The league's administrators, the Botswana Football League (BFL) decided to open the booze gates this season as a way to cushion local clubs, which face the biblical Lazarus predicament.
But SAAPA is not amused about the latest developments and wants the booze taps closed at stadiums. But who would blame the BFL for introducing such an initiative as the organisation is literally drowning its sorrows in alcohol? The BFL is a punch drunk organisation that has staggered from one criticism to the other; from the late league start to concerns over lack of adequate sponsors.
SAAPA, enjoying rare spotlight last week, argues, a move to sell alcohol at matches will encourage binge drinking and also will send a wrong signal to children who will be exposed to adults gulping gallons of the liquid while watching their favourite teams.
Sounds fair enough. SAAPA has not raised a voice about the sale of alcohol at most of the elite codes like golf and cricket, which have fully licensed bars at such facilities. Granted, football fans are perceived to be the rowdier and have since time immemorial, enjoyed an enduring relationship with hooliganism. But SAAPA’s position should not be unbalanced and selective.
It will appear it is a decision taken without full consideration of the general situation around the alcohol business and its consumption. In some quarters, it is then taken for a glory seeking stunt, meant to tick certain boxes. What the organisation should be fighting for is responsible drinking at soccer matches. Yes, football fans are known to be emotive and do not shy away from throwing an object or two, even when as sober as a judge.
What more when they have one too many and armed with a dangerous missile like a beer can or bottle. That’s where the concern should be more than just to constrict the argument only to the sale of alcohol at match venues.
Either way, football fans have always 'smuggled' alcohol into stadiums, or carried the liquid through the other legal route; their stomachs. It’s only logical, therefore to find a win-win situation, particularly in the face of dry pockets most clubs have to contend with but any decision has to be balanced with responsible drinking. In most countries, including in South Africa where violence is always brewing, alcohol is sold at match venues, but there are few reported incidents of hooliganism.
The other piece of news which made headlines last week pertained to the P100 cash reward which local prepared water company, AquaBliss gives to Premier League side, Police XI’s player-of-the-match. There was collective disapproval of the deal, with some critics dismissing the gesture as an insult. But, I believe in the absence of something, anything goes.
You take out that P100 and nothing remains. Even those shouting from rooftops that the figure is too little, will crawl back to their usual business when the noise dies and not offer any practical solution, besides dressing down AquaBliss. The amount generally speaking is not something to write home about, but in the local context, it translates into something.
Those leading the chorus of disapproval will deliberately omit the fact that AquaBliss is a start-up company, still struggling like any other and has made a sacrifice. They will not tell you that the very AquaBliss provides water to the team and also gives the player-of-the-month P700, which rolls into a decent deal considering the size of the company.
The P100 is part of a larger package; it is not the alpha and omega of the sponsorship deal. Critics will tell you how much mileage the company is getting from associating with Police XI and by extension, football. But in most cases, companies just donate as there is little proof of corresponding financial or goodwill benefit. You might find that AquaBliss is being insulted for nothing.
Where are those companies or individuals that can offer more than AquaBliss? Bring a better deal and kick-out AquaBliss then than shouting from the terraces. Talk (in this case, criticism) is cheap; actually it’s for free; doesn’t even cost P100.
