Football and community building

We can often find something larger than ourselves in communities. Football in the contemporary world is a way of building communities, as it creates a sense of belonging. Each club has its own history, its own successes and its own failures. Some clubs pivot more towards one camp than the other. A club might have its own style of football; it might be more expansive or defensive. Some clubs might have a history of prioritising youth whilst others tend to sign players. Even the fans themselves might have their own individual characteristics. Some fan bases might have a good reputation whilst others might be more belligerent. Each team also has its own rival and derby.

Additionally, a club might be founded by a particular industry, so a club might be associated with a particular economic resource, such as steel. In other instances, clubs might be associated with political allegiances. For instance, Roma is the leftist team in Rome whilst Lazio has a fascist past. Certain clubs are sometimes associated with certain classes. In some cases they are more working class, in others they are more upper crust.
Nations experience real unity when their national team plays. It is one of the times that political and social differences are cast aside and when the whole nation come together. So, although it is a completely tribal game, it can sometimes transcend tribalism. 

Ultimately, people should support their local clubs. They form part of the communal nature of clubs in that way. One of the effects of globalisation is that people support clubs in other cities because they have the best players and spend millions on advertising.

The physiognomy of football managers #4

Attack! Attack! Attack! Run! Run! Run! Mauricio Pochettino's teams do a lot of running and a lot of attacking. Their work-rate is phenomenal. It all seems far too much for the main man himself, Poche, to handle. He looks like he is about to have a panic attack. You can tell that he is a quiet, albeit nervous, chap. You can tell he is really passionate about what he does, that he is an obsessive. He is a bit like me, really.

Poche is from a humble background, having grown up in a poor town near Rosario. He was scouted by his mentor, Marcelo Bielsa, to play in the Rosario team Newell's Old Boys. He derives his tactics from 'El Loco' Bielsa, although he is more pragmatic when implementing them. Again, Poche is another example of someone marked by his uprbringing. Although he enjoyed a playing career in Europe, he is not at all flamboyant with his gestures. He is to the point. He does not talk at all about his private life. He is in the football stadium to one thing and one thing only: win a game of football.

Yet for all his humility, Poche isn't without his ideals. He is an idealist. He does want to achieve great, big, unheralded things. At the same time, he is down to earth about it. We can tell this we look at him. (Again the same shtick!) We can tell from the look in his eyes that he is driven to win big things with risky tactics. He is full of nervous energy - and he wants to transpose that nervous energy onto the pitch. Indeed, his teams are frenetically fast. Sadly, they often end the season having run out of legs. We can also tell that he is down to earth  in that his gestures and hand signals are kept to a minimum. We sense that he gets close to the pitch simply to let the players know that he is there. With his nervous demenour, however, could this have an adverse effect?

It's finally beginning to work with Spurs. They really are beginning to resemble their manager - at long last. If there's one team that lacks graft, it's Spurs. They now have both guile and graft thanks to their exemplary manager. If there's one key word that recurs in his press conferences, it's 'a philosophy.' This shouldn't be taken as a sign of pretension. Rather, it should just reveal that Maurcio Pochettino is a man of integrity and principles who wants to achieve great things playing the way he wants to play.

The physiognomy of football managers #3

Do you need some sleep? Would you like to take a rest? Manuel Pellegrini does look awfully rough. It seems like he has stayed up the whole night thinking about the match. But then, Pelle isn't the nervous type - quite the opposite. He's quite likely the calmest, most subdued manager in existence. We would assume that, prior to a football match, he methodically studies stats about the opposition. They contain a lot of curves and angles and equations that we mere mortals would never be able to fathom. He could also do with brushing his hair now and then.

Curves and angles. For indeed, Pelle is called el ingeniero - the engineer. He has an undergraduate degree in industrial engineering from Chile's most prestigious university, Universidad Catolica. He is definitely among the more cerebral and analytic managers out there. This is why he is likened to Prof Arsene Wenger. There are notable differences between the two, mind you. Wenger gets angry and often loses it. He is prone to making pissy statements in front the press. He often jumps around the touchline and waves his arms a lot.

And Pelle? What can we say about Pelle's touchline physiognomy? Well, we have already established that he looks rough, with his blood-shot eyes, messy hair and bored expression. Other than that, he does remarkably little. He sits motionless on his seat and rarely consults his assistants. He occasionally wanders close to the pitch and stands with a bored expression in front of the pitch. His physical expression communicates nothing.

This is exactly what Pelle does in press conferences, too. He literally says nothing at all. He'll say stuff like 'We played well. We deserved to win' or 'I did not think we should have lost because we played well' with a thick Chilean accent. This is all strategic, however. The idea is to say nothing and to give nothing away. He completely rejects the theatrical side of football management. When he was asked why he is not very animated on the touchline, he replied with something like 'I am not a clown. You do all the work for a game of football a week before in training. There is nothing you can do from the touchline.' (He did say this in Spanish, however - his first language. His English really isn't that good.) 

Pelle might look like he does not care when he speak and moves. Yet he also has a look of steely determination. This paradox we sense when we look at him is reflected completely by his work ethic. His ethic is 'work hard - play soft.' Indeed, although he works awfully hard, he does nothing on the touchline. It must be noted that, although Pelle is fond of fine arts, literature and culture as a whole, he is not intent on letting everyone know about his tastes. The man is the antithesis of a ponce. We are also very lucky to have him in the Premier League. I'll miss him when he is gone, but I bloody well hope he manages the Chile national team next.

The physiognomy of football managers #2

Should we call him 'Roberto' or 'Bob'? Indeed, Roberto Martinez has spent virtually his entire playing and mangerial career in England. He is 'Anglo-Spanish,' rather than 'Spanish.' Can we ascertain this when we look at him?

It must be said, though, Roberto seems more 'Spanish' in appearance - and this indeed is reflected by his teams' style of play. Roberto has helped make English football 'sexier.' This is evident when we look at Roberto's physiognomy: he sports an immaculate suit, wears a Rolex watch, speaks eloquently and is quite likely best groomed manager in the entire premier league.

Roberto is very animated on the touchline. He prances about a lot. He always directs incomprehensible hand signals and gestures at the players. This is most likely a sign of narcissism. Do the players really know what a square, plus four and a wave mean - all signaled by hand gestures? Don't football players have a reputation for being a bit thick, anyway? This is most likely a showcase for the cameras which all are, conveniently enough, perched right next to the managerial dug out.

We can tell by the way that Roberto grimaces that he is brave and that he is a poet. Indeed, he is very articulate and well-spoken. Let's not forget that football managers aren't the leading exemplars of articulacy. They are prone to dishing out tired sound-bites and platitudes such as 'we played with belief'' again and again and again. Let us not forget, either, that English is Roberto's second language.

Why is Roberto, then, a brave football poet? His teams so far haven't been blessed with the highest budgets. He is swimming against the current. The remedy for that would be the old tried and tested English way: lump the ball forward and defend. But no. Roberto plays innovative football with flair, with gusto and - poetically - with danger. When Roberto was at Wigan Athletic, his motto was 'Sin miedo.' Wigan Athletic were relegated from the premier league at the end of his tenure - with the lowest budget - but won the FA cup. This really was a romantic fairy tale. And it was led by the premier league's poet.

We can certainly tell all this when we look at Roberto. When he looks at the field, he is a man on a mission. Yet no-one finds him insufferable - quite the opposite. Unlike his counterpart Brendan Rodgers, Roberto does have a sense of humour and is a very nice likeable chap. Even when his teams enter a losing streak - and this does happen now and again with his teams, even Everton - we can't bring ourselves to get angry with Roberto. How could you?

The physiognomy of football managers #1

What does the figure of David Moyes tell us about him as a person? First of all, let us make a clear distinction between his two tenures as football manger: Everton and post-Everton.

His two tenures do confirm that Moyes is worthy of the epithet 'Brooding Dave.' The difference between the two tenures is very simple - it is one of confidence.

Moyes has always been static and immobile whilst on the dugout. Beyond those blue, cavernous eyes we can positively ascertain that he is a passionate, glum and solemn figure. He cares about one thing and one thing only: football. His unrelenting energy is driven towards that direction. His mind is racing. He is not thinking about sophisticated tactics. His mind, on the contrary, works on rather binary terms: win/lose. The outcome of a football game determines the outcome of his feelings and his frame of mind. Although not sophisticated when it comes to tactics, he knows that he can transfer his passion onto the players. He has grit and his team plays with grit. He is hard-working and team play with a similar ethic. Hence, they are organised and tough to beat.

Moysie is a working class kid from Glasgow. We can see this when we look at him. We can see that he has been marked by his upbringing. We can see that as he statically stands in the rain, bellowing instructions at his players. His upbringing has informed his values. Hence, he is a Methodist and a Labour supporter. Beyond that, he only cares about his football. We can see that as he stand on touchline. He is tenacity personified.

Once he moved to global multi-billionaire extravaganza that is Mancherster United, things changed for Moysie. He continues to brood, as is his wont. Except that he now cuts a rather glum, flummoxed and confused figure. He is overwhelmed by the new circumstances. He frequently scratches his head, dumbfounded. He is no longer fighting against the current as an underdog. He has all the resources at his disposal. Nevertheless, the circumstances are not propitious for Moysie. As such, he looks miserable and terrified. Will the tenacious Moyes make a come-back? Sadly, Moyes seems to think that he is more flexible and talented than he actually is. He is suitable for a team with a mid-table budget vying for Europe. Beyond that he cannot manage a global monolith like Man U, nor a Liga team like Real Sociedad. He needs to fight against the current. He needs to be in miserable circusmtances. Otherwise, wonderful circumstances make him miserable. Hopefully, he will come to his wits and realise that he a lot more parochial and one-dimensional than he thinks himself to be. We need the real David Moyes back on these shores.

Eclective affinities

In the last week of March I went to London three times. My wallet has been ever so light recently. The three events I attended were: The Sun Ra Arkestra on the 25th of March, a John Gray lecture on the 27th and football match between Chile and Brazil on the 29th.



The Sun Ra Arkestra

I introduced a school friend into Sun Ra's music and he let me know about this concert in London. It exceeded both of our expectations. This is quite likely the best concert I have ever attended.




The dour thing about most rock and pop is that is largely a dour process when it comes to live performance. The performers play the repertoire largely as it is on record. They insincerely thank the audience. They plan an encore. They leave. The great thing about jazz performances - especially with an ensemble as colourful as the Arkestra - is that each performance is different.





Sun Ra played nearly every variety of jazz throughout his career. He is written off by many as a crazy shaman who just made atonal cacophony. Yet the great thing about this music - and the Arkestra have kept at it for more than twenty years since his death - is that it is firmly poised between more traditional and more avant-garde stylings of jazz. In this concert, there was a lot of swing alongside brilliant atonal effusions.






It beggars belief that most of the group are in their eighties. Marshall Allan, who leads the group, is approaching ninety-one. They played with so much energy and passion that, if you heard a recording of the music, you'd assume they were all in their twenties. One of their saxophonists started dancing and doing incredible acrobatics - in his late seventies! Sun Ra has a despotic reputation. But, unlike other 'despotic' avant-garde-musicians - Mark E. Smith, Beefheart, Zappa, Miles Davis etc. - none of his musicians seem to harbour the slightest resentment against him. They still want to preserve his legacy, celebrate his cosmic philosophy and they still want to play each gig with the utmost energy and passion.




There is such a communal feeling to an Arkestra concert. They want the audience to get involved. I giddily danced and clapped throughout the concert. Towards the end, the wind and brass and players - barring Allan - descended onto the crowd and danced and soloed around us. I've been hearing Sun Ra's music for ten years now, so it is rather emotional to witness this. Also, strangely for a concert of avant-garde music there were a lot of pretty single girls floating around! (One of them started dancing with us but promptly left before the end of the concert!)




When you read about Sun Ra's music, he is always written about in past tense. It is easy to forget that his legacy lives on. To think that he was at his peak during the 60s and 70s when you can still attend a concert as mind-blowing as this.




John Gray

I've been reading John Gray's books and his magazine articles an awful lot lately. He has influenced a lot of my thinking and was the person largely responsible to get me into reading Schopenhauer (Borges played a part in that, too). I went with Michael Brooks, author of the 'Doves Will Rust' blog and a novel I review for this blog, Digital.




Gray is, by and large, the main voice of pessimism and unreason in this country. He has been a strident criticism of Enlightenment thinking and utopianism. The main charge leveled against him is that he offers nothing positive to lead to any tangible change and improvement. To Gray's credit, I think that there is far too much optimistic thinking. In my view, it is healthy to have his commentary and analysis in public discourse. He has been advocating a similar position for a long time. (This is despite seismic shifts from being a socialist labourite, to being a Thatcherite, a brief excursion into Blarism and now finally has arrived at a red herring where he does not really espouse any political label.) Gray critiqued free market globalism in False Dawn, where he argued that is an 'unstable Enlightenment project' on the verge of collapsing. He was an early critic of the Iraq war, viewing the idea of importing western liberal democracy as hubristic and utopian. As he was saying all this stuff about fifteen years ago, after Fukuyama had pronounced 'the end of history,' he was viewed as something of a crank. Yet after the financial crash of 2007, the unraveling of the Iraq war, the failure of the Arab Spring and many other developments have largely vindicated his position. The optimism of the 90s has largely lapsed into a collective scepticism.




The main target of Gray's polemics has been the notion of 'progress.' He argues that the Enlightenment/Liberal/Marxist idea of progress was inherited from the Christian notion. Gray argues that there is progress in science, in the sense that knowledge and information accumulates. Gray argues that that such a view is a 'human myth' (like religion), one of the many beliefs which humans have. (Another argument he uses against Enlightenemnt humanism is that humans are no different from other animals.) Gray sees politics as temporary remedial expedients - hence the 'seismic shifts' I mentioned above. There is no progress in politics or ethics. This was the view of ancient antiquity, which was a circular conception of history. In the Greek/Roman/pagan etc. conception, history was viewed as being sequential. There were wars and there was strife followed by periods of enlightenment and harmony. Whilst Gray does concede that living standards have improved and that we are more liberal and tolerant about civil liberties, these values and economic conditions can vanish overnight and be replaced by barbarism. (He cites the USA, the world's foremost liberal democracy, employing torture during the Iraq war.)




Gray covered some familiar ground in this lecture. He covered some of the stuff he has written about in recent articles as well as his most popular book, Straw Dogs. But the talk was at its most stimulating when he ventured into the subject of his latest book, free will. I disagreed with some of the things he had to say. Gray believes that our minds are deterministic and that we are not always conscious about our actions. In his book Straw Dogs, he argues that a pre-engineered cognitive system is essentially no different from that of humans. But, beyond that, can said cognitive system actually understand concepts like free will, morality, love beyond merely replicating them? (This has been brought up by John Searle in his 'Chinese Room' argument.)




Gray draws from examples from ancient antiquity against secular humanists who think they are more enlightened and scientific. He talked about the Gnostics and contemporary 'transhumanism.' Gnostics thought that the material world was illusory and that the afterlife was the real world (a view which has shades of Plato). By adhering to their creed and by practicing asceticism, they would enter a 'perfect' spiritual plane. Gray argues that is essentially no different from a current scientific fad that wants to load the data from our brains and to bring it back once we've passed away. We thus become 'eternal' and 'perfect.' Scientists are essentially being ascetic and austere by living so healthily that they will live until 2040 until technology has caught up with us.




Whilst I disagree with some of his arguments about free will, Gray ended his lecture on a stimulating note. He talked about the need for humans 'to live in mystery and ignorance.' Gray is less influenced by philosophers than he is by poets. There is a Romantic streak to his world-view (which I am sure he would deny). I get terribly bored by thinkers like Dawkins, Pinker and Grayling (all of whom Gray attacks on a regular basis) who preach about the need for science and 'reason.' Gray is sympathetic to religion. He wants us to preserve myths, one of the things which differentiates us from other animals. We are so sedated by consumerism and by the progress of science that Romantic concepts like transcendence and the sublime seem to have little currency. Though as Michael said once we left the lecture, we still feel the need to intellectualise these things. And we are often smug about 'ignorant' people.




Chile vs, Brazil at the Emirates stadium

I went to this game with bunch of Latin American PHD economics students whom I've developed very close friendships with. Two of them are Brazilian. They had been taunting me about what a crap Chile team before the world cup but largely retracted those statements after they saw them play in the world cup! (We were close - ever so close - of knocking them out.)


This the fourth time I have seen Chile play. (The previous time was the 2-0 win against England at Wembley.) This is the first time, though, that I saw them lose. The game ended 1-0 to Brazil.


The main reason for the disappointment was down to Dunga's negative tactics. Chile are a fast, fluid, passing side and Brazil constantly fouled them and stopped them. (They accrued a lot of cards.) Chile, despite being the better side, mustered one shot on target.


Though I did encounter something very, very suprising. A fan from my third division teach, Fernandez Vial, invaded the pithch. I am in an important European stadium, watching an international friendly and I see a Vial fan storm into the pitch. Only word could express my incredulity: SU-RRE-AL.


Vial are in danger of being disbanded. They were just promoted from the third tier and the ANFP (the football federation) has charged them a large sum they can't afford to pay. Vial are the team with most support in the region and with longest and most interesting history. They deserve a lot more. The fan went up to Bravo, who plays for Barcelona, and pleaded for his help... yep, the situation really is that desperate.


So, all in all, I had fun bantering with my Brazilian friend and witnessing that surreal incident. And I'm a passionate fan of La Roja, so it's a always a pleasure to see them play. So it was worth it.

The tactical fundamentalist

Marcelo Bielsa

Although I am not a very acute observer of football, when a passing side plays well I find it very aesthetically pleasing. I like to watch teams which are attacking and positive. And they do not get any more attacking and positive than Marcelo Bielsa.

When a Bielsa side plays at maximum capacity, it puts teams like Barcelona and Spain to shame. I sometimes find myself yawning when I watch that type of tiki-taka football. Bielsa's teams are well-drilled and pass the ball well, but it is ratcheted up to 500 miles per hour. Every single player presses the opposition and aims to retrieve the ball. His sides play with three defenders and even their role is offensive. The objective is to score more goals than the opposition, regardless of who the opponent is. Bielsa has his own philosophy and it will never be revised. You might call it inflexible and predictable, but for football purists it is a manna from heaven. Even if you call it reckless, you can't argue that it also gets results.

His eccentricities only make him more endearing. With a pair of gold-rimmed glasses dangling from the holders, he resembles a crochety professor or your favourite uncle. He crouches on the manager's dug-out, intently peering out onto the pitch. He trudges through the dug-out, endlessly analysing the ways he can win the game. Indeed, he is such an astute tactician that he can change the course of the match through a couple of substitutions.

Bielsa is from a football-mad town in Argentina called Rosario. The two teams are either Rosario Central and Newell's Old Boys. His father was a Rosario Central and Bielsa, being a contrarian, decided to ardently support Newell's.

His obsessive nature already flowered in early childhood. During one of several military dictatorships in Argentina, the police ordered a group of kids to stop playing a obstructive game of football in the street. They took his ball away. Bielsa stated that if the ball went, he went. He was arrested and his ball eventually returned, because he simply would not stop carping on about it. As we shall see, Bielsa is a very principled man.

After a brief playing career in Newell's, he took over the club as manager and led them to a championship trophy. He even took them to the final of the Copa Libertadores (the equivalent of the Champion's League). He has since acquired a legendary status at the club; one of the stadium's stands is named after him. Only a couple of years ago, the fans were being called upon to vote for a new president and Bielsa flew in and was the first person in the cue to vote.

His career is tainted by one regrettable episode, as Argentina manager the 2002 world cup. It is clear that he 'over did' the preparations. He assiduously overtrained the squad and they literally could only limp onto the pitch. Argentina crashed out in the first round after heading into the tournament as hot favourites.

He remains a divisive figure in Argentina to this day, though he acquired a God-like status in Chile after taking over the reins of the national team. It was footballing renaissance. He also instilled a type of high-pressing game that has now become emblematic of all Chilean football. When he was their manager, he even lived in a little hut in the stadium's ground. Of course, he was accompanied by his encyclopedic library of football videos, which he methodically analyses.

A socialist in his politics, Bielsa only communicates to the media through press conferences. He insists on answering every single question from every media outlet. His answers tend to be long-winded and this means that the conferences drag on for several hours. Indeed, he has stated that 'Every section of the media should get the same attention from me, from the capital's most prominent TV channel to the smallest newspaper in the provinces.'

True to his principles, Bielsa left Chile after some disgusting political manoeuvring. The president, Sebastián Pinera, decided that he simply must go. Bielsa stated that he would leave if his contractor was replaced, Harold-Mayne Nichols. He followed through on this threat when Pinera installed a different candidate.

Later, he moved to the quirky club Athletic Bilbao. As he was now playing European football, I managed to see two of their games.

In the first game, against Real Zaragoza, they managed to win with ten men. The squad had already grasped his methods - they can take a while to sink in - and were climbing up the table. My dad and I even tracked his hotel, but he didn't appear to be inside and it appeared to be a fenced private residence. It could be called stalking, but we were assured that he was receptive to visitors!

The second game was the best football match I have ever been to in my life. It was a Europa Cup tie between Bilbao and Manchester United, in Manchester. Bilbao swept Manchester aside with ease. It was a footballing masterclass. Man Untd. were left very beleaguered.

His methods have also forged a generation of acolytes. Gerardo Martino, the current manager of Barcelona, is an avowed disciple. So is Mauricio Pochetinno, manager of Southampton. And the current manager of Chile, Jorge Sampaoli. All these managers have made their way through Newell's Old Boys youth system. Pepe Guardiola has expressed his admiration, citing him as the best manager alive.

Rigid, obsessive, even brazen, Bielsa makes all of his players believe firmly in his methodology. He is a fundamentalist who never alters his 3-3-1-3 formation. On one occasion the entire Argentinean squad complained that they should play with four defenders instead. Bielsa said, 'Very well, we shall have a vote.' The entire team voted for four defender. 'Ok, then, the team has spoken. We will play with three defenders.'

Supporting the minnows

Football. I like football. It is an ember from my childhood. (As a child, I lived and breathed football.) I like watching it. I like following it. It is also diversionary. When I feel like doin' nothin' at all, I open up the BBC sport page and read about - guess what - football.

Though now, in many respects, the game is becoming quite superfluous. Most top flight clubs hoard in a multibillionaire sheik who artificially inflates the club with star signings. Genuine clubs with genuine support tend to dwindle. Most of the top flight teams could hardly be called real football clubs the way they were thirty-odd years ago. Most of them are conglomerates run with cynical motives.

Tournaments then become predictable and uncompetitive. Spain is the apotheosis of all this. Barcelona and Real Madrid pocket all the money from the TV rights, leaving the rest of the clubs in limbo. It's a two-horse race, to put it politely. (I heard a supporter from Athletic Bilbao tell me that the rest of the clubs should partition themselves from the big two teams and form their own separate league.) England's tournament is also dominated by big-spending clubs. The Bundesliga and, in some respects, the French league are comparatively fairer. Montpellier won the French league a couple of years ago, the equivalent of Wigan Athletic winning the Premier League here (more about them below).

So, if we live in an age where clubs are run as such, what do we do? The answer is simple. Support genuine football clubs who run their business organically and fairly. Support your local team. If that team is false and artificial, look elsewhere and support a team with the aforementioned characteristics.

The team I supported as a child, Arturo Fernandez Vial, are down in the doldrums at the minute. Shame, as they are one of these genuine clubs. They play in Concepción, quite a small city (population of 500,000; greater Concepción comprises a million people at a push). It has three football clubs: Arturo Fernandez Vial, Deportes Concepción (Deportes Maricón - Faggots - as we call them) and Universidad de Concepción (nobody calls them anything 'cos nobody supports them).

Fernandez Vial are supported by real working people and have the largest support overall. In fact, the success of each team is conversely proportional to their amount of supporters. Fernandez Vial are in the third tier, Deportes Maricón are in the second tier and Universidad de Concepción are in the first.

In the sprawling vast country that is Chile, people generally support the three corporate conglomerate teams from the capital Santiago (thus making the league predictable and uncompetitive). Someone pathetically told me 'Here we don't support the local teams - that's a purely English phenomenon - you support your father's team.' Incidentally, as a young Chilean child - because that's what I was back then, despite my bright blond hair - my dad took me to see a game between Magallanes and Fernandez Vial, as he supported Magallanes. Being a young contrarian, I chose to support Vial. I insisted that my dad take me to see all their games and he eventually became an Aurinegro as well.

Vial's committed fan-base, the Furia Guerrera.

 

Vial, and even Deportes Maricón, are teams with history. Vial were founded by in 1903 and were christened after the politician who raised the wages of Concepción's railway workers. Deportes Maricón were an alliance of several regional teams dotted around Concepción. Vial are a team supported by working class people, Maricón fans are generally supported by the middle classes (who have dubious political inclinations). Universidad de Concepción were founded by the local university in 1994. Why should the university start a football club? Just think of the productive and socially constructive projects they could be funding! Think of all the scholarships they could raise for disadvantaged students! All the cultural events they could organise! Instead, they fund a football club nobody cares about! That really rankles me!

 

Because that club is guaranteed financial security, they prosper. Dpt. Maricón receive less funding, so they are in the tier below. Vial, meanwhile, despite their committed following, have a ramshackle and corrupt organisation. So they suffer.

 

I used to see them play every home game. The players weren't gifted, but they worked bloody hard. Back then, we were in the second tier and always on the verge of ascending to the first.

 

When I moved to England aged eleven, my interest in football lapsed for a very long time. It was only when Marcelo Bielsa was appointed Chilean manager, and managed to get Chile playing fulminating football, that rekindled my passion for the game.

 

When I started following the Premier League, I chose to support Wigan Athletic. Why Wigan, you may ask?

 

Well, their Houdini act at the tail-end of the 2010-11 season grabbed me. They were 2-0 down against West Ham during the second half and went on to mount a stunning 3-2 victory.

 

The way the club is run is also laudable. The owner, Dave Whelan, does not invest that much money anymore. What they do is sign obscure players, make them better, sell them and restart the process. Their previous manager, Roberto Martinez, also made them play stylish entertaining football. With limited resources, it is quite dangerous to play with three defenders. A team like Arsenal have the infrastructure and the funding to make that kind of system fairly risk-free. Wigan Athletic were, and hopefully will continue to be, courageous in opting for that kind of positive game plan.

 

 

Wigan Athletic

 

Another blistering Houdini act followed the next season. Last season they were unlucky, as they were blighted by a number of injuries. Three of their defenders were injured, thus making them even more vulnerable. You always knew that for every two goals they'd score, they would concede three in return. Relegation certainly is shattering.

 

But then, they won the FA cup! They beat Manchester City in the final - a team costing 80 million pounds vs. a team with a net value 10 million. It was the second coming.

 

Roberto Martínez has had offers from big clubs in the past, which he snuffed. He has departed Wigan and gone to Everton, another genuine club. They are a team with a mid-table budget who are always contending for places in Europe. They are also a very communal club, with great supporters. It was a perfect move.

 

There is a team that, when they play, the whole world stops for me. They are a national team - Chile.

 

 

Chile

 

If they play a world cup game, I pretty much have a nervous breakdown watching them. Bielsa's glorious work has fostered a great generation of players and we play scintillating stuff at our best. I grew up with the generation of Salas-Zamorano. There were flashes of greatness back then, followed by a dark age. But, when Bielsa took over, it was a real awakening. A team that used to play like donkeys can now wipe the floor with their opponents - on a good day!

 

In any case, it is much better to support the minnows. The reasons I gave above should rest my case. Also, when you do support a big team, you win so much that the umpteenth title hardly means anything to you. When your punitive little team wins something, it means the world to you. That's how I felt when Wigan won the FA cup and that's how I felt when Chile beat Argentina for the first time. Who knows, might I experience that when Fernandez Vial win the Copa Libertadores? A man can dream!