Passing the Torch - or Putting Something Back.

On Thursday evening I attended, together with a number of other similar people, a meeting of the Football Association held at my local FA here in Nottinghamshire. I went as a representative of the Under 19 League of which I am secretary. The meeting had been planned in advance and was concerned with an issue confronting football (or “soccer” to any American readers!) in the UK – namely the gradual but definite fall in recent years in participation in the game at the local or grassroots level. Whilst it is true that at a professional and elite level - and especially the Premiership - the game is doing well, at the opposite end there is a worrying trend of teams closing down and general lack of participation. Over the past five or six years about 500 teams each year have ceased to exist because of lack of participation on the field and, perhaps more importantly, because volunteers cannot be found to administer and "run" the teams.  Indeed, on the very day of the meeting, and quite coincidentally, one of the government funding bodies “Sport England” reduced its funding of grassroots football to by some £1.6 million  - essentially because there are now fewer participants.

I could blog long and hard about what I see as the problems in modern football – especially at the elite end – and I could be even more depressive and aggressive about largely male society's testosterone filled obsession with sport generally and football in particular. One of the clubs who are members of my League advertise football as the “opera of the masses” – I prefer to think of it as the “opium of the masses” so besotted, dependent and addicted have so many become on this in their worship of the stars and the top teams. I have absolutely no doubt that we have somehow forgotten that in the end football (and indeed every other sport) is just a game, a pleasurable pursuit, a pastime. At its root it is simply a lot of blokes running around a field chasing a bag filled with air – no more, no less – and as such not a thing to get worked up about or upon which to lavish huge amounts of money, praise or importance. To give sport or football any more status than a game or a pastime is to misrepresent it and to do it a disservice - and it devalues the important things of life. However, you will be pleased that I will not on this occasion bang on (again!) about my views of professional sport in the modern world!

But back to the FA meeting which I attended. It was an excellent meeting, well researched both nationally and locally and well presented. The figures and surveys quoted gave much food for thought as to why levels of participation are falling. But as I listened and looked at the data and heard the comments made by many who had contributed to the research a number of thoughts came into my mind.

Firstly, the data presented reflected my League’s own experience – we know that many (or all) of our clubs are finding it harder and harder to stay afloat financially, we know that players are becoming less reliable in their commitment or willingness to be available for fixtures, we know that clubs are finding it incredibly difficult to recruit people to help out at the club especially  to do the many less glamorous jobs that need to be done in order that a game takes place – e.g. kit washed, programme printed, opposition liaised with to arrange the fixture, necessary paperwork completed before and after games, pitch marked out......all the myriad of unseen and unsung tasks that go on in the background before a ball is kicked but which without there would be no game. In short I heard nothing that I could not have predicted – and I guess that was true of everyone else in the room.

But having thought this, my second thought was that this sort of thing is also true in many other walks of life – not just football and not just sport. My wife is involved in a choir – they have exactly the same problems. A friend is involved with rowing – that, too, is afflicted with the same issues. And, unbelievably we heard recently of a thriving local WI (Women’s Institute) that bastion of English middle class endeavour and involvement which has had to close down because they could not find any volunteers to take over the role of secretary of the local branch; everyone wanted to come and enjoy the meetings, the speakers, the socialising and the jam making but no-one was prepared to do the planning and the paperwork and the general administration necessary to keep the show on the road! Similarly, 6 months ago I advised the Under 19 League of which I am secretary that I would be standing down as League Secretary at the end of this season – this would give them, I thought, plenty of time to find a replacement for me. I feel that after many years I have done enough but more importantly I know that I am increasingly out of touch with the young men who now play the game – their beliefs and aspirations are very different from mine.  I am of the firm view that it is bad for the League to have a Secretary (the most important administrative position within a club or league) who is increasingly out of touch with the needs and values those who are most actively involved in playing the sport. In short new, young blood is needed. Unfortunately, however, no replacement can be found – only two desultory enquiries have come forward and neither taken any further. And listening to the FA reports and surveys on Thursday I could see that my experiences were not in any way untypical. What will happen at the end of the season when I go I know not. It is worrying – both for the League and myself.

Quite rightly the speakers from the FA were keen to address this problem and all sorts of suggestions were made to leagues and clubs that they might explore to improve the situation and increase participation. We heard and read comments from players and others detailing why there is this fall off in participation: poor quality pitches, increasing costs, poor facilities, work commitments, busy life styles, family commitments, other interests, lack of interests in doing the backroom or administrative jobs. One comment was typical: “The problem with football is around the extensive amount of time needed to run teams. People (like me) want to play but the role of an organiser for the team is becoming too onerous” or, another comment was “The thing that stops me wanting to run a  team is the amount of paperwork and politics involved”  and finally one I could particularly relate to “When our chairman packs it in five teams will fold”. In short everyone wanted to play the game, and enjoy the privileges and benefits of what the club and league could offer - so long as it was convenient to them and on their terms. And, more worryingly, no-one was prepared to do anything to help. One can dress it up however one wants but that is the brutal truth. And I have no doubt that the same points would be made by my wife’s choir members, the members of the local WI and my friends rowing club members – they all want the fun and the experiences of membership but are unwilling to commit or amend their lifestyle for the good of the activity, the club or others and nor are they willing to put anything back into the organisation so that others, yet to come, can benefit.

Speakers at the FA argued that a supermarket would ensure that what they had on sale met the customers needs and so encouraged the customer to come to their supermarket and buy - this, it was argued, is what clubs and leagues must do if they are to encourage people to participate in football; they must give the footballing "customers" what they want. Whilst there is some truth in that in so far (for example) as a nice clubhouse might encourage spectators to come and watch the game it is, I believe a rather specious argument when related to involvement and participation. Being involved in a club is not the same at all as buying an item at a supermarket - it involves social interaction, a level of commitment on both sides and a two way process. The very nature of the membership of the team requires both parties to work together - the club cannot exist without the players (or choir singers etc.) and the players or singers cannot play or sing without the club. A player might think, "I don't like what this club has to offer - the pitch isn't good, the fees are too high, the standard of football doesn't suit me etc. -, I'll go somewhere else" (as he might when  he saw that the apples at the supermarket were unsuitable)- but he will still have to face the problem of the interaction and mutual involvement between club and participant when he goes elsewhere.   In short there is an interdependency and both have to give, fulfil their part of the "contract" if the venture is to succeed - and that, I believe, is the essence of the problem, people are less willing to give of their time, attention, help, money, involvement, participation  unless there is something in it for them as an individual.

The decline in team participation over the past few years

As I pondered this I reflected upon John Kennedy’s famous inauguration address comment in 1961 “Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country”. One could easily substitute “club” for “country”  the sentiment, the logic and the implication would hold just as true.

The whole thing is a worrying trend.

It seems to me that the basic “contract” that is inherent (and has always been so) in all social groups and endeavours is in danger of falling apart. When we pay our taxes, play in a football club, build a road, adhere to the basic laws of a society or work in a company we are making an implicit and an explicit contract between not only ourselves and the organisation but also with other members of the club, company or society – both at present and to come. When I drive down the road I enjoy the use of that road because people in the past paid taxes to pay for it – so I must do the same to not only keep it in good repair for my own use but also for others today and tomorrow. We pay our taxes or our weekly membership fees to the football club to keep up and maintain  what we have already invested and which we can enjoy,  but also to improve things for the future - in trust and for the benefit of future people perhaps yet to be born and still to enjoy what we have already enjoyed.  Others before me, who I never knew, did it for me and so I must do it for those who follow. Between the generations this “contract” is extended – not only do we, as adults, hope that the world will be better for our children and grandchildren – or other young footballers, choir members, rowers or young housewife members of the WI or whatever, we have an obligation to put into place measures and to ensure that it will be better.  It is their inheritance and is what being an adult member of society or social group is all about. Any sociologist will tell you that this characteristic is critical and common to all societies - no matter how primitive or advanced – it is one of the very basic attributes and social bonds of humanity that allow and ensure that society develops and improves. In short, it is one of the features that separates us from the animal kingdom - we ignore it at our peril. To do so chips away at our very humanity and sets society on a downward path.  And it is not simply about  great societies – it is true about organisations such as football clubs  - whether it be Manchester United or the village team, famous international choirs or the village song groups, rowing clubs or Women’s Institutes – or any other social grouping that one can think of.

But in recent years – since, I believe, the time of Margaret Thatcher - this basic contract has begun to unravel, a tiny thread of our basic human condition is a little weaker. We are, both as a society and as individuals far more concerned with our own self interest rather than our neighbours or those who will come after us. We now have generations who have grown up since the 1980s who are, in my view, increasingly self centred and selfish, interested only in satisfying their own needs rather than the wider good. Many of the comments recorded by the FA as to why levels of participation are falling in football are quite understandable in this modern world: “I’m too busy”, “I want better facilities”, “It’s too expensive”, “I don’t want the regular commitment I want to choose when it is convenient to play”, “I want the games to be played at a time more convenient to me”, “I have family commitments”...........and so the list goes on. But all are very selfish viewpoints and reflect the same unsaid theme – they are all “I” viewpoints. They are also understandable but largely false.  The notion that people are busier today is quite frankly a canard – they are largely only too busy because they choose to be involved in a number of other things deemed more important or satisfying which takes up their time – and football, choir membership, being the secretary of a club just doesn't come high enough on their priority list of choices. Similarly the claim that work commitments hinder involvement is equally doubtful. Whilst it might be true in some cases that work commitments do conflict with football, for the vast majority of people (and as a matter of statistical fact) less time is now spent at work – people have more free time than ever before. I am currently reading the biography of the Welsh politician and founder of the NHS Aneurin Bevan. He grew up as the son of a miner in south Wales – his father, David, was at work by 5.30 each morning and didn’t return from his shift until 6 in the evening but he still found time each evening to go to the local library to study, attend political meetings in the town where they lived and read his children bedtime stories. It is all about choices and priorities as to how you spend your available time. And finally, cost – the claim that playing football is costly  has to be seen in context  - as one member of the FA meeting pointed out during the discussion players might complain about paying a weekly membership fee of (say) £4.00 but not consider that the night before they have been out into the middle of Nottingham or some other big city and happily spent far more than this on and drink, food and general enjoyment. I read recently that a survey suggested that young people spent an average of £70 on a night out in the clubs - against those sorts of figures a small weekly “sub” is insignificant. I thought it was not without irony that one of the FA speakers said that survey results showed that players would be happy to pay for good facilities – so the issue is not that football participation costs too much but rather whether it is judged “good value” and something of which the player approves. In short, it is a “me” society where people are unwilling to pay up and turn up to make the whole thing better for themselves and those to come but rather they want everything as they desire for their own use and own terms. Its value is measured only in terms of "What am I getting for my £4.00?" and not whether the £4.00 is reasonable to sustain the club for everyone now and in the future.  It is a very selfish viewpoint - but sadly one that permeates society today at every level and reinforces the comment“Ask not what your club can do for you but what you can do for your club”.  Clearly this is not a dictum high in the minds of the average football player. They clearly expect the club or the league to do much for them but without themselves having to put much effort, time or expense in.

The Daily Telegraph's reporting of the cut in Sports England grant
for local, grassroots football

Of course, this is one of the problems facing the wider modern world – there is simply almost too much choice and too many things that can claim our time, our interests and our money. In football (and it is similar in other areas of life) a young man can go out and play for his local team – which might cost him a few pounds and some of his time – but there are also so many other things he can do to pass the time, some associated with football, many not. He might be prepared to go and join a football club if it is the only way he can get his football “fix” – but in the modern world he doesn't even need to do that. He can watch SKY and see a top class game from anywhere in the world almost any night of the week and twice on Sunday! He can switch on his computer and play virtual football. The football “opium” has truly worked, he has got his “fix” but not by participating in a game or a club. Given this scenario why would he elect to get involved (say) as a club organiser, secretary, kit washer, programme producer, gate man  – he might construe that as “work” or at least not as pleasurable as playing a game or watching a game in the comfort of his home or in the pub. And so, we are in danger of becoming a watching society rather than a participatory society. And in the long run society – and, in this case, sport (or choirs or WIs) etc.  - will suffer. I would add a personal view at this point - not only would these local bodies (football clubs, choirs, rowing clubs etc.) suffer through lack of members and participation but ultimately I have absolutely no doubt that the "health" of the elite game would suffer. It is well established that a successful elite game can only by assured and sustained in the long term by a healthy local, grassroots set up. A decline in participation at the bottom will lead to a decline in success and interest at the top - in whatever sphere, be it football, music, cycling or whatever. Media money such as that funding the Premiership may give short term success and raise interest levels, it will not sustain the game (or the choir) over the longer term, nor will it ensure a wealth of young talent coming through to "feed" the upper levels of the sport.

But, as I have already said, this is not a characteristic found only in football. It is widespread and it crosses generations. In my wife’s choir the vast majority of the members are older people. Many will leave and go elsewhere if they don’t like what the choir happen to be performing in one season. Others may say, “Sorry we are going to be on holiday for three weeks so we won’t join this term – it would be such a waste of money to pay my term’s fees and then not use all of them” -  and so the club or choir suffers. All these positions, as with the footballers, are perfectly understandable but all reflect a basic selfishness and lack of awareness. They all send the same message -  "I don't want to commit, my needs and life style are more important than the club or the society" Imagine what would happen if millions said, “Sorry, I don't have any children so I'm not paying the portion of my tax that goes towards the provision of maternity units, schools and the like”.  Then the whole system falls apart, which is exactly what is happening within the fabric of voluntary organisations – everyone wants them but no-one wants to do anything to ensure their provision and continuance.

The message being passed over by the speakers from the FA  on Thursday night was exactly right - how can we encourage individuals to choose football as their preferred option and participate; how can we give people what they want. Clearly football, like choirs and rowing clubs and WIs, are in a battle for people’s minds, time and money. But whilst it is right and proper that clubs, leagues and the FA do try encourage involvement and participation there is, I believe, also a need for a much bigger culture change within society. Sadly, in the age of the “selfie” photograph, twitter, facebook and, indeed, blogging (as I am doing here) all of which are various expressions of “me, me, me”  I really don’t see that happening any time soon.

This morning Pat and I stood in our local village store buying our newspapers and one or two other items. I suddenly noticed that we were standing alongside a shelf filled jars of meat pastes for sandwiches – salmon paste, beef paste, sandwich spread. We laughed as we remembered how for many years each Saturday morning was filled with making large trays full of sandwiches to take to the football club in the afternoon. Each Saturday morning I would go to the store and come back with several jars of sandwich spread, several loaves of bread and butter and we would spread butter and paste for ages during the morning. These would be put in the boot of the car and transported to the ground on the other side of Nottingham. At the end of the game the players would appear on the clubhouse to have a beer and enjoy the sandwiches and the other foods prepared by other committee members as they chatted and joked about the game with the fans, the match officials and anyone else who would listen. Pat commented how much money it must have cost us over the years to do this – but not one penny was begrudged, it was our way of putting something back into a sport and club – Arnold Town FC  -  that had given us both and our son (who played for them) so much pleasure and friendship. Since then I have moved on and become not only a Club Secretary but a League Secretary - but it is still my way of "putting something back" into something that gave me and my family much pleasure and opportunity. 

I have been involved with local football both for children and adults for almost forty years – not including the time that I spent organising school football – and now I feel that it is time to bow out – to simply enjoy the game without having any ultimate responsibilities or workload. I will leave behind a League Committee comprised almost entirely of older people a number of whom, I know, feel like me and would love to pass the torch on to a younger generation. I found it very sad to hear, on Thursday night, that my experience is not unique and that nationally people are now less willing to put something back into what they have enjoyed and taken for granted and are turning away from the chance to take up the torch for the next generation in order that those who follow can enjoy what they, themselves, have benefited from. It says, I fear, much about the prevalent attitudes and the times in which we live.