José Mourinho's comments regarding the Vinícius Júnior incident on Tuesday have raised significant concerns, shedding light on how football often treats racism as a reputational hazard rather than a harsh reality faced by players. The Brazilian forward, who has repeatedly encountered racial abuse throughout his career in Europe, found himself at the center of another controversy during a Champions League playoff match.
The Incident and Mourinho's Response
After Benfica's 1-0 defeat to Real Madrid, Mourinho addressed the alleged racial abuse by Gianluca Prestianni, who is accused of calling Vinícius a monkey. Mourinho emphasized the club's history, stating, "I told him the biggest person in the history of this club was Black. This club, the last thing that it is, is racist." While intended as reassurance, this response has been criticized for deflecting from the immediate issue and focusing on institutional image over the player's experience.
Broader Implications in Football
The reaction to this incident mirrors a troubling pattern in football discourse, where racism is often framed as a matter of reputation rather than a lived trauma. Former referee Mark Clattenburg's comment that Vinícius "has not helped himself" by his celebratory behavior, which led to a booking, underscores this tendency to blame victims and prioritize decorum over justice.
This perspective is not isolated. Recent remarks by Manchester United co-owner Jim Ratcliffe, who made controversial statements about immigration, further illustrate how systemic issues are minimized. Ratcliffe's comments, based on inaccurate data, reinforce narratives that position immigrants as disruptors, echoing the challenges Black players face in justifying their presence and reactions on and off the field.
Historical Context and Modern Parallels
Mourinho's invocation of Eusébio, a Black Portuguese football legend from the 1960s and 1970s, adds a historical layer. During the Salazar dictatorship, Eusébio's success was used to promote a narrative of benevolent colonialism, where assimilation and silence were rewarded. This history raises questions about whether football has evolved beyond tolerating players only when they conform and avoid controversy.
In today's climate, with rising online abuse and global events like the World Cup under regimes with supremacist ideologies, football's commitment to anti-racism is under scrutiny. The sport's response often involves equivocation, demands for irrefutable proof, and panels that may dismiss incidents as hearsay, leaving victims like Vinícius to face consequences alone.
The Demand for Perfect Victims
A common thread in reactions to racism in football is the expectation of perfect victims. Black players, including Jude Bellingham and Marcus Rashford, are frequently criticized for any perceived misstep, whether it's celebrating a goal too exuberantly or speaking out on social issues. This creates a double standard where their dignity is conditional on meeting arbitrary standards of behavior, diverting attention from the abuse they endure.
As the debate continues, it prompts a critical examination: Is football genuinely invested in eradicating racism, or does it view it merely as an inconvenience to be managed? The Vinícius incident serves as a stark reminder that without meaningful action and a shift in perspective, the cycle of abuse and inadequate response may persist unchanged.
