Sat in my usual seat at the Theatre of Nightmares which is the Broadfield Stadium, home of the mighty Crawley Town Football Club, I am mentally preparing myself for another crushing defeat, and yet another week lingering ever closer to relegation doom in the league. The mood for this Saturday afternoon springtime six pointer is not exactly one of hope and excitement, but rather already filled with a sense of inevitability of disappointment and post-match anger. A protest coordinated by the disgruntled supporters against the chaotic ownership of the club has taken place before the match. Chants ring around the stadium pleading for change, demanding reform. Behind me, a discussion regarding the upcoming local councillor election drowns out the echoes of the faulty Tannoy system. Immediately before kick-off, all 22 players take the knee in support of the Black Lives Matter movement: a gesture that has become routine in the past few months. Once again, jeers can be heard from all around the ground. Meanwhile, many fans applaud. The decision to kneel in support of an anti-racism message has obviously become a contested issue and ideologically divided those in attendance. Some love it, some hate it. One particular member of the crowd vocally questions the necessity to constantly politicise and wreck the sport that we all love. Questions begin to spring to mind as the referee blows his whistle. Is the collision of sport and politics inevitable? Can its intertwinement be avoided? Is the purity of sport being lost by steering public attention towards matters which do not appear to influence the result of the game? 

 

 It is said by some that, by keeping politics out of sports, the events themselves can act as a unifying force, fostering a sense of community and shared identity among diverse groups of people. That is true to a certain extent: the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa was a month of celebration of the cultural wealth and diversity that humanity has to offer and did help to break down racial and social stereotypes surrounding the continent of Africa. This was achieved mostly by the memorable moments created on the pitches in Johannesburg, Cape Town and Pretoria, and the efforts to focus attention on the sporting achievements of the players did yield results for the spiritual unification of a nation, and a continent as a whole. As commentator Peter Drury poetically described during the opening game of the tournament: “Goal for South Africa! Goal for all Africa!”.  

 

 However, one had to grasp the political history of the area to fully understand the passion of those brought together by the competition. 15 years prior, South Africa had just come out of the dark age of the apartheid system, which sought to physically separate the white and black populations for half a century, and so this World Cup was as much about highlighting South Africa’s development in breaking down racial barriers, as it was about assessing its capabilities to host a high-profile sporting competition, both of which were somewhat achieved. The World Cup was a landmark moment in shaping the sporting landscape of the entire continent, but its conception was initially motivated by an ambition to change the world’s moral perception of the region and so, primarily served as a political symbol of a new and improved Africa. 

 

 In fact, it was political decisions in the sporting world which contributed to South Africa reaching a position in which it would even be considered to be given a platform to host such a prestigious event in the first place. These decisions can be traced back as far back as the 1960s, when the International Olympic Committee withdrew its invitation to South Africa to the 1964 Summer Olympics when it was confirmed that the team would not be racially integrated. Subsequent bans and boycotts on the nation in multiple sports led to both internal and external pressures to dismantle the apartheid regime for South Africans to regain the rights to compete on the global stage once again. The abolition of apartheid laws led to the reintegration of South Africa in world sport, with the country returning to the 1992 Olympic Games and being given the right to host the Rugby World Cup in 1995. Ultimately, the sporting community’s disapproval of the political situation in South Africa had an immense influence on damaging the oppressive government’s credibility in the eyes of its citizens and can therefore be proven to be a force for positive political change.  

 

 In some cases, sport has stressed the constant need for social change, revealing the continuous interplay between sport and politics. A key example is sporting figures standing up to the ongoing issue of racism, not only deeply rooted in the game but also in wider society. Jesse Owens’ 1936 Olympic triumphs in front of Adolf Hitler marked a significant moment in demonstrating the exceptional qualities of black individuals when given opportunities to thrive. The raised black-gloved fists of Tommie Smith and John Carlos at the 1968 Olympics will remain one of the most iconic single moments in sport. More recently, San Francisco 49ers’ quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s defiant gesture to sit during the national anthem played at a pre-season game in 2016, as a protest against racial injustice, led to a booming movement across multiple sport leagues in the following years to take the kneel before matches. Since that moment, Kaepernick has not stepped foot on to an NFL field, and many attribute this to the fact that the organisation firmly disagrees with his views.  

 

  So, politics only seems to be able to sit alongside sport when it fits the approved narrative of those in power. This reveals a political crisis within the sporting world itself. Attempts to divorce sport from its origins deny the democratic nature of the playing field, where diverse opinions and backgrounds collide. Sport is the breeding ground for self-expression, and just as Lionel Messi dazzles fans with his freedom to entertain with the ball at his feet, participants should also be free to express themselves in other ways too. And these opportunities to mix politics and sport should never be cherry-picked. The contrast emerges when we observe selective acceptance - those that tend to be firmly against its intertwinement offered no resistance against UEFA’s decision to ban all Russian clubs from competing in European competitions following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, while international teams’ choice to publicly protest against Qatar's stance on homosexuality during that year’s FIFA World Cup was met with hypocritical hostility.  

 

 It is utterly false to assume that sport has only just recently been forced into the political sphere. In fact, some sports would not even exist in their present form were it not for significant contributions made by politics. Many sports were designed to enforce social needs, from Japanese martial arts, celebrated as a means of spiritual development and social ordering, to cricket, an instrument through which Victorians sought to teach the ruling class to rule and the plebs to obey. It is also common for fans to select a team to support whose political background aligns with their own. The fierce rivalry between Celtic and Rangers in Scotland is rooted in sectarianism and tribalism around Irish nationalism, and this deeply-rooted ideological battle is reflected in the tenacity of those that play in an Old Firm Derby. Without politics, this famous fixture would have no significance whatsoever. It would seem unlikely that the “anti-politics” football fans would support the destruction of the traditions which make this particular match-up so special.  

 

 Sports possess a rare and remarkable quality: they create a momentary equality where everyone, regardless of skin colour, class, or background, stands on a level playing field. In the arena, the game transcends societal divides, offering a space where individual differences momentarily fade into the background. However, it is equally crucial not to overlook what makes each participant unique. Sports provide a platform where everyone has a voice, a chance to express individuality and diversity. The beauty lies in acknowledging and respecting these differences, fostering an environment where every opinion, every perspective, has the right to be heard. It is in this celebration of both unity and diversity that the true magic of sports unfolds. You do not necessarily have to agree, like certain fans towards the taking of a knee, but if players believe making a political gesture for a cause is the right thing to do, then they should be free to exercise that right.  

 

 So, to respond to the Crawley fan who claimed that sport and politics should be kept strictly separate: sport is the gift that we all love, partly due to its constant politicisation. Attempts to isolate the two are futile, as history shows they have always danced together. The passion of sport derives from the hearts of those that play and watch it; and each individual’s identity and freedom to express themselves helps to shape what makes sport so beautifully powerful. Sport, at its core, is a reflection of society, and acknowledging its political dimension enhances its power to unite and inspire. Its power on the political stage should therefore be embraced also for providing accessible platforms for those to use their elevated voices to be able to influence the world outside of the arena, as well as within it. With an audience that is becoming increasingly numerous and globalised, the opportunities to use sport as a vehicle for change are greater than ever.