How Football, Once Labeled ‘The People’s Game,’ Has Become Unattainable for the People

Around the world, there are hundreds of millions of people who dream of a career in football whether that be as a coach, a fitness manager, or a striker. From training on the most beautiful lawns in England, to the soft beaches in Brazil and even to the mountains of Bolivia. The beautiful game is played in every corner of the world. It is therefore by far the most popular sport. But this also leaves many people with various questions. How did football originate? Who invented it? Why has it become so popular? Was it always this popular?

Football has not always been the sport we know today. In the Middle Ages, a game was played in several British villages in which a ball had to be moved from one side of the village to the other. This was often accompanied by barbaric practices that also involved a lot of vandalism of villages. At one point it became so popular that people preferred it to the "compulsory and vain" sports of the time such as archery and hunting. This even led to several English kings such as Henry V, Edward IV, Henry VII banning football to restrict and control it (Orjan 2011). In 1314, King Edwards II called the sport “which many evils arise from” (Basch, 1970, p.215). In an effort to refocus men on archery and hunting, Edward IV banned football in 1477:

No person shall practice any unlawful games such as dice, quoits, football and such games, but that every strong and able-bodied person shall practive with the bow for the reason that the national defense depends upon such bowmen (Walvin, 1994, p. 78)

This wild and barbaric form of football has often been banned in the history of the English monarchy. It took the royals of the British society some time to accept the sport, which was mainly popular in urban life, and to allow it again. But after the countless alternatives to football that we now know, there is no doubt that it was the British “public” private school teams and football clubs that took the first steps towards modern football. They created the Football Association (FA) in 1863 and the FA Cup in 1871 and then, working like colonial missionaries, gradually introduced the new structured and codified game to the working class. For years, it was the middle-class teams that dominated football. This hegemony came to an end when the Blackburn team from Lancashire, known as the birthplace spinning and weaving of cotton into fabric, took on the team of the prestigious Eton College, the Old Estonians, in 1883. Blackburn's team included cotton weavers, plumbers, and steel factory workers. Still, Blackburn managed to win here and take home the FA Cup. For some it may looks like underdog-like story where the not-favorites won, but it was more than just a beautiful story. Deep social factors were rooted in this win (Storey, 2016).

Although the public schools in England, The FA, civilized the game and gave it rules, it was not long before football died out as the middle-class favorite sport. Under the pressure of the changes in society in the Industrial Revolution, team sports became less and less popular among the middle class. On the other hand, the sport continued to find life as a form of recreation among those who worked in the factories. At that time, it was not uncommon to play a game of football during the break, at least something that resembles modern football. The exact reasons are hard to pin down, but thanks to its low threshold and fraternization, which built team chemistry between the people, football ended up in the hearts of all the cotton weavers and steel mill workers.

The Industrial Revolution increased the size of cities and the population of the working class. Many of them came from rural areas. This means that they had very different hobbies like hunting, in those big new factory cities it was inevitable for them to change those hobbies. They did not have much free time, but they decided to do something together. Because of this, they decided to go to a football game together on their free Saturday to play or to watch. Institutions such as the church, trade unions, and schools organized working-class boys and men into recreational football teams. Growing adult literacy encouraged media coverage of organized sports, while transportation infrastructure like railroads and urban trams made it possible for athletes and fans to get to football games (Curry, 2015). Slowly but surely, football is back in middle class’s life, but due to all kinds of changes in the popularity of the sport in recent decades, the luxury goods market is also taking advantage of their opportunities in football. For some it may be a form of recreation they do in their day-to-day life, for others it is as important in their lives as breathing. What was once originally sown by the prestigious schools of the English middle class has been harvest by the working class who made it into a profession and is now left to its fate by the luxury goods market.

France and Real Madrid star Eduardo Camavinga who became the first footballer to walk on the runway for Balenciaga in 2022, former England international David Beckham who has become the man known for his style, the late Karl Lagerfeld designing the kit of the French national team in 2011, football and luxury fashion are no strangers of each other. But how come the game that played in the industrial districts of England ended on the catwalk of Balenciaga?

The aim of this research paper is to look at how football, which was once a sport for the working class, is now becoming less and less attainable for them and has become a “luxury” sport. For the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, class does present itself through three different 'forms' of capital, economic, cultural, and social. This paper will be more focused on the cultural and social capitals. Many of Bourdieu's field work rooted in agents' volume, structure, and trajectory of economic and cultural capital have influenced a great deal of research on sport and social inequality (Stemple, 2018). His Theory of Capital will give us more insight into how football has evolved into the sport it has become today.

By using Pierre Bourdieu's theory of capitals, this study explores the various forms of capital and their influence on the changing dynamics within football. Added to this is Deleuze's philosophy of looking at football and football culture not as something that is, but something that is becoming through multiplicity, territorialization and deterritorialization, intensities and affect. This allows us to look at football its traditional boundaries an enables us to rethink the game. This paper seeks to answer the question; is football still attainable goal for the working class? To provide a better understanding of this, I will us use a few examples within the football industry (not soccer please!).

Bourdieu’s Theory of Capital – Introduction

In 1986, French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu introduced his Theory of Capitals. Bourdieu argued that capital is the currency that buys you a higher position in society. It is the foundation in social life, and it is what decides your role in the social world. Capital is the result of labor and over time the amount of capital you can accumulate increases. However, not all labor, for example forms of capital are equal. The more time you spend accumulating a form of capital, the more valuable the capital is. 'Accumulated labor (in its materialized form or its 'incorporated,' embodied form) which, when appropriated on a private, i.e., exclusive, basis by agents or groups of agents, enables them to appropriate social energy in the form of reified or living labour' (Bourdieu, 1986, p.15). Depending on the field where it functions, Bourdieu distinguishes two main types of capital, the cultural and the social capital (with a third economic capital). The cultural capital can be described as what you know. ‘Convertible, in certain conditions, into economic capital and maybe institutionalized in the form of educational qualifications’ (Bourdieu, 1986, p. 242). And he created this idea to study how culture affects social stratification and ‘the relationship between action and social structure,’ (Lamont & Lareau, 1988, p. 154). Therefore, Bourdieu distinguishes this cultural capital in three forms. These were the objectified cultural capital, institutionalized cultural capital and embodied cultural capital. The first two are discussed in the next two paragraphs respectively.

The latter capital is about the knowledge consciously acquired and inherited. While factors such as the accent of skills used to be very important for someone's image of football, things are very different now. You can even say that football has been democratized. You used to get into a team like the old Estonians if you were a certain kind of person with a certain attitude or accent. Football today does not necessarily look at your mind or body, you can also join successful teams like the "Royal" Real Madrid even if you don't have a noble background. There are several factors that have made the game significantly different.

Objectified Cultural Capital

First (not that is has an order) is the objectified cultural capital. This refers to the material belongings that one owns and that have cultural significance and can be transmitted for economic profit. Owning material belongings of significant value has become even more important in today's football. Think of the football boots that a player wears. Where before the 20th century it was often about leather shoes with metal studs that weighed more than half a kilo, brands such as Nike and Puma are now looking for the lightest materials, so that the players achieve a better performance. The game has changed a lot technically, so this also requires that these brands use the latest technologies. It does not stop there for the evolution of the leather football shoe, because high-fashion brands have also started to get involved in 2023. Italian luxury fashion house Prada launched their new football boots in collaboration with Adidas. These boots included the finest leather, a clean mono-color, and the iconic Linea Rossa. The collection showcases the sophisticated craftsmanship of Prada and design details synonymous with Prada, blended with the high-performance football technologies unique to Adidas. Besides this example, there are plenty of other examples where fashion and football come together. One can really start to wonder, will I really play better football because of three extra red stripes and some better leather? Would a striker strike the ball better? With or without the Prada logo, the shoe would feel good, but this exact shoe sold out in a few minutes. The reason lies in the cultural capital, they want to show to which social class they belong. Only by showing this “code” can one, on a material level, let oneself belong to a certain group that has a higher objectified cultural capital in this aspect.

In the old days, when football was played by cotton weavers, everyone on the field was dressed in the same kind of clothes. Not a single factory worker entered the field with the newest shoes. This meant that many people were in the same environment. People in a certain environment often have the same taste. What you see on the football fields now is that those tastes differ. One likes those Prada football boots and the other can't stand that luxurious good. Bourdieu also argued that 'taste classifies and it classifies the classifier' (1986). What Bourdieu is trying to say here is that one's taste is a way of classifying another. So, if you see someone on our local football field with those Prada football boots you judge him by that, he is in a higher social class. At the same time, this also means that you classified yourself. Your taste arises within a certain framework of this objectified cultural capital, it arises from what you know about football boots. Such valuations are never a simple matter of individual taste, consumption operates both to identify and to mark social distinction and to sustain social difference (Storey, 2021).

Institutioned Cultural Capital

We tend to think that football is this mediocracy where it doesn't matter whether or not you have an institutionalized edge. On the one hand, this argument is correct, football is a way out for many. Just look at the Brazilian attacker Gabriel Jesus who, at the age of 17, was painting the streets of Sao Paulo, Brazil in 2014 to prepare the country for the World Cup. To then represent his country at the World Cup in Russia four years later. But like the inequality that people experience in their careers (Storey, 2021, p.147), football is not very different. Because becoming a footballer is also “doable” nowadays. Naturally, talent is still important. Where Blackburn's coach had to make do with the employees of his factory in the 1880s, in 2023 the French national coach Didier Deschamps will be served the talents on a plate. At least 10 players in the France national football team who won the World Cup have "graduated" from the Clairfontaine academy. Clairefontaine is, in essence, a national training center where the objective is to equip Ligue 1 sides and ultimately the French national team. They select 25 teenagers between the age of 13 and 15 that can train at the Clairefontaine base (Dailymail, 2017). For two years these players live by a strict football philosophy in order to persue the career they want. And of course, being allowed for such a prestigious academy doesn't come cheap. The academy demands a lot of effort from both the player and the parents. This means that for those who cannot spare the time or effort, it will be a difficult story to get into. This makes football less and less accessible to everyone. Where it used to be about raw talent and where everyone had "an equal" chance, it is now the turn of football schools and expensive private coaches who have to prepare the new generation of football players for the future.

Social Cultural Capital

Social capital how Bourdieu describes it, is access to exclusive network and knowing the right people. According to Bourdieu, not every member of a community or group have access to social capital; rather, those who make an effort to obtain it by reaching positions of authority and prestige and by cultivating goodwill can do so (Bourdieu, 1986). Bourdieu also used the notion of field. He did many different research projects in fields, like the educational system, art world and the media. His researched showed how owning and having accesses to form of social capital can allow one to be more successful in those fields. Although Bourdieu's social capital is manifested through social network, he argues that the source of this capitals is thus symbolically shifted from the economic field to the field of consumption, making social power appear to be the result of a specific disposition (Storey, 2021). Therefore, social capital is less about having a significant social circle than it is about having a position in society that makes one's social network potentially beneficial. So how important is having the right network for a player? And how do luxury brands use it?

Many football players of the late 90s and early 00s are seen as icons in contemporary football. There was a very nice class of football players at that time. One of those football players was, for example, the French midfielder Zinedine Zidane (what a name by the way). After his flamboyant football career, he was appointed head coach for Real Madrid, where he had a great time and won many trophies. His appointment was fun for especially one person, his son Luca Zidane, who was immediately bought by his father to Real Madrid. He now plays somewhere in the second Spanish league and is actually a very average player (shocking goalkeeper) who would never end up with the great Real Madrid without his father. This kind of nepotism and favoritism happens at every level of football and in every league. Roberto Mancini epitomized nepotism when he signed his sons, Andrea, and Filippo, for Manchester City. Both couldn't crack the first eleven, because they were just not good enough, yet they received a very nice salary. This does not only happen in a team, but also on a managerial level. Sporting Directors often have families that are in agencies that represent certain players, which creates a kind of favoritism. You can continue to name examples of nepotism in football. Don't get me wrong I get it, it's almost a human instinct to help our family and people close to us as much as possible. It is also a blessing for many to be in such a position. Only the problem with football is that it comes at the expense of the organic that was once the drive of every footballer. You wanted to become a football player and really prove yourself to the scouts. You had to 'fight' for your position. Due to the new infrastructure of football, that motivation “to fight for the badge” has disappeared from football players who know that they are in a luxury position. The danger of this is not only that football loses its organic foundation, but also that real talents no longer get the chance to prove themselves (Sogut, 2021). In the past, football was just the way out for the working class to show what they could do, without all those luxury attributes. But now they hardly stand a chance if they don't have a father, acquaintance or an agent who can put in a good word for them with the club management or the head coach.

This nepotism also ensures that only a handful of players are the stars of football today. In the past, the somewhat older football players also stood on billboards. In 1994, for example, Nike launched a campaign with the then 30-year-old Eric Cantona, which became a great success. But in football nowadays this is no longer to be found. Clubs use their young star players as much as possible to market the club. As a result, luxury brands now only have the Erling Haaland's (son of former football player Alfie Haaland) and Kylian Mbappe's (from the Clairefontaine academy) of this world. And so, you only see youngsters in advertising or, like the French super talent, Eduardo Camavinga, at the Balenciaga runway show. This does not necessarily have an immediate effect on how they play, but it does affect their economic capital therefore they have an advantage in their social capital.

Pierre Bourdieu introduced his Theory of Capitals, which explores the concept of capital as the currency that determines one's position in society. In the context of football, objectified cultural capital has become increasingly important. Luxury fashion brands like Prada have teamed up with classic sports brands such as Adidas and thus entered the football industry, merging fashion with the sport. Owning these high-end products can signal social class and help individuals belong to a group with higher objectified cultural capital.

Institutionalized cultural capital in football involves the emergence of football academies and specialized training centers, like Clairefontaine academy in France. These institutions provide young players with intensive training and a strict football philosophy, preparing them for professional careers. However, gaining access to these academies often requires significant effort and financial resources, making football less accessible to everyone and emphasizing the importance of institutionalized cultural capital. Social capital in football is related to having access to exclusive networks and knowing the right people. Bourdieu argues that individuals who reach positions of authority and cultivate goodwill can acquire social capital. In football, this can be seen through nepotism and favoritism, where players or coaches' family members are given opportunities based on their connections rather than merit. This practice exists at all levels of the sport and can limit the chances for talented individuals without influential connections.

The use of social capital is also evident in marketing and endorsements. Luxury brands and clubs often rely on young star players to promote their products and enhance their image. This can contribute to the economic capital of these players and give them an advantage in their social capital. Overall, Bourdieu's Theory of Capitals provides insights into how different forms of capital, such as cultural, institutionalized, and social capital, influence social stratification and opportunities in football. Bourdieu is trying to argue how culture itself becomes a hierarchy, where people lower in the system with less cultural capital must learn other people’s culture to be seen as part of that culture and like a cool/legitimate person.

Football and Deleuze: Introduction

The French-born Gilles Deleuze (1925 – 1995) is seen in philosophy as one of the most influential French philosophers of the twentieth century. Deleuze's philosophical concepts can provide insights into the transformation of football from a working-class sport to a high-class phenomenon. The concepts of multiplicity, deterritorialization and reterritorialization, intensities, and affect can shed light on the question of whether football remains an attainable goal for the working class. Football, as a dynamic and complex sport, offers a ground for exploring philosophical concepts and applying them to more practical scenarios. Gilles Deleuze's philosophical framework, with its emphasis on deterritorialization, reterritorialization, multiplicity, intensities, and affect, provides an intriguing lens through which we can analyze and enhance our understanding of football as both social (and a physical) phenomenon.

Multiplicity

Deleuze's concept of multiplicity recognizes the diverse and complex nature of social phenomena. It is a collection of parts. Deleuze distinguished this term between an intensive and an extensive multiplicity. With an extensive multiplicity you can think of physical things that people wear. Everyone around the stadium wears an Ajax shirt, which means that they are connected. An intensive multiplicity are the connections that we cannot see. In the case of football, it is essential to understand that the sport operates within a multiplicity of forces, interests, and power dynamics. While football has historically been associated with working-class communities, it has also grown into a global industry with multiple stakeholders, including wealthy owners, corporate sponsors, and media conglomerates. This multiplicity shapes the contemporary landscape of football.

Territorialization and Deterritorialization

Deleuze and Guattari's concept of deterritorialization refers to the process by which entities break free from their established territories and reconfigure their relationships. Life creates and furthers itself by forming connections or territories. This way everything can be a form of territorialisation. For Deleuze a territory is the connection of forces (Colebrook, 2002). In the context of football, the cotton weavers, plumbers, and steel factory workers of Blackburn were a territorialisation. Because of their common background, they produce a force that distinguishes itself, because of their work or lifestyle, from the whole, society. This force of distinction thus creates a territorialization, which means that within this territory the body is allowed to do things. The territory influences what bodies can do, according to a spoken or an implicit set of concepts, expectations, actions (they often call these 'codes'). For the factory workers, the football field was a territory with codes. What the body could do was encoded. The ball had to be shot into the opponent's goal, to regain possession you have to tackle the opponent, even the terms opponent and your teammates are codes. But where there is territorialization, deterritorialization also takes place. Deterritorialization can be seen in the sport's commercialization, as it has moved beyond its local and grassroots origins. The influx of significant financial investments, high transfer fees, and lavish salaries has contributed to the detachment of football from its working-class roots. As a result, football has been reterritorialized into a high-class sport, often associated with glamour, exclusivity, and wealth. This shows that there has been an overcoding in football. Where it was first played only as an amateur sport, it has now become a profession. In addition to the honor in the local factory village, there are now also many financial interests at stake.

But Deleuze even goes so far as to mention the term reterritorialization. This is when a new order takes place. Space is re-territorialized, they are 'recoded', given order of what is sensible, and settled into a newfound stability in their patterns of movement. Many football fans, such as those of England's Newcastle United, are rebelling against investors such as the Saudis who want to pump millions into football clubs. The reason for this is because the club is the territory of the fans, such an unknown investor from a country with different standards will have to change the codes in Newcastle. Many fans are not happy about that (Farrer, 2021).

Deleuze’s deterritorialization is not necessarily spatial and doesn’t focus on what a code is, it has more to do the freeing of a code. The codes allow territorial to overcode and assemblages new reterritorializations. Which provokes or induces new deterritorializing desires (Houten, 2010).

Intensities

Deleuze emphasizes the notion of intensities, which refers to the affective and emotional dimensions of experiences. In football, the intensity of emotions such as joy, camaraderie, and tribalism has always played a significant role. However, the intensities associated with the sport have become entangled with other forces, such as consumerism, branding, and social status. High-class football has transformed into a spectacle, generating intense emotions linked not only to the game itself but also to the status and identity of the fans. Many people classify supporters of clubs like PSG or Manchester City, which have been taken over by wealthy oil giants, as plastic supporters or glory hunters. Intensities such as happiness because your team gets to play in it for the first time since the Premier League existed (e.g., Luton Town) or crying because your team loses the Champions League final. They are intensities that you can only experience if you have been a true “fan” for years and have supported the club through all its ups and downs. Clubs that have been able to buy players with dizzying amounts of money because of all that "oil money", are of course destined to achieve success in the eyes of the "real" fans. According to Mary Beth Mader (2014) it would be wrong to explain intensities of happiness to win a prize by how the quality of happiness changes. For Deleuze it is about how intense such a change is. And then you can argue that someone whose club can't throw buckets of cash to buy the best players will be more intensive happier with a prize than someone whose club can.

Affect

Deleuze's concept of affect refers to the pre-individual and non-conscious forces that shape our experiences and subjectivities. ‘Affect is not the meaning of an experience but the response its prompts’ (Colebrook, 2014). In the context of football's shift towards a high-class sport, affect plays a crucial role. The affective dimensions of football have been harnessed by various actors, such as clubs, sponsors, and media, to create desires, aspirations, and identifications that align with the values and lifestyles associated with high-class culture. The affective pull of these associations can shape the working class's perception of football, potentially making it seem unattainable or distant. A football match can have a different affect for everyone. One can be happy because his team wins, the other sad because his team loses. But that doesn't mean that the affect or perception must be in a point of view. For example, a 1-0 deficit in the first half does not immediately mean that you have lost, but you can still see from the game (e.g. less possession, few chances created, etc.) that the other team has the advantage.

Considering these Deleuzian concepts, we can argue that while football remains accessible in terms of participation and fandom, its transformation into a high-class sport has created new barriers for the working class. The commercialization, deterritorialization, and reterritorialization of football have elevated the sport's status and made it intertwined with economic and cultural capital. This intertwining of football with high-class culture has altered the intensities and affects associated with the game, potentially leading to a sense for the working class. However, it is important to acknowledge that football's multiplicity still allows for diverse experiences and possibilities, and working-class individuals and communities can still find avenues to engage with the sport, albeit within the transformed landscape.

Conclusion

In medieval times, in the villages of the Midlands of England, they played a game where you had to move the ball from one side of the village to the other with your foot. It was so disorganized that sometimes they were too many people, causing a lot of vandalism to the village. This kind of barbaric games did not fit in the time of archery and hunting. Therefore, it was banned by some British monarchs. The game was not accepted until the boys from the "public" private schools in England created the Football Association (FA) in 1863 and the FA Cup in 1871. It was these guys who coded the barbaric game with rules and laws. So, they were also the one who dominated it. That dominance came to an end when a team of cotton weavers, plumbers, and steel factory workers from Blackburn defeated the men of the prestigious Eton College to win the FA Cup in 1883.

The popularity of football succumbed to the changes of the Industrial Revolution. While the middle class sidelined the sport on the one hand, it became a form of recreation for the working class. It was then not uncommon to play a game of football on the free Saturday afternoon. The feeling of working on something together and clearing your head was something the steel mill workers could get after a long day in a factory under bad conditions. The exact reason is difficult to determine, but gradually football became a daily recreation and even grew into a profession among the middle class. This caused the Fa to make new rules to be allowed to have football as a profession. As a result, more was arranged such as fixtures and salaries. In the decades that followed, the popularity of football only grew and grew. It is played in every corner of the world. The working class was able to receive its flowers when football was doing so well that even the luxury goods market has started to get involved.

Did the involvement of the upper class mean that football was no longer accessible to the working class? According to Bourdieu's forms of capital and Deleuze's theories, the attainability of football as a goal for the working class can be understood through the lens of social and cultural factors.

Bourdieu's theory of capital provides additional insight into the question. According to Bourdieu, there are different forms of capital, including economic, social, and cultural capital. Cultural capital involves knowledge, skills, and cultural competencies, such as understanding the norms and practices of the football industry. Social capital encompasses networks, connections, and relationships, which can provide access to important contacts and opportunities within the football world. Cultural capital involves knowledge, skills, and cultural competencies, such as understanding the norms and practices of the football industry. Economic capital refers to financial resources, which can play a significant role in accessing football training, facilities, and opportunities.

In the context of football, individuals from the working class may face challenges in accumulating the necessary economic, social, and cultural capital to pursue a professional career. Economic constraints can limit access to quality training, coaching, and equipment. Social barriers may restrict networking opportunities and connections with influential figures in the football industry. Cultural barriers, such as lacking specific training methods or lacking knowledge of the "right" way to navigate the football world, can also hinder progress.

Deleuze's theory of deterritorialization, reterritorialization, multiplicity, intensities, and affect give one a better understanding of how we can look at football outside and rethink the boundaries is has. The overcoding of football made to sport go from an amateur game to a billionare doller business, this resulted in a game that is much more commercialized. Working-class territory where you used to “give your heart to your club” has diminished that affect on the viewer. It has all become a force that moves on the field like a game of chess. You also feel at some clubs that the fans are less happy with their successes because they have managed to put themselves far above the rest with that economic capital.

However, it is important to note that Deleuze and Bourdieu's theories do not imply that football is completely unattainable for the working class. While structural barriers and inequalities exist, there are instances of individuals from working-class backgrounds breaking through and achieving success in football. These cases often involve exceptional talent, perseverance, and a combination of various forms of capital. Furthermore, there are initiatives and programs aimed at promoting inclusivity and providing opportunities for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds to engage with the sport.

In summary, according to Deleuze's theories and Bourdieu's forms of capital, the attainability of football as a goal for the working class is influenced by complex social, economic, and cultural factors. While there are challenges and barriers to overcome, individual talent, determination, and supportive initiatives can potentially enable individuals from the working class to pursue and achieve success in football.