Politics and football have more in common than you think
If politics is showbiz for ugly people, it might also be seen as sport for the unathletic. It often carries the same partisanship, the obsession with obscure statistics, and the familiar pattern of renewed hope, only to be dampened by reality, says John Oxley
By the time you read things, two things will have happened – England will have played their first World Cup match, and polling stations in Makerfield will have opened. In both cases, it is the first salvo in a competition that could run for weeks. After a marked improvement under Southgate, we now expect England to go deep into the final rounds of international tournaments, while in politics, Andy Burnham hopes victory will start a run towards Downing Street.
If politics is showbiz for ugly people, it might also be seen as sport for the unathletic. It often carries the same partisanship, the obsession with obscure statistics, and the familiar pattern of renewed hope, only to be dampened by reality. Like football, too, it feels like an endless contest of who is up and down, winners and losers, without any final resolution. It just keeps going on relentlessly.
The two domains, however, often overlap. Right now, in New York, Mamdani is enjoying a fresh bump of popularity as the Knicks won the NBA Championship after a 53-year drought. This success, just a few months into the mayor’s term, and combined with his beloved Arsenal winning the Premier League, has given Mamdani a talismanic quality. It pairs well with his feel-good politics. Every four years, pundits ask the same question of our own PM – whether a World Cup win might boost their popularity. For Starmer (also a Gooner), it couldn’t come at a better time.
Can an England win save Starmer?
Unfortunately, we only have one data point to draw on – and it doesn’t bode well for the man in Number 10. Labour had just won an increased majority when England lifted the Jules Rimet trophy in 1966. The following years saw rising unemployment and devaluation of the pound, as well as the escalation of the Troubles in Northern Ireland. The next election coincided with the 1970 World Cup, and both England and Wilson floundered. The defending champions went out in the quarter finals, and the Tories won a majority. It became part of political lore that England won a World Cup under Wilson, but it did little to help his political prospects.
Other sports haven’t saved PMs either. Theresa May was a confirmed cricket fan but was already a lame duck when England won the World Cup in a dramatic triumph in a Super Over in front of a home crowd. The success provided no redemption or bounce to her reputation. Equally, while a great legacy of John Major was establishing the system that made Britain an Olympic powerhouse, he was long gone by the time political rewards accrued. Nor did he gain any boost from England’s impressive performance in Euro 96.
As ever, Tony Blair is perhaps the exception. His tenure never produced a football World Cup, but was marked by sporting success. The England rugby team did the job in 2003, while the cricketers claimed a historic Ashes in 2005. Successes bookended his third election victory and added to the feel-good bounce of the mid-2000s.
Sir Keir will be hoping for at least the chance to parade the champion team through Westminster. Politicians like success and hope it mirrors back on them, even if the results are mixed. It could be worse, however. In the late 60s, fan riots at a match between Honduras and El Salvador helped tip the two countries into war. This summer, things are unlikely to be so serious. But a beleaguered Prime Minister will be looking for any sign of hope he can find – and an England victory might just be the last thing we get to associate with Starmer.
John Oxley is a political commentator