American Soccer – Disallowed Boys and Booty Call

I detest Plato. If someone had simply replied, "Why would you assume that, Socrates?", his collected works would fit onto a Post-It Note.

However, the Socratic method – recognizable perhaps to some as catechism – can occasionally be used helpfully to focus thought. So let's try to focus on the question that has roiled Major League Soccer this week:

The reason I am superior to Plato and Socrates is that, unlike them, I am humble. I will not attempt to claim that my reasoning necessarily speaks for anyone else, let alone the universe, let alone conceptual thought. Plato sucked. Where was I. Oh, yes. I'll ask questions, but I won't pretend you and I will have the same answers.

This is how I see the issue: I think MLS can, and should, pre-emptively ban Nazis from their games.

Can MLS ban Nazis from the stadium?

Oh, citizen. They can ban anyone they please. Forget political speech, we've all read about people getting tossed for bringing banners saying "Fire the coach." They can't ban you for your race, your age, or your gender, but the fine print of every ticket we've ever bought tells us Major League Soccer can give us the bum's rush for next to any or no reason. MLS isn't exactly the only promoter that claims such rights, either. If you'd like to wear that "Snakes on a Plane" shirt you got at Goodwill, complete with famous catchphrase? You would do so entirely on the sufferance of The Man.

In case you doubt this, here's a helpful Tweet from David Rudin.

And, in case you still doubt it, for a few hot minutes in the 1990's, American flags were banned at Galaxy games. Allow me to explain. You see, the Rose Bowl had a fairly big general admission section. And while US fans had their feelings hurt by Mexico fans throwing debris at them – we wisely wore disposable raincoats for the occasion – the rivalry between Mexico and El Salvador, to pick an example not entirely at random, had literally an edge to it, shall we say. The easiest way to forestall discussions on team MVPs from becoming, shall we say, unreasonably frank? Lose the flags. And, since you couldn't single out those two flags, the rest of the world was brought along. Once the Galaxy moved into its own stadium, and security was able to focus on not so great an acreage, was national pride welcomed back.

So what about this claim by NYCFC, via Christian Araos in the Guardian?

The supporters section at Yankee Stadium is general admission so any of them can purchase a ticket and sit there. As long as they refrain from making any obvious gestures or shout any hateful slogans, there’s not much the club can do.

NYC FC’s policy is to keep decisions to sanction fans private and the club did not publicize the fact that Antillon – whose tattoos include an SS symbol and the white supremacist phrase “Blood And Honor” in Spanish – was banned permanently after making an offensive gesture at an away game. In line with Garber’s beliefs, NYC FC do not ban fans based on their political beliefs but rather for transgressions directly linked to the club that take place inside or outside stadiums. Another man who attended the Proud Boys event with Antillon was not banned. Since he has no record of offense, he can still attend the club’s games and events

I think this is about practicality rather than policy. NYCFC did run off Antillon, and I'll bet they wish they had made it public. Knowing MLS front offices as we do, I imagine some form of double secret probation is permanently in effect for dipsticks like this.

But the NYCFC front office needs to get their heads right. Sure, there's no way to prevent Horst Wessell from buying a ticket with cash, attending the game while keeping his stupid opinions to himself, and then going home again to do the same thing next week. There's absolutely a way to keep Horst out of the bleedin' supporters section, thanks to our friend the video camera. I doubt there are two teams in the league right now who don't have some kind of way to track their supporters groups in-game, and I'm including the one that hasn't had an MLS home game yet.

Fine, so MLS has the right to bounce anyone for any reason. Should they?

Okay, since we're now voyaging into the stormy waters of Ought and Should, now is probably a good time to say that from here on in I'm speaking for my own opinion. Let's say I own a team in MLS, like the Loney Rangers or the Loney Wolves or something.

So, not for any reason. But I'd have a pretty strong policy against politics and religion, and I'll tell you why. I'm trying to sell tickets, and here you are trying to get your cause free publicity.

That would go for causes I agree with, too. I wouldn’t take pro-choice or pro-life signs or ads. That's not what the fans are here for. That's not what the players are playing for. This isn't the Old Firm.

But that banner in Seattle, for example, should have stayed. I don't want to sell tickets to people who will keep other people from coming. I don't want to sell tickets to racists, if only because they chase away other customers. There's that "right thing to do" going on, sure, but I'm trying to run a business here.

So you'd confiscate a hammer and sickle flag, or an antifa flag?

The former cheerfully, the latter with an explanation that since anarchism and socialism are technically political movements, this isn't the time or place. Again, this is me talking. You, as owner or investor/operator or general manager or whatever, have the right to drop-kick anyone and watch them bounce on their way out.

And would you let Communists or antifa attend games?

Sure. Why not?

Why would you let violent people in the stadium?

As long as they're not violent in the stadium. I wouldn't want to ban ex-convicts, for example. They've apparently served their debt to society, if they're walking around loose, and they of all people could probably use a good soccer game to cheer them up. I'll try not to let the Communists starve out the kulaks of Section 203 or wherever.

Hey, the Soviet Union was –

Not cool. Gotcha. And if they come to my games and act all Commie, that's different. But if they want to kick back and enjoy soccer, they're welcome.

So you'd also let in Nazis, if they didn't do any Nazi things during the game?

Oh, hell no. You get your picture online as one of those Proud Boy crapsacks, I'll put your face up in the office next to the people who try to pay for tickets with home-printed money.

How do we know they're Nazis?

Close enough for jazz, as the great Stan Freberg would have put it.

So why is extreme right-wing worse than extreme left-wing?

Oh, you don't really want my opinion – fine:

That's pretty much it. People are born targets of this kind of ideology. Communism doesn't have what you'd call a great track record, either, and if you were to make the case that trying to establish Communism inevitably leads to authoritarianism, I'd listen politely. But you could make an equally fair case that whatever happens in practice, Stalin's Soviet Union was not what Marxism intended. A single-family monarchy in North Korea was not what Communism intended.

The Third Reich was exactly what Nazism intended. There's not even a poor plausible cover for fascism. Violence is as much a part of fascism as potatoes are in potato chips.

So wherever you would draw the line, if you're drawing it in a way that includes Nazis, you're making a series of wrongheaded mistakes.

Several supporters groups, specifically Portland and Chicago, have already come to similar conclusions on moral grounds. We have to assume that Don Garber is looking at this topic from a legal and financial view – he must be worried about some lowlife suing the league for unjust discrimination or pre-crime from "Majority Report" or something.

To which the response could, would and should be: So? Let them sue. Let them complain. Let them tell all the world that racists aren't allowed in Major League Soccer games. And let them spend whatever they can afford on legal fees. We're not talking about Rocco Commisso or Riccardo Silva here – at least, I hope not.

And no, it won't keep every misguided, misbegotten miscreant out of the stands. If they hide their tattoos, skip the hand gestures, leave the banners and flags, and quietly blend in with other fans in general admission, it will be difficult to track them down and kick them out.

That's fine. If we can't change their hearts, at least let's shut their mouths.

__________

So Eric Wynalda retold one of the stories his career at the USL site. Not that long a story short, Waldo missed an easy shot, made a joke about it in the locker room afterward, and one of the veterans threw a cleat at his face in rage.

The moral of the story is that soccer is a deadly serious job without joy or fun or happiness:

This may seem like a small thing to you. A forgettable moment in a long career. But for me, as a young player, that day taught me a lot about what it means to be a pro. It was humbling.

Because here’s the truth: If you want to make it to the highest level, there’s no “Hey nice try, you’ll get ‘em next time.” There’s just success, and failure, and accountability.

That’s it.

This story has bugged me for a while, but this is the first time I've read or heard it without the usual distracting lesson Wynalda has added to this story over the years, along the lines that promotion and relegation inspires and demands this kind of constant devotion to excellence. Well, that narrative isn't going to truck very well in USL for the foreseeable, so it's now a more generalized lesson about accountability.

And now I know what's wrong with the story.

Wynalda's team at the time was 1.FC Saarbrucken. They were, in fact, relegated that year, and have never returned to the Bundesliga. As it happened, Saarbrucken finished tied for fifteenth place, and were relegated on goal differential. So the goal that Wynalda missed was directly responsible for Saarbrucken dropping out of the Bundesliga.

No, of course not. Saarbrucken finished dead last, four points from safety in an era where a win was two points. Had Wynalda scored the winning goal that afternoon or evening, whichever it was? Saarbrucken would have had six wins all season, instead of five.

So when I hear this story, I don't picture a young American learning about professionalism. I see a borderline pro using a young player as a scapegoat.

In 1993, being a loose cannon was his entire reputation, thanks to the 1990 World Cup red card against Czechoslovakia. Saarbrucken didn't bring this kid in for his steel nerves. Wynalda isn't telling a story about professionalism. He's telling a story about a club in badly over its head, talentless and desperate, cracking under pressure.

Oh, interesting bit of trivia. Saarbrucken's leading scorer that season? Currently coaching the Las Vegas Lights. Maybe Wynalda's veteran teammate should have been throwing his shoes elsewhere. And hopefully one of Coach Wynalda's lessons in professionalism will be something about not throwing cleats at your leading scorer's eyeball.