• 
• 

By fixating on the games played by politicians rather than probing the realities of a political circus, it is argued, the news media could be doing the public a great disservice.

On the one hand, the assertion that journalists are doing their job badly by focusing more on the "impact" of political gamesmanship than the actual substance of what is going on below the surface, may have some basis of truth. It should be taken up as a valid subject of public discussion and self-examination by journalists themselves.

On the other hand, who can really blame them when national politics, at its current stage of development, closely resembles English Premier League football - both in its organisation and function?

The English professional league of football clubs, as everybody knows, is Thailand's most popular spectator sport.

The analogy between our national politics and the English Premier League football scene is not only appropriate but useful in promoting a better understanding of our dysfunctional politics.

For a start, in both professional football and Thai politics, the biggest controversy hotly debated is how the invasion of freewheeling capitalism has damaged professional football and democracy.

A few years back Fifa president Sepp Blatter lashed out at owners of the world's richest football clubs for creating a "Wild West-style of capitalism" by "throwing pornographic amounts of money" at "a tiny group of elite players" in order to "control the global game".

It used to be that the beauty of football had something to do with the special bond between football clubs and locals who supported them.

The excessive commercialisation of professional football in recent years has somewhat devalued the essence of the sport, which lies in participatory nature of the game and grassroots support that it attracts among people.

Coincidentally, Thailand's former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra has acquired the dubious distinction of damaging English football and Thai politics.

Thaksin bought Manchester City FC following his ouster in a military coup where he was accused of trying to corrupt democracy through power-grabbing, backed by fabulous wealth.

Thaksin, though on a much smaller scale, was following in the footsteps of Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich and other foreign tycoons who have been vilified for taking over football clubs, motivated mainly by greed and personal prestige.

English professional football clubs and most Thai political parties share similar features and seemingly operate pretty much under similar circumstances.

The only difference is Fifa and national sporting authorities in Europe are beginning to wake up to the need to better regulate and improve the governance of football clubs to ensure the most popular sport on earth continues to be a force for good.

It is here that the similarities between the clubs and Thai politics end.

Even the most ruthless club-owner knows how to spend his money acquiring top talent, put together the best team money can buy and win as many championships as they can.

At least they provide good entertainment to the world's football enthusiasts while making them tons of money.

The problem with local politics is the owners of most parties continue to try to win their games by fielding talentless players and then try to rig match results with all sorts of trickery.

Caught with cheating, they then try to bribe referees to be let off the hook.

When that fails, they want to move the goalposts and rewrite the rules of the game.

It is obvious Thailand has a lot to learn from what is happening in the world of football.

Even Thai politics can make a good spectator sport with some good rules, watchful audience and some vigorous refereeing.