Si un alt articol pentru drepturile omului la bun simt:
Those close to Luis Suárez must offer reality check, not a chorus of approval The Times Matthew Syed
“In normal circumstances,” Albert Speer, Hitler’s henchman, wrote in his autobiography, “people who turn their backs on reality are soon set straight by the mockery and criticism of those around them. In the Third Reich, there were no such correctives, especially for those who belonged to the upper stratum.”
It is with some hesitation that I bring a discourse on the Holocaust into an article about football, but Speer’s point, it seems to me, has deep relevance. It is the idea that moral boundaries are often given to us by our peers, our colleagues, our parents, those close to us. These are the people who check our excesses, our tendency to veer into unacceptable territory, who help us to navigate in a world po****ted by other people.
They are the ones who caution us, who ridicule us, who teach us, who sometimes shout at us when we are going too far. These are the people who show their love not with unconditional support but with chastisement. Without these correctives, these critiques, these educational dialogues that help us to recognise the boundaries of acceptable behaviour, we are pretty much lost, whether in childhood or in the equally complex terrain of adulthood.
All of which brings me to Luis Suárez. You will have noticed over the past few days that those within football have condemned Suárez’s behaviour, but have condoned the support he has received from his coach and team-mates. As Michael Ballack put it: “I can understand the reaction from Uruguay. As a team-mate Suárez will be like a family member to those players. He’s done something wrong, but he’s still family, so of course they protect him.”
The problem with this analysis, I would suggest, is that it misses something deeply important: these two issues are intimately related. It is precisely because Suárez is so lavishly indulged by those around him that he is unable to perceive the boundaries of proper behaviour; it is precisely because his crimes are legitimated by his peers that he is incapable of seeing the need to reform.
Óscar Tabárez, the Uruguay coach, described Suárez as a “scapegoat” and the punishment as “media-driven”. He indicated that he would step down from his official positions on the technical groups with Fifa in solidarity with his player. Diego Lugano, the captain, said: “I’ve just watched the TV images and I didn’t see anything.” Even the president of Uruguay went to the airport to welcome Suárez home. How is the player supposed to confess to his crime while those around him are colluding in the fantasy that he didn’t commit one?
Some have pointed out that Sir Alex Ferguson also defended his players publicly, but the difference is that the Scot chastised his players in private. Indeed, boundaries were probably more tightly enforced at Old Trafford than anywhere else. The players soon heard about it if they stepped out of line, in whatever way. Public support from Ferguson was about creating a siege mentality; it had nothing to do with the social realities within the training ground.
The problem for Suárez is that he is being indulged both publicly and privately. It is a united chorus of sycophancy. Just look at the comical defence he issued to Fifa: “I lost my balance and my face hit a player, hurting my teeth.” This was signed off by the Uruguayan FA, who must have known that it would irk the tribunal but who were unable to stand up to the pitiful delusions of their star player. For all we know, they drafted it for him, merely adding to the unreality he inhabits.
At Liverpool under Kenny Dalglish, Suárez was given the same dangerous latitude. After Suárez had racially abused Patrice Evra, the manager told the entire team to don T-shirts in support of the Uruguayan. Sources suggested that the Liverpool manager was four-square behind his star man privately, too, making the calculation that he needed to “keep him onside”. The consequence was inescapable: a further detachment from reality.
There have been some excellent articles in recent days on the formative years of Suárez. With insight and sensitivity, these have deconstructed the atavistic rages of the footballer and speculated about where they come from. They have talked of a boy who was deserted by his father at the age of 9, who learnt his values in the anarchic subculture of the backstreets of Montevideo. They argue that he should be given sympathy; and that with therapy he will find the right path.
These insights are cogent, but they miss something important: therapy cannot work until Suárez admits that he needs it. If he has convinced himself — with the connivance of those who should have told him otherwise — that he did nothing wrong, that he is a martyr to other people’s prejudices, why would he wish to have help? In his mind, it is the rest of us who need help.
Stardom is a curious thing. I remember sitting in the café at the National Football Museum in Manchester as David Beckham’s car rolled up to take part in a Times+ event. We all wanted to take his photo, get him to sign our books, tell him how much he meant to us. There was a sort of serial fawning while the ordinary punters outside kept up an audible chant of “We love David”. And I remember thinking: that kind of thing could ruin a man.
How does Beckham stay grounded? Speer’s words give us the answer: “With the mockery and criticism of those around him.” Mum. Dad. Best mate Dave. While he was a player, his team-mates and manager. These are the people who matter most, whose disapproval hurts. They are the thermostat of sanity.
Suárez needs access to these social checks, too. When he bites someone, he needs to be told that it is wrong by those around him. When he racially abuses someone, he must be chastised. This is not the solution, but it is the necessary starting point for any rehabilitation worthy of the name. Without it, he will remain in a parallel universe where biting someone is synonymous with falling on to their shoulder, teeth first.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by bogdan_nj
