Both are from Northern Ireland. Both are from a Catholic background. Both managed Celtic. So why does Neil Lennon get it in the neck more than Martin O'Neill did, or indeed Anton Rogan did?
Those abusing Neil Lennon most often cite his abrasive nature. Certainly, he's not a shrinking violet. He was more of an abrasive player than Jackie McNamara or Shaun Maloney. However, he was certainly no more abrasive than say Robbie Savage, Dennis Wise, or Darren Jackson. Not to mention Diouf, McCullouch, and Novo. I can't think of a player that was seriously injured by Lennon during his playing career. In his managerial career he has sometimes been outspoken. Again, is this any more the case than with Ferguson, Wenger, or Mourinho? Smith? I think not. He is occasionally abrasive but not unusually so. Not enough to attract the kind of vitriol he does at matches, never mind the death threats.
I suspect that the main reason Lennon and O'Neill are treated differently is that Lennon played for Celtic and Northern Ireland at the same time. Lennon was booed by Northern Ireland fans, and then Hearts fans decided to follow suit partly out of their own bigotry, and partly out of a childish desire to boo along as if they were at a pantomime. Soon almost every team in Scotland were booing a man they hadn't booed before, and who hadn't been booed in his time in England. It's harder to randomly single out a manager (do you boo a substitution?) but there was also never the catalyst of O'Neill being booed at Windsor park because he never played for Celtic. Football is often blighted by copycat crimes; when there is one pitch invasion, there is often another the next week. coin-throwing begets coin-throwing, laser pens beget laser pens. The whole Lennophobia campaign started out as an anti-Catholic anti-Celtic anti-Irish copycat "lark".
The other main difference between O'Neill and Lennon is that Lennon is more defiant in the face of bigotry than O'Neill was. But only slightly. Many people in Scotland think that when Lennon is abused he should put his head down and walk away in order to keep the public peace. By challenging fans who rain abuse on his, he is seen as throwing oil on the fire. While Martin O'Neill didn't tackle these things head on as often (possibly because he wasn't faced with them as often), he wasn't entirely meek in the face of confrontation. In 2004 he marched Neil Lennon himself over to the Celtic fans at Ibrox after "sectarian and racist abuse" and lambasted for it by many in the Scottish media. (You can read Jim Traynor's response here; http://kerrydalestreet.co.uk/topic/8213827/48/). The " irrepressible Taig" as Roddy Forsyth refers to it in his criticism of the Scottish bigot's mindset is unacceptable to many in Scotland and when anyone shows defiance to their world view the victim becomes the cause.
So, why was Anton Rogan not treated the same way as Lennon? He was booed by Northern Ireland fans, but this didn't really spread. Partly, this is because Anton Rogan wasn't as good. Beyond that though, they played in different eras. Partly this is because Lennon played in at a time when the newspapers were in the habit of inventing bogeymen and then telling us all to hate them. Or in Jade Goody's case, hatethemthenlovethemthenhatethemthenlovethem. more importantly, though Neil Lennon played and managed in an era where internet forums were used to whip up hatred, and in recent times have come to be seen as mainstream. Do you remember the first time you looked at followfollow? I don't really go in for football forums; there's too much reading through "we should play a 3-2-3-1-7 formation and sign Drogba and play him in the hole" nonsense. When I was first pointed towards followfollow i was genuinely gobsmacked. There were phases of shock, amusement and disgust, but above all bewilderment. It didn't seem to reflect the country I lived in. While Rangers always seemed to have a sectarian basis the rest of Scottish society didn't. I was called a fenian in the street before I knew what one was, but in terms of bigotry that actually held me back in life I can only think of one incident in a golf club, which was soon fixed when we complained. I played football with Rangers supporters; I worked with Rangers supporters; I was friends with Rangers supporters - hardly any of whom exhibited any sign of extremism. Followfollow was awash with delusional hatred and death threats. It was, however, surely the lunatic fringe of Rangers supporters.
Nowadays FollowFollow and similar organisations are courted by the media. They are invited on the radio, and many opinion pieces in newspapers look as though they have FollowFollow as the target market. Extremism has become mainstream and legitimatised. It's against this backdrop that Lennon is different from Rogan. The hatred and fear of Lennon has been whipped up by sections of the media as well as fans groups to the extent that when a man is sent bombs in the post or assaulted on the sideline thousands celebrate. Openly.
The question is not really about how Lennon is different from anyone, but how we are different from a civilised society.
No comments:
Post a Comment