Pickford’s experience is a microcosm of the direction of football discourse. Much of the noise around football has been shifted online. The immediate feedback you can get when eliciting a vile opinion on the Internet is completely and utterly seductive and becomes consuming.
The ante is upped, the boundaries are pushed and the normalisation of antisocial ideals takes place and contaminates the echo system.
Even the fact that it’s still a minority of people behaving like this, it affects the way football is discussed in the mainstream. Everything becomes exaggerated, dramatic, and IMPORTANT. It’s all so very important.
The sheer vitality of football coverage means that everyone who is engaged with it is compelled to take a side; they’re obligated to back their colours and stick to it. There’s no discretion or room for moderation.
On Pickford: his challenge was poor and was legitimately criticised. But the player he injured is arguably the most important player in the league in terms of impact on his club. So the coverage is extensive and non-stop This then creates a circus which bleeds into mainstream coverage. Fringe opinions about a huge ban become talking points despite it being wildly disproportionate.
SomeLiverpool fans want blood. They refuse to move on. Some Everton fans argue it wasn't even that a bad challenge. The polarisation of opinion adds to the cacophony of vitriol which is now totally deafening. Talking about the Pickford incident becomes exhausting. The ante is upped. Death threats from some nut job makes the papers. The story continues, fans keep talking about it and the race to the bottom goes on.
