Money, slavery and African sport

In a Coventry University seminar earlier this year, speakers considered whether or not football is the new slavery in Africa. Several African students questioned whether this was the right way to address the subject, stating that football for them is a way out of poverty, not a form of slavery. Fast-forward to this morning's coverage in The Independent newspaper of Emmanuel Adebayor's transfer from Arsenal to Manchester City, where it was suggested that the player may have moved for money. Both instances raise some important questions about how non-Africans view African football, footballers and, indeed, African sport in general: is sport slavery? Or is this an entirely European, especially Anglo-Saxon view? If one accepts the view that it is slavery, to what extent could this mean measures are imposed in football/sport that may actually be to the detriment of Africa? In which case, what does this tell us about the way in which decision-making takes place in sport? As for Adebayor, given his background in Togo, is it any surprise (should it be any surprise) that he possibly finds money to be an important motivator in his decisions about which team to play for? Is it therefore unnecessarily judgemental for Europeans to question the financial motivations of African athletes? After all, this summer's football transfer activities have been notable for the transfer of non-African players, and their financial motivations have not really questioned as strongly. Could it actually be that Adebayor is telling us how it is for African athletes, and that we (non-Africans) should accept that athlete motivation elsewhere in the world may sometimes be considerably different to our own? Perhaps this view is wrong too and a more Afro-centric view of football and sport needs to strongly emerge? Moreover, if one considers how Eto'o, Drogba and Weah have used the wealth they have derived from football to benefit their home countries, to what extent should we be looking at Adebayor in a positive light rather than alluding to a suspicion that he might be motivated by money? In the end, to a greater or lesser extent, aren't we all?