Messi vs Ronaldo: The GOAT debate is political, too

Show me your GOAT*

Could your answer to the “Messi or Ronaldo” debate actually say something more about you?

A recent study conducted in 26 countries used the biggest football debate of the past two decades to examine something broader: whether political identity shapes preferences that appear to have nothing to do with politics, such as which athlete we like, admire, or consider the GOAT.

*Greatest Of All Time

The symbolism behind the players

According to the study, the two players function as symbols — meaning that a preference for either of them may reveal more about the viewer than about the players themselves.

• Messi is consistently characterized as quiet, deferential, and team-first (a symbol of communitarianism*)
• Ronaldo as individually dominant, openly self-promotional, and explicit about personal excellence (a symbol of dominance)

*Communitarianism is a social and political theory that prioritizes the interests of the community over the individual and emphasizes the importance of community for political life and human well-being.

 What did the study examine?

The study surveyed 10.661 respondents across 26 countries on six continents, asking them to rate Messi and Ronaldo on a 1–7 favourability scale.

The researchers then examined those responses alongside factors such as political ideology, approval of authoritarianism, self-esteem, short-form video news use, cognitive reflection, empathy, age, and more.

The debate is political, too

Political ideology emerged as the most robust individual-level predictor of preference.

Within the same country, respondents who were more liberal than the national mean were significantly more likely to prefer Messi over Ronaldo, while those who were more conservative tended to prefer Ronaldo.

Demographic factors (such as age, gender, education level, and social class) did not significantly affect preference.

The other factors

The study also identified other factors associated with preference:

• Respondents who reported higher approval of authoritarianism, higher self-esteem, and greater use of short-form video for news were significantly more likely to prefer Ronaldo.
• Cognitive reflection, on the other hand, was a small but significant Messi-leaning predictor.

Does age play a role?

The link between ideology and preference remains stable across most of adult life and weakens in older age cohorts.

Put simply, among younger respondents, preference for Messi or Ronaldo appeared to be more closely tied to political identity.

The generational account holds that cohorts socialized under heightened sorting carry the political–cultural link into domains their predecessors did not reach.

What did the countries say?

• 8 countries preferred Messi: South Korea, Argentina, Finland, Spain, the United Kingdom, Norway, the United States, and Canada.
• 11 countries preferred Ronaldo: Nigeria, India, France, China, Singapore, Portugal, Malaysia, Egypt, Mexico, Turkey, and Indonesia.
• 7 countries showed no significant preference for either player: South Africa, Japan, the Philippines, Brazil, Australia, Germany, and the Netherlands.

Argentina vs Portugal

The home-country effect for the two players is markedly unequal:

• Argentinians rate Messi well above their rating of Ronaldo, whereas Portuguese respondents prefer Ronaldo over Messi by a substantially smaller margin.
• Notably, Portugal is not the most Ronaldo-leaning country in the sample; Indonesia, Turkey, Mexico, Egypt, and Malaysia all express stronger Ronaldo preferences.

This pattern suggests that national affiliation with a player is neither necessary nor sufficient for country-level lean. Whatever drives country-level preference is not reducible to that factor.

Conclusion at the 90′

The study does not claim that all liberals prefer Messi and all conservatives prefer Ronaldo. Nor does it prove that political ideology causes preference for one player over the other.

What it does show, however, is that political ideology appears to be increasingly linked to preferences that may seem very far removed from politics.

Source

Πανεπιστήμιο Σιγκαπούρης