The reception of Paris Saint-Germain at the Élysée Palace confirms a development that has been underway for years: football in France is much more than a sport. After the club’s second triumph in the Champions League, President Emmanuel Macron once again received the team at the presidential palace – just as he did after the first European victory. These gestures are no longer mere courtesies today. They reflect the special role that football has assumed in French political life.
For politicians, it is now almost impossible to distance themselves from football. The sport offers something that politics continually seeks: images of unity, collective emotions, and an easily understandable national narrative. Millions of people watch the same matches, experience the same moments of euphoria or disappointment, and share the same symbols. Few other social phenomena achieve a similar widespread impact.
Emmanuel Macron recognized this dynamic early on. While traditionally presenting himself as a supporter of Olympique Marseille, he knows the political significance of a European success by PSG. A French club at the top of European football allows the head of state to speak of recognition and national pride without immediately being accused of partisan manipulation. The club’s success is thus idealized as a success of France.
At the same time, this connection with football has also become an obligation for politics. Leading political figures are expected to accompany major sporting moments, congratulating the winning teams and publicly identifying with their successes. Those who refuse risk being perceived as distant or emotionless. Football has thus become a fixed component of political communication.
But the popularity of the sport also entails risks. Great victories are regularly overshadowed by riots, acts of vandalism or clashes. Political leadership therefore faces a delicate balance: it must promote enthusiasm while ensuring order and security. Even after PSG’s latest triumph, Macron combined his congratulations with a clear condemnation of the violence that occurred during the celebrations.
On the other side of the political spectrum, the Rassemblement National takes a different approach. Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella focus less on the sporting euphoria and more on the negative aspects of mass celebrations. For them, it is not the images of success that prevail, but those of chaos, destruction and security problems. This position fits perfectly into the party’s political strategy, which centers its messages on social order and internal security.
Here a fundamental difference emerges between political fields. Government parties and centrist forces seek to exploit the inclusive power of football to their advantage. They present the sport as an expression of national community and social cohesion. The Rassemblement National, on the other hand, focuses more on the darker aspects of such major events, addressing those citizens who feel directly affected by the consequences of public disorder.
Football has thus become a political stage where different narratives compete. For Macron, it is a symbol of national unity and international prestige. For the RN, the same event exposes shortcomings in terms of security and public order. Both interpretations refer to the same facts but lead to completely different political messages.
This is where the political significance of modern football lies. It offers not only entertainment but also a projective surface for social debates on identity, cohesion, security, and national representation. The ball no longer only rolls on the green field. It moves in the French political arena and has become an indispensable component of the public staging of power, community, and conflict.
Author: P. Tiko