The Arsenal, Manchester United, and QPR stars are among those to ‘Tweet’ their way into trouble with the FA.
How the social networking does not exempt professionals from their responsibilities
Arsenal midfielder Emmanuel Frimpong was charged this week by the FA for improper conduct relating to an exchange of tweets between him and a Spurs fan. After the fan wished the player to ‘break [his] arms and legs’, Frimpong promptly replied ‘Scum Yid’. Tottenham Hotspur fans use the term frequently in an affectionate manner to refer to themselves and Frimpong was most likely unaware of the word’s derogatory etymology.
The Premier League today introduced guidelines for players on the use of players that ban the reveal of team news and outline the disciplinary procedure for improper use to negate cases such as Frimpong.
However he is not the first to arouse controversy on the social networking site. When Joey Barton was sent off in the final-day game against Manchester City, the player took to Twitter that evening to justify his actions. He contended that Carlos Tevez had started the altercation and his subsequent actions were simply futile attempts to get an opposition player sent off. Joey Barton’s tweets, which outlined his line of thought that unpredictable afternoon, formed part of the FA’s evidence in choosing to ban the player for twelve games.
But players must be mindful of their responsibilities on Twitter in all aspects. Arsenal’s Jack Wilshere was reprimanded by UEFA last month for a benign tweet about betting on teammate Frimpong to score. Although no bet was actually made by Wilshere, his off-the-cuff tweet contravened betting rules and landed Wilshere in more trouble that he might have presumed.
What we begin to see in Twitter is the danger of exposing a football player’s private activities and thoughts on a public platform. The player may send a tweet when he is away from the training ground or stadium, in his own private space, and yet is still accountable for his responsibilities as a footballer.
Both Ravel Morrison of West Ham and Federico Macheda of Manchester United, on loan at QPR at the time, also both landed themselves in trouble for remarks made on the social networking site.
But why would players join despite Twitter’s drawbacks? For Chelsea’s David Luiz, Twitter facilitates his interaction with fans upon which he may thank them; share photos of him and teammates; and update followers on the movements of the Chelsea (and Brazil) squad. The Chelsea fan-favourite, with his signature ‘geezers’ saying on the networking site, is perhaps a paragon of what the footballing tweeter should present: the player avoids voicing personal opinions but his Twitter activity enhances the interaction between player, club and fans.
But otherwise for the bigger – and intrinsically less popular – players, Twitter’s interaction with the public is a field of potential pitfalls, with endless provocation from insolent fans. Rio Ferdinand admitted that temperament is key to dealing with the Twitter abuse. However the player, who was embroiled in his own Twitter controversy for a ‘choc-ice’ retweet aimed at Ashley Cole, stated he uses the abuse as motivation when playing.
For the United defender, the principal benefit of the social networking site is that it allows fans to be close to their idols: “I would have loved to be able to be close to the likes of John Barnes, Gazza and Paul Ince when I was a kid.”
Rio Ferdinand is right; Twitter allows fans to gain an insight into these professionals’ lives but they should be wary of the consequences of their 140-charactered ramblings. Footballers are scrutinised at every possible moment but the prevalence of Twitter will only generate more disciplinary actions for the players than any tangible reward.
images: © West McGowan, © West McGowan
Receive exclusive football transfer news and updates twice a week to your mailbox
