‘If I Ever Play Football, Dad, Can I Play for England or India?’

‘If I Ever Play Football, Dad, Can I Play for England or India?’ British Asians, Sport and Diasporic National Identities

■ Daniel Burdsey University of Brighton

ABSTRACT

The overall scope of this article is to examine how young British Asians experi- ence and articulate recent transformations in popular notions of ‘race’, nation and culture.The context for the analysis is sport, which acts as a prominent arena in which these variables are contested and, indeed, embodies the complexities of national affiliations and identities.The article argues that despite continuing ethni- cally exclusive manifestations of ‘Englishness’ – both in football and in the wider society – increasing numbers of young British Asians are expressing their support for the England football team.This is in direct contrast to cricket, where large num- bers choose to follow a team from the Indian subcontinent.The article argues that these trends reflect the multifaceted, fragmented nature of diasporic identities, in that the diverse sporting affiliations of young British Asians enable them to empha- size both their cultural traditions and the permanency of South Asian settlement in Britain.

KEY WORDS

British Asians / diaspora / football / hybridity / identity / ‘race’ / sport

Introduction

uring the spring and summer of 2001, a number of towns and cities in northern England witnessed extensive outbreaks of urban unrest, as local tensions between British Asian and white communities – exacerbated by

11

Sociology Copyright © 2006

BSA Publications Ltd® Volume 40(1): 11–28

DOI: 10.1177/0038038506058435 SAGE Publications

London,Thousand Oaks, New Delhi

Diasporic Identities

D

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 11

the insidious presence of far right activists – erupted into violent street con- frontations. Shortly after these events, the British and United States govern- ments initiated their global ‘war against terror’ – ‘officially’ a response to the terrorist attacks on the USA on 11 September 2001. These atrocities were reportedly carried out by pan-global Islamic extremist groups but, in the after- math, many British Asians (of all religious denominations) experienced a back- lash – much of which was violent – against them. This situation was further influenced by media reports alleging that British Muslims were amongst those fighting coalition forces in Afghanistan and, more significantly, was re- intensified in 2005 as a result of the terrorist attacks on London. A direct consequence of these episodes is that the citizenship, national affiliations and identities of British Asians, especially Muslims, have become subject to rigorous political and public debate.

Carrington and McDonald (2001a: 2) suggest that ‘sport is a particularly useful sociological site for examining the changing context and content of con- temporary British racisms, as it articulates the complex interplay of “race”, nation, culture and identity in very public and direct ways’. Of considerable sociological significance in this regard are those teams that are selected to rep- resent ‘the nation’ – or, as is it popularly conceived, ‘the people’ – and it is these national teams that form the focus of this article. It has been widely argued that the symbolism that these teams possess is so powerful that they often become the main outlets for popular articulations of nationalist sentiment. For exam- ple, Kellas (1991: 21) argues that ‘the most popular form of nationalist behaviour in many countries is sport, where masses of people become highly emotional in support of their national team’. However, a pertinent question to ask is: who are ‘the people’ that these teams are perceived to represent? As has been increasingly noted, not all social or ethnic groups endorse such rhetoric, and the processes of selection, affiliation and fandom that operate in relation to such teams can sustain, as well as challenge, structures and patterns of inclu- sion/exclusion, discrimination and prejudice in the wider society (Back et al., 2001; Carrington, 1998a).

This article examines how contemporary popular interpretations of ‘race’, nation and culture are articulated and experienced by young British Asians in the context of international sport, and demonstrates how these trends reflect the complexities of 21st-century diasporic lifestyles, affiliations and identities. The analysis comprises three interrelated sections: first, it traces the development of ‘cultural racism’ (Fanon, 1967) in late 20th-century Britain, particularly in rela- tion to the migration and settlement of South Asians, and highlights how this has contributed to increasingly ethnically exclusive notions of ‘Englishness’. Second, the article illustrates how the nexus between ‘race’ and nation is enacted within English sport. It argues that national identities remain complex and contentious within this sphere, and indicates how sport embodies the frag- mented and seemingly contradictory nature of identity in late modern society, by examining the contrasting affiliations of young British Asians in football and cricket. Third, the article argues that these trends reflect the multifaceted nature

12 Sociology Volume 40 ■ Number 1 ■ February 2006

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 12

of diasporic identities, in that the diverse sporting allegiances of young British Asians enable them to both preserve notions of culture and tradition associated with the subcontinent, and to emphasize the permanency of South Asian settle- ment in Britain.

Methodology

The data presented here were generated by a comprehensive process of ethno- graphic fieldwork, undertaken between 2000 and 2003. Primarily, interviews were carried out with 16 professional, ex-professional and amateur British Asian footballers in south-east England. Interviewees were selected through ‘snowball’ sampling and by utilizing the contact networks of existing partici- pants. In order to complement the data generated through interviews, par- ticipant observation was also undertaken with four British Asian amateur teams, based in inner and Greater London, between autumn 2001 and summer 2002. Two of these teams consisted predominantly of Bangladeshi Muslim players, one of Pakistani Muslims and the other of Punjabi Sikhs. This obser- vation mainly involved attending matches and training sessions, but also included social excursions to cafés, restaurants and pubs. Access to participant groups was achieved through a continuous process of (re)negotiation and by gaining the acceptance and trust of a number of ‘gatekeepers’, i.e. those ‘actors with control over key sources and avenues of opportunity’ (Hammersley and Atkinson, 1995: 34). In the amateur sphere, these tended to be those players who also had important off-field roles, for example, as coaches or as members of federations, whilst contact with professional players was enabled by their clubs.

It is crucial to emphasize that this research involved a white, middle-class researcher probing the world of working-class British Asian footballers. Debates about the ethics behind, and the legitimacy of, white researchers under- taking research with minority ethnic groups have existed for a considerable time. There is not space within this article to make a substantial contribution to this dialectic, yet it must be recognized that these issues remain extremely salient and require ongoing critical analysis and dialogue, particularly while minority ethnic scholars remain underrepresented within the academy (Bulmer and Solomos, 2004). It is essential for white researchers in the field of ethnic and racial studies to examine not simply how hegemonic ‘whiteness’ and notions of white privilege permeate the structures and institutions in our areas of research (Ware and Back, 2002); we must also examine how these issues enter and affect the research process. The intrinsic power relations of the research setting (especially interviews) – further compounded by class differen- tials – can inadvertently construct ‘whiteness’ as fixed, normal, homogenous, knowledgeable and unproblematic. Ethnic differences between researchers and participants are certainly not insurmountable, but they also cannot be fully evis- cerated. Consequently, we must engage in a continual process of self-reflexivity

13Diasporic national identities Burdsey

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 13

and seek to critically scrutinize and interrogate how our ethnicities impinge on the research process (Fawcett and Hearn, 2004).

The focus of this article is on British Asian identities but its content exclu- sively covers young men. Regrettably, it thus does not contribute towards relocating minority ethnic women from their subordinate position as ‘a “blind spot” in mainstream policy and research studies that talk about women on the one hand or ethnic minorities on the other’ (Mirza, 2003: 121). The main rea- son (although not an excuse) for this is that this article emanates from a larger research project which specifically examined young, male British Asian identi- ties. The absence of reference to gender in this article is also due to the fact there is very little auxiliary involvement of girls and women in British Asian men’s football. Unlike the situation with many white amateur men’s clubs, British Asian female supporters were never present at matches observed as part of this research, and they were not involved in off-field roles, for example as secretaries or treasurers. As a result, this particular ethnography focused on an exclusively male social space and was unable to explicate the role of football for British Asian females. The popularity of, and participation in, football amongst British Asian females is gradually increasing, yet the significance of football in their lifestyles and identities remains largely unrecognized (Anvari, 2001). Indeed, it is extremely significant that the first major British film to focus on women’s football, Bend It Like Beckham, centres on a young British Asian women who is forced to confront some of the issues raised in this article. Whilst obviously a fictional account, it demonstrates the need for academic research that unravels the nexus between ‘race’, ‘Asianness’ and gender in British football.

‘Little Englanders’, ‘the People’ and ‘Others’: ‘Race’, Nation and Culture in late 20th-century Britain

From the middle of the 20th century, a rapid and sizeable migration of South Asians to Britain began to take place, influenced by a demand for labour within Britain’s manual industries and public services combined with a striving amongst migrants to improve their standard of living. Many of Britain’s metropolitan regions soon experienced major demographic changes, with resi- dents of previously ‘white’, working-class districts finding themselves with South Asian neighbours and work colleagues. Balibar (1991: 43) argues that the influx of migrants from former colonial territories, such as the Indian subcon- tinent, represented an ‘interiorization of the exterior’ and that this process established the context for the (re)construction and (re)contestation of notions of ‘race’, nation and culture in late 20th-century Western Europe. In particular, these transformations provided the antecedents for the emergence of ‘cultural racism’ (Fanon, 1967) in western societies. In contrast to cruder biological racisms, which revolve explicitly around phenotypical characteristics and hier- archies of ‘race’, the key tenet of cultural racism is the concept of cultural dif- ference and the degree to which minority ethnic groups are believed to conform

14 Sociology Volume 40 ■ Number 1 ■ February 2006

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 14

to, and assimilate into, the norms and values of ‘traditional’ domestic life. However, culture becomes a euphemism for ‘race’ as, despite the changing nomenclature, cultures are also interpreted as being fixed and discrete. Different cultures are viewed as being inherently incompatible and those minorities that do not share the dominant values of western societies are believed to represent a threat to their cohesion and, therefore, their social stability.

During the early phases of migration, South Asians were seen to be intro- ducing irreversible changes to the social composition of Britain. In particular, the main threats were believed to be that they provided competition for jobs and housing, that they had excessively large families, and that adult men harassed white women (Pearson, 1976). It was also perceived that their differ- ent religious and social practices, together with a lack of identification with cer- tain elements of the host culture, were not conducive to a modern, western, Christian nation. More recently, the refusal of many young British Asians to withstand the levels of racism meted out to previous generations – and the grad- ual erosion of the ‘passive Asian’ stereotype – means that discourses of ‘threat’ and ‘fear’ among white communities are now articulated with reference to per- ceived associations between young British Asian men and militant resistance, violent masculinity and gang culture (Alexander, 2000, 2004; Goodey, 2001; Webster, 1997). These beliefs often result not only in further racial discrimina- tion and violence towards British Asians, but also what Cohen terms a ‘racial- ization of space’. He argues that this:

Involves the colour-coding of particular residential areas, housing estates, or public amenities as ‘white’ or ‘black’ in a way which often homogenizes ethnically diverse neighbourhoods and turns relative population densities into absolute markers of racial division. This process is usually articulated through images of confrontation – ‘front lines’, ‘no-go areas’, and the like – which serve to orchestrate moral panics about ‘invasion’ and ‘blacks [or Asians] taking over’. (1996: 71)

Fundamentally, the presence of large numbers of British Asians in adjacent neighbourhoods is irrationally interpreted, fuelling the belief amongst certain white groups that they are becoming a minority within their own towns and, by implication, their country and, as a result, that their way of life is under threat.

Perceptions of a threat to England and ‘Englishness’ have resulted in the emergence of a defensive ‘Little Englander’ mentality. This worldview is con- structed around the celebration of a quasi-mythical English history and utopian images of suburban/rural life, free from the alleged problems of inner city (and ipso facto minority ethnic) communities. It stresses a perceived common ances- try and homogeneity of English culture and, in the process, constructs a notion of ‘Englishness’ that is palpably monocultural. As Gilroy argues, the signifi- cance of cultural racism is that:

The emphasis on culture allows nation and race to fuse. Nationalism and racism become so closely identified that to speak of the nation is to speak automatically in racially exclusive terms. Blackness and Englishness are constructed as incompatible, mutually exclusive identities. To speak of the British or English people is to speak of the white people. (1993: 27–8)

15Diasporic national identities Burdsey

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 15

Whilst these views are prevalent at all levels of society, they often find their most public expression within the dictums of the political right. For example, in 2001, echoing Margaret Thatcher’s ‘swamping’ rhetoric of the 1980s, Conservative MP John Townend argued that ‘Our homogenous Anglo-Saxon society has been seriously undermined by the massive immigration … that has taken place since the war’ (cited in White, 2001, emphasis added). Similarly, speaking after the urban unrest in Oldham during April 2001, British National Party activist Michael Treacy stated, somewhat apocryphally, that ‘I have no qualms against Asians or people of any colour. It’s a matter of the country losing its identity and culture’ (cited in Vasagar et al., 2001, emphasis added).

Hall (1992: 293) highlights how popular images of ‘Englishness’ have invoked notions of militarism, empire, ritual and commemoration, through their associations with public ceremonials, such as Trooping the Colour and Remembrance Sunday. In reality, these specific connotations appeal only to older generations. Young white people are similarly inclined to define them- selves as an English ethnic collective (Anthias and Lloyd, 2002), yet their notions of ‘Englishness’ are more likely to be constructed in relation to style and consumption than to history. For example, images of national sports teams, ‘Britpop’ music, football violence, Eastenders or Coronation Street, and lager- induced shenanigans in Mediterranean holiday resorts all conjure up notions of ‘Englishness’. Nonetheless, the sense of cultural separation between whites and minority ethnic groups is reproduced through the alienation of the latter from these contemporary white, youth-orientated forms of ‘Englishness’.

Putting the Ball in Play: Nation, Identity and Sporting Affiliation

A significant number of authors have identified that popular manifestations of ‘Englishness’ are often exclusionary, alienating or irrelevant to African- Caribbeans (e.g. Back, 1996; Gilroy, 1993). Whilst less attention has focused on British Asians, many are also antipathetic towards dominant images of English national culture and demotic manifestations of nationalism. Consequently their identities are often constructed outside of this context. For example, the National Centre for Social Research annual survey of 2000 found that the notion of ‘Englishness’ proves particularly problematic for British Asians. Whilst more than a third classified themselves as British (not English), only seven percent clas- sified themselves as English (not British) (Carvel, 2000). Similarly, according to the Office for National Statistics (2004), whilst 67 percent of Bangladeshis see themselves as British, only six percent identify as English. The reasons for this identification with ‘Britishness’ rather than ‘Englishness’ are multiple, and con- textually and temporally specific. Nevertheless, it is evident that these notions are perceived to possess different connotations in relation to concepts of citizenship and ethnicity. For example, in Eade’s (1994: 389) study of Bangladeshi Muslims in east London, one participant stated that ‘I don’t know why, I just feel to be

16 Sociology Volume 40 ■ Number 1 ■ February 2006

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 16

British, you don’t actually have to be white. But to be English I always have this feeling you have to be white.’ Whilst ‘Britishness’ appears to possess more plu- ralistic and less racialized associations, ‘Englishness’ is perceived as an ethnically exclusive identity.

Switching the focus to sport, this rejection of ‘Englishness’ by British Asians appears to be present in international cricket. In recent years, it has been increasingly acknowledged that a substantial number of British Asians support their country of ancestry – India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Sri Lanka – particu- larly when they are playing against England (Werbner, 1996). This phe- nomenon prevails despite the criticisms forwarded by public figures such as the Conservative politician Norman Tebbit and former England cricket captain Nasser Hussain. Before the 1990 cricket Test series between England and India, Tebbit made a parliamentary speech in which he castigated British Asian and African-Caribbean people who chose not to support England in sporting con- tests.1 He argued that:

If you come to live in a country and take up the passport of that country, and you see your future and your family’s future in that country, it seems to me that is your country. You can’t just keep harking back. (cited in Werbner, 1996: 104)

In May 2001, England cricket captain Nasser Hussain – himself of dual eth- nicity – expressed his disappointment that most of the British Asian supporters at a Test match between England and Pakistan at Edgbaston supported Pakistan. He stated that, ‘I cannot really understand why those born here, or who came here at a very early age like me, cannot support or follow England’ (cited in Campbell, 2001).

However, supporting a South Asian nation serves an important function for many British Asians. First, it facilitates the construction of an ‘imagined com- munity’ (Anderson, 1991), in that it forges a symbolic link with the subconti- nent, enabling the celebration of tradition and feelings of belonging with the nation from which they or their forebears migrated. Second, cricket fandom provides an opportunity for British Asians to distance themselves from those elements of ‘Englishness’ with which they feel uncomfortable. As Werbner (1996: 101) points out, ‘it is in the field of sport, through support of the [Pakistan] national team, that young British Pakistanis express their love of both cricket and the home country, along with their sense of alienation and dis- affection from British society’. Nevertheless, whilst substantial attention – both in academe and the media – has focused on the relationship between cricket and national identity amongst British Asians, due to the fallacious, yet pervasive, belief that participation in football is anathema to British Asians, little investi- gation has focused on this latter sport.

Analogous interpretations of, and attitudes towards, ‘Englishness’ to those identified above are often reproduced within football. For example, Carrington’s (1998a) analysis of the 1996 European Football Championships (held in England), highlights that the manner in which the mass media depicted the event, together with the concomitant celebration of popular cultural forms,

17Diasporic national identities Burdsey

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 17

such as ‘Britpop’ music and the British film industry, contributed to increasingly ethnically exclusive definitions of ‘Englishness’, and reinforced discourses of exclusion and cultural racism. He argues that:

The fact that the majority of the black population living in England had either a large degree of ambivalence towards England or openly supported ‘anyone but England’ underscores the points being made that the form of national identity pro- duced failed to be inclusive and actually alienated large sections of the nation from view. (1998a: 118)

It might be argued that the position of British Asians is especially problematic as their sense of exclusion has been compounded by the absence of British Asians on the pitch. Significant numbers of African-Caribbeans have played for the England national football team yet, although British Asian players Zesh Rehman and Michael Chopra (an Anglo-Asian)2 have achieved England hon- ours at youth and under-21 levels respectively, a male British Asian has never played for the full England team.

Widespread beliefs regarding the potential conflict between ‘Englishness’ and British Asian identities were demonstrated by a number of football sup- porters during a piece of observational fieldwork undertaken in the summer of 2001:

On 24 July 2001, as part of their summer tour of England, the Indian national football team played Brentford FC at Griffin Park. Before the match (an evening fixture) commenced, a group of eight white, male teenagers were sitting in the Ealing Road end of the main stand. One was sporting a replica England shirt and the youths were openly displaying both St. George and Union flags. These flags were new but of cheap quality and in contrast to those normally displayed by sup- porters at professional matches, which include some form of appellation, such as the club name or nickname, they had no identifications. It was evident that the flags had been purchased especially for this game. Many other supporters wore England replica shirts or items of leisurewear, such as baseball caps, t-shirts and shorts. In the eyes of these supporters, for the duration of this match, their team were per- forming as an ‘England representative XI’, rather than as Brentford FC per se. After the match, a sizeable proportion of supporters – many of whom were young, white men – walked towards Brentford railway station. A car of Indian supporters approached the road junction and was met with loud, aggressive shouts of ‘3–0’ [the match result] and ‘England, England’. A group of youths surrounded the car, placing their St. George and Union flags over the windscreen, thus preventing the vehicle from moving. Various threats were made, such as ‘Don’t let him [the driver] through, he’s Indian!’ and ‘Smash the windows!’. At Brentford railway station the youths (numbering approximately thirty males and now including a couple who were of dual white and African-Caribbean heritage) entered the westbound plat- form. On the eastbound platform (across the tracks) were approximately ten adult Indian supporters. The youths stood in a confrontational stance, displaying their flags and chanting ‘England, England’. After a few minutes they decided to walk home rather than wait for the train and as they made their way up the steps, a num- ber chanted ‘We’re coming to get you’ and shouted ‘Fucking Pakis’. Two glass beer

18 Sociology Volume 40 ■ Number 1 ■ February 2006

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 18

bottles were thrown by the youths, which smashed, but missed their intended tar- gets. (Fieldnotes, 24 July 2001)

It would be unsurprising if such displays of ‘Englishness’ further alienated British Asians from the national football collectivity and led to an affiliation with a national team from the subcontinent, as occurs in international cricket. Whilst hostility within the diaspora is clearly not the only reason underpinning allegiance with teams from ancestral countries, it may be a significant factor for some supporters.

However, whilst this appears to the case with cricket, this research suggests that, with English football, certain contradictory trends are evident. For exam- ple, Fulham’s Zesh Rehman states that ‘My perfect day would be to score a goal for my country in an important game. Would that be England or Pakistan? Huh, England!’ (cited in Donovan, 2003). Furthermore, Dagenham and Redbridge’s Anglo-Asian defender Anwar Uddin states that:

My mum’s English [and white] and I was brought up in the East End [of London]. I think of myself as English and would be so proud to represent my country. I was asked to captain Bangladesh recently, but I turned it down, because if I played for them, I won’t be eligible to play for England. (cited in Hawkey, 2002)

Likewise, when asked which country he would wish to represent, Harpal Singh of Stockport County replied, ‘England – no question’ (cited in Bhatia, 2003). These sentiments are endorsed by the British Asian players interviewed in this research. One current British Asian professional player stated that, ‘I was born here, brought up here and lived and raised here so I see myself as British Asian. I want to play for England. I’d love to play for England’ (Interview, 11 February 2002). Similar statements were made by amateur players:

Obviously [players] will have sentiments attached to [the subcontinent] but, you know, if you ask a lot of the Asian community, they would like to play for England … A lot of Asian players don’t even see themselves as, you know, Indian or Bangladeshi, etc. because they see themselves as British Asian individuals. (Interview with British Asian player/member of British Asian sports organization, 14 May 2002)

My son certainly says to me at times, ‘Dad, what am I?’. And I say to him, ‘Obviously by parents you’re Indian – because we’re both Indian – but by your right of birth, you know, you’re English’. So he’s already said to me, ‘If I ever play foot- ball Dad, can I play for England or India?’. And I said, ‘Who do you want to play for?’. He said ‘England’, so I said, ‘There you are, you know, it’s your choice.’ (Interview with British Asian amateur player, 5 February 2002)

The following two statements were made with regard to supporting, rather than playing for, England:

I’ve spoken to a few people I know about this and all of us were actually up for England in this [2002] World Cup. And that’s a first because in the past we’ve not really felt affiliated to England. But for some reason we felt more English on this occasion … I think people are realising that they’re English or British or British

19Diasporic national identities Burdsey

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 19

Asians, or whatever, and want to fit in … I think more and more British-born Asian people are thinking that they are, or looking at themselves as, English and if they were given a choice in playing sport, they’d play for England. (Interview with British Asian football supporter, 27 June 2002)

I think that it is a misconception [that British Asians do not support England] because there’s loads of Asians that support England. If you go to local cafés, [British Asians] are England supporters. It’s natural because they’re living in this country and they’re supporting the country, you know. There’s nothing wrong with that. (Interview with ‘Asian’ semi-professional player, 11 May 2002)

During observations at coaching sessions for young Bangladeshis in Tower Hamlets, England shirts were well represented amongst the replica jerseys worn by players (Fieldnotes, 11 May 2002). Furthermore, anecdotal evidence sug- gests that significant numbers of British Asian supporters travelled to Portugal for the 2004 European Championships, either to watch matches in the stadiums or in bars in the Algarve (Laville, 2004).

The final section of this article argues that affiliation to the England national football team reflects recent transformations in the identity politics of young British Asians, but it is first possible to propose some specific explana- tions for the disparity between cricket and football. First, whilst India, Pakistan and, to a lesser extent, Bangladesh, are world forces in international cricket, they remain comparative minnows – and thus possess low prestige – in the global football arena.3 Thus the perception amongst most British professional footballers that playing international football would represent the pinnacle of their careers may not be applicable to those qualified to play for these nations. Since the beginning of the century, the India and Pakistan national teams have been convincingly beaten by English club sides4 and so for any British Asians playing professionally in England, representing India, Pakistan or Bangladesh does not represent an avenue for international success, career development or enhancing their reputations. Furthermore, until a standardized global football calendar is implemented, English-based players representing non-European countries still have to miss substantial sections of their club seasons in order to fulfil their international commitments. Many players are becoming increasingly reluctant to jeopardize their place in their club teams in order to play for their countries, particularly if those nations have little or no chance of qualifying for a major championship.

Second, and in direct contrast to football, supporting a subcontinental nation in cricket provides frequent opportunities for British Asians to experi- ence international sporting success, either in Test matches or in the World Cup, which India (1983) and Pakistan (1992) have both won since its inception in 1975. These achievements may also serve wider political functions. Cricket is one of the few arenas in which the Indian subcontinent and its diaspora can assert an ephemeral challenge to western hegemony. Due to the competitive structure of international cricket, India and Pakistan regularly play against England and, in recent decades, have been frequently victorious.5 Despite, or

20 Sociology Volume 40 ■ Number 1 ■ February 2006

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 20

perhaps because of, the role of cricket in British imperialism in India, the game now enables a temporary disruption of this historical connection, whereby for- mer colonial peoples are able to compete with, and even defeat, England. Conversely, because similar matches do not occur, this process is not evident in football. Therefore, within the context of colonial subordination and contem- porary racisms, international cricket can operate as a means of cultural resist- ance (Carrington, 1998b) for British Asians.

Third, attending international cricket matches enables British Asians to support their teams in a manner that is not only more similar to how games are experienced in the subcontinent, but is also often excluded from lower levels of the English game (Carrington and McDonald, 2001b). In amateur (and to some extent professional) cricket, British Asians can be alienated by the class-specific connotations of various structures and institutions, together with a hegemonic ‘traditional (white) Englishness’ which means that the game is often equated with village greens, church spires and the quaffing of real ale. However, spectatorship of the international game appears to facilitate greater opportunities for recreating popular South Asian forms of cricket fandom. Whilst increasingly stringent and restrictive stewarding practices have reduced the feasibility of this phenomenon, international cricket has enabled British Asians to celebrate the game on their own terms, through the use of chants, flags and musical instruments.

Fourth, despite it being one of their stated aims, the recent visits to England by the India and Pakistan national teams do not appear to have forged any sig- nificant footballing links between subcontinental and diasporic South Asians. For example, although nations such as Jamaica and the Republic of Ireland have utilized changes in FIFA regulations which state that a player is eligible to play for a country if one of his grandparents was born there and have subse- quently selected English-born players, Bangladesh, India and Pakistan have failed to recruit players from their respective diasporas. British Indians Harpal Singh (of Stockport County) and Nevin Saroya (a former professional now playing non-league football with Yeading) have trained with the Indian national team during their visits to England, but subcontinental teams have not selected such players for matches.6 In the case of India, this is because, unlike most other nations, the All India Football Federation (AIFF) does not currently allow non- nationals or dual nationals to represent the country. This decision to exclude diasporic Indians clearly reflects wider socio-political developments that have sought to restrict the boundaries of ‘Indianness’ (Dimeo, 2002).

In terms of fandom, it is apparent that whilst young British Asians may cite cricketers such as India’s Sachin Tendulkar or Shoaib Akhtar of Pakistan as heroes, in football they are far more likely to idolize familiar, non-British Asian figures such as David Beckham (Din and Cullingford, 2004). Indeed, few young British Asians will be familiar with any subcontinental footballers, except pos- sibly for Baichung Bhutia, who played for Bury during the late 1990s. Certainly, the players in this research had little knowledge about, or interest in, foot- ball in South Asia, and although there was a degree of curiosity about the

21Diasporic national identities Burdsey

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 21

Bagladesh, India and Pakistan teams, there was no evidence of actual support. This may help to explain the indifference shown by many British Asians to the visits made by these teams in recent years. The numbers of British Asians attending most of these matches were very low, especially considering that the majority of games were held at clubs based in areas of high British Asian population.7

Playing away from Home? Sport, Diaspora and ‘Glocal’ British Asian Identities

The different affiliations held by young British Asians in relation to the English national football and cricket teams demonstrate not only the inadequacy of essentialist models of national identity, but also the need to appreciate the dynamic, fluctuating and fragmented nature of British Asian identities in late modernity. Social identities are constantly ‘in process’ (Hall, 1990), contextu- ally specific, and the product of numerous different, and often seemingly con- flicting or contradictory, influences. As Hall (1992: 277) argues:

The fully unified, completed, secure and coherent identity is a fantasy. Instead, as the systems of meaning and cultural representation multiply, we are confronted by a bewildering, fleeting multiplicity of possible identities, any one of which we could identify with – at least temporarily.

It should thus come as no surprise that British Asians, like various other sec- tions of the population, follow different sides in different sports, and that these affiliations are underpinned and influenced by diverse personal reasons and social factors. Such a position sits uneasily with those who believe that the fail- ure of many British Asians to pass the ‘Tebbit test’ (discussed earler) suggests an unwillingness or inability to integrate into British society, yet as Parekh (2000: 205) rightly points out, ‘a multicultural society requires that the pre- vailing view of national identity should allow its members to entertain dual and even multiple identities without arising fears of divided loyalties’.

Analysing national identities and affiliations in the context of sport helps to facilitate a wider sociological understanding of the nuances and complexities of young British Asian identities. Indeed, despite their diverse histories, migra- tion trajectories and experiences, this relationship between sport and national identity may be of significant analytical value in examining other second- and third-generation migrant identities. It is apposite at this juncture to utilize the concept of ‘diaspora’, a term that primarily ‘references a connection between groups across different nation states whose commonality derives from an orig- inal but maybe removed homeland; a new identity becomes constructed on a world scale which crosses national borders and boundaries’ (Anthias, 1998: 559–60). However, as Brah (1996: 183) points out, ‘diasporas, in the sense of distinctive historical experiences, are often composite formations made up of many journeys to different parts of the globe, each with its own history, its own

22 Sociology Volume 40 ■ Number 1 ■ February 2006

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 22

particularities’. Therefore, whilst British Asian communities need to be under- stood as part of, for example, wider Pakistani, Gujarati, Sikh or South Asian diasporas, it is important to recognize not only the similarities, but also the dif- ferences between those migrants situated in Britain and those in other global locations. Following Hall (1990) and Gilroy (1993), for example, who use the concept of diaspora as a means of progressing beyond representations of the essentialist black subject, it is employed here to theorize the myriad identities that comprise British ‘Asianness’. In this regard, like these authors, it is used to denote a social condition rather than as a descriptive term (Anthias, 1998: 565).

In particular, the concept of diaspora enables an unravelling of the nexus between (and relative significance of) place(s) of ‘origin’ and place(s) of ‘settle- ment’ and allows us to comprehend how the identities of second- and third- generation British Asians are subject to both global and local, or, as Robertson (1995) puts it, ‘glocal’, influences. Cohen (1999: ix) argues that:

All diasporic communities settled outside their natal (or imagined natal) territories acknowledge that ‘the old country’ – a notion often buried deep in language, reli- gion, custom or folklore – always has some claim on their loyalty and emotions. That claim may be strong or weak, or boldly or meekly articulated in a given cir- cumstance or historical period, but a member’s adherence to a diasporic community is demonstrated by an acceptance of an inescapable link with their past migration history and a sense of co-ethnicity with others of a similar background.

For many young British Asians, cricket invokes images of their own or their ancestors’ homes and lives before migration, and thus supporting a subconti- nental nation in the global sport arena facilitates an imagined connection with ‘the old country’. However, Anthias (2001: 632) points out that the concept of diaspora has often been employed in a way that privileges the point of ‘origin’ in constructing identities and solidarities, and does not sufficiently acknowledge transethnic, as opposed to transnational, processes. Furthermore, as Brah (1996: 180) argues, ‘not all diasporas sustain an ideology of “return”’. Unlike the original (and, in some cases, continuing) aspirations of their parents and grandparents, most young British Asians have no desire to permanently ‘return’ to the Indian subcontinent. In contrast to cricket, football is equated with their own residence in England and, in this regard, supporting the national team acts as an arena where the permanency of settlement, and the associated implica- tions for the construction of identity, can be emphasized. In other words, their involvement in football may be conceived of as a situating strategy, literally a means of signalling their attachment to what is regarded as ‘home’ rather than to what might be perceived as the ‘homeland(s)’.

The lives of young, diasporic British Asians are grounded not only in the cultures and traditions of their parents and the Indian subcontinent, but also in the social practices of Britain and beyond, with increasing reference to globally mediated spheres such as football, music, fashion, style and consumption, com- bined with a localism based in their personal and urban landscapes. As Clifford (1994) succinctly enunciates, diasporas think globally, but live locally.

23Diasporic national identities Burdsey

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 23

However, the arguments outlined here should not be reduced to essentialist interpretations of ethnicity and culture, i.e. an equation of cricket equals ‘Asianness’ and football equals ‘Englishness/Britishness’, nor is it suggested that these notions are fixed, static or unproblematic. Furthermore, the fact that their interests, affiliations and identities differ in relation to football and cricket should not be seen as verification of the erroneous popular belief that young British Asians are ‘caught between two cultures’ (Anwar, 1998). Whilst dias- poric identities are intrinsically comprised of a panoply of diverse cultures, eth- nicities, histories, genealogies, migrations and settlements, these are inherently imbricating and cannot be disengaged from each other. As Ramji (2003: 229) argues, ‘By framing questions of culture as dichotomous and oppositional, tra- ditional or Western, the clash of culture thesis fails to come to grips with the complex realities of South Asian [people’s] everyday lives’. Instead, participa- tion in football and, in particular, affiliation to the England national team rep- resents the construction of specifically British Asian identities, rather than insular ‘Asian’ or ‘British’ ones. To further instantiate this point, it is pertinent to reflect on another sport, boxing, and in particular the imagery surrounding the silver medal won by Amir Khan at the 2004 Olympic Games: a Bolton-born British Asian boxer, proudly sporting a British boxing vest and a gum-shield bearing the green and white of the Pakistan national flag, juxtaposed against the cultural bricolage of England football shirts, Pakistan cricket jerseys and Union flags exhibited by his family and friends (Burdsley, 2005).

The construction of diasporic young British Asian identities thus emerges at the intersection of local and global dynamics. These ‘new’ identities are underpinned by a plethora of factors that transcend ethnic, cultural, genera- tional and national boundaries: increasing commonalities with multiethnic peers and decreasing continuities with previous familial generations; a growing ‘imagined’ distance between their lives in Britain and their relationship to the subcontinent; the influence of western commodities and new patterns of con- sumption; and a desire to construct a multilateral social identity that simulta- neously emphasizes their British citizenship and their ethnicities. Crucially, the formation of these identities is influenced not only by processes within the dias- pora itself, but it is also the result of socio-political transformations and fluctu- ating boundaries of belonging in the original point of migration.

It is extremely ironic, yet hugely significant, that the symbol being used by many young British Asians to celebrate their British citizenship, the England national football team, is one that has not only been used for similar purposes by young whites, but has also been one of the main outlets for overt racism and xenophobia by this latter group. In many ways sport represents a social ‘field’ (Bourdieu, 1990), a structured space of positions that impose specific determi- nations on those who enter it. It also operates as an arena of contestation where individuals and institutions can maintain – or, indeed, challenge – the existing distribution of power and capital. However, involvement and attainment in a ‘field’ are based on a combination of one’s habitus and cultural capital and those groups that possess the most capital can dictate the legitimate means of

24 Sociology Volume 40 ■ Number 1 ■ February 2006

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 24

access to the ‘field’. Therefore, in conclusion, it must be acknowledged that the trends outlined in this article do not signify either a universal, unconditional embracing of ‘Englishness’ by young British Asians or a substantial shift towards multiculturalism in the English game. In other words, the fact that increasing numbers of British Asians are affirming their support for the England football team does not mean that notions of ‘Englishness’ are no longer prob- lematic or offensive, or that they are necessarily granted inclusion in ‘main- stream’ (predominantly white) fan collectivities. As Brah (1996: 193) argues, ‘It is quite possible to feel at home in a place and, yet, the experience of social exclusions may inhibit public proclamations of the place as home’. Popular symbols and manifestations of English football fandom certainly retain pejora- tive, ethnically monosemic connotations: for example, the Union flag, due to its appropriation by far right extremists; songs and chants, such as Rule Britannia and No Surrender to the IRA, which both celebrate/support British imperialism (past or present), and, most recently, the iterative I’d rather be a Paki than a Turk; and overt racism and xenophobia by supporters. Until such elements are eradicated, despite their support for the team, minority ethnic fans are still, sadly, likely to find the ‘live’ public England football experience – whether in the stadium or in pubs and bars – a hostile experience. Consequently, for British Asians, the articulations of English footballing identity outlined in this article may be restricted to their own, private social spheres. Thus, although football is an important social space in which shifting notions of identity and belonging amongst young British Asians can be articulated and contested, the degree to which the game can facilitate wider transformations in their social location may currently be limited.

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my gratitude to the three anonymous Sociology reviewers for their invaluable comments and suggestions on an earlier draft of this article.

Notes

1 In the July 1995 issue of Wisden Cricket Monthly, Tebbit’s sentiments were extended by Robert Henderson to question the loyalty of minority ethnic England players. He argued that ‘Norman Tebbit’s cricket test is as pertinent for players as it is for spectators. It is even possible that part of a coloured England-qualified player feels satisfaction (perhaps subconsciously) at seeing England humiliated, because of post-imperial myths of oppression and exploitation’ (Henderson, 1995: 9).

2 Chopra’s father is Indian and his mother is white. 3 In November 2004, the official FIFA rankings (out of 205) placed India 135th,

Bangladesh 168th and Pakistan 170th.

25Diasporic national identities Burdsey

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 25

4 In 2000, India lost 2–0 to Fulham and drew 0–0 with West Bromwich Albion. In 2001, they lost 3–0 to Brentford, 2–0 to Walsall, 2–0 to Nottingham Forest and drew 1–1 with Leyton Orient. Also that year, Pakistan lost 3–0 to Bury and 2–0 to Coventry City.

5 Bangladesh only achieved Test status in the 1990s. 6 One attempt to forge links between subcontinental and diasporic Indian foot-

ballers was the first Indian International Football Series, held in Germany in 2002. This competition involved the Indian under-17 national team, the Indian Tata football academy under-16 side, an England under-17 Indian select side and a Germany under-17 IFG (Indian Footballers in Germany) select side.

7 In 2000, 5000 people, the majority of whom were white, watched Fulham play India (Fieldnotes, 22 July 2000); 3000 people watched Bangladesh play India in Leicester; and 1292 fans attended the match between Bury and Pakistan. In 2001, India played two matches against Jamaica in England. Some 1200 people watched the first match at Watford, whilst 4000 spectators attended the fixture at Wolverhampton Wanderers. An exception to the trend is the match between West Bromwich Albion and India in 2000, which attracted a crowd of over 12,000.

References

Alexander, C. (2000) The Asian Gang: Ethnicity, Identity, Masculinity. Oxford: Berg.

Alexander, C. (2004) ‘Imagining the Asian Gang: Ethnicity, Masculinity and Youth after ‘the Riots’’, Critical Social Policy 24(4): 526–49.

Anderson, B. (1991) Imagined Communities. Verso: London. Anthias, F. (1998) ‘Evaluating “Diaspora”: Beyond Ethnicity?’, Sociology 32(3):

557–80. Anthias, F. (2001) ‘New Hybridities, Old Concepts: The Limits of “Culture”’,

Ethnic and Racial Studies 24(4): 619–41. Anthias, F. and C. Lloyd (2002) ‘Introduction: Fighting Racisms, Defining the

Territory’, in F. Anthias and C. Lloyd (eds) Rethinking Anti-racisms: From Theory to Practice, pp. 1–21. London: Routledge.

Anvari, H. (2001) ‘Games beneath the Veil Uncovered’, Guardian 26 October. Anwar, M. (1998) Between Cultures: Continuity and Change in the Lives of Young

Asians. London: Routledge. Back, L. (1996) New Ethnicities and Urban Culture: Racisms and Multiculture in

Young Lives. London: UCL Press. Back, L., Crabbe, T. and J. Solomos (2001) The Changing Face of Football: Racism,

Identity and Multiculture in the English Game. Oxford: Berg. Balibar, E. (1991) ‘Racism and Nationalism’, in E. Balibar and I. Wallerstein Race,

Nation, Class: Ambiguous Identities, pp. 37–67. London: Verso. Bhatia, S. (2003) ‘Harpal is ready to Make Huge Step’, Eastern Eye 17 January. Bourdieu, P. (1990) The Logic of Practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Brah, A. (1996) Cartographies of Diaspora: Contesting Identities. London:

Routledge.

26 Sociology Volume 40 ■ Number 1 ■ February 2006

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 26

Bulmer, M. and J. Solomos (eds) (2004) Researching Race and Racism. London: Routledge.

Burdsey, D. (2005) ‘“Role with the Punches”: “Race”, Representation and the Construction of Amir Khan as a Role Model for Multiethnic Britain’, Paper presented at Lost in Transl-Asian? British Asians, Sport, Leisure and Popular Culture study workshop, University of Brighton, 19 November.

Campbell, D. (2001) ‘Hussain Lashes British Asians as Unpatriotic’, Observer 27 May.

Carrington, B. (1998a) ‘“Football’s Coming Home” but Whose Home? And Do We Want It?: Nation, Football and the Politics of Exclusion’, in A. Brown (ed.) Fanatics! Power, Identity and Fandom in Football, pp. 101–23. London: Routledge.

Carrington, B. (1998b) ‘Sport, Masculinity and Black Cultural Resistance’, Journal of Sport and Social Issues 22(3): 275–98.

Carrington, B. and I. McDonald (2001a) ‘Introduction: “Race”, Sport and British Society’, in B. Carrington and I. McDonald (eds) ‘Race’, Sport and British Society, pp. 1–26. London: Routledge.

Carrington, B. and I. McDonald (2001b) ‘Whose Game Is It Anyway? Racism in Local League Cricket’, in B. Carrington and I. McDonald (eds) ‘Race’, Sport and British Society, pp. 49–69. London: Routledge.

Carvel, J. (2000) ‘The Rise of the Little Englanders’, Guardian 28 November. Clifford, J. (1994) ‘Diasporas’, Cultural Anthropology 9(3): 302–38. Cohen, P. (1996) ‘Homing Devices’, in V. Amit-Talai and C. Knowles (eds) Re-

situating Identities: The Politics of Race, Ethnicity and Culture, pp. 68–82. Hadleigh: Broadview.

Cohen, R. (1999) Global Diasporas: An Introduction. London: UCL Press. Dimeo, P. (2002) ‘The Local, National and Global in Indian Football: Issues of

Power and Identity’, Football Studies 5(2): 74–87. Din, I. and C. Cullingford (2004) ‘Boyzone and Bhangra: The Place of Popular and

Minority Cultures’, Race, Ethnicity and Education 7(3): 307–20. Donovan, M. (2003) ‘Twenty Questions with Albion Loan Star Zesh Rehman’,

Brighton and Hove Sports Argus 18 October. Eade, J. (1994) ‘Identity, Nation and Religion: Educated Young Bangladeshi

Muslims in London’s East End’, International Sociology 9(3): 377–94. Fanon, F. (1967) Towards the African Revolution. New York: Monthly Review

Press. Fawcett, B. and J. Hearn (2004) ‘Researching Others: Epistemology, Experience,

Standpoints and Participation’, International Journal of Social Research Methodology 7(3): 201–18.

Gilroy, P. (1993) Small Acts: Thoughts on the Politics of Black Cultures. London: Serpent’s Tail.

Goodey, J. (2001) ‘The Criminalization of British Asian Youth: Research from Bradford and Sheffield’, Journal of Youth Studies 4(4): 429–50.

Hall, S. (1990) ‘Cultural Identity and Diaspora’, in J. Rutherford (ed.) Identity: Community, Culture, Difference, pp. 222–37. London: Lawrence and Wishart.

Hall, S. (1992) ‘The Question of Cultural Identity’, in S. Hall, D. Held and T. McGrew (eds) Modernity and its Futures, pp. 273–325. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Hammersley, M. and P. Atkinson (1995) Ethnography: Principles in Practice. London: Routledge.

27Diasporic national identities Burdsey

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 27

Hawkey, I. (2002) ‘Hitting back at Racism on the Home Pitch’, Sunday Times 20 October.

Henderson, R. (1995) ‘Is it in the Blood?’, Wisden Cricket Monthly July. Kellas, J. (1991) The Politics of Nationalism and Ethnicity. London: Macmillan. Laville, S. (2004) ‘White Shirt, No Shame for British Asians’, Guardian 21 June. Mirza, H, (2003) ‘“All the Women Are White, All the Blacks are Men – But Some

of Us Are Brave”: Mapping the Consequences of Invisibility for Black and Minority Ethnic Women in Britain’, in D. Mason (ed.) Explaining Ethnic Differences: Changing Patterns of Disadvantage in Britain, pp. 121–38. Bristol: Policy Press.

Office for National Statistics (2004) URL (consulted Jan. 2004): http:// www.statis- tics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=459

Parekh, B. (2000) ‘National Identity in a Multicultural Society’, in M. Anwar, P. Roach and R. Sondhi (eds) From Legislation to Integration? Race Relations in Britain, pp. 196–211. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

Pearson, G. (1976) ‘“Paki-bashing” in a North East Lancashire Cotton Town: A Case Study and its History’, in G. Mungham and G. Pearson (eds) Working- class Youth Culture, pp. 48–81. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Ramji, H. (2003) ‘Engendering Diasporic Identities’, in N. Puwar and P. Raghuram (eds) South Asian Women in the Diaspora, pp. 227–41. Oxford: Berg.

Robertson, R. (1995) ‘Glocalization: Time-space and Homogeneity-heterogeneity’, in M. Featherstone, S. Lash and R. Robertson (eds) Global Modernities, pp. 25–44. London: Sage.

Vasagar, J., Ward, D., Etim, A. and M. Keating (2001) ‘“No go for Whites” in Race Hotspot’, Guardian 20 April.

Ware, V. and L. Back (2002) Out of Whiteness: Color, Politics and Culture. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Webster, C. (1997) ‘The Construction of British “Asian” Criminality’, International Journal of the Sociology of Law 25(1): 65–86.

Werbner, P. (1996) ‘“Our Blood Is Green”: Cricket, Identity and Social Empowerment among British Pakistanis,’ in J. MacClancy (ed.) Sport, Identity and Ethnicity, pp. 87–111. Oxford: Berg.

White, M. (2001) ‘Tory Rapped for Saying Enoch Powell Was Right’, Guardian 28 March.

Daniel Burdsey

Is a senior lecturer in Sociology of Sport and Leisure, University of Brighton.

Address: Sociology of Sport and Leisure, Chelsea School, University of Brighton,Trevin

Towers Annexe, Gaudick Road, Eastbourne, BN20 7SP, UK.

E-mail: D.C.Burdsey@brighton.ac.uk

28 Sociology Volume 40 ■ Number 1 ■ February 2006

058435 Burdsey 13/1/06 11:10 am Page 28