Distorting mirror of Russian politics

We have long ago arrived at such a state of society that examples from any sphere of life can be painlessly applied to any other spheres. If there is a conversation about extortions on the roads or bribes in bureaucratic offices, they will immediately mention everyday corruption among doctors or teachers. If you start complaining about the chaos in one area or another, a similar example will be cited from anywhere. But oddly enough, modern life manifests itself most clearly and prominently where it seems it should not be visible (or should be to a minimal extent). In football.

In the article “Russian football as a parody of politics,” which I published in Moskovsky Komsomolets, I wrote that football has become an exaggerated reflection of Russian reality, brought to the point of complete absurdity. Domestic “fools and roads” are perfectly extrapolated to football realities. However, this formula has long been converted into the politically correct “management and infrastructure” - why really offend fools? Football in Russia means a complete absence of fields, that is, infrastructure (fields are sometimes impassable, like most roads), and very specific management.

We seem to have politicians sorted by political parties, but their full-fledged political activity is not very visible. We seem to have players divided into teams. Only football has completely degraded.

Players of the Russian national team have long been divided into two groups - “St. Petersburg” and “non-St. Petersburg”. When last year I devoted a large part of my book “Football will kill Russia” to this topic, a wave of controversy and indignation arose, but no one refuted this or proved the opposite.

Clubs in the Russian championship are also divided into two categories - Zenit and others. There are different rules for them, different approaches to them, different attitudes when making decisions. I have long been proposing to play for places in the championship, starting from second. And the first thing is to immediately, outside the game, give it to Zenit. Absurd, you say? But isn't it the same in politics?

There is one game that, regardless of the “quality of the game,” will still be first. There is a so-called systemic (parliamentary) opposition, and there is a non-systemic (street) opposition. In football, such a distribution of roles is also very clear.

In addition to the champion determined from above, there is a “parliamentary opposition” - CSKA, Lokomotiv, Dynamo. Their representatives seem to be ready, when the patience of the imperious lawlessness is completely overflowing, to utter hard-won and correct words, but then they remember that they are supposedly “system-forming” characters - and they obediently lower their raised hand with the sword. Lokomotiv President Olga Smorodskaya is ready to go to the last in the fight against coach Krasnozhan, who has tarnished his name, but in the end she does not dare explain why she fired him. “For omissions” is a completely State Duma formulation. She is ready to fight with the Russian Football Union (RFU) on other fundamental issues, but then they seem to “dissolve” by themselves. The head of Dynamo's board of trustees, Sergei Stepashin, loudly declares that it is necessary to stop the Grozny lawlessness associated with leftist points in favor of Terek, but a day later he remembers that he is also the country's chief accountant, which means it is necessary to reduce the intensity of the rhetoric.

Well, it seems that Moscow Spartak has become the non-parliamentary opposition. He was once in honor, he could lobby for any decisions in his favor, but times have changed. And today he behaves according to the principle “But Baba Yaga is against it!” (if everyone is for the limit on foreign players, then Karpin is against it; today the majority already consider it necessary to abolish the limit - the general director of the red and white immediately changed his position to the opposite), then he looks like a street fighter who does not know compromises. “The People's Team” is like the people in the square. The call of Spartak owner Leonid Fedun for fans to come to the stands in white as a sign of protest fits well with modern political trends. Not political, really, but against football outrages, but these are nothing more than clarifying details.

It is impossible to separate sports from politics in today's world. The long-standing confrontation around the Moscow Olympics-80 is now being reproduced in miniature around the football championship in Ukraine. And it is still unknown, by the way, what we will get by 2014 regarding the political project “Olympics in Sochi,” and even more so by 2018 in connection with the football World Cup.

And if this whole story with football and politics seemed far-fetched to you, then let's honestly admit: when choosing who to root for in the recent Champions League final - Chelsea or Bayern - many were guided not only by football reference points . “Chelsea” is a project behind which stands one of those who are the “hand of the Kremlin.” That is why many fans did not choose the London club.

And one more nuance. It seems to be personal, but not unimportant. Even foreigners, when they find themselves in our realities, are instantly transformed. More precisely, the word “transformed” is not entirely correct here. It still has some positive meaning. Like, you have a new chance, a new challenge - and a new, positive shift is possible. I don’t remember any such cases. But counter examples are a dime a dozen. A coach or football player who comes to Russia does so with only one goal - to “make money.” And even well-performing players who have found success in Russian teams say very symptomatic things. Irishman Aiden McGeady says that he will honestly work out his contract at Spartak until the end - until 2014, but then he would like to go somewhere to the English championship. They say, we also have time to play football.

But isn’t all this also a reflection of the political experience of today’s Russia? (Is our air spoiled?) After all, what do many young people now want to become - not even at the age of pragmatic students, but of romantic high school students? A huge number of them no longer dream of a career as a successful businessman - they want to be officials. And they don’t think about the common good - about the revenue part of their personal budget. Where do they see their future? Where do you plan to educate your children? Where do you see yourself happy, in retirement? Definitely “there”.

It is absurd to demand that the authorities be moral and honest. Everything here is an imitation, everything is a convention. After all, any minister can be moved horizontally anywhere, so what? Will anything really change? You can also portray a social elevator - appoint as plenipotentiary... well, you know who. The one who called to restore order in an unconstitutional way, to deal with fellow citizens using illegal methods. But even then nothing will change. Because all this life is virtual.

Everyone at his post says the words that he is supposed to say. Signs papers that are required to be signed. He drives with a flashing light, because without it, it’s kind of stupid to drive... So why should it be different in football? They name some kind of lineup because they need to put someone on the field. It seems like they carry out the training process, they shout something to the players during the match - that means they are “sort of” in charge. Thank God, at least they come to press conferences - then we can discuss the next nonsense. And the Zenit players have not yet thought of requesting a dedicated lane on the field for themselves.

Dick Advocaat expelled from the Russian national team a player who played more successfully than many of the “teamers” in the spring part of the championship. It doesn’t matter to me for what reasons the coach kicked Artem Dzyuba out. It would be better if “Mr. Dick” did not give any explanations at all: he supposedly has too many players of this role. Why did you call for a meeting in this case? Why did you give it a chance? What message does your decision send to others? Your place in the team depends not on the level of training, not on motivation, but solely on other factors: who and how agreed on whom. After all, a number of football players are clearly included in the team according to some agreed quotas.

Pavlyuchenko’s level is simply beyond the bounds. What Pogrebnyak does on the field has long given fans a reason to remember a variety of wooden products. But their place in the main team is guaranteed. Why? And for no reason. They just hit this deck once. And they, as officials, will always be shuffled in this deck.

Or maybe the point is simply that no one just wants to strain? After all, in order to select the best, to determine who will suit you on the field and who will not fit into your schemes, you need to analyze, think - in a word, you need to work. But we don’t work in Russia—we pretend to work. Nobody expects results from an official for a long time either. What are we all talking about these years? Remember by what criterion Yeltsin assessed the work ability of his ministers: whether the light is on in the window in the White House...