World Cup 2010

[padraig (u.s.)]

Ah yes, but public complaint serves a function: it can highlight the wrongness of behaviour that has fallen through the inevitably present legal and penal cracks, and thereby serve as a deterrent.[/

let's be honest tho, it's a pretty shite deterrent in most cases. if we're just talking about football and not in a more general sense, then especially so. clearly Maradona, Zidane, Henry etc have escaped any kind of real public censure; I dunno about Henry but the former two are if anything more popular than they were as players. again, the incentives to win are much, much greater than the negligible effects of ex post facto "public complaint" on a player.

also, the bit about Suarez having been more likely to do it than a non-South American is patently ridiculous. one need look no further than the Henry, the German goalkeeper, the numerous dives by non-South Americans during the WC, and so on.

 

[crackerjack]

also, the bit about Suarez having been more likely to do it than a non-South American is patently ridiculous. one need look no further than the Henry, the German goalkeeper, the numerous dives by non-South Americans during the WC, and so on.

Or Harry Kewell...being S American may have made him more likely to brag about it afterwards though.

 

[crackerjack]

Its not inconceivable that we could have made top of the group if we'd taken Frances place - especially the way Uruguay played in their first match. After that, South Korea and Ghana certainly offered the easiest path to the semis, so again, its possible we might've made it, not withstanding that Holland would probably kick our asses.

Blimey, once a guy gets to dreaming...

The way Uruguay played in the first match is likely to have been related to them being up against the reigning WC runners-up (if there is such a thing) and recent holders. I really doubt Ireland instil quite that level of caution.

In fact, Uruguay and Mexico seem exactly the kind of team Ireland would struggle against - hard-working, technically superior and with just enough flair to unpick them.

Still, we're all allowed our fantasies. I'm currently working on one in which Rooney's shot against Slovenia went in instead of hitting the post, we topped our group, he rediscovered that mojo that went missing a couple of months ago and the rejuvenated side cruised into the semis, where we now face an efficient but workmanlike Dutch team.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

Its certainly true that FIFA have a lot to answer for when it comes to rules and regulations but that doesn't absolve players of ethical responsibility

no, it doesn't completely absolve them, you're firing at the wrong target. it was Henry, now Suarez; next it will be someone else. the point is, the ultimate responsibility to ensure these things don't happen by creating incentives against them lies with FIFA. perhaps not every player would do it, but enough would. I know you're still smarting over Ireland getting the shaft, but all this moralizing is ridiculous. you can't tell me that if it was a Robbie Keane handball to put Ireland through you wouldn't have taken it. maybe with a grimace, or with an uncomfortable laugh & shrug of the shoulders, but taken it nonetheless.

and every match isn't replete w/handballs, but enough matches that it's clearly a perpetual thorn in the side of football, no? otherwise there wouldn't have been two major incidents in the last year.

 

[franz]

whatever the opposite of fatalism is (intelligent design? designerliness? preening?), that is what football fans clearly are at the moment. It's one thing to be upset about some kind of infraction---very much a part of the parcel experience of the game as far as i can tell--and quite another to demand all kinds of rule changes whenever these frustrating moments occur.

It's like young mommies who can't bear the idea of their little junior getting hurt on the playground so they either make him run around in a helmet all day or round up the PTA to have the entire playground covered in soft foam.

Justice enacts itself in all kinds of ways across the game. France, for example, got to be humiliated on the world stage, and left with a program totally in shambles (i wouldn't attribute some kind of one to one reading of crime-punishment in that instance, but nonetheless...). Uruguay have gotten away with something totally lame (and for the record, it was a play at head level, and a lot of players would have just tried to head it away, even if i doubt it would have worked in this instance), but as i mentioned upthread, i fully expect them to be rewarded accordingly. Particularly with Suarez out, i do think they will get spanked in the semis, and i expect the same in the 3rd place match--and that will be sufficient for me. It may not be for Ghanaian fans, but so it goes. Moving forward, they don't need to be losing sleep on the idea that their path forward will be forever be impeded by a handball on the line--because it will shape up to be a totally exceptional experience in their football history.

 

[Sick Boy]

I don't see what's wrong with a goal-line handball anyway. It's not like they didn't pay the price of a penalty kick, and even when Gyan missed it, it's not like that guaranteed a Uruguayan win either. What's the big deal?

 

[mixed_biscuits]

clearly Maradona, Zidane, Henry etc have escaped any kind of real public censure

Perhaps there is such a thing as 'ethical rep' between participants (here's hoping): why didn't Domenech shake Parreira's hand after their final match? Because South Africa's coach had said that their entry by Hand-of-God meant that they were undeserving participants!

cf Franz' comment: What I found interesting was the appropriateness of the karmic payback that France got, both in terms of its humiliating, utterly negating scale (the players probably wished that they had never qualified) and its specificity, conceding a goal involving a handball.

 

[grave]

I don't see what's wrong with a goal-line handball anyway. It's not like they didn't pay the price of a penalty kick, and even when Gyan missed it, it's not like that guaranteed a Uruguayan win either. What's the big deal?

The problem is it's Ghana who are penalised in that situation. It would have been a certain goal, but instead they had to move 12 yards back and try to score again, with the keeper to beat.

 

[droid]

Blimey, once a guy gets to dreaming...

The way Uruguay played in the first match is likely to have been related to them being up against the reigning WC runners-up (if there is such a thing) and recent holders. I really doubt Ireland instil quite that level of caution.

In fact, Uruguay and Mexico seem exactly the kind of team Ireland would struggle against - hard-working, technically superior and with just enough flair to unpick them.

Maybe. But the fact is that had we qualified we wouldve faced Mexico, Uruguay, South Africa, and then possibly South Korea and Ghana.

All of those teams are beatable for us on a good day and it wouldve been by far the easiest path we've ever had.

In 1990 we faced England, Holland and Egypt in the first round, then Romania in the 2nd round and got knocked out by Italy in the quarters.

94, Italy, Mexico, Norway. Knocked out by Holland 2nd round.

2002, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Cameroon. Knocked out by Spain on penos in the 2nd round.

So, sure, there's an element of fantasy there, but given the psychology of the team I reckon we wouldve had a chance.

Still, we're all allowed our fantasies. I'm currently working on one in which Rooney's shot against Slovenia went in instead of hitting the post, we topped our group, he rediscovered that mojo that went missing a couple of months ago and the rejuvenated side cruised into the semis, where we now face an efficient but workmanlike Dutch team.

Yee-aah. Except my fantasy is based on the fact that Ireland punch above their weight in big tournaments, wheras England do the opposite.

 

[Damien]

I really wanted Ghana to win (also had Suarez in my dream team and he lost me loads of points) but that's the rules and everyone knows them.

You are allowed to handball at any time you like, then you are given a yellow/red card where appropiate. I'm glad he wasn't given a harsher penalty than a one match ban.

What definitely was unethical was when Suarez walked away and pretended he hadn't handballed.

 

[Damien]

related to the Uruguay hand ball incident:

Has anyone played FIFA/Pro Evo, and when an opponent is through on goal at a particularly important part of the game, decided to hack them down and get a red card rather than let a goal pass? I do this all the time

 

[baboon2004]

And just to flog my favourite old horse again for a sec - I cant help but think that had we qualified there is a reasonable chance we would now be in Uruguay's position, possibly making it to the finals without having to face Germany, Italy, France, Brazil or Argentina - which is almost unheard of.

you had a very similar chance in 2002, and you (much to my dismay) didn't take it! Spain were there for the taking!

 

[droid]

you had a very similar chance in 2002, and you (much to my dismay) didn't take it! Spain were there for the taking!

To be fair, we had Germany in the qualifying group and scraped through with a 92nd minute equaliser in the last match. We should've beaten Spain though - that was the match were we really missed a certain presence in midfield.

 

[baboon2004]

Yeah, Spain were all over the place in that match, and with South Korea in the quarters, ireland could definitely have made it to the semis that year. In fairness, I don't think this tournament has been as open - in fact, I can't think of any recent World Cups where so many sides could be described as excellent.

 

[droid]

If we'd had Roy anything could've happened...

 

[BareBones]

I find it so frustrating watching football. The amount of cheating that goes on is obscene. Pretty much everyone dives, fakes injuries, appeals for corners/throw ins when they blatantly knocked the ball out, appeals for cards etc

agreed. it makes me pretty sad. diving has become such an intrisic part of the game, same as passing or shooting. every single player does it, it's a tactical manouevre now - "winning" free kicks - you're defending a cross or a corner, someone touches you slightly, down you go, free kick.... you receive the ball on the half-way line, have to hold it up and wait for your teammates, someone makes the tiniest bit of contact, down you go, free kick... you're closed down in possession and going to lose the ball, go down, free kick... you basically throw yourself to the floor at the most minimal contact to gain territory or time for your team. and most of the time when this sort of thing happens the commentator will say "oh, he was clever there" or something similar. it's total bullshit.

 

[droid]

no, it doesn't completely absolve them, you're firing at the wrong target. it was Henry, now Suarez; next it will be someone else. the point is, the ultimate responsibility to ensure these things don't happen by creating incentives against them lies with FIFA. perhaps not every player would do it, but enough would. I know you're still smarting over Ireland getting the shaft, but all this moralizing is ridiculous. you can't tell me that if it was a Robbie Keane handball to put Ireland through you wouldn't have taken it. maybe with a grimace, or with an uncomfortable laugh & shrug of the shoulders, but taken it nonetheless.

and every match isn't replete w/handballs, but enough matches that it's clearly a perpetual thorn in the side of football, no? otherwise there wouldn't have been two major incidents in the last year.

Just to be clear. I'm not saying that the rules don't need to be changed and that the problems aren't mainly structural. Ive been in favour of video evidence since forever.

What bothers me is the whole 'anyone would've done it', 'its not cheating' line. There are rules and norms. This kind of cheating violates both. It is simply not normal to handle the ball off the line or into the goal. It happens - but most players don't do it and its the worst kind of cynicism.

If Robbie had done it? We mightn't taken it (what choice would we have had?), but we wouldn't be denying that he was a cheating fucker.

 

[BareBones]

having said all of that, i am in support of suarez.

 

[BareBones]

it was cheating, but it wasn't exactly underhanded. he was sacrificing himself for his team, if it was england in the quarters/semis/whatever and rooney had done that, i'd be cheering him on. obviously it "shouldn't" happen and a "penalty goal" or whatever would be fairer, but still, there's nothing sly or dishonest about it, which is why it seems fairly acceptable to me, more so than say capdevilla diving and getting that portuguese guy sent off in the previous round. reminded me a bit of that man utd game years ago when there was a player clean through on goal and solksjaer, the last man, deliberately tripped the attacker to prevent the goal being scored and got sent off, and the majority of the response to that was "fair enough".

 

[baboon2004]

i suppose what underlies this is everyone's ambivalent thoughts about cheating. On the one hand, everyone knows how frustrating it is to be cheated against, but, on the other, it's very difficult in honesty to say that you wouldn't do the same.

The whole idea of having mass games (especially at an international level) governed by a set of laws, is intriguing in itself. The idea of winning, or winning only with integrity, is a fundamental human dilemma in so many spheres (jobs, relationships, politics etc etc)