© Priya Narayanan, Assistant Professor of Marketing, IIM Kozhikode. Views are personal.

It was during the final match of FIFA football World Cup in 2006 that Zinedane Zidane, the French football legend, head butted a player from the opposing team and watched from the benches as a penalty kick saved the day for Italy (watch the video here). After all these years, Ronaldo’s snub of Coca Cola is possibly the nearest I have seen to Zidane’s act in terms of wilfulness.

While many might disagree, the point remains that a statement was made at the last month UEFA pre match press conference. Avoid Coca Cola, drink water. A point well made indeed, as can be seen in this video that soon became viral. Apparently, Coca Cola lost $4 billion in stock value that day for this reason. (This Forbes article, though, presents an interesting counter view.) Regardless of monetary losses, customers might have started to think.

A celebrity sportsperson blatantly deriding the leading fizzy drink of the world! Could this be the end of sugar and fizz? Then again, one could argue that those who drink Coca Cola will continue to do so, some might take pride in their unwise loyalty to the drink. But, right now, the anti-Coca Cola sentiment that has dogged the brand like an unwelcome guest seems to have found form. Till memory fades, the Ronaldo incident can be used to present a silent but clear visual sword-shake at the brand.

And not just at brand Coca Cola. At its competitors too! Oh yes, by aiming a punch at the leading brand and raising a bottle of water, Ronaldo’s protest rang against all unhealthy fizzy drinks. Pepsi comes to mind first. A minus one for its fizzy rival is not a plus one for Pepsi, this time. Because this time it’s a vote for healthy consumption, for asking yourself why the fizz when there’s plain water. I couldn’t help asking this question as I stood in a queue at a conference in Hamburg, Germany to pick up a glass of water and had to choose between still water and sparkling water. (Remember how the lady in the movie English Vinglish, played by Sreedevi, becomes overwhelmed by choice, especially the question “still, or sparkling?” Watch the scene here.) Dear Coca Cola, it’s time to put your Dasani water in the spotlight.

It wasn’t just fizzy drinks that Ronaldo was protesting against. His action was, on deeper analysis, a snub to the hegemony of sponsor interests in sports and other public events. Sponsors get to adorn the back walls at press conferences and the extent of presence of sponsor logos on the athletes’ attire and the stadium perimeters is nothing short of blatant product placement. But today’s consumers are unwilling to tacitly endorse brands they don’t affirm. The products people use are increasingly seen as statements and consumers want control on these statements. Ask any consumer, and they will tell you: “I like it the way I like it.” Especially the person is a celebrity who endorses several brands.

Overall, the conclusion, to me, seems to be that brands need to be more careful. They need to sense not only consumer support but also anti-brand or anti-category sentiment that might lie beneath the surface waiting to be expressed, the way Ronaldo did. Otherwise, the unpredictable errors of omission might exceed the known errors of commission. Missing the current of anti-brand sentiment could be worse than selling fizzy drinks as if they really lead to happiness.