Fantastic Footnotes Podcast
Soccer is truly a worldwide sport, which sometimes comes with worldwide issues. Today we’re going to talk a little bit about how politics affects international soccer. From outright bans and boycotts to contentious, and potentially contentious, games, let’s see how the World Cup has been shaped by politics. Let’s start with teams that have been outright banned. 1950 – Germany and Japan Germany and Japan were banned because of sanctions following World War II. Interestingly enough, both East and West Germany were barred from participating. 1970–1990 – South Africa South Africa was banned because of apartheid. It was actually illegal to have mixed-race sports teams in South Africa, and foreign countries were required to bring all-white teams into the country to play. South Africa eventually hosted the World Cup in 2010 and gave us what is, in my opinion, the greatest World Cup song ever: Waka Waka [https://youtu.be/pRpeEdMmmQ0?si=4oTObP93nzZ5qRts] by Shakira. 1994 – Yugoslavia FIFA banned Yugoslavia from participating in the 1994 World Cup because of United Nations sanctions related to the wars in the Balkans, particularly the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina. 2022–Present – Russia Russia has been banned from FIFA competitions following its invasion of Ukraine. Some countries have chosen to give up their chance to play in the World Cup through boycotts. In 1958, so many countries refused to play Israel that FIFA actually had to create a new rule. During the qualifying rounds, Israel managed to advance without playing a single match. Israel was originally supposed to face Turkey, but Turkey withdrew because it objected to its placement in the Africa/Asia qualifying zone. Israel was then scheduled to play Indonesia, which also withdrew. Indonesia had requested that the matches be played on neutral ground rather than in Tel Aviv or Jakarta, but FIFA declined. Next came Egypt and Sudan, both of which refused to play Israel. As a result, Israel qualified without taking the field. FIFA quickly decided that wasn’t acceptable and created a rule requiring teams to win at least one qualifying match. A European runner-up was drawn at random, and Israel ended up facing Wales. And after all of that… Isreal lost. It became the first time that Wales ever qualified to play in a World Cup. Wales made it to the quarter-finals that year and lost to Brazil. The only goal scored was by a 17yr old Brazilian player… Pelé. Interestingly, because of the qualifying debacle in 1958, Israel now competes in UEFA, the European soccer federation rather than with Middle Eastern teams. In 1966, much of Africa boycotted World Cup qualifying in protest of the allocation system. Sixteen spots were available in the tournament, but the way they were distributed was unfair. Europe received ten spots, South America received four, and North America/Central America/the Carribean received one. That left just one place for all of Africa, Asia, and Oceania combined. African nations decided that was unfair and largely refused to participate. The boycott eventually led FIFA to guarantee Africa its own qualification spot beginning with the 1970 World Cup. The unfortunate part is that many people believe the team from Ghana that year was good enough that they could have won the entire tournament. In 1973, the Soviet Union refused to play its second World Cup qualifying match against Chile. The first match had been played in Moscow, but the second game was scheduled for Chile’s National Stadium. Just weeks earlier, Chile had experienced a military coup in which President Salvador Allende was overthrown by General Augusto Pinochet. Following the coup, thousands of political prisoners were detained, interrogated, and tortured inside the National Stadium. The Soviet Union refused to play there. Humanitarian concerns were certainly part of the decision, though the fact that the Soviets had supported Allende’s government probably played a role as well. When match day arrived, the Soviet team never appeared. The referee started the game anyway, Chile kicked the ball into an empty net, and the match was immediately ended. Chile advanced to the World Cup. It is still remembered as the “Match of Ghosts”. Some games have had the potential to be contentious, though most worked out just fine. In 1998, Iran played the United States. The two countries had not had diplomatic relations since the Iranian Revolution of 1979. Many people were concerned about tensions surrounding the match, but it remained peaceful. Before kickoff, the Iranian players presented the Americans with white roses as a symbol of peace. The U.S. team reciprocated with commemorative pennants. Iran went on to win 2–1, earning its first-ever World Cup victory. In 1974, East Germany played West Germany in the group stage. This wasn’t just Germany versus Germany. It was democracy versus communism, NATO versus the Soviets, and one of the most politically charged matches in World Cup history. East Germany won 1–0, but was eventually eliminated. West Germany recovered from the loss, advanced through the tournament, and ultimately won the World Cup that year. The 2018 World Cup match between Serbia and Switzerland was also tense. Many of the Swiss players, including Granit Xhaka and Xherdan Shaqiri, had family roots in Kosovo and Albania. Serbia does not recognize Kosovo’s independence, and the legacy of the Kosovo War runs deep in the region. During that conflict, Serbian and Yugoslav forces were responsible for a campaign that resulted in the deaths of thousands of Kosovo Albanians and the displacement of hundreds of thousands more. Serbia led 1–0, but Switzerland rallied to win 2–1. After scoring, Xhaka and Shaqiri celebrated by making a hand gesture widely interpreted as the Albanian double-headed eagle. Serbia viewed the gesture as a political statement, and FIFA fined both players after the match. The final game on this list was politically charged, but it is remembered for an entirely different reason. In 1986, Argentina and England met in the World Cup quarterfinals. Just four years earlier, the two countries had fought the Falklands War, which resulted in nearly 650 Argentine military deaths. It was always going to be a tense match, but it became famous for another reason. In the second half, Diego Maradona scored one of the most famous goals in soccer history: the Hand of God goal. From the referees’ perspective, Maradona had headed the ball into the net. What they couldn’t see was that he had actually punched it with his hand. After the match, Maradona joked that the goal had been scored “a little with the head of Maradona and a little with the hand of God.” Years later, in his autobiography, Maradona openly admitted that he had used his hand. This goal led to the Argentina win over England, 2-1. There are two games that could carry political significance in this year’s tournament. First, Iran and the United States could potentially meet. Relations between our two countries are extremely tense, and recent events in the Middle East have only increased that tension. Couple that with the fact that Iran was supposed to have a base camp here in the US and were denied last minute, and that they are not allowed to stay overnight even after games, the atmosphere if they play could be tense. The other possible matchup is Algeria versus Morocco. The two North African nations share a border, but that border has been closed since 1994. One major source of tension is Western Sahara. Morocco claims the territory as part of its country, while Algeria supports the Polisario Front, which seeks independence for Western Sahara. Another “political” game could happen, but this one would be a lot more fun than contentious. The United States could potentially play England on July 4th - the 250th birthday of America. Even better, there is a small chance the match could take place in Philadelphia, one of the original thirteen colonies. Talk about a historical rematch! In all, the World Cup brings people together, a fact you can see if you have watched even a single video of a European going to Buc-ees or the Tartan Army taking over Boston, but the matches do have the possibility of being politically and historically charged. Luckily, humanity always almost wins out and the World Cup remains a way to bring us all together. Sources: https://www.weforum.org/stories/2018/06/here-are-4-of-the-most-politically-charged-world-cup-games-ever-played-russia2018/ https://sports.yahoo.com/articles/every-world-cup-nation-banned-120000200.html https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaellewis/2026/03/09/a-history-of-teams-that-were-banned-or-refused-to-play-the-world-cup/ https://time.com/6234776/countries-banned-world-cup-russia/ https://en.majalla.com/node/331514/politics/world-cup-has-always-been-pitch-global-politics https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-36763036 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1966_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algeria%E2%80%93Morocco_football_rivalry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_hand_of_God This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fantasticfootnotes.substack.com [https://fantasticfootnotes.substack.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]
18 episodes
Comments
0Be the first to comment
Sign up now and become a member of the Fantastic Footnotes Podcast community!