Nike Learns The Hard Way That Spending Millions On A Soccer Star Endorsement Can Be A Pain You-Know-Where When That Player Keeps Getting Foot Injuries Wearing Your Boot

Philip Stone August 16, 2007

Celebrity endorsements have always been somewhat dodgy, usually because of the morals clause or similar, but Nike has another bigger problem on its hands – a star British football player has been hurt for the third time wearing Nike’s star soccer shoes and all the denials of “It’s not our fault” still has doctors and players endorsing bringing back the old heavy football shoes. Not exactly the type of publicity Nike craves, the stars certainly wouldn’t be as agile, but would they be safer?

The hullaballoo started Sunday when Manchester United and England star Wayne Rooney suffered his third foot injury since 2004 – all of them while wearing Nike soccer shoes. In Sunday’s game he was wearing Nike’s latest soccer creation, the T90. The key to soccer boots these days is lightness. They allow the athlete to be far more agile than wearing the old heavy clogs of years gone by. But because the boots are so light they don’t offer much protection if another player steps on your foot, or there is a hard tackle or somewhat. And that has now happened to Rooney for the third time.

Nike has gone into crisis control overdrive to tell the media, and the public, that its boots are not to blame. Indeed, Nike pointed out that Rooney spent time with Nike in developing the boots. But the British media have also gone into overdrive wheeling out doctors and former players who say while the old heavier boots might restrict player mobility, they would also prevent many of the soccer injuries seen today.

Charlie Brooks, head of corporate communications for Nike UK, said, “He (Rooney) is personally absolutely confident, as we are, that the boot had nothing to do with his injury. Nearly 20% of the professional players in the Barclays Premier League this weekend were wearing the boot. I think it is a boot that stands up to all kinds of testing … and stands up to on-pitch demand. I think what happened is just an unfortunate football injury. When we were developing this boot we worked extensively with Wayne. He was part of the development testing process …he went over to our headquarters in the United States and he tested the boot extensively over there.”

But the media then rolls out such experts as Professor Chris Moran, who oversaw Rooney’s last injury during the 2006 World Cup. “There’s no question we are seeing more metatarsal injuries and that could be because boots are more flimsy.”

Sir Alex Ferguson, Manchester United manager, was critical of Nike in another Rooney injury when he got hurt wearing the Total 90 Supremacy boots. But Ferguson must walk a fine line in criticizing Nike because Manchester United signed a 13-year sponsorship deal with Nike back in 2000. Rooney himself has kept silent.

Former England player Ian Wright observed in The Sun newspaper that he thought Rooney’s boot did not give him the proper support when he suffered Sunday’s injury. “His foot seemed to be squashed far too easily,” he wrote. “This latest spate of foot injuries must be linked to the lightness of the boot – what else can it be? Let’s roll back a decade and look at a time when boots weren’t so far advanced or precise – very few players seemed to have metatarsal injuries or foot damage like this. The boot companies need to sit down and sort this out properly.”

Nike’s television ads for the boots promote heavily that they provide the agility to hit a moving target. They don’t talk about player protection. Nike has been sensitive to protection problems in the past. When Rooney was first injured during the Euro 2004 championships he was wearing Nike Predator boots. The company then remodeled the boot to give more protection to the front of the foot. Two years later Rooney launched the Nike Air Zoom Total Supremacy boot, but four days afterwards he was carried off the field on a stretcher with another foot injury.

In addition to its UK PR director, Nike has also been rolling out other former players who are now employees of the company and also consultants to protect the product. Athlete physiotherapist Gard Hartmann told The Daily Mail, “It’s not the footwear but the demands placed on athletes whether they be footballers or whoever. The twisting, turning and pivoting movements make football a very intense game and it’s like anything – if you keep bending a wire hanger then it will be OK 20 times and then snap the 21st time.

“The general public only became aware of metatarsal injuries after David Beckham broke one in the run-up to the 2002 World Cup. Suddenly we’re aware of the metatarsal, but it’s nothing new. Footballers have always had foot injuries but they are described as metatarsal injuries in a way that has made people believe it’s a new phenomenon.”

Which does bring up the question of what exactly is the metatarsal? It’s the area at the top of the foot (little protection there in the new boots) that consists of five individual bones, one for each toe.

Brian Marwood, a former Arsenal player now working for Nike UK also said it’s not the boot’s fault. “Wayne’s been involved in every stage of research, Manchester United are aware of what’s gone into these boots, we talk to them on a regular basis, with their medical team as well, so we share a lot of information. It’s not as if we just bring out a pair of boots! I defy anybody to tell me otherwise if a 15 stone (210 lbs, 95 kilos) defender was putting his full force down on the top of your boot it wouldn’t cause a problem!”

What we’re being treated to is a classic case of a huge multinational company doing everything it can to protect a huge investment and persuade the media and the public that what is happening is nothing really new.

At the end of the day, it was Nike’s Brookes who really pretty accurately described what is going on, and why. “Players today demand performance and technology from their boots. I don’t think anybody thinks that we would be better going back to a heavy boot. You could create a boot with steel toe caps and three inches (1.25 cm) of padding but would a player be able to control the ball? Of course not, that’s not what the players want. What we have to do is work with the players, testing and researching and getting their feedback to get a boot that works for them.”

In a way this all conjures up parallels to doping -- athletes seeking the very best performance they can give, and getting the big bucks for that, and whom seem willing to risk their bodies to get that ability that brings with it huge contracts. With doping, the sporting associations stepped in to say, eventually, enough is enough and maybe the same needs to occur with sporting wear, too.

In this particular case, the player may want the most agile boot possible and is willing to give up on safety features to get that, but is that what sporting bodies should be allowing, too?

And one would think the sporting bodies and the football clubs would really want to see the safety issue addressed. After all, Rooney is not doing Manchester United or England any good at all sitting on the bench with an injury.

ftm Follow Up & Comments