What’s in a snood?



According to Wikipedia, a Snood is a type of headgear worn mainly by European women to cover their hair. According to Shearer, Lawrenson, et al, it is a scarf-like garment worn by metrosexual footballers to the detriment of their ability to do their job. Aside from debates over classification, the ‘snood’ has become a divisive issue in the English game.

On one side stand the ‘old guard’. This largeish contingent is made up variously of managers and pundits and consists largely of ex-players. Apart from its outspoken media representation, the anti-snood agenda has also been given voice by Roy Keane, Alex McLeish and Ian Holloway this week, their views ranging from grudging tolerance to something close to rage.

On the other side stand the snood set of players, most notably Carlos Tevez, Samir Nasri and Marouane Chamakh. This weekend Tevez and Nasri managed, in spite of their self-imposed neck manacles, to score some pretty good and important goals.

Nasri’s performance in particular gave lie to the ‘how can you play football in that?!’ argument. He was absolutely brilliant. But the way that he was brilliant is indicative of why some in the game find the snood so hard to stomach.

Nasri’s goals against Fulham were dainty and balletic. He skipped through on his tip-toes and literally pirouetted his second goal into the net.

And he did it all in a snood. On the one hand, this shows that the whole debate is nonsense. On the other, it shows why it’s such a big deal in the first place.

There was something innately foreign in the delicacy of Nasri’s movements on Saturday, something suggestive of effeminacy. This combination goes to the heart of English football’s prejudices. Of course, ‘the game has come a long way from the dark days of the 70s and 80s’. Nonetheless, there remains an ingrained mistrust of Jonny Foreigner. Exemplified by the ex-pros on the game’s sofas and benches, this mistrust is characterized by a vague mingling of xeno and homophobia.

In football, as in society, these prejudices have receded into repression. In this era of political correctness negative commentary on an individual’s nationality or sexuality is, happily, unacceptable. Their distaste for the cold and consequent fashion decisions, however, are fair game. Through the snood, these prejudices have snuck back onto the table. Here’s the Daily Mail’s weekend ‘stats’:

Pretty overt.

This isn’t a massive problem, and it’s not new. Diving and feigning injury were treated the same way. But in the backlash against the World Cup Draw, and the perceived responsibility of the BBC and Sunday Times for England’s failure, there is a risk of English football regressing back into its old isolationism. This would be a bad thing.

Maybe what we need, while there is no chance of a gay footballer coming out and forcing those within the game to examine their prejudices, is a typically English player, a Kevin Davies or a Jamie Carragher to don a snood.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Football and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to What’s in a snood?

  1. kt says:

    I’m a left-wing feminist and I loathe snood-wearing cissies. Where does that place me in your pigeon-holing of guardian reading quiche eating foreigners versus daily star reading talksport listening alan brazils, huh?

    • Calum says:

      Hi kt,
      I don’t think your characterisation of my argument is accurate. I made no reference to The Guardian, quiche, (frankly the idea of Tevez eating anything other than steak and reading anything is incredible to me) Talksport or The Daily Star, and made no attempts to construct the political binary you imply.
      Rather, I argued that a binary exists between those who wear snoods and those that dislike them and any pigeon-holing in which I indulged was done on that relatively straight forward basis.
      You obviously fit into the ‘dislike’ category.
      Finally, as a left-wing feminist myself, I am surprised at your pejorative use of a girl’s name to describe the snood wearers.

      • Mikey says:

        Ooops

        I agree with the article. England will never win the World Cup with the ‘it’s a man’s game’ attitude. When did a
        country last win the World Cup by lumping it forward and getting stuck in? A few glove wearing jessies with a bit of
        class and quality is more than fine by me.

        Also in the Mail article, why are Arsenal criticised for having five glove wearers but Spurs had ‘only’ 5 glove wearers?
        Nothing to do with media darling Harry Redknapp?

  2. Pingback: Homosexuality in an Asexual World or Why there are no Gay Footballers | Good Feet for a Big Man

  3. Pingback: In the Bin: Football’s sinners should be given the Rugby Treatment | Good Feet for a Big Man

  4. Pingback: Form is Temporary, Class is Permanent? Some Notes towards a Comparison Between Samir Nasri and Halle Berry | Good Feet for a Big Man

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s