Could we all be caught with our trousers down?

I didn't actually catch the World Cup match between Holland and Ivory Coast, but what unfolded in the stands at Stuttgart on 16 June was perhaps more interesting than the nuances of the 2-1 scoreline.

Around 1,000 mixed-sex fans watched the game in a trouserless state.

No voyeurism intended, mind you: it wasn't what was underneath the trousers that mattered.

It was the significance, so to speak, of their absence.

As you probably remember, the fans in question had, in their jolly Dutch way, rolled up to the game wearing "lion trousers" (leeuwenhose).

The lion is Holland's national symbol - oddly enough, since precious few lions actually roam the polders.

Said trousers come equipped with a lion tail and two large pockets for storing beer cans. They are, needless to say, in obligatory orange. Oh yes, and they have the words "Bavaria" printed in blue down the sides.

Offending garments were binned

To most World Cup viewers around the world, all that this name will mean is a southern German state renowned for conservatism, Catholicism and lederhosen.

It is also, however, the name of Holland's second biggest brewery and - oh dear - that brewery was not an official sponsor of the 2006 World Cup. As a result, FIFA officials insisted the trousers came off as the fans came in. The offending garments went into a big bin, along with all the other rubbish.

I can't help wondering about the legal status of this action. Insisting that people remove their clothes against their will is, I would hope, an action permitted to few, and only permissible under certain carefully defined conditions.

While the games may be sponsored, the fans are surely not. American Budweiser had a contract with FIFA, but I rather doubt it negotiated one with each individual fan. Was there any small-print on the back of the tickets insisting that the holder agrees to become a marketing zombie for the duration of each match? I doubt that, too.

If there was, it would constitute abusive sponsorship. What if the sponsor was a German brewery whose beer was bottled, Bombardier-style, with the colours of the national flag, and what if that brewery insisted that every single spectator in the stands wear an overall in those colours which it issued at the gates? Absurd, perhaps, but if you can make a large hairy Dutchman take his trousers off...

We chide our politicians for attempting to impose norms of social behaviour on us, but contentedly allow big brands to impose their norms of consumption on us - via their sponsorship of events to which we attach great emotional value. Should money always dictate terms? Are there no other considerations?

American Budweiser and the other six "suppliers" and 15 "partners" paid FIFA £480m and, of course, deserve a return on their money. Their names should feature in all the key TV shots. But to insist that the creativity, humanity and sense of humour of those who have gone to the trouble and expense of attending the Cup should toe the sponsor's line has an Orwellian whiff to it.

Prepare for more trouser tricks

Of no area of World Cup sponsorship is this more important than beer, since beer and football regalia go together in the same way that whisky goes with thermal underwear and rum goes with lime-green thongs.

The 2006 World Cup has, given this cultural affinity, been a mortifying one. I think that allowing an American beer notorious for its organoleptic inoffensiveness to become the main beer sponsor of an event hosted by one of Europe's greatest brewing nations is, to put it mildly, insensitive, and underlines the fact that the role of the sponsors is now over-dominant.

The Atlanta Olympics should have taught us that already, of course. And we may be about to discover the same thing for ourselves with the 2012 London Olympics. Licensees should know that British law now prohibits any illicit use of the words "Olympic Games," "London 2012" and the ringed symbol.

An ideal beer sponsor for the London Olympics would, of course, be a great traditional British brewer with a burgeoning international reputation such as Timothy Taylor, Adnams or Fuller's, the sole remaining authentic London brewer (heroic microbreweries aside).

What chance do you think they have? The same kind of hopes with which small African nations would have concluded their World Cup preparations, I'd say: the main sponsors will be expected to chip in at least £50m.

Prepare, therefore, for further trouser-removal outrages; and get ready for further domination by the bland.