Panaji: Fresh demonstrations erupted against the placement of a Cristiano Ronaldo monument in Goa. The Ronaldo effigy stands in Calangute. The Goan administration defended the installation, stating it aimed to motivate young people.
The dissent focused on celebrating a figure from Goa’s former colonial overlords. Protesters, carrying black flags, voiced objections on-site after the statue’s unveiling. They criticized the government’s decision to erect the statue when other Indian sports stars could have been considered.
Mickey Fernandes, a former Indian national football player from Goa, described the Ronaldo statue as “distressing,” suggesting a lingering influence from Portugal’s rule. He acknowledged Ronaldo’s global prominence, yet emphasized the need for a statue honoring a Goan footballer.
In the meantime, Goa’s Minister and BJP representative, Michael Lobo, explained that the Ronaldo statue was intended to encourage young footballers. He believed the monument would serve as a powerful stimulus for aspiring athletes.
Goa plans to construct top-tier football facilities. The state boasts numerous talented players. “With proper training, India could produce its own Ronaldo,” he added.
The Goan government spent approximately Rs 12 lakh on the Ronaldo statue. Opposition factions demanded a legislative boycott.
Ronaldo in Goa: A Statue Sparks Controversy
The unveiling of a Cristiano Ronaldo statue in Calangute, Goa, has ignited a firestorm of protest, highlighting a deep-seated tension between Goan identity and its colonial past. While the government champions the statue as a motivational tool for aspiring young footballers, critics see it as a jarring symbol of Goa’s Portuguese heritage, a reminder of a colonial power rather than a celebration of homegrown talent.
The demonstration, featuring protesters waving black flags, underscored the discontent. The central argument revolves around the choice of Ronaldo over a Goan sporting icon. Former Indian national football player Mickey Fernandes poignantly captured this sentiment, calling the statue “distressing” and highlighting the perceived lingering impact of Portuguese rule. His statement reflects a wider concern: Why celebrate a global superstar when local heroes deserve recognition?
Goa’s Minister Michael Lobo defended the government’s decision, framing the statue as an inspirational force for young athletes. He emphasized the planned development of top-tier football facilities and expressed confidence in Goa’s potential to nurture future footballing stars, echoing the belief that “with proper training, India could produce its own Ronaldo.” This aspirational vision, however, fails to fully address the underlying cultural sensitivities.
The Rs 12 lakh price tag adds another layer to the controversy, with opposition parties calling for a legislative boycott. This financial aspect underscores the debate’s broader context: is it appropriate to invest such funds in a statue that is seen by many as an insensitive tribute to a figure associated with a colonial past, at the expense of acknowledging and celebrating Goa’s own sporting legacy? The Ronaldo statue in Goa is more than just a bronze figure; it represents a complex struggle over identity, memory, and the appropriate use of public funds. The controversy promises to continue fueling debate long after the statue is firmly in place.
