Keane, MacIntyre and the virtues

The Times - peace be upon it - provides wonderful vindication today of my theory that the deepest insights into the human condition come from the back pages of a newspaper, not the front.
The front page lead is some copper talking unutterable tosh. On the back, we get this from Roy Keane:

Why is there such a big attraction with London? It would be different if it was Chelsea, Arsenal or maybe [my emphasis - CD] Tottenham, but when they go to a smaller club just because it’s in London, then it’s clearly because of the shops.
“Their priorities are not the same as mine. We will do the best for our players’ families, but we’ve had a player this summer who didn’t even ring us back because his wife wanted to move to London. And shopping was mentioned. It might astonish many people, but it’s true.
“That’s not a football move, it’s a lifestyle move. To me that player is weak."

What Roy's driving at here is something I've mentioned before - that big financial incentives can be counter-productive. When even average players are paid fortunes, their priorities change - from developing themselves as professionals to going shopping. The upshot is worse players.
But this isn't just a funny quirk of human behaviour. It raises a profound point about moral flourishing, made by Alasdair MacIntyre.
There are, he said, two types of goods. There are internal goods, the goods of excellence - being a great footballer in this case. And there are external goods, the goods of effectiveness - money, fame and laydees. The problem is that external goods always threaten to displace or undermine internal goods.
The "essential function" of the virtues, said MacIntyre, is to equip people to resist the corrupting influence of external goods. What Roy's calling for is for virtuous players, who can do just this.
And this is where there's a link with the Times' front page story about Peter Fahy's complaints about underage drinking. Of all the things Mr Fahy calls for, there's a big omission: he never calls for teenagers to be virtuous, in the sense of being able to drink like civilized people - that is, having a skinful without getting violent. As such virtues would make repressive legislation unnecessary, they are a vital support for liberty.
Could it be that Mr Fahy doesn't make this point because he knows (probably without being able to articulate why)  that society as it is currently constituted cannot produce a virtuous citizenry? Or could it be that a footballer with a violent past has a better grasp of moral thinking than a senior policeman?   

Comments

[dearieme]

All sensible people read the papers from back to front, starting with the factual stuff (they very rarely get the result of a football match wrong; only slightly more often do they get the score wrong) on to the lies and deceit of News and Politics. As for The Young, the answer lies in the machine gun.

[Dan B]

No its that Roy Keane probably has more experience in terms of life than the senior policeman.
I dont think booze is the problem. Teenagers will always drink too much - I certainly did. I guess the only difference is that I was able to channel my aggression/hormones into sport and activities.....I wonder how many of those kids that murdered the man in Warrington play sport or have a past time that doesnt include hanging out under bridges, playing playstation, and doing drugs?

What happened to that poor man in Warrington just highlights to me what is wrong with the UK today. Imagine all of those people fighting for their country 60 years and just under 100 years ago..if they saw what had happened would they have been as proud and as willing to sacrifice their life for this? (slight reference to your Maggie Thatcher blog on Society)

Anyway Roy Keane has a point. Too much easy money in football. I know its almost a free market and the market forces have pushed up prices paid for a professional Footballers, but it most definately hasn't helped them maintain their grip on reality.

It would be interesting to compare Hedge Fund managers with Footballers....both massively overpaid, one more educated than the other....now which group as a whole gives back more to society in terms of charitable donations, but which group is vilified the most by society?

[Matt Munro]

All very intersting but, all other things being equal, who in their right mind would chose Sunderland over London as a place to live ?

[chris]

dearieme: At which end of the machine-gun would you put them?

[Ken Houghton]

"It would be interesting to compare Hedge Fund managers with Footballers....both massively overpaid, one more educated than the other.."

You mean the Footballers, right?

I note for the record that it's the Footballers's Wives (trying not to think of Joan Collins) who are picking the place to live and shop. Clearly, the solution is to let them buy a place in London but require that the player live in a local flat from training through the season. As noted above, money would not be an issue there, and if it is, certainly the Spurs, at least, can afford to provide a housing allowance.

[Max]

"... I wonder how many of those kids that murdered the man in Warrington play sport or have a past time that doesnt include hanging out under bridges, playing playstation, and doing drugs?"

When I read that, my kneejerk reaction was "So why don't they do something contructive off their own backs?" Where does the responsibility or the initiative lie for young people to do something constructive with their time/lives?

[dearieme]

chris: full marks - I wondered if anyone would ask. Yours, lost in admiration....

[Sam]

Are not the footballers who want to move to London so that their wives can shop maintaining the famous work-life balance that we hear so much about these days, in the face of Roy Keane's demand that they devote their lives to the company?

[john b]

A small minority of kids have started street fights, sometimes fatal, since the beginning of time - while most kids get a bit pissed, make some noise and annoy grown-ups with their rowdiness, but don't kill anybody.

You were in the latter group as a kid; I was in the latter group as a kid; nearly all the kids today are also in the latter group, which is why nobody reading this knows anyone [not 'has read in the Daily Wail about'] who's been killed or seriously hurt by Feral Teens (anyone? Bueller?)

It's stark raving mad to let one terrible event shape our attitudes to everything - and it's something lefties like Chris are just as guilty of as the hangers 'n' floggers and the nannying coppers.

Overall, the kids are alright; sometimes, but very rarely good people will be killed in street fights; that sucks, but it's better than imposing totalitarian lunacy in an effort to save a couple of lives a year.

[Pete in Dunbar]

"...off their own backs..."

[pedant mode]
This is a common error, but for goodness sake - it's BAT dammit, not back. Doing something 'off your own bat', that is solely through your own efforts.

Sigh. Doesn't anyone understand cricket any more?
[/pedant mode]

[kimmitt]

Matt: Do you think Sunderland players LIVE in Sunderland? They don't. They live in isolated houses in extraordinarly beautiful countryside. Who would choose London over that?

[Cleanthes]

"As such virtues would make repressive legislation unnecessary, they are a vital support for liberty."

Wow: are you really arguing in favour of one of the most pressing reasons that men created religions in the first place?

;-P

[Matt Munro]

Kimmit - No I don't imagine that they do - in the same way that I imagine Chelasea players live in Belgravia rather than Detford. The point is that 20 something millionaires (and their WAGS) would probably find the bright lights of London more appealing that rolling countryside, I certainly did at that age.