Tags:
Journalism of Courage
Qatar hosting the World Cup has prompted protests from various quarters, over the country’s allegedly dubious human rights record, lack of footballing pedigree, and charges of graft in the bidding process. Russia’s ban from the showpiece event due to its invasion of Ukraine has added another political element to the event.
But football and politics have often been intertwined, and FIFA has not always taken a stand in these matters.
Chile’s participation in the 1974 tournament in West Germany came in the backdrop of a military coup led by the ruthless Augusto Pinochet, who overthrew the democratically elected government led by Salvador Allende and subsequently executed the president.
When the Soviet Union refused to play a World Cup playoff game at a Chilean venue previously used for executions, FIFA banned them from the tourney, allowed Chile to appear for the match at the designated time in the same stadium, poke a ball into an empty net, and be declared 1-0 winners. Chile were thus granted World Cup qualification by default.
During the tournament, in Chile’s match against the hosts, Carlos Caszely was shown the first red card ever at the FIFA World Cup for a lunging tackle on West German Berti Vogts.
Years later, Caszely, an icon among Chileans for his outspoken political views, revealed in a TV interview that hours before the match, he had been informed that back home, his mother had been arrested by the Pinochet regime, hinting that this was playing on his mind when he lost his cool on the football pitch.
Ironically, while the Soviet Union was banned then for protesting a military intervention, Russia was thrown out from the 2022 edition for undertaking an offensive of its own.
There are other examples. In 1970, Israel was allowed to play in the Mexico World Cup after 1966 quarter-finalists North Korea refused to play them in the knock-off Asian qualifier, citing Israel’s occupation of Palestine.
France continued to play in World Cups despite its military interventions in North Africa and Indo-China through the 1950s till the 1970s, as did England, unaffected by its colonial occupations that continued till the late 1970s.
The Argentine military junta was allowed to host the 1978 World Cup, as was Spain, which was awarded the hosting rights of the 1982 tournament with Francisco Franco still in power. Saudi Arabia, Iran and China continue to play in World Cups despite their questionable human rights records.
This, however, does not mean that FIFA has never done the “right” thing. It had banned Germany and Japan from the 1950 World Cup as military aggressors in the Second World War that had ended in 1945. Two previous editions of the still-nascent tournament —1942 and 1946 — had been cancelled because of the global conflict.
The ban, though, mattered little, as several teams representing war-ravaged European countries refused to travel to Brazil for the tournament, citing distance. Incidentally, this was also the sole World Cup that India had qualified for, though eventually, the newly independent nation gave up the opportunity, citing financial constraints.
