires mapping their conceptual origins and situating racial thinking within a historical context. Goldberg (2006) explains that conceptions of explicit references to race in Europe arguably ended with The Holocaust, since The Holocaust “rendered race unmentionable, unspeakable if not as reference to an anti-Semitism of the past” (339). What the European historical context highlights is how discrimination based on difference as a form of racialization has a deep and long tradition in Europe.

Meanings given to race evolve over time, however, their hierarchical nature produces racial structures that subjugates certain groups in society while privileging others (Bonilla-Silva 2015; Robinson et al. 2021). In a “post-racial” society this has resulted in terms like ethnicity and culture being used in everyday discourse to allude to difference that is not necessarily embedded in “real racism” (The Holocaust, Apartheid, Jim Crow etc.) (Lentin 2020), but rather to distinguish between different cultural practices like language, dress code, and values. Acts that are considered to be racist can only be explicit because conceptions of racism are associated with being identifiable and abominable. For this study, we remain attentive to institutionalized and implicit forms of racial thinking (including its coded expressions in terms like “culture”, ethnicity and microaggressions) that may come to the fore in the language used by football leaders.

Methodology

Participants

To uncover the meanings that European football leaders draw on concerning race and racism in the context of football governance, semi-structured interviews were conducted with twelve football leaders across Europe. These leaders hold middle-management positions in football organizations and their work profiles involve addressing discrimination in varying capacities. Given that football leaders in management roles are not easily accessible, particularly at elite levels, the snowball sampling strategy was adopted. This purposive sampling method ensures that participants who fit within desired criteria are sufficiently represented through network and participant referrals (Wan 2019). For this study, participants were recruited with the help of football organizations that supported our research, most notably the football players union FIFPRO, the European Football Association (UEFA), and the anti-racism network Fare. Of the twelve interviewed leaders, three were women while the remainder of the participants were men. The participants age range falls between 30 and 52 years old. Most of the participants were White, of which eight were White men and two were White women. Of the twelve participants only two leaders of colour were interviewed, one being a non-White woman and the other a non-White man. Although the snowball method ensures a level of depth in terms of the data derived from desired participants, the disadvantage can be limited in breadth with a smaller pool of diverse participants. This may have been the case with our interviewees, however, the lack of women and non-White leaders represented in the sample, to a significant degree, mirror the reality of European football leadership (van Sterkenburg et al. 2023).

For this study, football leaders were classified as individuals who hold senior leadership positions in football governance or operations in European football associations, unions, or associated organizations. Positions varied from leaders working in legal fields, corporate affairs, or heads of teams within football organizations. Although their titles or roles differed, all participants had some form of experience with equality policy development, implementation, or management in the football industry. The football leaders interviewed came from a variety of countries: France (1), Spain (1), Poland (1), Norway (2), Greece (2), The Netherlands (3), Romania (1) and Denmark (1). These countries reflect Europe’s multifaceted football culture, migration histories and varying discourses surrounding race and ethnicity. The countries are also geographically diverse and have a different hierarchical positioning in European football, thus offering multiple perspectives and experiences of leaders in national football organizations.

Due to availability, two interviews were conducted in person, one via telephone, while the rest of the interviews were conducted through Zoom. A topic list was designed for the interview process to help elicit how football leaders characterize racial discrimination and inclusion in football and to further identify the potential implications of this characterization. Participants signed consent forms that ensured anonymity and the ability to stop the interview at any stage of the interview process. Additionally, interviewees were told in advance that the study was part of a wider research project on football and race administered by Erasmus University Rotterdam in cooperation with football organizations Fare, UEFA and FIFPRO.

Analysis

The analysis of the interviews was informed by insights from Thematic Analysis (TA) and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). TA is focused on identifying patterns of meaning and finding main themes in text (Braun and Clarke 2006). As an analytical tool, TA provides procedures to codify prevalence (Braun and Clarke 2006), whereas CDA is characterized by techniques that help reveal power imbalances by identifying underlying discourses that reinforce inequalities within prominent themes (Mullet 2018; Wodak and Meyer 2009). This analytic practice recognizes that it is “not only what is said that has significance but also the way it is said, and what is not said but could be said” (Hall et al. 2003, 124), when attempting to understand the dialectic nature of discourse, language and society.

The use of CDA as an analytic practice is helpful in bridging the gap between the micro (use of a racial slur in an interaction) and the macro (institutional racism) by focusing on the relationship between social structures, discourse and individual language use (Tannen, Hamilton, and Schiffrin 2015). What van Dijk (2015) puts forward is that social actors as language users know what they know not only because of their biographical trajectories but also because they are members of social groups, organizations and institutions who exchange socio-cultural knowledge. Therefore, the knowledge, attitudes or ideologies that individuals (such as football leaders) hold mentally, when expressed discursively, are arguably reflections of the social structures within which they live and work (van Dijk 2015). For this study, this means that the way football leaders talk about and reflect on issues related to race and racism can provide insight into what knowledge is obtained and (re)produced with regards to racial discrimination in the wider (European) football culture.

Transcribing the interviews and preparing the transcripts for analysis allowed for familiarity with the data to develop as initial coding was simultaneously being performed. During this initial process, codes were identified based on “essence-capturing and essential elements” (Saldana 2021, 13) of the data. The subsequent cycles of coding involved both deductive and inductive coding. Inductive coding informed by TA strategies, sought to search and collate codes according to overarching themes (Braun and Clarke 2006), while deductive coding was underpinned by CDA theoretical framework which sought to identify underlying meanings of prominent themes through linguistic or semantic properties (van Dijk 2015). In our analysis, we were mainly interested in discourses the participants, generally, drew upon in their perceptions of and reflections about race and racism, rather than in individual differences between interviewees.

Positionality

Given this paper’s concern with meanings given to race/ethnicity, it is beneficial to reflect on our own positionality and how that may have impacted our interpretation of findings as authors of this article. The first two authors of the paper reflect on their positionality because of their main role in the analysis of the data and the writing process. The first author of this paper is a Black South African woman media scholar with a background in journalism. She is a lecturer and researcher at a Dutch university whose current work focuses on manifestations of race and racism in football culture. As a Black woman of African heritage studying race, her research approach is characterized by a critical paradigm which is intersectional and aims to contribute to social change.

The second author is a White man from the Netherlands who has done research on race in sports for over twenty years. Being part of the majority racial/ethnic group in the country he lives in, he has been socialized into everyday hegemonic racialized discourses. Being part of the privileged social group and not having experienced racism personally, he may not always “see” or recognize implicit forms of racism (van Sterkenburg and Walder 2021). To mitigate his own “blind spots” in this regard, he gives primacy to the theoretical frameworks of cultural studies and CRT that place an emphasis on both implicit and explicit forms of racism, Whiteness, and self-reflexivity.

Findings

During the analysis process three of the following themes broadly emerged from the interviews: Diversity and corporatized football practices, discriminatory actions isolated from wider football culture, leadership, and resistance to change. In this section we unpack the themes in more detail.

Diversity and corporatized football practices

On discussions concerning diversity and inclusion in European football, all the leaders interviewed acknowledged and expressed a lack of diverse representation in leadership positions within their own organizations and the football world at large. Many of the participants were quick to point to the racial and cultural diversity that they perceived to be represented on the football pitch but also acknowledged the path to progress they think still needs to be taken in the industry. To varying degrees, the notion of diversity and inclusion was discussed in positive terms and was portrayed to be a valuable endeavour that is “good for business”:

So, for me, diversity is key in a team to fully operate as an organisation and reach your goals. So, in my team, I always look to a good balance in diversity to bring different kind of perspectives to the table to reach our objectives. – Daniel,38 (Netherlands)

These sentiments were echoed by a significant number of the participants, particularly highlighting the global draw that football has on the world stage and the importance of reflecting that in football teams and organizations. Empirical research has shown that racially diverse and inclusive workforces yield fruitful returns for sports organizations (Bradbury, Lusted, and Sterkenburg 2020) which corresponds with the predominant framing presented by most interviewees on diversity and inclusion as a project. Furthermore, the discourses related to diversity and inclusion are arguably laced with market-oriented undertones which is illustrated in Daniel’s use of words like “objectives” and “goals”. This commonly used corporate jargon reflects sports’ organizations shift towards a professionalization model which is perceived to result in efficient governance (Stenling et al. 2023). The professionalization model prioritizes outcomes which can be financially rewarding for sports organizations. This business-like approach to sports management but more specifically the management of social responsibility can be attributed to the Football and Social Responsibility (FSR) framework under which “diversity or equality work” falls. Within the professionalized model, social responsibility initiatives are approached through corporatized processes. These corporatized practices tend to focus on leveraging diversity and inclusion concerns, thereby, potentially neglecting the systematic nature of discriminatory practices.

Conversations about diversity were a gateway to understanding participants’ perceptions on the subject of race and racism in football. Although strides towards equality in football were favourably viewed by all participants, one interviewee expressed a dislike for the term diversity:

If you want to say, okay, if you have, example like a company umm and you have to have diversity in your company, it doesn’t matter if it is the union or an FA. But I don’t like the word because if you are good, you are in this position and you are good, and you have a good leader, it doesn’t matter if you are woman or if you are coloured or if you are from China. If you understand your job, then you will hire somebody who will do the job. - Jacek,44 (Poland)

To describe the state of diversity within Polish football, Jacek adopted a corporate context to explain their perspective which reflects aforementioned patterns and associations made between sports organizations and the private sector. The interviewee suggested that race or gender should not be a factor in recruitment and rather advocated for appointment to be based on merit. This resembles the professionalization and meritocratic-oriented approach to governance as emphasis is placed on technical ability and merit in this particular model (Stenling et al. 2023). The participant’s reasoning on recruitment in football is explained within the backdrop of a homogenously White and male football environment in Poland. To account for the lack of non-White leaders represented in Polish football, Jacek explained how football players of colour often leave the country early – before they can reach leadership status in their careers. He also attributed the lack of diverse leadership in Poland to the Eastern European state being demographically homogenous and politically conservative on issues concerning race or immigration. The demographic nature of certain European countries was commonly used to explain the absence of diverse representation in football organizations by other participants. Jacek did not mention any barriers non-White candidates may potentially face in his organization’s existing recruitment processes. This corresponds with some participants who were generally not perceptive to potential obstacles in their organization’s recruitment procedures. In contrast, one participant discussed their organization’s recruitment reform and detailed how their organization trained hiring managers to be aware of racial bias and removed aspects of the CV/motivation letter format from the hiring process. This was an exception, though. Existing studies confirm that football leaders often think that existing recruitment procedures are non-discriminatory (van Sterkenburg et al. 2023). Interventionist measures like quota systems or target-setting are, therefore, often resisted and such elements of resistance, veiled through language of meritocracy, can be identified in Jacek’s statement above.

Recruitment procedures were noted by most participants as an area that needs to be improved but as mentioned above, few interviewees mentioned specific organizational measures they believe need to be implemented. On this topic, a Danish participant provided his perception on their organization’s approach to recruitment and inclusivity in general:

From an HR perspective, we, I think we are inclusive … eh, we eh, well, we recruit no matter how you look, where you come from, uh, your personal background, it doesn’t matter and we have moved along a lot during the last seven years I’ve been in, in the office. - Søren,38 (Denmark)

The interviewee discussed Danish law and its role in ensuring that social institutions in the country are not discriminatory – “it’s illegal to not be inclusive”. By highlighting the legal system and how their organization’s approach is “HR approved”, the participant is underscoring how recruitment procedures are lawful and inclusive, on paper. In this way, their organization cannot necessarily be discriminatory in how people are appointed. However, the phrase, “from an HR perspective”, operates paradoxically here as it both emphasizes how, on a positive note, the organizational culture is legally inclusive, but suggests that when viewed outside the “HR lens”, recruitment procedures in practice are potentially exclusionary. This framing reinforces how equality policymaking can be inconsistent. In other words, the association may be legally bound to operate as a pro-equality organization but may not be implementing sufficient measures to create an inclusive work environment that not only attracts diverse talent but also safeguards work experiences for marginalized employees. Søren expressed an awareness of this discrepancy within their own organization and the football industry. Upon reflecting on their own work environments, most interviewees, like Søren, do not necessarily believe their football organizations to be innately discriminatory. As can be found in most professionalized environments, there are regulations and targets to adhere to. However, the line between complying with legislative requirements by merely “ticking a box” or taking steps further into developing “good practices” remains blurry in discourses on equality in football (Ahmed 2007). What this suggests is that diversity work in the form of policy runs the risk of being a proxy for meaningful action.

Many participants mainly raised issues of diversity in relation to gender in football. Although race, sexual orientation, ableism, and religion were mentioned, emphasis placed on topic choices like gender in relation to diversity and inclusion suggest that a significant number of interviewees were more familiar with or aware of the state of gender representation in football as opposed to race, for example. Interviewees from Northern and Western European countries highlighted the developments made within their national contexts, with more women holding various leadership positions and the support for women’s football. Conversely, a handful of Southern and Eastern European participants alluded to the barriers that male-dominated football culture poses:

Okay. The thing is that diversity, okay, we are in football. Football is not that from my point of view. Honestly, we are not so modern. We are not accepting anything else than men playing football. So, everything else except men playing football is diversity. From my point of view. Even the women’s football is diversity. So especially in Greece or the south of the south of of Europe, I can say that the women's football is a project that we will sell it like diversity, of course, diversity. I sold the other, other people. Yeah. Of course. All the other people. Same. What I can say with the disabilities, with the, with sexual issues and all that is … yeah is diversity.- Sophia,44 (Greece)

On the topic of diversity, Sophia underscored the efforts that the organization has been making in trying to garner attention and support for women’s football as well as the participation of marginalized groups. She drew comparisons as to the scale of these efforts in relation to men’s football but emphasized how the efforts were incomparable – with men’s football being the norm receiving more attention – due to the nature of the sport being male (White) dominated. The normalization of White men playing, managing, and governing football plays a significant role in the sport being a site for gender and racial stereotypes to foster and reproduce themselves (Elling, Hovden, and Knoppers 2018).

Overall, the participants’ references to diversity in football suggest that on “progressive” issues like gender and racial inclusion, the football industry remains inevitably underdeveloped. Moreover, the manner of speaking is often underpinned by commercial language, where the term diversity carries meaning that implies that it is a commodity to be sold. Furthermore, the intersectional lens regarding the lack of gender representation in football was rarely put forward by the interviewees, with the exception of leaders from the Netherlands and Norway who raised concern over the absence of non-White women and girls’ participation on the pitch and in football leadership. Within a European context, this suggests that when gender is discussed, this is often in relation to the diversification and inclusion of White women. This speaks to how discourses concerning gender discrimination have often centred the “intersectional identities of a few” (Crenshaw 1991, 1299), in this case those “few” being White, heterosexual women. The implication here seems to be that there are glass ceilings with cracks that are yet to be raptured concerning women leaders and women’s football before racial inequities and the impact of intersectional dimensions can arguably be acknowledged or prioritized.

Discriminatory actions isolated from wider football culture

Most of the leaders interviewed exhibited an awareness of racial discrimination in football. A small number of interviewees described experiences with racism both in a personal and professional capacity due to their racialized backgrounds whilst most of the participants discussed experiences with racism by having to address race-related discrimination in football through organizational initiatives or media reports. Across all the interviews, examples of racial discrimination offered were explicit in nature like fans’ monkey chants or supporters in stands throwing banana peels at racialized players. Most of the participants recalled racial abuse that took place in stadiums and others talked about online abuse. In talking about racism in football, one participant was hesitant to frame football culture as innately discriminatory and rather alluded to “emotions” that football can ignite in fans:

I love football. I love football culture. But, uh, let’s not forget that football has a lot of passion and a lot of rivalry inside so, this passion and uh, this passion for your team can lead you in actions that you probably, uh, maybe don't like yourself but, it’s passion and, when you are passionate you sometimes don’t understand what you're doing. - Nicholas,33 (Greece)

Nicholas repeatedly refers to “passion” which arguably acts as a euphemism for behaviour that incites discrimination. Similarly, another interviewee suggested that both “passion” and ignorance can account for racist behaviour within football: “You don’t want to have it[racism], but if the people don’t know something, then, then they are angry about something … If you lose the game, it’s easy to, to have racism.” – Jacek,44 (Poland). Both participants’ sentiments were echoed by some of the other leaders in the way that football was framed as a considerably competitive space that evokes desirable (unifying) or abhorrent (racist) behaviour from fans and other stakeholders alike. A minority of the participants mentioned implicit forms of racism in the industry. This illustrates the limited definitions that are given to acts of racism which are often recognized as overt displays of discrimination rendering systemic forms of racism “unidentifiable”.

On discussions pertaining to the prevalence of racial discrimination, it is evident that experiences and perceptions vary as to the extent of the issue in football within different countries. A Norwegian participant described the severity of the situation from their perspective in professional and grassroots football:

Eh, both grassroots and, and, and professional uh, we have, uh, players, uh, who are using words we don't want to be used on football pitches. We have parents who are like, um, “tackle that Black kid”, for example, from, from the, from the sideline. We have people in the stands who are yelling, uh, to the, to the referees, um, um, “go back home, where where you're from”? Um, “you don’t belong here”. Um, yeah, we have a lot of, of, of, of examples of uh … Yeah, and also, and also players players using the N-word for, for example.` - Andersen,32 (Norway)

What is notable in the discourse structures above is the fragmented text and hesitant linguistic markers. Much like most of the interviewees, these properties are natural ways of speaking especially for non-native English speakers, however, an excessive amount can also indicate patterns of discomfort which was commonly observed among some of the interviewees due to the sensitive nature of topics likes race. This can suggest a discomfort or unfamiliarity with the language but can also point to different national contexts having unclear ways to discuss race and racism. This discomfort or unfamiliarity with topics concerning race and racism has also been found in earlier studies, for example, within the Spanish football context where youths circumvented terms like “race” due to the term being dispelled in public discourse which is the case for many European countries (Longas Luque and van Sterkenburg 2022).

In contextualising his experience, Andersen talked about the increasing number of discriminatory cases that were reported through the organization’s reporting tool. These cases were mostly identified as racist acts because of their explicit nature. Like Andersen, some leaders outlined similar anti-racism strategies employed by their organizations. Very few interviewees discussed these strategies or discrimination cases in the same manner of detail. National and socio-political contexts play a significant role in how developed anti-racism strategies were in different organizations. This is due to various factors like resources, personnel, and the different stages that FAs are in terms of their “fight” against racial discrimination specifically. Most participants expressed the crucial role that bodies like UEFA, on a federal level, play in pushing the anti-racism agenda. High on the list of vital local stakeholders in addressing racial abuse were the clubs. Some of the interviewees believe that racial discrimination is much more prevalent outside of the club or “football family” and suggested that the problem is external:

The public is not as open minded as the let’s say club environment. So clubs are much more open minded here with some exceptions, but I don’t think it’s an institutional matter. It’s a personal matter of some people. But for sure the public is not as open minded. We still have, for instance, a big challenge here in giving Romanian citizenship to foreign players, foreign players and inviting them to play for the national team. Yeah, there are still slogans: “Make more children don’t give citizenship to players”. Yeah, which is of course, a stupid slogan.– Andrei, 49 (Romania).

The notion of the football community, namely clubs, as being opened-minded environments was reiterated by many leaders. Society and “badly behaved” (individual) fans were often considered to be the source of racial abuse or disruption within the football world. This coincides with recurring discourses of leaders who dismiss racial discrimination as individual acts and insist that they do not reflect the football culture. In such cases, actions get isolated from the larger collective. In doing so, some leaders disconnect the individual (who “misbehaves”) from the institution. Referring to the title of the paper, this shows how, in the eyes of many football leaders, racism is the result of some individuals – “a few ‘rotten apples’– instead of being part of wider football culture. This contrasts several scholars’ findings, which indicate that wider football culture constitutes an important context for racism to persist and flourish, and thus requires further critical reflection” (Bradbury 2013; Bradbury, Lusted, and Sterkenburg 2020; Hylton 2010). When emphasis is placed on racial discrimination being external, the focus is on sanctioning individuals (e.g. fans) coming into the football space and this curtails the attention given to the internal practices that are potentially prejudicial.

Leadership and resistance to change

Despite some leaders expressing positive experiences with or thoughts about clubs concerning anti-racism initiatives, these relationships are not always easy to manage. One Danish participant described how clubs sometimes feel like FA’s “police” them. Another Romanian participant noted that when they approach clubs about anti-discrimination initiatives, members worry that a preoccupation with discrimination takes away from the football. In a country like the Netherlands where football organizations are perceived to be relatively progressive in managing discriminatory issues, a participant explained the challenge of approaching some clubs:

A lot of clubs don’t see the problem. And the main thing that I hear is when I want to talk about this[anti-racism] program, the first thing they say, it’s not happening here … And one thing they say is look at my field, we’re very diverse and our players. - Ayyan,46 (Netherlands)

Ayyan’s experience is representative of the resistance that is often shown within football organizations when it comes to the implementation of target setting or policy change regarding race and racism in football because of the conviction that football is race-neutral (van Sterkenburg et al. 2023). A number of participants highlighted the diversity of club players, this points to a common pattern that the diverse representation on the field is seen as indicative of a colour-blind and inclusive football culture. On the contrary, as we mentioned earlier, football institutional structures do not reflect the racial or ethnic diversity on the pitch in European football leadership.

All the leaders interviewed discussed the importance of all football stakeholders banding together to address racism and other forms of discrimination in football. Several participants attributed any significant progress in their organization to a board or executive leadership that embraced change first, however, Søren explained why change is often resisted at the top:

It’s because European football is ruled by, eh, White, male, and pale, eh, men. Like it’s, eh, it’s they are all 60 years plus, they’re White, they have been within the same football industry for a lot of years, they have not been exposed to diversity … they’ve not been pressured to open up. Uh, that’s like, in my perspective, the whole reason why we are not doing anything, and why it's not high up in the agenda is because of our leaders. – Søren,38 (Denmark)

Underpinned by Søren’s explanation is the normalization of a senior, White, and male dominated football industry and the barriers that this normalization is associated with. Additionally, this explanation highlights the value of a representative leadership body that is necessary to act in the interest of a diverse football environment “advocating for a ‘politics of presence' to address structural inequalities” (Stenling et al. 2023, 115). In other words, diverse leadership is key as it is likely to represent the interests of an array of people within the football industry resulting in a more inclusive culture.

Discussion and concluding remarks

This paper sought to contribute to the growing literature on race, racism, and inclusion in European football. The focus on the experiences and perceptions of football leaders in their governance of race-related discrimination, provided insight into how the industry addresses racism. Interviews with leaders across different European countries revealed conflicting tensions in the football industry. Tensions between corporatized football practices and equality policymaking, discrepancies in views on discriminatory actions and their connections to larger structural issues and finally the promise of change in the hands of predominantly White, male institutions.

Interviews with football leaders illustrated how racism has garnered attention in the football industry. Stakeholders in various capacities are responding to the call to address racial discrimination – some are leading while others are lagging. Much of the framing around diversity and inclusion within European football shared by the participants, supports Ahmed’s (2012,) notion that a “managerial focus on diversity works to individuate differences and conceal the continuation of systematic inequalities” (53). This is illustrated when cases of discrimination are primarily perceived and managed as isolated cases while rarely being recognized as symptoms of structural racism. This managerial focus is revealed through corporate jargon that underpins leaders’ perceptions and practices concerned with issues around diversity and inclusion, suggesting intersections between the private sector and football governance. Corporate practices are characterized by streamlining processes which focus on efficiency and profitability. This contrasts with equality work principles which advocate for redistributive justice and value transformation (Delgado and Stefancic 2017; Stenling et al. 2023). The language and its connections with corporatized practices in work on diversity and inclusion that interviewees in our study draw on, speaks to Althusser’s (Althusser 2020; Fairclough 2010) arguments of individuals as interpellated by wider discourses, thus reproducing institutional ideas or attitudes which are capitalistic in nature and thus tend to benefit some and not others. According to Delgado and Stefancic (2017), differential racialization refers to the way dominant society racializes marginalized populations in response to changing needs. The commercialized value of diversity and inclusion demonstrated by the language used by most participants points to the application of differential racialization in how football stakeholders in power, who are predominantly White men, pursue diversity and inclusion because they are currently considered social goods that economic value can be derived from (Delgado and Stefancic 2017; Leong 2012).

The semantic properties of some participants when discussing diversity and inclusion are marked by commercial undertones – diversity is “sold” under broad categories that falls outside male, Whiteness. Gender as a primary dimension to talk about diversity reveals a failure to recognize the intersectional identities of women of colour and how racism impacts their experiences in European football. The tendency to intuitively highlight White women as representations of diversity efforts shows the absence of intersectional thinking of the individualized experiences of marginalized groups whose subjugation occurs on multiple levels of their different identities. From a CRT perspective, there is a failure to recognize how race is intertwined with different forms of oppression like gender or class which allows for implicit forms of discrimination and microaggressions to go unnoticed and thus unaddressed (Delgado and Stefancic 2017; Hylton 2008). What the discourses of some interviewees arguably also unveils is how underlying equality policymaking performed through corporatized practices results in sports organizations “compliance with legal requirements but not necessarily valuing diversity – in its various facets – to achieve equality in the football industry” (Kirton and Greene 2021).

Amongst most interviewees, there was an acknowledgment that racism is a significant issue in football. However, there were opposing views on how the football community perpetuated discriminatory practices. Some believed that clubs and leagues were partly responsible for enabling racial discrimination while others held external factors like individual fans as solely liable. This reiterates earlier points on defensive tones that football leaders can take when the football community is accused of racism and the emphasis that is then often placed on individual fans for discriminatory behaviour. Football culture is generally framed as racially neutral but, as illustrated through CRT scholarship, football like any other cultural practice is a product of historic and ideological process and thus heirs to the legacy of racism (Hylton 2010). Critical race theorists are, therefore, critical of colour-blind rhetoric. Moreover, they argue how such colour-blind rhetoric enables organizations to apply double standards: they openly act against explicit racial abuse, refer to a “colour-blind” industry while leaving implicit and institutionalized forms of racism unchallenged. This absolves institutions of responsibility for the more structural and discursive practices of racism that go beyond individual racist aberrations (Delgado and Stefancic 2017).

The importance of leadership in the “fight” against discrimination was noted by most participants. Those in decision-making positions and their perceptions on discrimination dictated how the issue was addressed. The normalization of Whiteness in football leadership is central to how racial discrimination is addressed in the industry. According to Fletcher and Hylton (2016), actions by White leadership in football suggest a concern to showcase that legal requirements in equality policy work are met as opposed to employing a transformational approach in policy reform as advocated for by CRT scholarship. The inability by some football leaders in senior or executive positions to prioritize anti-racism practices or to acknowledge implicit forms of racism contributes to the reproduction of racial discrimination as embedded in microaggressions or racial stereotyping. This is facilitated by the fact that the experiences of marginalized voices are not sufficiently represented or centred in football leadership (Bradbury, Lusted, and Sterkenburg 2020; Fletcher and Hylton 2016). As Essed and Goldberg (2001) argue, inaction in the form of silence as opposed to public concession legitimizes racial discrimination. Such inaction may also be the result of the normalized view of White leadership in football and an attempt to maintain their social position. Those who benefit from this privileged position are arguably careful to lose their status at the helm of the social hierarchy and are potentially resistant to “radical” change (Delgado and Stefancic 2017; Fletcher and Hylton 2016). A notable observation in this regard is how leaders from Western and Northern Europe were more likely to critically reflect on White privilege than leaders from Eastern and Southern Europe, with exceptions. This may point to variegated forms of Whiteness within a European context (Hylton and Lawrence 2015), with higher levels of self-reflection on own (White-situated) positionality in Western and Northern European contexts compared to Eastern and Southern European contexts. At the same time, however, similar research on White-situated football media in different parts of Europe has shown how hegemonic Whiteness is usually invisible to White men irrespective of European region or country (van Lienden and van Sterkenburg 2023). More research needs to be done, however, to gain more insights into the operation of Whiteness in different European contexts.

Overall, football leaders’ discourses around racial discrimination suggest that the industry is making progress but is also still in contention with “old-fashioned” notions of football as mainly being about the sport – meritocratic and thus colour-blind. In doing so, football governance and the industry as a whole is often overlooked as a political site where interests are represented and contested (Stenling et al. 2023). If football as a sport is considered neutral (egalitarian) and the governance of football is corporatized (profit-driven) and equality work is associated with politics (power), there are tensions between these categories which influence how diversity and inclusion measures are implemented meaningfully. There are tensions in the practices and principles of these different categories which results in conflicting interests, resistance to change by those in power, and the lack of understanding and acknowledgement of the social justice element required in anti-racism practices.

As mentioned by all the participants interviewed – racism in football is symptom of wider societal issues. However, what is not recognized by most interviewees and other football stakeholders is how football is not only reflective of, but also reproductive of racialized power relations in wider society. Moreover, what is often neglected by the leaders interviewed is how the power of racism does not only manifest explicitly and that it is “never the property of an individual. It belongs to a group as long as a group stays together” (Essed and Goldberg 2001, 181–182). In other words, racial discrimination is exerted on an institutional level and is not isolated from the “rotten apples” because apples don’t fall far from the tree.

Statement of ethics

On the 19th of January 2023, the ESHCC Ethical Review Board (ERB) from Erasmus University, Rotterdam, granted this study ethical approval under the following reference number: ETH2223-0209.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported by the Fare Network, FIFPRO and UEFA.