By Ignacio Villarreal

Bathed in red paint and shouting, this image of Wayne Rooney has been catalogued as offensive, exploitative, in bad taste and even alarming, and the Christ like pose of the English striker in a new advertising campaign by Nike has provoked condemnation at an international level.

The columnist, Christopher Howse, from London´s Daily Telegraph points out that, "In relation to the images of the Crucifixion, in paradox for which Mel Gibson has a lot to answer for. In the Passion of Christ, his last hours were narrated as if it were a horror film."

Christopher Howse goes on to say, "Advertisers do like controversy, though, and somebody has been found to say that Rooney's pose is a blasphemous parody of the Crucifixion. Come off it! I knew I'd seen that grimace somewhere before, and it wasn't on a crucifix exactly. It was on one of the obscene reptilian monsters in Francis Bacon 's Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion (1944). It's in the Tate, and I think you'll find that the screaming, misshapen creature on the right is a perfect Roo-alike."

To that type of image belongs the cross of St. George bathed in blood of Wayne Rooney. It turns half into Jack Nicholson, with his mouth opened in The Shining, and half into the monster in Alien- very frightening but blasphemy.

If the photograph is a work of art, as it is, we see here this work that raised awareness in a powerful manner in the United Kingdom. Obviously the well known campaigns by Benneton come to mind or as someone may say today, Benewhat?

Nike, in a reaction to the avalanche of protests has declared, "We only were showing the player´s traditional celebration and denied any religious connotation while those who did protest immediately thought of the photograph as a reference to the crucifixion."

An MP told the Daily Mail, "He should go out and wear Adidas instead. It's offensive on so many different levels and extremely nasty. Wayne's a good Catholic boy, and I think the obvious crucifixion nuance is one part of it, but the aggressive nature of the pose is something we could do without. If we have learned anything about football in the last few years, it should be that it doesn't need big business trying to inject even more aggression into the mix."

The photograph was taken by an unnamed photographer (poor artist, he did not even get his 15 minutes of fame, though we will later know who he was) and is limited to say that it is the work of Nike executives as well as its advertising agency Wieden and Kennedy (so that we may think that they all clicked at the same time).

Nike has announced that this campaign will not be shown in other countries. Maybe in another strategic meeting they decided that the cross of St. George is not known in other countries or cultures.

The intention, they point out, has nothing to do with the crucifixion.

Nike stated, "If we have offended anybody on these terms, we stress that there was no intention and ask to be forgiven."

And to be even more cynical they say that the photograph is not intended to be aggressive. That, no one can believe.

The red paint does not mean blood, it only makes an echo of the same body painting fans use. It´s the flag of England and nothing else.

Following, there is an exercise so that the reader can get to know some of the opinions of those who have received the impact of the advertisement, we publish some of the comments that have been received by various blogs:


Don't know about images of the Crucifixion, but he looks like a blood-drenched thug in the middle of a gang fight. All the picture really needs is a broken beer bottle and a bicycle chain clutched in the fists and it would be even more of a hooligan icon.

- Ap Mcginn , Olney, Bucks

I am very patriotic and proud to be English, and I have the English flag on my car number plates and wear the flag on T shirts etc. but I find this picture of Wayne Rooney very offensive.

- Mike , Whitby

I know which sportswear brand to avoid from now on.

- Rob, Macclesfield , UK

I think the photo is a fantastic piece of artwork, cleverly alluding to a number of images and references but not in an obvious or offensive way. Loosen up, enjoy it for what it is - an image, not an insult.

- Ellie, Royston, Herts

Absolutely revolting - what will they not do for money?

- Peter Osborn , St.Albans , England

I will never purchase Nike again.

- Sam Corbitt , Wareham , USA

When I first saw this I saw a triumphant footballer wearing body paint in the cross of St George . His mouth is open in a shout of victory.

I do not see the crucifixion, blood or animosity in it at all. I am a christian but see no offense in this poster at all.

- Claire , Welling, Kent

I put this in here because its more than just about football. For me it ranks as being in the worst possible taste rivalling anything Benneton released. Its how as rooeny as nothing morer than a thug with a red cross resembling blood , with what look like two fangs with a mean, vicious and aggressive expression on his face. What kind of statement does that make about our flag and our people?

- La Gran Siete

For more information you may follow the following links:

Daily Mail.co.uk

Telegraph.co.uk

The Nordish Portal

Sportinggoodsbusiness.com