Enrique Pichon-Rivière and Ana P. de Quiroga: Football and Politics.

The World Cup, like any collective phenomenon that mobilizes public opinion and mass reactions, has both a manifest and a latent content, susceptible to interpretation.

The symbolism carried by the Jules Rimet Cup created particular expectations in two European nations: Germany and England, historically linked by a complex relationship; and in three Latin American countries: Brazil, Uruguay, and Argentina, all undergoing similar processes of social change, grappling with disintegration, uncertain due to the breakdown of links between people and institutions, and the confusion of roles between individuals and structures.

For Brazil, Uruguay, and Argentina, marked by underdevelopment, intervening in the tournament meant competing with other cultures, emerging from infancy. Winning meant integrating into the block of developed countries, gaining power and prestige through leadership.

The sense of belonging to the nation had been fractured by disintegration, shifting then to the club and national team, which was magically considered the solution to the hoped-for resolution. The political ideal, often frustrated, turned towards sports. The rupture of a total image of the country, coupled with the urgent need for firmer, closer belonging, triggered this shift.

The Europeans, particularly the Anglo-Saxons, driven by their own loss of power, acted with a colonialist mindset, where conspiracy and arbitrariness were the usual tactics. On our part, driven by resentment over our chronic dependency on the dollar and the pound, we entered the game: discovering too late that their strategy had outsmarted us, and being unable to anticipate it, triggered violent popular reactions in the face of the failure of the "viveza criolla" (sharpness, cleverness).

English imperialism was always felt by South Americans as the harshest system of domination. The insecurity brought by such frustrations causes collective attitudes and movements of opinion that stir up old resentments, like a family argument reigniting past grievances. The uncertainty paradoxically increases the aspiration rate and decreases resistance to frustration. Thus, although at first, based on objective facts, we believed in the possibility of winning a match, later we couldn’t bear being eliminated from the tournament.

Basic fears were then mobilized, fueled by the idea that a conspiracy had been plotted against us. On the political front, these three American countries experienced the decay of liberal regimes, which heightened ethnocentrism and nationalism, represented by groups and elites of an authoritarian nature, who were associated with strength and security.

The national team, initially fragmented and ineffective as a reflection of the social, economic, and political events of its departure, suddenly transformed, thanks to an organizing leader, into a coherent and effective group. The Argentinians thus felt their internal image of the country changing, and new expectations were born.

With frustration came acute conflict and a climate of tension. Defense mechanisms were set into motion, such as denial (claiming to be the moral victors of the tournament) and rationalization.

Summarizing the collective behavior surrounding the World Cup, from the spectator's perspective, we can highlight a first event that was perfectly captured and disseminated by 108 media outlets in a way rarely seen, pointing out the discredit and inability of the team. This first period, now considering the team itself and its performance prior to the tournament, did nothing more than confirm the previous prediction, a prediction that, through the language used and the dissemination given, undoubtedly reached the targeted audience and also reinforced the hostility of the European press, helping to create the image of a disintegrated and impotent team.

In the second period, the World Cup itself, the "miracle" happened. The scene was set by the new Government. This image was then adopted by the team members, who integrated, overcame individualism, and transformed from a conglomerate into an operational group, where role confusion ceased to exist. Then emerged a goal, the possibility of winning, which was experienced as though we had already won the Cup. This "as if" became more manifest in last week’s reception… At that moment, a new act of magic appeared for the newcomers: a new President arrived, awakening old images, and entered the game.

Psychology of Everyday Life, 1966-1967

Enrique Pichon-Rivière: The Ball.

Up until now, everything that has been said about football still leaves one fundamental piece to be clarified: the object of the dispute—the ball.

The meaning and function of the ball within the structural context of the spectacle can be approached from an anthropological, psychosocial, and sociological perspective. These disciplines must rely on a careful analysis of the relationship between the subject and the ball. The ball takes on a fascinating quality, linked to the perfection of its trajectory and the uncertainty introduced by its descent, contrasting with the euphoria produced by its rise.

Ultimately, our games are remnants of a non-playful existence, that is, of a past phase of culture where play did not yet exist as such. Within games, ancient fantasies—more or less latent—manifest themselves, which is why they serve as a form of release. Football, due to its particular structure and primitive characteristics, fully fulfills this function.

This sport is also a ritual that brings together spectators and teams in a ceremony that holds elements of magic and catharsis.

Only in recent years has football begun to be understood in terms of its internal structure and philosophical dimension. Researchers who have studied this subject—including myself—have approached it from different perspectives, ultimately forming a general theory that we could call psychoanalytic and structuralist.

These studies place great importance on the ball.

Thus, the focus of research shifted—from the public to the player, and from the player to the disputed object. The goalposts create the frame within which the action is decided, and it is the goalkeeper who must move with the precision, speed, and grace of a principal dancer. Yet, he is also the most vulnerable figure, subject to the pressure of certain fans who push him into a state of uncertainty where he abandons all strategy, gradually losing control over space and time.

In our country, this destructive tactic is particularly prevalent, often reducing goalkeepers to a state of deep insecurity.

From another perspective, it is essential to explore the fascination that the ball exerts over people of all ages, especially those who have played football and feel an irresistible compulsion to intervene in unexpected situations.

A simple example illustrates this: an older person walking along the street sees a ball roll toward them, kicked by children playing nearby. Almost instinctively, they feel the urge to return it. In doing so, they experience a sense of having accomplished something useful, perhaps even reviving an old, faded feeling of belonging to a club from their youth. Rarely does one react with annoyance to the intrusion of this anonymous ball. Instead, if their pass is well-placed, they anticipate approval from their immediate audience—a recognition that fills them with pleasure. In that moment, coupled with the release felt in striking the ball, they undergo a temporary transformation in their self-image—a fleeting sensation of agility that stirs up fantasies of returning to their old sporting days.

On the field of play, the ball defines the space in which the action unfolds. It positions the players, gathers and disperses them. It is the central object of strategy, with the ultimate goal of placing it inside the opponent’s net. The ball becomes something both desired and feared, a privilege to possess and an unforgivable failure to lose.

If football is a form of communication, then the ball is the message.

It is also the leader—the force that mobilizes twenty-two players across the field and captures the attention and emotions of thousands of spectators for more than an hour.

The ball’s leadership is no coincidence. Its spherical shape connects it to one of humanity’s most ancient symbols, referenced by philosophers like Parmenides and poets like Rilke. The sphere represents perfection, the consciousness of unity and totality, an image of the infinite.

Since the most ancient times, humans have played with spherical objects, engaging in brutal, primitive games, as if trying to familiarize themselves with this almost sacred object—a mysterious synthesis of war and celebration.

Enrique Pichon-Rivière: Institutional problem.

—Doctor Pichon Rivière, I understand that today we are facing an institutional problem.

—I believe so too.

—And I have the impression that we are holding the final end of a burning thread. We should objectively search for the other end...

—Let’s begin by saying that this end of the thread represents the current situation. The journey between this point and the starting one is what we will call history. If we take a segment of that trajectory, encompassing a critical moment in the present, we can investigate specific emerging factors that have erupted and, in turn, triggered new elements of this situation—one that everyone laments and whose epicenter was in Sweden (World Championships in Sweden 1958/traductors note). These elements have not only hindered the development of national football but, through an accumulation of tensions and the consequent wear and tear, have led it into a state of decline.

—Public opinion starts from a basic premise: the exodus of players, first to Colombia and then to Europe.

—Of course, one cannot deny that this led to the dismantling of a group of players who operated here with a certain harmony and cohesion. Furthermore, the departure—or "escape"—of members of the footballing family to various parts of the world was masked behind apparent economic conflicts. In reality, this was merely a disguise. It is true that tempting offers served as a springboard, but we can assume that there was a deeper set of unresolved conflicts that gradually pushed football into a downward curve.

—I see that the issue branches out: at this moment, we must also consider everything related to the actions of national teams and coaches.

—That is one aspect of the problem. The existence of autocratic leaders in the technical management of our football, the subjugation of all coaches to a single leader, and the transplantation of foreign systems that do not align with the idiosyncrasy of our style of play—already a victim of rigid and stereotyped approaches—have all hindered the evolution that everyone desires.

—Additionally, Doctor Pichon Rivière, there are several influential factors, such as the diversity of interests at play, which are entirely unrelated to the sport itself. In many cases, club officials have become elements of discord.

—Absolutely. This is why it is necessary to analyze the situation in its entirety.

—Does that mean an institutional analysis is required?

—Without a doubt.

—From your perspective, how would you structure it?

—I would begin with a dynamic social study, as understanding the group is of fundamental importance. The basic unit of social life is not the isolated individual but the contact group, the direct interactions between individuals and their groups.

—Our sport, in general, does not have an overly complex organizational structure. However, it does have an intricate web of overlapping spheres, which makes the situation confusing.

—What I mentioned earlier leads us to consider a large formal structure, composed at each level by a network of small contact groups, both direct and indirect, whose relationships play a crucial role in the institution’s dynamics.

—Could these levels be concretely defined?

—Yes. In order to analyze an institution—something that is necessary in the case of football—we must consider four different levels, each requiring specific criteria and techniques:

a) Psycho-social analysis (the individual and their environment).

b) Social dynamic analysis (the group and its environment).

c) Institutional analysis, which includes: 1) Its formal structure; 2) Its dynamic structure; 3) Its functions within administrative and national contexts.

d) Institution and the individual (establishing what the institution represents for the individual).

—What would be the benefits of such an analysis?

—First, it would reveal the effectiveness of the administrative and managerial apparatus, meaning the activities of the members and leaders within it. Then, it would examine the relationships established between these entities and the masses (members and the public they serve). In short, institutional research and analysis can identify the causes of dysfunction and propose ways to prevent stagnation, outdated practices, resistance to responsibilities, delays, ambiguity, poor communication, contradictory orders, and so on. Consequently, this would also prevent an insecure, individualistic style of football, irregular performance, and the degradation of the "profession."

—Regarding this last point, there is no doubt that players suffer the consequences of all the irregularities within the leadership sphere.

—Exactly. The environment has a profound impact on the player, fundamentally stripping them of the joy of playing and the desire to improve. A lack of identification with the institution, or even hostility towards it—whether conscious or unconscious—makes the player feel trapped, torn between fulfilling their commitments on one hand and "sabotaging" the institution on the other. These processes are not entirely conscious, but they often manifest through erratic behavior that affects the player's athletic performance. Added to this is the isolation they experience and an unconscious sense of guilt, which often expresses itself as self-reproach.

—This creates a vicious cycle in which the player moves without fully understanding what is happening. A common response from them might be: "I don’t know what’s wrong with me.""I feel stuck." "The fans bother me." "I have no enthusiasm." etc.

—So, have you found the formula for creating the favorable environment that seems to be missing?

—I believe this is the only approach available to us. This would be the path toward creating the necessary conditions for fostering such an environment—whether within the clubs themselves or in the relations between the football association and its various audiences. This ultimately means addressing and investigating the problem of human and public relations, both internal and external, within each club and the association as a whole.

Football, needless to say, is not only significant because of the hundreds of thousands of players involved but also because of the much larger number of spectators and fans concentrated around it. We will continue to delve into football in future discussions. But before concluding, I should mention that as early as 1903, an article titled "The Psychology of Football" was published in the United States—precisely in response to a question that remains unanswered today: Why is football the sport that attracts the largest number of spectators, and why are the conflicts surrounding it so numerous and varied?

Enrique Pichon Rivière
(From "Psychology of Everyday Life", 1966/67)

Enrique Pichon-Rivière: For the first time.

Many readers may frown and ask: Social psychology in sports?... What kind of territorial invasion is this? However, we must accept the premise, whose conclusions stem from surprising experiences. News reports have informed us of the presence of a psychologist in the Brazilian football delegation that competed in the World Cup. Some joked about it; others reported the news with astonishment. Europeans, accustomed to exploring every field of research, have received this innovation with great interest. It is already being stated that, both in Italy and France, future sports delegations will include a specialist in psycho-social matters.

We, also driven by curiosity, have built a bridge between a scientist and public opinion. This scientist is Dr. Enrique Pichon Rivière, whose prestige as a psychoanalyst has gained worldwide recognition. Addressing the relevant topics, Dr. Pichon Rivière begins by telling us:

—Indeed, in our times, sports are of paramount concern. Everyone seeks to develop physical strength and endurance. Advances in science and mechanics have created numerous means that athletic training employs for its purposes, and in every country around the world, many governing bodies and clubs have been established to oversee, manage, and promote various sports activities. Established rules have, in turn, created a common uniformity for these practices. However, what has been little discussed is that the involvement of a social psychologist in the field of sports holds special significance today. This is because one of the most prominent figures in social psychology, George H. Mead, based his studies on observations made in team games, in which he himself participated.

—It seems to me that you are very interested in the subject. May I ask what led you to focus on it?

—I have practiced sports since childhood, particularly football. Moreover, I have lived in small towns with sparse populations, which naturally facilitated the formation of gangs or "crews," meaning spontaneous groups of children with a specific purpose. In Goya, Corrientes, for example, we founded a club, Matienzo, which became the most important in the area. I remember that, in those days, we constantly organized ourselves as a team—whether for playing, planning collective escapes to an island, engaging in naval battles on the river (to the great despair of our mothers), or any other adventure. Since then, I have carried with me the experiential awareness of the operational nature of group situations. Years later, sharing sports activities with my children, I have relived this experience.

—Is this the first time you are presenting ideas on this subject?

—Yes.

—Do you have any information on whether such work has been undertaken before?

—I have gathered some, but I am certain that nothing systematic has been done.

—In your opinion, doctor, what is the position of a team within an institution?

—A group or team that functions within a club must assume assigned roles and maintain a specific level of prestige.

—But... what about professionalism?

—With professionalism, this situation becomes considerably more complex. Because now, in addition to the team’s task of winning matches, there is also the need to sustain a certain level of performance, as their role has become a profession—a means of livelihood.

—There is no doubt that sports as entertainment have brought about a series of deeply ingrained issues.

—But there are other conflicting factors. Most of a team’s problems do not originate solely from within the team itself. Consider the commitments that club officials have and the secondary uses of sports activity (such as political projection). This means that each team member—the player—is caught in a web of tensions, which he often tries to escape from, though unsuccessfully. There is also another circle composed of coaches, physical trainers, and masseurs who revolve around the core group, forming a kind of protective belt that isolates the player from certain realities of the club, which can become increasingly distorted over time.

—Let’s not forget the fan or "supporter"...

—Not at all. The hincha (supporter) is a highly important figure, though unfortunately marginalized today. The supporter, frustrated by the team’s lack of effectiveness, sometimes reacts with intense violence, scapegoating his favorite player—the final link in this chain of conflicts we have discussed. The disappointment of the hinchada (fan base) is immense because the gap between their aspirations and the team’s actual performance is also immense. That is why they fundamentally feel betrayed. We must also consider that their expectations are closely tied to their own understanding of ball control and game strategy.

—Doctor, it is clear that through your insights, we can delve deeply into the study of sports and, particularly, football.

—I am fully prepared to do so.

And thus, our dialogue concluded, though it became evident that we had only just introduced the subject. We later submitted a questionnaire to Dr. Pichon Rivière, who kindly agreed to analyze it. In it, we explored sports in their broadest aspects—beginning with their definition, moving on to the role of an athlete, and concluding with an analysis of Argentine football from this perspective. In the upcoming issues of our magazine, we will present this material, which will undoubtedly serve as a valuable reference point.

Enrique Pichon Rivière
(From Psychology of Everyday Life, 1966/67)

Enrique Pichon-Rivière: Strategy.

-Well, Dr. Pichon Rivière, we should now address what is considered tactics and what we define as strategy.

-Agreed. If we refer to the academic linguistic definition, tactics is defined as a "special system used in some matter or enterprise, discreetly and skillfully, to achieve a goal." If we transfer this concept to football, we find that tactics here is nothing more than the positioning of players on the field and the assignment of each player's mission during the game. Modern football is based on team integration, so that each player has both defensive and offensive duties.

-Is the mission always both defensive and offensive at the same time?

-Exactly, although to different degrees, depending on the player's position. But all players, to perform well, must fulfill both aspects; failing to collaborate with teammates in some of them puts them at a disadvantage. Furthermore, anything one player fails to do will have to be done by a teammate whom he did not assist, and that is relative because the teammate may not always be in a position to do so.

-So, finding the right tactics would be ideal?

-I have already stated that tactics is the arrangement of player functions on the field and the organization of their movements according to a predetermined plan aimed at neutralizing the opponent's defense and overcoming their offense. But it is not enough to conceive an ideal plan; for a team to function, trials must be conducted, synchronization among players must be sought, and so on. Additionally, one must consider that a theoretical plan on a board is one thing, and executing it on the field is quite another, as the game is played with thinking individuals, not automatons. That is why it is not possible to create a tactic and then fit players into it; rather, the tactic must be adapted to the players available.

-And what about strategy?

-Strategy would be the prior work of an individual or group, through which, by means of a continuous process of role assumption, the action is internally presented. Through a learning process, an adjustment is made between the work framework and the later operational techniques that will attempt to execute what was planned in advance.

-What does this role assumption mean?

-George H. Mead, one of the founders of Social Psychology, considers the concept of role indispensable for explaining the genesis of personality. Thanks to language, a person can internalize the different parts of a social act—in this case, a football match—in which he participates. This allows him to control both the activity of "others" and his "own," based on a planned strategy for the social act.

-Does this mean that a player assumes another player's attitude?

-That’s right: the player can take on the attitude of another, meaning he plays the role of that "other." Through this process, he understands the "other," recognizing his possibilities on the field and being able to take on that role in a specific situation.

-But can a player simultaneously represent internally all the other players on the field?

-Without a doubt. The totality of characters involved in the action—not only teammates but also opponents—forms a whole within the player. This is what Mead calls the "generalized other," which ultimately serves as a referential, operational, or strategic framework.

-So, does a match begin before the player even steps onto the field?

-Exactly. The match begins in what we might call the "internal field," where, through mental rehearsals, the player configures a strategy and a tactic for playing on the external field. If this capability is combined with ball control, the player achieves an effectiveness that is difficult to measure.

-I understand, but I suppose contingencies cannot be entirely predicted...

-One of the conditions we must highlight is that the player must be able to adjust certain work patterns during the game itself. This means going through the different stages of what social sciences call "operational inquiry." This is how we witness an intelligent, dynamic, and aesthetic performance of someone trying to resolve the challenges of the game through his actions.

-I think we are approaching the concept of the "operative team."

-No doubt. We have already said that each player represents the eleven opponents, the ten teammates, and himself in action. This approach leads to a flexible administration of roles, achieving cohesion and operability where each player takes on the characteristics of a task leader (also known as a functional leader) when, through his actions and the overall dynamics, he determines the course of play at a given moment. If each player performs his task in this way—where individual and group factors coexist as described—each one contributes effectively in every moment.

-Could this system be hindered by players with certain psychological anomalies?

-Sometimes, we observe players who, due to neurotic factors, exhibit an unassigned form of leadership; on the other hand, some may struggle to make even the smallest, constantly changing decision necessary to play their role within the team. The former are characterized by being nervous, aggressive, and disruptive, seeking confrontation as an outlet for their neurosis. Meanwhile, the latter appear as indecisive and depressive individuals, filled with guilt every time the team loses, believing themselves responsible for the defeat.

-Aren’t we once again approaching the concepts of "play" and "sport"?

-In these complex social functions, which are organized from childhood, Mead himself studies two types of activities that manifest during a child's development: "play" and "game"—terms that do not have an exact equivalent in Spanish but can be translated as "juego" and "deporte." "Play" is free play, while "game" is an organized activity containing elements of institutionalized behavior. In "play," for example, a child might play with an imaginary companion, alternating between his own role and that of his companion. Between ages six and eight, children’s games change in nature and become organized, social activities with other children.

We can then affirm that to perform a specific social role, each of us must incorporate a considerable number of roles corresponding to our time and social group. Similarly, a football player will assume a role or set of roles based on his childhood history and current situations. And any difficulty in managing a game situation on the field will always be linked to more or less irrational elements that the player is unaware of but that can significantly disrupt the group’s task. If teammates overly identify with a neurotic player’s role, the entire team will take on characteristics of a conflicted group, expressing this condition through a particular neurotic behavior.

-How could this situation be resolved?

-The only way is through a psychotherapeutic technique called "group psychotherapy," which, along with its therapist, must examine the interplay of roles within the group concerning the specific task of playing football and winning.

Enrique Pichon Rivière
(From Psychology of Everyday Life, 1966/67)