Nutmeg Radio

UEFA has banned vuvuzelas from matches at all UEFA competitions. That includes the European Championships, the Europa League, and the UEFA Champions League.

My first instinct was: That’s rather ignorant and authoritarian. But then I realized that I had a bigger gripe. UEFA’s decision to ban vuvuzelas in European competition sets a very strange precedent.

According to UEFA:

European football’s governing body has informed its 53 member associations that it has taken the move for reasons related to Europe’s football culture and tradition, saying that the atmosphere at matches would be changed by the sound of the vuvuzela.

…

UEFA feels that the instrument’s widespread use would not be appropriate in Europe, where a continuous loud background noise would be emphasised.

The magic of football consists of the two-way exchange of emotions between the pitch and the stands, where the public can transmit a full range of feelings to the players. However, UEFA is of the view that the vuvuzelas would completely change the atmosphere, drowning supporter emotions and detracting from the experience of the game.

To avoid the risk of these negative effects in the stadiums where UEFA competitions are played and to protect the culture and tradition of football in Europe – singing, chanting etc. – UEFA has decided with immediate effect that vuvuzelas will not be allowed in the stadiums where UEFA competitions matches are played.

For what it’s worth, I was at the World Cup in South Africa, and although I had the occasional moment of disgust brought on by someone disrespectfully blowing a vuvuzela in my ear, for the most part, the instrument was simply an entertaining and incredibly addictive toy that created a distinct atmosphere influenced by local culture. Scores of fellow visitors seemingly agreed as they seemed unable to put the instrument down. The vuvuzela became such a phenomenon that it was banned from bars and restaurants across South Africa.

Various opinions about the legitimacy of vuvuzela bans seem to focus on whether individuals find the horn tolerable. But these critiques, although reasonable expressions of individual tolerance, seem to miss the greater point.

UEFA has no business legislating custom and tradition.

UEFA supports its vuvuzela ban by presenting itself as the guardian of European culture and tradition, saving the masses from unwelcome atmosphere changes. But aren’t the clubs and supporters themselves capable of determining what is worth saving, rather than having big brother regulate match atmospheres?

This isn’t even about whether people like the vuvuzela or find it annoying. Plenty of annoying things happen at sporting events. Rather it’s a matter of self-determination, a matter of clubs and supporters being able to determine for themselves what is appropriate in their stadiums and what is not. Clubs and supporters should be free to organically create their own fan environment without UEFA edicts governing instruments. If vuvuzelas presented a legitimate safety concern (and there is an argument to make), that would be another thing, but nowhere does UEFA mention safety.

It’s a strange precedent. If UEFA’s job is “to protect the culture and tradition of football in Europe” (e.g. singing, chanting etc.), where do they now draw the line? If a group of supporters decide to bring pots and pans to the game as a means of supporting their side, will UEFA step in? If a club begins to draw a significant immigrant community that has a unique horn used to support their side, will UEFA tell them that European custom is in danger? What is European culture and tradition? Is it only made up of “two-way exchanges,” or is it permissible for a European club to have other customs?

UEFA presents European culture and tradition as if it is static. But customs change, as do populations. If UEFA decides they are now in a postion to legislate culture and tradition, they are entering dangerous territory. One should always begin to worry when a sprawling, unfocused cross-national organization like UEFA begins legislating what is culturally acceptable in the name of preserving some sort of nebulous European culture.

Furthermore, to suggest that allowing vuvuzelas will jeopardize a club’s musical identity is naive and flies in the face of the musical reality of South African soccer. At the World Cup, stadiums were jam packed with foreigners. But under more normal circumstances in South Africa, one would be sorely mistaken if they thought that one had to choose between the vuvuzela and singing at soccer matches.

The World Cup was a unique moment in time for South Africa. Normally people don’t walk into restaurants blowing vuvuzelas in patrons’ ears. South Africans have developed their own relationship with the vuvuzela during more normal times, and have figured out the balance singing and tooting in their own domestic league. In fact, South African songs rank as some of the most impressive you’ll find anywhere. I am confident that people outside of South Africa can find their own balance between horns and song without the assistance of a patronizing overlord. The threat of this horn to music is premature, overstated and unnecessarily authoritarian.

Ultimately, how any of us individually feel about vuvuzelas is almost irrelevant to this conversation. The larger point is that preservation of culture should be a local decision, not one dictated by UEFA. In this case, there are way too many things that UEFA should be concentrating on without wasting its time telling supporters across Europe what instruments are appropriate in their respective stadiums. If UEFA wants to crack down on fan behavior, they may want to dedicate their time to stamping out racism, not vuvuzelas.

Follow Nutmeg Radio on Twitter and Facebook!