From prejudice to shirts to the rule of capital; Iranian football in the fight of money and loyalty
Do values such as loyalty, shirt bias, responsibility and collective belonging still have a decisive place in football relationships, or do economic logic and competition for money and fame gradually replace these values?
According to Mehr reporter, there are many examples of Alireza Biranvand in Iranian football, players who take momentary and sometimes quick decisions because of the high contract figures, complain and criticize anyone and come back with an apology whenever they want to multiply their contract amount and duration this time.
Dr. Sadat Moqdad, a sports sociologist, addressed this issue in a note for the Arjan Ambassador Sports Group and wrote: "Football in Iran has never been just a 90-minute game. For millions of Iranians, football is a part of daily life, collective memories and a sense of belonging to a larger community. A team's shirt, beyond the color and logo of the club, is a reminder of years of hope, failure, victory and moments that have brought people together despite individual and social differences.
Sometimes a goal has made a city happy and sometimes a failure has plunged millions of people into common sadness. This amazing power of football is rooted in the social and cultural status of this phenomenon rather than its sporting nature.
However, in recent years, Iran's professional football has faced a serious question: Do values such as loyalty, shirt bias, responsibility and collective belonging still have a decisive place in football relations, or have economic logic and competition for money and fame gradually marginalized these values?
Controversies related to contracts, transfer of players, differences between clubs and stars and the sometimes violent reactions of fans show that it is not only about the amount of a contract or the professional choice of a footballer. In deeper layers, we are facing a transformation in the relationship between sports, economy, ethics and social identity, a transformation that can affect the future of public trust in football.
The differences and margins raised around Alireza Biranvand can also be analyzed in this framework. These controversies, regardless of the arbitration of his contractual rights or individual decisions, have provided an opportunity to ask a more important question: why a decision that can be considered a career choice in the logic of professional football, turns into an emotional and even moral issue in the eyes of some fans?
The answer to this question should be sought in the dual nature of football, where the player is, on the one hand, a professional workforce with economic rights, and on the other hand, in the minds of the fans, he is a symbol of memories, honors and collective identity.
When football becomes an economic commodity from a social value
One of the most important concepts that can explain today's football developments is commodification. In the critical tradition of Karl Marx's thought, capitalist relations have the capacity to make human activities and social relations more subject to the logic of exchange and economic value.
In professional football, players, clubs, rights to broadcast matches, advertisements, team shirts and even the attention of fans enter the economic value production cycle. This development is not unnatural in itself. Professional football needs capital to grow, compete and develop its infrastructure. But the problem starts when the economic value becomes the only criterion for decision-making and overshadows other human and social aspects of sports.
In such a situation, a player who has played for a club for many years and has become a fan icon may be judged solely on the financial value of his next contract. On the other hand, the club may consider the player not a member of its history and identity, but a transferable asset. But what is less visible in this process is the capital that is not recorded in the financial balance sheets: the trust of the fans, the shared memories, the sense of belonging and the credibility that has been formed over the years.
From this point of view, the main danger is not increasing the income of football players, nor the principle of transfers, but reducing all football relations to the logic of buying and selling. The player has the right to decide for his professional future, just as the club has the right to manage its financial and sporting resources, but none of these rights destroys the importance of the social relationship between the club, the player and the fan. In fact, football faces a crisis when its economic value increases, but its capacity to generate social trust decreases.
symbolic capital; Why is the popularity of the stars not only theirs?
To better understand the relationship between players and fans, we can take help from the thoughts of "Pierre Bourdieu", a French sociologist. Bourdieu shows that capital is not limited to economic property; Humans have other types of capital in social fields, including cultural, social and symbolic capital. In football, symbolic capital is the prestige, prestige and popularity that a player acquires over the years. This capital originates from his individual skill, effort, sporting achievements and media presence, but at the same time, it is also dependent on social recognition and acceptance.
A soccer player may find a lasting place in the collective memory of fans by saving a decisive penalty or recording a brilliant performance. From that moment on, he is no longer just an athlete; It becomes a symbol that a group of people see a part of their dreams and honors in him. This position also provides new economic opportunities for the player. Advertising contracts, better financial offers and increased bargaining power are among the consequences of transforming symbolic capital into economic capital.
Here is a remarkable paradox: the popularity built with the emotional involvement of fans can become a source of personal income; But if this process takes place regardless of social expectations, the same popularity may suffer.
Of course, one should not conclude from the fact that the fans own the professional decisions of the player. Social popularity does not deprive anyone of the right to choose a career. What is important is how to manage the relationship between personal interests and social responsibility. A football star can change his club, but the way he expresses his decision, honesty in communication with the audience and respect for shared memories, will determine whether this separation will become a normal professional development or a crisis in public trust.
From this point of view, the story of Biranvand should be seen beyond a contractual dispute. The sociological importance of such disputes is that they show how much symbolic capital can be the source of economic power and social vulnerability at the same time.
celebrity economy; When fame becomes power
Today's football developments cannot be properly understood without considering the spread of celebrity culture. In the past, most of the fame of football players came from their performance on the field. Today, however, social networks, advertisements, visual media and commercial activities have created a new field for the production and reproduction of fame. In this space, the player is not just an athlete, he can become an economic brand whose image, lifestyle, words and even his sidelines gain media and commercial value.
This situation can be considered a kind of attention economy; In an economy where being seen, followed and being the subject of conversation become sources of power and income, as a result, the relationship between fame and sports performance becomes more complicated. Sometimes a player finds a special place not only because of his technical ability, but because of the power of the media and the amount of attention he creates.
First, the bargaining power of stars against clubs increases. A player who has a large audience in addition to his athletic ability can take advantage of his media position in professional relationships.
Second, the distance between his public image and his real life increases. A fan who faces daily economic difficulties may feel distanced and alienated from the display of wealth, heavy contracts, and expensive lifestyles of some sports figures.
Of course, the issue is not the athlete getting rich. Professional sports can and should provide the possibility of economic enjoyment commensurate with talent, effort and success. The problem arises when the display of wealth is accompanied by disregard for social sensitivities and fame takes the place of responsibility. In such a situation, the star that was once a symbol of hope and closeness to the people, may become a symbol of class distance and economic privileges in the minds of a part of the society. More than just an individual issue, this changing image reflects the complex relationship between celebrity culture, social inequality and the economics of sport.
Durkheim and erosion of solidarity; When the old rules lose their validity
"Emile Durkheim" uses the concept of anomie or abnormality to explain situations in which social rules and norms lose their regulatory power. This concept can help to understand a part of Iranian football tensions.
In the traditional fan culture, loyalty to the club was one of the important values. A player who stayed with a team for years often became a symbol of fanaticism, commitment and belonging. Of course, the football of the past was not free of economic benefits, management disputes and player transfers; But social expectations from the player were mostly formed around concepts such as loyalty and emotional connection.
Today, the logic of professional football has changed. Financial contracts, commitment period, termination clauses, market conditions and job opportunities have a more decisive role in players' decisions. The problem arises when new economic rules have been expanded, but the corresponding moral and social norms have not yet reached a general agreement.
The fan still expects long-term loyalty from the player; The player considers himself the owner of professional choice; The club sometimes emphasizes emotional commitment and sometimes makes decisions based on financial interests. This inconsistency provides the basis for misunderstanding and conflict.
In such a situation, any controversial transfer may become a conflict about morality, commitment, and identity. The fan feels that shared values have been ignored, and the player may feel that his professional rights have been sacrificed to unrealistic expectations. The solution to this conflict is not to return to forced loyalty or to deprive players of career rights. What football needs is the formation of clear and fair norms that recognize both the economic rights of athletes and define their social responsibilities. Loyalty is valuable when it is conscious and voluntary, not when it becomes a tool to limit professional freedom.
Max Weber; When economic calculation dominates football behavior
In the analysis of social action, Max Weber distinguishes between behaviors that are formed based on profit calculation and goal achievement and behaviors that are based on adherence to values. This distinction is especially important in professional football.
A player who, among several financial offers, chooses a contract that provides a more suitable economic future for him, acts in the framework of a rational action aimed at the goal. In contrast, a player who remains at his club due to emotional attachment or personal commitment despite a better financial offer may be taking a value-oriented rational action. None of these two types of behavior can be considered absolutely moral or immoral.
The main problem arises when one of these logics completely excludes the other. If football is governed solely on the basis of emotions, the possibility of economic planning, professional development and compliance with labor rights will be reduced. On the contrary, if all decisions are measured only by the criterion of financial gain, values such as trust, collective identity and social responsibility will be undermined.
Therefore, the challenge of Iranian football is not to choose between rationality and emotion, but to create a balance between economic rationality and social commitment. Modern football needs professional contracts, but the contract alone cannot explain all the complexity of the relationship between the player and the fan.
fans; The forgotten social capital of football
One of the most important consequences of economic developments in football is the change in the position of fans. In many professional relationships, fans are seen more and more as consumers of sports services; A person who buys a ticket, watches a match, buys club products and helps increase its commercial value. But this image is only part of the reality.
Fans are the main producers of an important part of soccer's social and symbolic capital. They give identity and continuity to the club by attending the stadium, supporting in the days of failure, passing on the memories of the club to the next generations and participating in collective rituals.
From a sociological point of view, the stadium is not just a place to watch the match; It is a space where the sense of belonging and social solidarity is reproduced. People with different economic, cultural and social situations may feel closer under the flag of a club. These links can create networks of communication, trust and social participation, for this reason, football has the capacity to help strengthen social capital beyond entertainment. But this capacity is not permanent and guaranteed.
The same emotional force that can lead to solidarity, in case of lack of trust and responsible management, may also lead to polarization, hostility and escalation of group conflicts. When fans feel that they are important only when buying tickets, financial support or increasing the media audience, but they do not have a place in the basic decisions of the club, the possibility of feeling powerless and mistrust increases.