Content warning: discussions of homophobia, racism

“An unprecedented milestone in the fight against racism in sports.” 

Such read the triumphant statement released by La Liga following the May 2025 court conviction of five Real Valladolid supporters, who had racially abused Real Madrid star Vinícius Júnior during a match in December 2022, to suspended prison sentences. 

A mere nine months on, however, and the Brazilian winger may on reflection repute such purported progress since the landmark judgement, as he has remained at the centre of relentless racial discrimination, most recently on the European stage in Madrid’s Round of 32 encounter away at Benfica. 

Following a superb curling strike that ultimately defined a crucial away win for Los Blancos, Vinícius was subsequently confronted by opposition winger Gianluca Prestianni, who was recorded veiling his mouth before allegedly uttering a racist slur that prompted a Madrid walk-off, halting the fixture for ten minutes before its eventual restart. It must seem like Groundhog Day for the mercurial Brazilian… 

The prodigious world talent and 2024 Ballon d’Or runner-up cannot seem to escape the toxicity of racial abuse, not only on the pitch from disgruntled opposition fans, but also off it from the media, and even his fellow professionals. 

Whilst the hostile reception endured in the Estádio da Luz is nothing new to Vinícius, the subsequent reaction by UEFA and Mourinho, who condemned the forward’s ‘provocative’ dance celebrations, exhibit exactly the indirect, tepid responses that legitimise such discrimination, and perpetuate the vicious cycle of oppression that victims like Vinícius consistently suffer. 

However, as former Napoli striker Victor Osihmen can attest to following his own team’s controversial ‘coconut’ TikTok post in 2023, this episode is not an isolated case of primitive football tribalism crossing the line. Rather, it is a symptom of a persistent pattern of ethnic and racial discrimination that continues to plague not only the beautiful spectacle of football artistry, but ask questions of our own human morality and tolerance.

From the bus chants of the Argentine squad concerning the African heritage of French athletes, to Bernardo Silva’s “joke” tweet comparing then-teammate Benjamin Mendy to the character on a Conguitos chocolate wrapper, this problematic behaviour can no longer claim to be an iniquity of the past that has since been “stamped out” by UEFA’s ‘Say No to Racism’ campaign. Instead, these instances ironically underline the abortive nature of such existing schemes, exposing the failings of sporting authorities to put their foot down on discrimination that is rife in the sport.  

However, such disciplinary inefficacy is unfortunately not limited to the elite echelons of professional European knockout tournaments, or even solely to the prominent media coverage of racial issues. Racism and homophobia is still as visible at the grassroots level.

Homophobia is also a topic that is often dismissed in the men’s game. The women’s game in comparison, whilst not completely free of discrimination, offers a progressive model that serves as an example of tolerant attitudes towards players’ sexualities and the image of the ‘ideal athlete’. This approach could perhaps act as a blueprint for the men’s game to follow in the face of a culture of toxic masculinity, and a potential solution to the dangerous environment queer male players and officials currently navigate.

Last year several top clubs, including Spurs, West Ham and Manchester United, were fined after fans targeted opposition players with homophobic insults. The players targeted in these chants, as far as the public are aware, are heterosexual, but the nature of these insidious chants aimed to denigrate opposition players. The intolerance and prejudice loudly voiced at the very top of English football speaks to the parochial attitudes of a significant portion of the game’s fanbase, demonstrating why the men’s game currently has no openly ‘out’ queer players in the top five leagues, not to mention the scant LGBTQ+ representation in the broader footballing media domain.

Conversely, the women’s game has for some time seen many players come ‘out’, including ex-footballer and prominent pundit Jill Scott, and several members of the back-to-back England Lionesses such as Beth Mead, Lauren Hemp and Jess Carter.

 The Premier League’s collaboration with Stonewall FC between 2017-2025 exhibits only a half-hearted attempt to combat homophobia by introducing initiatives like the Rainbow Laces campaign and ‘One Love’ rainbow armbands to be worn on the field, to “signal that those in the LGBTQ+ community are welcome”. However, following the refusal of a minority of players to participate in the campaign, it became seen as unnecessary and ‘optional’, signalling to those in the LGBTQ+ community that their presence is not an immediate priority.

Similarly, several European captains had pledged to wear the ‘One Love’ armband during the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, but eventually decided against the gesture in fear of receiving a yellow card. These incidents expose how the threat of conflict with players of opposing views, paired with the punishment of in-game bookings, took priority for FIFA and players competing in their tournaments over promoting tolerance. Such instances exemplify the importance of players’ sexualities and queer representation in the game. FIFA and Qatar’s Supreme Committee’s attempt to sanction players over awareness only highlights the acute extent to which true equality and fairness in treatment is yet to be reached in football and its global cultural appeal.

Overall, men’s football continues to foster a homophobic atmosphere that cannot simply be rectified by performative gestures like the Rainbow Laces or the One Love armband, especially when such support is so easily compromised when placed under political pressure. This environment regrettably permeates to all levels of the game and thus, in order to ‘kick it out’, the culture of toxic masculinity must be uprooted through decisive action by the necessary authorities, and fundamental changes at grassroots level, to reaffirm that LGBTQ+ presence in football is not a concession, but rather a non-negotiable.

Where identities are weaponised against players, instead of on-field rivalries, football becomes unsafe and antagonistic for all involved. The weak-willed responses to recent cases of racism and homophobia by governing bodies expose how discrimination is not an obsolete offence of the past, but rather continues to institutionally plague the sport.

The increasing political and state influence in football across Europe and the Middle East, privileging the profits of capital and soft power from the world’s most economically lucrative sport, is likely to further burden players of marginalised identities. 

So, although some may insist on “keeping politics out of football”, we must ask ourselves, do we want to watch football played on an uneven playing field? 

If you liked this, read more from Redbrick Comment:

UoN Course Cuts: Is UoB Safe?

The University Business: a French Perspective

Wicked, Weight-Loss and ‘Well-Intentioned’ Comments