Reacting to the Suarez Handball
Well, Twitter is pretty much a smoldering pile of @s and #s in the aftermath of a polarizing, Suarez-fueled debate.
For those that missed it (and it's a shame if you did, because it was a wild finish), Uruguay striker Luis Suarez stopped a header in the dying moments of extra time that was headed for the back of the net by slapping it away with his hand, denying Ghana what would have been the winning goal. The referee spotted the offense and dished out the appropriate punishment: a red card for Suarez and a penalty kick for Ghana.
As I'm sure you can guess by the result of the match, Ghana didn't capitalize on this glorious opportunity. With the game on his foot, Asamoah Gyan blasted the Jabulani square into the woodwork, leaving probably everyone watching the game speechless and stunned for a moment. The ref then blew the final whistle to end extra time, sending the match to penalties, after which Uruguay would emerge triumphant.
The situation caused quite a stir around the globe, with some decreeing it as a woefully immoral act and disgusting display of unsporting behavior, while others hailed it as an intelligent play that saved the game for Uruguay. Much like Thierry Henry's handball back in November, things quickly escalated across the internet, with simple arguments soon leading to generalizations on the character and lives of those on the other side of the fence. Besides yours truly, Jozy Altidore seemed to deal with some backlash because of his perspective, defending this statement:
"What a play suarez hand ball turned out to be. I think that was a good choice by him since it was going in any way and it was that last min."
with this:
"Lol I'm not for cheating now so relax. I'm just saying he took a big gamble and it paid. Ghana got what they deserved in penalty but didn't score, so in the end Suarez play got his team to the semis."
I share Altidore's opinion; Suarez' play was smart and necessary. What he did kept his team in the game and gave them an opportunity to win, which they did. The referee spotted the offense and awarded Ghana accordingly, and Suarez will now miss the semifinals as a result, but his team lives on.
Now, the distinction that needs to made is that what is "smart" and "necessary" does not have to be "honorable" or "fair". Suarez may have broken millions of hearts (nearly a billion if we're to believe that all of Africa was indeed behind the Black Stars) with his blatant violation of the rules, but it ended up being the key to his team advancing on. He knew that a goal at that stage in the match would mean a loss for Uruguay, so he did whatever he could to prevent that despite the punishment of such a crime. It was a split second decision and reaction that did what it needed to do and eventually paid off handsomely.
And I don't even think that what Suarez did precludes the use of "honorable" as a descriptive adjective; I'm sure more than a few Uruguayans are calling his act an honorable sacrifice for the team, giving up his eligibility for a potential World Cup semifinal, a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, so that his countrymen might take part. It's all about perspective.
Let's think about perspective for a second. Had this been Landon Donovan or Clint Dempsey reaching their hand back to save a would-be goal en route to a similar stunning turn of events and eventual win, what would we say? Would we be ashamed of the win, or would we hail it as a brilliant bit of quick thinking, sacrifice, and unbelievable good luck? I'm very much inclined to think that it would be the latter. And had the US filled Ghana's role, I think the reaction would generally be that we only have ourselves to blame for missing an extra time penalty for the win and two more afterward, rather than a cry of injustice at the handball. Perhaps I'm wrong on that, but I know that my first reaction would be that we blew the game, not that it was stolen away from us.
Had the referee missed this call (as was the case against Germany in 2002, or with Henry's handball against Ireland), it might be a different story. But the bottom line is that the ref saw it and properly punished Suarez and Uruguay according to the letter of the law. If you are going to complain, complain about rules that incentivize a handball on the line in that situation, not about the player who takes the gamble knowing what the repercussions would be.
Was it "cheating"? If you define "cheating" as "violating the rules", then yes. But so is every single foul, unnoticed tug, and dishonest point for possession on balls that go out of bounds. Cheating, by that simple definition, is a part of the game, as players constantly toe the line to get the competitive edge. If there wasn't cheating, we wouldn't need a referee. But there is, and we do, and it's his job to enforce the rules and dole out punishment when they are violated. In this situation, the referee did his duty, and if anything we should applaud that in a World Cup that has been the scene of so many horrendous officiating blunders.
No matter what way you spin it, Ghana had opportunities to win, and they didn't take advantage of them. If you watch the replay, Ghana celebrated the penalty call and red card, rather than getting angry about the handball. They knew that the game was theirs for the taking and rightly were happy about it. They only can be mad at themselves for failing to convert from the spot.
Is there a solution? Well, I don't see FIFA changing things anytime soon, but even if they did adopt something like the goaltending rule in basketball, it would just open up the opportunity for more judgment calls that could be botched or could create controversy. No matter how hard we try, there will always be controversy, and all we can hope for is that the referee is able to make the right calls and let the players decide the games.
But let's not act like injustice is a one-way street because Uruguay might have had a gripe about giving up that goal had it gone in. Look back at the replay to see what led to a free kick (a tip of the hat to commenter Mikey for alerting me to this). Yup, that looks an awful lot like a dive on the wing to draw the whistle. If you ask me, that would've been unfair to Uruguay if they conceded there after such a suspect call and the embellishment that drew it. Perhaps the outcome was ultimately a fair one, balancing out a situation that probably never should have been and sending it level to penalties with everything up for grabs.
I feel terrible for Asamoah Gyan, who will surely be haunted for the rest of his life by this miss, and I'm sad to see a fun Ghana team eliminated from the tournament. But I completely understand and have no problem with what Luis Suarez did. You can say that his action was wrong and that I'm a fool for not lambasting him, but I calls 'em as I sees 'em, and to me that was an intelligent play in a desperate situation.
Suarez' celebration after the fact? Now, that's something that I could see rubbing people the wrong way. But that's not what's at the root of this debate, so I'll leave it for now.
If you agree or disagree, feel free to voice your opinion. But, please, let's be respectful, folks.
Posts
21 comments:
i think that if the US had committed the handball, then the country that had rallied to support them (as of late) would suddenly get a sour taste in their mouth... because hey "that's what they don't like about soccer anyway"
i understand basketball players foul all the time intentionally towards the end of the games... but it doesn't make it right for a sport like soccer where there are so few goals scored per match.
Cheating often contains an element of "smarts" and even skill. That doesn't make it right.
I've seen this as a growing aspect of the sport (fouling intentionally like they do in basketball). i hope we continue to play clean... we have developed this reputation of playing w/ the "american spirit" and the last thing we'd want to do is soil that with a sketchy play.
I agree with InModWeTrust that US fans would probably have a sour taste in their mouths if the US had committed such a foul. Sure, a US win in the quarterfinal would be great, but I surely would not want my countrymen to advance on a decidedly tainted game, deserving of an asterisk. While we (US fans) might have taken the win (albeit a dirty win), I don't think we would scream for joy (like many of the Uruguayans did) following the match, especially considering that during this tournament the US was plagued by misfortune (and thus I can sympathize with Ghana and Gyan despite the fact that they defeated the US). The moment, however important to the Uruguayans and earned within the confines of the rules of soccer, I felt was tarnished by the celebration of Suarez and his countrymen.
As far as Suarez is considered, I think the way he handled the situation after the fact was deplorable. He knowingly flaunted the spirit of the sport, "fair play" (FIFA's slogan). I don't think a red card is severe enough for Suarez. I think that, should Uruguay advance to the final (however unlikely), Suarez should not be able to play again this World Cup (at a minimum).
Suarez manipulated the sport's rules and he, and Uruguay, got away with it. Ghana was the better team that day, but left the stadium defeated. Yes, Ghana had plenty of opportunities to put the game away but could not capitalize, and you can keep claiming that it was all Ghana's fault that the result of the game came down to missed PKs (but that smacks of what people said about the US's tie to Slovenia and the late-win over Algeria). You can't fault Ghana for its inability to capitalize more than you can fault any other team in the tournament (especially the US). It is an unfair expectation of Ghana to have to win despite a blatant transgression of the spirit and rules of soccer. If every team capitalized on every opportunity, then World Cup results would more often resemble baseball scores than hockey scores.
The way I think the game should have ended (following Gyan's missed PK): the first three Uruguayan PK-takers kick their PKs to the corner flags, meanwhile Uruguay's goalie stands at the post and allows Ghana to score three open shots. I realize that this would (likely) never happen, because the Uruguayan players love to play and want a chance at winning it all and the country would disown the team members who would willing kick away Uruguay's chance at a third title.
If chivalry still existed, the Uruguayan players would not have tried to steal a win they, by all measures, did not deserve. But, then again, my scenario is better fitted for a movie than reality.
First of all, if you look at where the call came from, a free kick. Said free kick in the views of many, it shouldn't have been a free kick.
I've been reading all sorts of comments all over the net. Many saying what Suarez did was an awful act of cheating an a huge dishonor for the game. Suarez only did what ANYONE, I mean ANYONE in that position would have done. He knew he would get a red card, and that Ghana would also get a Penalty kick that would most likely end up in a goal, but yet, in his heart he believed that if there is a small chance on the penalty being missed it's worth sacrificing him self for it, and he did.
Ghana had the game all set and done in that penalty kick, they celebrated before they took the shot, meaning they thought they had already won... but, they couldn't get it and Suarez's sacrifice paid off.
Cheating??... Football is all about cheating, goes back ages! Just take a look at what the Netherlands tried today with a corner kick, or maybe think about all of the strikers over reacting to a foul inside the box to try and get a penalty, all the shirt pulling? All the sliding tackles that aim to stop the player and not the ball? Football is such a great sport because of all the cheating.
But one thing no one has mentioned is that Uruguay went all out at the beginning of the match, they were pushing, attacking and defending great and it wasn't until their captain got hurt were Ghana found ways to gain an advantage. Uruguay's captain plays mid center and he is the player that sets the plays, that is also responsible for holding their defense so strong. As soon as he got hurt, Uruguay seem as if they were 3 man short, and that's why Uruguay had such a tough game. If their captain hadn't been injured, they would not have made it to extra time and Uruguay would have beaten Ghana easily. Let's hope that he's able to play on the semi-finals.
Regardless of the controversy, this has been one of the best matches in this world cup, it kept me in the edge of my seat all of the 120 minutes. Congratulations Uruguay, semi-finalist once again, best of luck.
**This is football, a beautiful game were anything can happen.
Wonderful comments, all of you.
And thanks, Mikey; I was wondering about the play that led to the FK last night but the replay was up on ESPN3 yet. After looking at it again, it does look like there is little to no contact on the play, yet a free kick is awarded.
I totally dissagree with how you see this situation if it were the USA doing it. Our advancement would be seriously soured if we won like this. Our team would lose a lot of national support. As for the opinion of the rest of the world, you better bet your butt if USA did this there we'd be tarred and feathered in the media for it.
Dissagree with the writers assessment of 'cheating'. Walking the lines with rules is part of competition, the ref and rules control it. Cheating happens when you purposely violate a rule for which you know the ref/rules cant account for.
There are very few other sports where this type of thing could happen except in Soccer. This would be like a basketball player whipping his mouthpiece at the ball during a game winning 3 pt shot while the ball is still on its way up. What could the refs do? Award a technical? Thats not 3 pts. Goal tending? But the ball was on its way up...
Come on, if Ron Artest did this to give the Lakers a victory, he'd hardly be looked at as a hero.
It's like blatantly tackling an open wide receiver in the end zone. It's strategic, not cheating.
I'm sorry, but if anyone on the US team had been in this same situation, I don't doubt that they would have done the exact same thing, whether it's Landon Donovan or Michael Bradley or Carlos Bocanegra. Breaking the rules, knowing that you'll get caught, in order to gain a tactical advantage or to prevent the other team from scoring is part of every sport: basketball, football, and soccer. This isn't some new thing. This is the first time I've seen this outrage out of this situation, because I don't remember the other team not converting the penalty.
If the casual American fan can't see that this happens in every sport, then that's his loss.
Its not the same as blasting a reciever, because you're allowed and supposed to hit a receiver, the only stretch is when you do it.
In soccer, you're never ever supposed to touch the ball with your hands. Your doing something totally outside of the scope of the sport.
Furtehrmore, a TD reception is not ever a certainty. The receiver is never guaranteed to make the play, The DB is in position to make a hit, no way is it that wide open. Even if the DB does it earlier in the play, how do you know a different teammate couldnt have covered the play, or the receiver wouldnt have just dropped it?
Its not the same as blasting a reciever, because you're allowed and supposed to hit a receiver, the only stretch is when you do it.
In soccer, you're never ever supposed to touch the ball with your hands. Your doing something totally outside of the scope of the sport.
Furtehrmore, a TD reception is not ever a certainty. The receiver is never guaranteed to make the play, The DB is in position to make a hit, no way is it that wide open. Even if the DB does it earlier in the play, how do you know a different teammate couldnt have covered the play, or the receiver wouldnt have just dropped it?
Megan, it doesn't happen in every sport. I've not seen a good comparison yet. Its not the same thing as a DB making a hit on a receiver. There is no guarantee that receiver would have made the play, a ball is guaranteed to roll in to a wide open net.
And although its splitting hairs to a degree, hitting a WR is part of football, grabbing the ball with your hands is completely outside the scope of Soccer.
Its just not the same.
My closest analogy would be a basketball player throwing a shoe or moutpiece at a game winning 3 pt shot while its on the way up.. this is a close analogy because the ref. couldnt call goal tending in that situation. The player cheated, knowing the rules would only grant one technical Free Throw and repossession of the ball, but with less time remaining. Providing his team an advantage. A basketball player would never do that, but yet thats what this soccer player did.
I guess throwing your shoe at a game winning basketball shot should be part of good 'competitive spirit' too Megan?
The difference between everyone elses analogy is in this situation the player is skirting the rules by doing something outside the scope of the game.
I guess throwing your shoe at a game winning basketball shot should be part of good 'competitive spirit' too Megan? This is a close analogy because the ref. couldnt call goal tending in that situation. The player cheated, knowing the rules would only grant one technical Free Throw and repossession of the ball
The difference between everyone elses analogy is in this situation the player is skirting the rules by doing something outside the scope of the game.
This post also assumes that USA players would have the set of moral values as the Uruguay team. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't have many players on any of the World Cup teams reach up with *both* hands to punch at a ball like a goalie. It's funny how people can justify actions so their own set of beliefs are justified. And it's funny how a little sporting action brings up a morality conversation, just like waterboarding does...
Throwing a shoe? Really?
If that situation were to ever arise, the player would be thrown out because that is a flagrantly dirty play, not because it denied what would have been sure points.
However, let's say a basketball game is tied in the final seconds. Player A has a breakaway and is about to score an easy layup that will win the game at the buzzer. Out of nowhere, Player B rushes A from behind, fouling him, making him miss the shots. Player B went outside the rules. Now Player A has to make a free throw to win the game...and misses both of them. Player A's team loses in overtime.
If Player B hadn't "cheated" then Player A's team would have one the game. Somehow, I don't think ANYONE would see it that way, though. They call that a good foul.
What you guys need to understand though, is that Football(soccer) is like no other sport. You cannot compare it with any other sport, it's a very unique sport.
Also, something very important to take note of... When the penalty kick was awarded after the handball, *EVERYONE* in Ghana's team, and I could bet anything that *EVERYONE* supporting Ghana, *CELEBRATED WITH JOY* having a penalty kick in the last second. Thinking that they had won the game.
If the #3 player had made the goal... No one would have complained about the handball. It wasn't Suarez who stopped the penalty kick it was Ghana's player who *MISSED* it, and gave a more experienced Uruguay the chance to win in the shoot-out.
One final thought... People have to realize that this is Football, a sport where not always the team that deserved the win takes it but the lucky one does, and in this case Uruguay.
Controversies like this one are as old as the sport it self... go back to Diego Maradona's time... he actually scored a goal with his hand, and **GOT AWAY WITH IT**
So again... this is FOOTBALL people, things like this are BOUND to happen. Just enjoy the suspenseful and controversial games because those are the ones that **WILL BE REMEMBERED** in history
As unfair plays go, Suarez's is pretty tame. Henri's handball was much worse because he wasn't caught and didn't fess up. Of course, Suarez almost certainly wasn't concerned with being caught (besides, the action was so fast paced his decision might not even have been that conscious). And Suarez almost certainly wouldn't have fessed up had he not been caught. So what's my point? Suarez's play was, through no action of his, nowhere near as bad (in all senses) as it could have been. And yes, we'd all have a sour taste about the U.S. winning similarly, and yes, I'm certain any player would have done the same.
Not a moral or ethical issue.
Example, last goal from Ghana was in spite of USA defender's foul = red card? USA-Mexico in 2002 clear handball. Olden times: FIFA rule used to allow the goal ... but that was not enough, so red card and PK rule appeared. FIFA can only call one play, i.e., giving advantage requires execution.
BTW players are kicking a dead cow :(
stills of the game show Suarez looking pretty much set up like he intended to handball that play.the other player on the line threw his hands up. I think it has a lot to do with sportsmanship and watching the world cup, some players go for headers with their arms up, some don't. The ones who don't always seem classier to me and play with more sportsmanship. link for the handball: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/03/suarez-ban-fifa-to-study-_n_634684.html
If you don't care about sportsmanship in the game, then you don't want to be fair, then you take away someone else's right to a fair game that was trying to be a good sport. That ain't ethical and your morals aren't in line with those of the game. You live in a world with other people, not everything is me me me...
USSD this is an interesting little article you've written. I just watched the Germany-Uruguay consolation match and was a little perplexed at the commentator's remarks about the jeers Suarez was receiving each time he touched the ball. The commentator's slant seemed to be that the fans were disgraceful for jeering Suarez who made an instinctual goal line handball two games back. I was taken aback by the commentator's remarks and hit the web to see what other people were thinking.
I must say I'm a little perplexed at this article too. I do share your sentiment that what Suarez did doesn't preclude the use of "honorable" as a descriptive adjective. I don't think the matter has to do with playing fair or being honorable. I even share Jozy & your opinion that what he did was "smart" and "necessary".
Nonetheless, I find the handball by Suarez deplorable because in so committing that handball, he gamed the justice system of World Cup Soccer. Your slant in this article seems to be negligent of this.
Now there's a justice system in every sport. In basketball for example, if a player touches a basketball that has been shot and is on a downward trajectory, the referee will call "goal tending" and the team on offense will be awarded the points for the basket. In baseball, if the pitcher hits a batter, the batter is awarded a free base. In football, if a player is hit from the side or behind, the referee will call "clipping" and the team that clipped is penalized in terms of yardage. In every sport justice is exacted by the ump/ref/arbiter for certain situations. What is the same, repercussions are dealt with by the ump/ref/arbiter for certain actions players take.
Suarez committed a handball directly in front of the net to prevent a goal. The repercussion was a red card. But what exactly does this red card mean in emergency time of an elimination soccer game? First, it means that Suarez team must play with only 10 men for all of the (max) 30 seconds left in the game. Not much of a repercussion at all. Second, it means that Suarez can't play in the next game. Well, even if he hadn't committed the handball, he wouldn't have played in the next game because Uruguay wouldn't have advanced. But he did commit the handball and wouldn't play the next game all the same. His participation in the next game was effectively a "damned if you do and damned if you don't" situation. Of course this makes his decision a "smart" and "necessary" one - I completely agree with you on this USSD. But you allude to this idea that Suarez took a gamble:
"If you are going to complain, complain about rules that incentivize a handball on the line in that situation, not about the player who takes the gamble knowing what the repercussions would be."
It seems quite disingenuous to make the allusion that Suarez took a Gamble since the repercussions were so marginal and insignificant. The punishment of a red card could have never been enough for the crime of the handball which disallowed Ghana's certain victory goal. The goal was a done deal. And I think everyone should jeer Suarez and complain about him because he gamed the justice system of World-Cup-elimination-game soccer. He effectively gave Uruguay an extra goalie and the potential to live another tourney day for the price of a 30 second power play for Ghana - a power play which would never happen as the whistle was blown immediately after the penalty kick. In all, it cost Suarez nothing...and Ghana everything.
Sure Gyan missed a penalty kick. But considering that the game would have been over in Ghana's favor if Uruguay didn't have two goalies in goal, Gyan's miss is a moot point. There is someone to complain about and someone to jeer for gaming the justice system. And he is Luis Alberto Suarez.
Neglecting these points when talking about the handball incident seems just a travesty.
Bottom line, its cheating. it cheapens the game. there is absolutely no class in cheating. uruguay got what they deserve in the end.
Insignificant and marginal repercussions?
Ghana got the penalty for his handball - coupled with his red that meant he was out of the next game and couldn't take his PK. Now, you might say that him not taking a penalty doesn't matter but he is their star striker and thus a key penalty taker. It's not Suarez fault Ghana missed their penalty - how was he to know that would happen.
How exactly did Suarez cheat when he got punished for his crime?
You start adding things like to penalty goals to football and you'll see a lot more inconsistent interpretation and more mistakes.
Post a Comment