Little Hooliganz: online game glorifies football violence

The great benefit of my brand spanking new NetVibes page is it tells me what's going on in the world of football in the event that I don't have the time or inclination to read a newspaper.

The Daily Telegraph falls firmly into the 'no inclination to read' category, but one click away from NetVibes I discovered an article about Little Hooliganz, a G-com (according to its creator, Blouzar) in which the player controls a football hooligan. It's the height of sophistication, I'm sure you'll agree.

To give you a little background, a 'G-com' is a game "based on real life genres and communities". As a sociologist that in itself is enough to have me pissing myself laughing. When you consider Blouzar's other effort, Miss Bimbo, apparently involves the player controlling her little person straight into a boob job clinic, the giggles become plentiful.

I should acknowledge at this point that there are two sides to every story, and the Telegraph is painting a very different picture of both games to the one punted about by Blouzar itself. According to my not-so-favourite broadsheet rag, Blouzar's games are all about knives and gangs and tits and ass. But in the words of the developer itself, "Little Hooliganz is the newly launched g-com where sons, fathers and grandfathers can enjoy all things football." Cosy, no?

I don't believe them, and while the Telegraph is doubtlessly blowing the whole thing out of proportion by reporting it in the environs of knife crime rather than simply hooliganism (both wrong, I know, but entirely different subcultures - that's if you believe in subcultures, which I may or may not), the debate is raging elsewhere. The Football Association has voiced its distaste for the game, along with football fan groups.


The topic is an interesting one, which covers all sorts of issues:

• Should gaming be censored on the basis of its potential impact on future behaviours?
• Is Blouzar not an amateurish little piss-pot outfit scrambling for notoriety?
• Where does the reponsibility for protecting/educating children belong?
• What about free speech?
• Do games really influence behaviour?
• Should censorship be extended to movies, like The Football Factory and Green Street (not on the basis of quality, sadly)?

It's a never-ending argument. Does life imitate art, or art imitate life? Is a crappy online game art? The solution is probably out there somewhere, but we'll never find it.

From my point of view, Blouzar may as well be allowed to continue pushing this game - after all, I believe those few idiotic children who would become Little Hooliganz would probably do so anyway. But it needs to take a long hard look at itself and its business plan. Negative publicity will only get it so far, and seeing as its entire idea seems to be based on a load of bollocks, it's on shaky ground.

Ideally, we'd ban anything which encourages bad behaviour in football. But people need to be given enough rope, frankly, and the football establishment can't be held responsible for social doings - except that this game gives football a bad name, of course.

I'd also encourage the gun and knife crime campaigners to back off in this particular case. There may be a little overlap, but street gangs and football firms are essentially different issues in my view. To combine the two simply indicates a lack of focus.

Let me know if I'm squinting at this through wonky eyes.

(Photo Credits: Screenrush)