11
By Muhammed Lamin Drammeh
In Gambian football, a small post on a football page’s Facebook page can quickly become a much larger public issue. A club may respond to a rumor or criticism to protect its reputation, only to give the matter far more attention than it originally received. In some cases, the original post is soon forgotten while the club’s official response becomes the main subject of discussion.
This is not an argument against clubs defending themselves. Clubs have every right to correct false information, protect their players and officials, and explain decisions that affect supporters. The real question is whether every criticism, rumour, or social media post requires an official statement.
In modern football, success is no longer measured solely by trophies won, matches played, or players transferred. Increasingly, a club’s reputation is shaped by how effectively it communicates with its supporters, the media, sponsors, regulators, and the wider public.
Football communication has evolved into a strategic management function that influences public perception, protects institutional reputation, and strengthens stakeholder confidence. Yet in The Gambia, many football clubs continue to treat communication as a reactive exercise rather than a strategic responsibility.
One of the most common communication mistakes among football clubs is the tendency to respond publicly to almost every criticism, rumour, or social media discussion. A speculative transfer story, a Facebook opinion, or an unverified claim often triggers an immediate official statement. While such responses are usually intended to defend the club’s reputation, they sometimes achieve the opposite. Rather than ending the discussion, they can extend it. In some cases, the statement itself becomes part of the crisis.
The digital era has fundamentally transformed the communication environment in which football clubs operate. Social media has empowered fans, journalists, and content creators to publish information instantly, often without the editorial gatekeeping associated with traditional media. Consequently, football clubs feel immense pressure to respond quickly to every issue, fearing that silence may be interpreted as weakness or an admission of guilt. However, effective communication is not defined by speed. It is defined by strategy.
Communication scholars have long argued that organisations should not communicate simply because they can. They should communicate because doing so advances a clear objective. Every official statement issued by a football club carries institutional authority. Unlike a comment from a fan or a post from a blogger, an official statement represents the position of the entire organisation. It therefore deserves careful consideration before publication.
One useful explanation for why reactive statements often backfire can be found in Agenda Setting Theory. Developed by Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw, the theory argues that the media influence what people think about by determining which issues receive attention.
The same principle applies to football clubs. When a club releases an official statement responding to a rumour that had attracted limited attention, it can unintentionally give the issue greater visibility. Media outlets begin reporting the club’s statement, fans share it across social media, and a relatively minor issue suddenly becomes a major football discussion. And ironically, many people only become aware of the original allegation because the club chose to respond publicly.
Framing Theory further explains how communication can unintentionally shape public perception. Every official statement frames an issue in a particular way. The language chosen, the details disclosed, and the tone adopted all influence how audiences interpret events. A statement intended to dismiss speculation may inadvertently reinforce it by repeating the allegations, introducing new information, or escalating the emotional tone of the discussion. In attempting to defend itself, a club may unintentionally provide the very narrative that keeps the controversy alive.
Recent developments in Gambian football on Facebook provide useful examples of this communication challenge. In one instance, Medina United Football Club issued an official press release in response to a social media post by Space TV concerning the proposed transfer of one of its players. While the club sought to clarify its position and dispel speculation, the statement also disclosed details of the ongoing negotiations, thereby extending public discussion beyond the original report.
Similarly, TMT Football Club responded to reports published by GamFoot Transfers with two official statements. The first clarified the club’s position on transfer speculation, while the second directly challenged the publication over allegations involving the club president and indicated possible legal action.
In both cases, the communication issues moved beyond the original reports and generated wider public debate across social media. Whether the clubs were justified in defending their interests is not the central concern of this discussion. Rather, these cases invite a more important communication question. Did the official statements help contain the issues, or did they inadvertently amplify them?
For communication professionals, this distinction is crucial because the success of crisis communication should be measured not merely by the act of responding, but by whether the response advances the organisation’s strategic objectives.
International football offers similar lessons. Across Europe and other major football markets, clubs are constantly confronted with transfer rumours, criticism from pundits, and speculation surrounding players and management. Yet many of the world’s most professionally managed clubs resist the temptation to respond to every rumour. Instead, they communicate when there is verified information to share, when stakeholders genuinely require clarification, or when legal, ethical, or safety considerations make public communication necessary. Their restraint is not a sign of weakness but of strategic discipline. They understand that silence can sometimes be the most effective communication strategy.
This is not to suggest that football clubs should remain silent in every circumstance. There are situations in which public communication is both necessary and responsible. Allegations of discrimination, player welfare concerns, financial accountability, governance matters, security incidents, or misinformation capable of causing significant reputational damage often require prompt and transparent communication.
However, these situations differ fundamentally from ordinary online speculation or routine criticism. Effective communication requires distinguishing between an issue that needs monitoring and a crisis that demands institutional intervention. Unfortunately, many football clubs confuse these two concepts. They treat every issue as though it were a crisis. In doing so, they risk weakening the credibility of their official communication.
If every rumour receives a formal statement, fans may eventually struggle to distinguish between genuinely significant announcements and routine reactions to social media debates.
Another challenge facing football communication in The Gambia is that communication officers are often brought into the process after decisions have already been made. A professional communication structure requires clubs to involve communication teams before major decisions, not after controversy emerges. Strategic communication begins before the statement is written. It begins when decisions are being considered.
Communication officers should not be viewed merely as individuals who write statements after issues have already escalated. They should serve as strategic advisers, helping club executives determine risks, understand public perception, and decide whether communication is necessary in the first place. Sometimes, the most valuable advice a communication officer can offer is that no public statement should be issued.
Crucially, before recommending an official response, communication professionals should ask several critical questions.
Does the issue genuinely threaten the club’s reputation? Will a public response resolve the matter or simply attract more attention? Have all relevant facts been verified? Could the matter be addressed privately through dialogue with the journalist, media outlet, or stakeholder involved?
Most importantly, does the proposed communication align with the club’s long-term reputation and communication strategy?
These questions reflect the essence of strategic communication. Football communication should not be driven by emotion or pressure from the moment. It should be guided by professional judgement.
A practical step forward
To move from theory to practice, Gambian clubs should adopt a simple ‘three-question gate’ before issuing any official statement:
- Is this a genuine reputational threat or just noise? 2. Can this be resolved privately through direct dialogue? 3. Does this align with our season-long communication plan?
If the answer to any of these is NO, the default position should be no public statement. This discipline helps preserve the authority of official communications and prevents clubs from turning minor issues into major crises.
As Gambian football continues to develop, there is a growing need for clubs to professionalise their communication functions. Football communication extends far beyond social media management and press releases. It encompasses media relations, stakeholder engagement, crisis communication, branding, reputation management, supporter communication, internal communication, sponsorship communication, and strategic planning. Clubs that invest in these areas will be better positioned to build trust, attract commercial partners, and strengthen their public image. Ultimately, football communication should never be driven by emotion or the pressure of the moment. Every official statement has consequences. It can protect a club’s reputation, but it can also unintentionally amplify controversy, prolong public debate, and shift attention away from football itself. - The strongest clubs are not those that respond to every criticism. They are those that understand when communication serves their interests and when silence is the wiser strategy.
In an age where every post, comment, and rumour can become headline news within minutes, perhaps the most important question every football club should ask is not what should we say, but should we say anything at all? That question may ultimately determine whether a club successfully manages an issue or unintentionally creates a bigger crisis.
About the Author
Muhammed Lamin Drammeh (ML Drammeh) is a Gambian journalist and communication professional with experience in strategic communication, public relations, advocacy, and sports journalism. He holds a Master’s degree in Journalism and Communication from the Communication University of China, specialising in International Communication. He serves as Secretary General of the Sports Journalists’ Association of The Gambia.
