Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: The Week In Worst: When Baseball Goes Wrong

A distasteful tale of soccer and possible institutional racism

I talked to a friend this morning. He’s a good dude who owns a few local restaurants and dotes on his employees. Big soccer guy, too. Took a bunch of his co-workers to the FC Dallas-Inter Milan match last month and had a killer time. “Fiesta, fiesta, no termina!”

Loose translation: “Keep the party going!”

Our conversation reminded me of a story he told me, a story that reminds us where our game (soccer, ‘course) sometimes fits in the complex societal structure.

It reminds me of why I’m proud of how soccer is like Weezie Jefferson – it just keeps “movin’ on up!"  It keeps spreading through the American fabric despite the (thankfully diminishing) legion of ninnies, xenophobes and fearful, the types who perpetually and anxiously wonder why things “can’t just be the way the used to be?”

It’s a story about soccer and institutional racism. I’ll try to tell it quickly:

Star-divide

My friend lives in a nice neighborhood with a nice-enough, nearby neighborhood park. There’s a big green space in the park.

Where I live, like so many urban areas, lack of quality park space is endemic. I coached a game in the suburbs last night.  I love living in the city but, man, if our parks are a raggedy 12-year old Honda, theirs is a slick, new model hybrid. Space is ample for league matches and pick-up games alike. It’s well-manicured, well-marked, well-equipped, partially lighted, etc.

Meanwhile, we fight for our little scraps of land down here for my under-12 team’s practices and for my own pickup games. Generally speaking, the places where we pass and trap have two types of grass: knee-high or non-existent. All the plush stuff in between exists only in my dreams. Well, in the suburbs, too.

So needless to say, adequate areas for pickup games or for youth practices are sparse. While that’s unfortunate on one hand, I’ve always been heartened at how so many open spaces, no matter how tattered, uneven or glass-strewn, turn into pick-up game space. And what could possibly be wrong with pick-up games?

I know that to a few folks from, uh, “the older side of town,” this notion of grown men running around in short britches playing “a children’s game” is troubling.  That’s the same group that bemoans as soccer is too slow – but they love baseball. That’s always a head-scratcher.

I say this: instead of going to a bar, people who understand the value of exercise gather up after work. They take to the athletic field to release the day’s stress, tension and desire to cold-cock the boss-man. Sometimes, family comes out. Kids, wives, girlfriends, grandmas, etc.

Stop me when you see something bad in all this, something to fear.

Yes, I do understand that garbage or parking can become issues for nearby residents. But these are relatively benign matters of enforcement, issue to be settled fairly easily through routine civic processes, or simply by devoting a little attention to the issue.

So, back to my friend and his nearby park: He told me the green space in the park played host to a weekend soccer game. Again, friends, families, shared weekend activity, that kind of stuff. They weren’t out there drag racing or worshiping the devil or pushing some other kind of nonsense. It’s families finding ways to spend time together without spending money at the mall. Besides, anyone reading this who believes kids should be inside playing video games all weekend instead of being outside, running, playing, spending time with other human beings, seeing the example of parent who value exercise, well, you can just stop reading now. (And go get some exercise, for goodness sakes!)

Well, it just happened that this was a mostly-Latino gathering. And it happens that this neighborhood was more or less white.  So, I think we can all see where this was going.

One day my friend drove by the park and saw … trees.

Trees had been planted right out in the middle of the green space. Not strategically, really. Just here and there, rather willy-nilly. Only a few. As a potentially thriving forest, it was a wee bit on the puny side.

Then he noticed signs. In Spanish. “Ningún futbol permitió”

“No soccer allowed”

As my friend said: “They should have just put up a sign that said ‘No Mexicans allowed!’ ”

So, the scourge of the Latino-dominated pickup soccer game, surely among the pressing issues of our time, had been crushed. Disaster and societal downfall averted. Praise be.

Outright, overt racism? Maybe, maybe not. More likely it could have been something they taught me in my liberal, namby-pamby, tree-hugging sociology class down at the University of Texas (where I managed to attend a lecture or two when I wasn’t manning the apartheid shanty or plotting my next move with that adorable Suzie from Media Law class): It was covert racism. Or, even more likely, it could have been something even less sinister but no less distasteful: maybe it was thoughtless, institutional racism.

Since then I’ve noticed a few other places in and around the city where pick-up games once happened regularly. Trees have been planted in some of these open areas, too.  Right in the middle! Coincidence?  Honestly, it may be.  I’m not much of a conspiracy theorist.  But who knows? At best, it was an example of thoughtless planning, of a hopelessly over-stretched parks department that can’t keep the grass mown, much less be persuaded to actually investigate how their parks are being used. 

One final thought on my friend’s neighborhood park. I just wonder: what if the pickup game of choice at this park had been baseball? Maybe if the “foreigners” choose to play a more “American” game, the ninnies, dopes and NIMBYs would grudgingly let them stay. Maybe.

(FYI: I have one more great example of possible institutional racism and soccer. But I’ll let you guess on that one … until I write about it some other day.)

Comment 34 comments  |  2 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

That was a depressing read

Sad to hear crap like that still happens.

by DarrenV on Sep 16, 2010 4:05 PM EDT reply actions  

I deleted it

You can disagree with me in an informed manner … But you don’t get to come onto my blog and insult me. Period. Especially as a first-time poster. If you’ve earned some cred, you get some benefit of the doubt … then maybe you’ve earned the right to get after me a little. And double-especially when you’re not as informed as you might think. You named a city. I never did. There are a lot of urban areas around my parts, ya know?

by Steve Davis on Sep 16, 2010 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

Cred

You may seek to dismiss me as a “first-time poster” who has failed to earn “cred,” but I would hope that the 3422 comments (as of this writing) I have made on various SBNation blogs, including my having been promoted to a contributing author on Burnt Orange Nation (where I’ve regularly drawn hundreds of comments on the subjects I’ve written about) would indicate that I’m not some sort of crank that’s just crawled in off the street merely to insult you.

The facts of the matter are that (1) you deduced some sort of racism from the story you related above; (2) I challenged you in a completely non-profane comment (with the most “insulting” word I used being “lazy” — my how thin-skinned we are!) to report on the other side of the story before reflexively resorting to the explosive charge of racism, believing that the story could be more complex than how you are portraying it; and (3) you deleted the comment within 30 minutes claiming that I would have been permitted to have my comment stand had my comment been “informed”. Other than mentioning that I was from Dallas (which was an attempt to find common ground more than anything else), how else was my comment ill-informed? Would it have been better had I said that I was from DFW? Texas?

I’ve been called far, far worse over at BON, and I’ve never resorted to deleting the comment of those who disagreed with what I wrote. And if I had, I know I’d be taken to task by BON’s editors for interfering in an open and honest debate. We regularly mock the editors of SBNation blogs (such as the A&M-centric blog) who think of deleting comments which show dissent without a second thought. I didn’t think a well-published writer like yourself would have been as thin-skinned.

And since this is now my third comment (and the second non-deleted comment), have I earned enough “cred” for you to deem me worthy enough to engage in conversation? If not, please let me know how many comments it will take for someone who wishes to contribute to this community to be taken seriously.

Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!

by Hopkins Horn on Sep 16, 2010 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

And one additional point...

…let me be clear that if the reporting I called for was performed and revealed that some form of racism did in fact lead to the planting of those trees, I would be among those who would want those racists exposed for the racists they’d be.

Let’s just not make that assumption publicly without knowing all the facts.

Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!

by Hopkins Horn on Sep 16, 2010 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

Isn't the word "possible" in the title indicative that it's not assumed at all?

A's Fan in Sweden

"Some of us know him as the a-hole who piled into Ray Fosse in an All-Star game (it's why Ray is the way he is folks)" - OptimistPrime

by travdog6 on Sep 16, 2010 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

Or, quoting from the body of the piece:
More likely it could have been something they taught me in my liberal, namby-pamby, tree-hugging sociology class down at the University of Texas . . . It was covert racism. Or, even more likely, it could have been something even less sinister but no less distasteful: maybe it was thoughtless, institutional racism.

Emphasis added. The ellipse deletes a non-relevant parenthetical.

To my eyes, that reads as a pretty strong insinuation of some sort of racist motivation.

Again, maybe it was, maybe it wasn’t. But I think it’s somewhat irresponsible (is that an insulting word?) for a nationally-published writer to make such a charged insinuation without seeking out the facts on the other side.

Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!

by Hopkins Horn on Sep 16, 2010 6:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think it's clear that he thinks there might be something there.

As for this part:

Again, maybe it was, maybe it wasn’t. But I think it’s somewhat irresponsible (is that an insulting word?) for a nationally-published writer to make such a charged insinuation without seeking out the facts on the other side.

It’s a blog, and I think one of the beauties of a blog is that it allows for more personal opinions. This of course means there are more opportunities to be wrong. But I think Steve has the right to state an opinion, especially when he’s cautious enough to put in words like “maybe” and “possibly”. He at no point in the article declares this racism as a fact. Especially when he goes so clearly declares it may be just a coincidence.

A's Fan in Sweden

"Some of us know him as the a-hole who piled into Ray Fosse in an All-Star game (it's why Ray is the way he is folks)" - OptimistPrime

by travdog6 on Sep 16, 2010 6:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

If Davis had simply responded as you had . . .

. . . to my deleted comment, there’d be no further issue. We’d have a respectable disagreement on the issue of whether he had an obligation to dig a little deeper before insinuating racism, and nothing more.

But the deletion of a comment, out of hand, of a non-profane, coherent comment which merely challenged him not to make “lazy” (again, the strongest word used) accusations of racism, and the justification of the deletion by relying upon that schoolyard taunt of "you’re new here so you don’t get to play,’ baffles me. I’d understand that sort of behavior from a just-out-of-college blogger who’s never been exposed to contrary opinions. I didn’t expect a writer as experienced as Davis to play the “my blog so my rules” card so effortlessly.

Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!

by Hopkins Horn on Sep 16, 2010 6:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

I obviously couldn't read your deleted comment

But I would note that merely being ‘non-profane’ doesn’t necessarily clear the bar. This is the type of discussion that is either going to advance or degenerate, and just speaking for myself, If I were maintaining a blog, I would likely delete any comment that doesn’t advance the discussion. If the terminology is too normatively loaded, and its substantive claims are either not obvious or vaguely worded, I’d probably get rid of it. Because that’s a terrible combination when it comes to discussion.

'Gentlemen' he said,
'I don't need your organization,
I've shined your shoes,
moved your mountains and marked your cards,
but Eden is burning.
Either get ready for elimination,
or else your heart must have the courage,
for the changing of the guards.'

by Sgc on Sep 17, 2010 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions  

I appreciate the level-headed response...

…and I will merely say in my defense that the comment which was deleted raised the point that making the assumption of racism without fully understanding the motivations of the other side is a pretty serious charge for a writer to make (and perhaps I am holding Davis to a higher standard on this, given, his professional background) and that it was “lazy” to make the charge in writing without seeking the other view.

If the issue is the perception of racism, I think my comment advanced the argument from the point of view of challenging that underlying assumption. As I noted above (and as you noted below), I’m pretty experienced with these SBNation blogs, and if the the particular comment which was deleted failed to clear whatever bar is in place over here, then the bar is at a far, far lower place than I would have imagined.

But at the end of the day, it’s Davis’ blog, and if he prefers no comments which challenge the assumptions he makes, he has every right to delete them.

Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!

by Hopkins Horn on Sep 17, 2010 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

The sign specified "Soccer"...in Spanish

If the sign posted in the field said something general, like “Stay Off the Grass” in English (or in English and Spanish), I think it’d be harder to infer racism. But it specified one activity in a language specific to one ethnicity.

by soccerjohn on Sep 17, 2010 7:44 AM EDT up reply actions  

Doh!

Sorry, folks. I read through the above postings and immediately posted without reading the rest first. I see now that the point had been made.

by soccerjohn on Sep 17, 2010 7:46 AM EDT up reply actions  

Playing devil's advocate...

…since the nature of my first post seems to give me that role by default….

Change the fact pattern so that it is a bunch of wealthy white kids from the local (though not neighborhood) university who had found and adopted the field as a de facto intramural field, with the same amount of traffic and impact as the Latino soccer players do in the original scenario.

Don’t you think there’s at least a slight chance that the same neighborhood/city interests who saw the park as “therirs” might have had a similar reaction in order to keep the unwanted (albeit white) outsiders from using it?

I guess the sign, though, in this case, would have been in English so that those who had been using the park in the undesired way would have understood the intentions.

This is one example of why I didn’t like the initial leaping to the conclusion of racism.

Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!

by Hopkins Horn on Sep 17, 2010 9:19 AM EDT up reply actions  

There are two disturbing facts here

1) Sign in Spanish, which in context, makes it look very targeted. Plenty has been said on this already

2) Lack of consultation. This is where I would answer “no” to your question. I think if it were wealthy white college kids, the park’s operator would get in touch with the University and ask them, “hey, don’t your kids have somewhere else to play?”

Informing people this way comes off rude and disrespectful. It reminds me of the scene in Office Space where they laid off Milton and forgot to tell him, and there was a ‘glitch’ where he was still receiving paychecks. So when the consultants come in:

“We fixed the glitch.”
“You fired him?”
“No, we fixed the glitch. He won’t be getting paychecks anymore. This way, the problem works itself out.”

It seems to me that, much like Milton in the movie, these recreational footballers were treated as a glitch—and not as people.

'Gentlemen' he said,
'I don't need your organization,
I've shined your shoes,
moved your mountains and marked your cards,
but Eden is burning.
Either get ready for elimination,
or else your heart must have the courage,
for the changing of the guards.'

by Sgc on Sep 17, 2010 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions  

Rude and disrepectful, sure...

…but again, I don’t necessarily see the inherently racist intent. I’ve been around enough neighborhood association types in my life to know that many of them wouldn’t want any sort of outsiders, regardless of race or nationality, to use “their” park, that many of them would pursue legal or administrative causes of action to advance their cause, and that they would seek the most passive way possible to inform those of their actions in order to avoid direct confrontation. That’s what I respectfully disagree with you that there more likely would have been a phone call in the scenario I laid out.

Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!

by Hopkins Horn on Sep 17, 2010 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

Rude/Disrespectful + Targeted

Might not quite equal ‘racist’. . .but it gets pretty close.

'Gentlemen' he said,
'I don't need your organization,
I've shined your shoes,
moved your mountains and marked your cards,
but Eden is burning.
Either get ready for elimination,
or else your heart must have the courage,
for the changing of the guards.'

by Sgc on Sep 19, 2010 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions  

Sign in only one language makes it fairly clearly racist

It either means that they think that spanish speakers are complete idiots who couldn’t see the trees and needed to be told.

Or they don’t mind it when the English speaking white populace uses the fields for soccer with trees.

I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart

by Dave Clark on Sep 19, 2010 7:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

Seriuosly BON credentials

HH, go back to BON then. You likely have no footy cred. You likely were just being a doosh if SD deleted you. SD has footy cred.

by Sin2r on Sep 17, 2010 12:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

That doesn't help.

He’s merely pointing out that he’s written enough for people to figure out if he’s level-headed or not. This is not an inherently “soccer issue,” so if he knows nothing about the game, he’s still qualified to speak.

'Gentlemen' he said,
'I don't need your organization,
I've shined your shoes,
moved your mountains and marked your cards,
but Eden is burning.
Either get ready for elimination,
or else your heart must have the courage,
for the changing of the guards.'

by Sgc on Sep 17, 2010 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

Thank you

I’m not sure what “footy cred” has to do with this, by the way. Is there an application form to receive such cred?

Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!

by Hopkins Horn on Sep 17, 2010 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yes

I haven’t even been accepted yet.

And I’ve run a Sounders blog for more than two years

I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart

by Dave Clark on Sep 17, 2010 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think

that putting up a sign in Spanish saying no more soccer just after planting trees in the middle of the “field” would constitute racism. Unfortunately a sad story.

by the12thman11 on Sep 16, 2010 6:33 PM EDT reply actions   2 recs

That's the question I have

Were those signs in Spanish only or was was it also in English?

by CPC on Sep 16, 2010 8:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

That's really the key I think

I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart

by Dave Clark on Sep 16, 2010 9:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

Same kind of thing happens in California

Around the town of Costa Mesa there is a lot of people who say the parks should be for “passive uses”.

About a year ago the city put large boulders in an open area of a park specifically to stop soccer from being played there. The ethnic nature of the players wasn’t overtly a part of the issue. It was pretty obvious that it was a large factor in the minds of some of the people making public comments though.

Los Angeles is like Manchester. There is a red team that wins championships and a blue team that doesn't.

by oc phil on Sep 17, 2010 2:22 AM EDT reply actions  

Really ridiculous

Was it a public park Steve, or just an open space? If it was an actual park, I’d be on the phone complaining to parks department and my city council member about this. It’s really ridiculous. Luckily there are some good spots for pickup in Austin, and the parks department encourages people to actually, you know, use the parks. There is a park on Airport in East Austin (on the border between an Anglo neighborhood and a Hispanic neighborhood) that has a “no soccer” sign, right next to the baseball backstop. After my friend complained to the neighborhood association, police department, and city council, I think they finally allowed his team to hold practices there.

Not mediocre. Right about average

by trza on Sep 17, 2010 10:41 AM EDT reply actions  

Idea for ya

Tell your buddies to go ahead and play some footy ball in that park, and just use the trees as obsticles. It may build skill! Don’t use a goal, and don’t call it soccer. There are other games that they could play with a ball at your feet. If authorities show up, tell them your playing american kick ball, not soccer.

by Sin2r on Sep 17, 2010 12:22 PM EDT reply actions  

I think everyone needs to relax.

Some people, rightfully so, get up-in-arms about being called racist. I sure wouldn’t want to be called racist. It’d be absolutely preposterous, and my reaction would indicate how offended I was.

As soccer fans, we need to have less of a chip on our shoulder when it comes to our sports gradual acceptance into American society. I don’t like cricket, but not because I don’t like foreigners. I don’t like cricket because cricket sucks. And that’s a legitimate opinion to have. If other people don’t like soccer, fine, that’s one more seat open at the next Aston Villa match for me.

I regularly read BON, and I regularly read HH’s material. While I can’t extract too much about HH’s personal existence, I can say that he, at the very least, thinks about what he writes. I didn’t read HH’s comment, so I can’t defend it, but I can defend HH.

So, let’s all take this olive branch and remember that a passionate love of sports is something we have in common, not something that tears us apart.

by fortyakers on Sep 20, 2010 10:08 PM EDT reply actions  

unless you’re Hispanic. HONK!

by rudi on Sep 26, 2010 4:40 AM EDT up reply actions  

The great debate

Two separate points:

1) In Fort Lauderdale, Holiday Park used to be the site of as many as a half dozen pick up matches, daily. There were Latino groups, Haitian groups, white groups and mixers. There was even a gay team that practiced there regularly.

Then, last year signs went up, putting the fields off limits ‘for maintenance.’ Those signs have yet to come down but organised youth events, concerts and American football practices still go on there without interference, with the signs removed for said events and then returned afterwards.

As I pass through the park twice daily, I often see touch football being played, frisbee and other activities, on the banned fields but should soccer players gather, the park rangers magically appear.

Rangers have said that the fields need time to recover, to stay in pristine condition but when questioned about other users, they say that most of those pay permits. A law has actually been passed:

8.0 COLLECTION FEES
It is prohibited for any person to use any facility, land or area for which a fee or charge has been established by the City of Fort Lauderdale without payment of such fee or charge.

Some might point out that parks cost money to maintain and there is no racism inherent in that. However, the park rangers do seem to be very selective in which activities they stop from ‘borrowing’ the field.

Beyond that, I seem to remember public parks were once for public use, maintained through property taxes, which are extremely high around here and haven’t shrunk with the downward correction in the housing market. So, whether it’s political greed, racism or a combination, I’m inclined to be offended when anyone tries to co-opt or reserve land that was created for (all) the public to enjoy.

and 2) It’s gotten so bad, someone has planted a tree right on this comment page! It’s small right now but….

by WFC Martin on Oct 6, 2010 6:07 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

SB Nation's soccer blog is heavy on the domestic game -- flavored with a dash the global greatness

Recent Posts


Managers

Daily_soccer_fix_crest_small Steve Davis