Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Mike Aitken: Authorities must come down hard on petulance that besmirched the game

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 08 May 2009
EVERYONE knows top-class football is an emotional battlefield. When the stakes are high and the referee's decisions can exert a disproportionate influence on the outcome, it's not uncommon for players on the receiving end of officials' mistakes to lose perspective and let frustration and anger get the better of them.
Yet the squandering of dignity always comes at a far higher cost than the mere loss of a football match. The reputation of Chelsea Football Club was dragged into the gutter on Wednesday evening when their players responded to those cruel twists of fo
rtune not uncommon in professional sport with the kind of disreputable tantrums which besmirch the reputation of the game. However hard done by Chelsea felt during the second leg of their Champions League semi-final against Barcelona, when the Norwegian referee Tom Henning Ovrebo waved away no fewer than four solid claims for penalty kicks, it was no justification for the wild over-reactions of Didier Drogba and Michael Ballack at Stamford Bridge.

Drogba, who had been substituted in the second-half, made menacing gestures towards Ovrebo after the final whistle which were as petulant as any seen from a bully on the school playground. He was booked for this show of dissent and had to be restrained from further antagonism by manager Guus Hiddink as well as trackside security men. The big centre forward then stuck his face in one of Sky's cameras and used foul language to harangue the referee's performance.

Coming on top of Ballack's manic 40-yard confrontation with the referee, who waved away the German's claim for a penalty after a Barcelona defender raised an arm to block the midfielder's shot, it was remarkable Chelsea finished the night without so much as a single red card. If the psychologist from Oslo was guilty of anything apart from a myopic view of penalty box incidents, it surely lay in his timid response to such crass outbursts of dissent.

Given the boorish nature of their players' behaviour, Chelsea's show of disrespect for both a match official and the integrity of Uefa cannot be allowed to go unpunished. The TV pictures of wild misbehaviour beamed around the globe means the disciplinarians of European football must deliver a swingeing response. Footballers may not be role models, but they do set an example. Yesterday's unsettling agency reports of internet death threats against Ovrebo and the need to smuggle the referee out of the country merely confirmed the folly of the players' recklessness.

While a Uefa spokesman refrained from rushing to judgment, there's no way European football's governing body can afford to let Chelsea off the hook when the reputation of club football's pre-eminent competition is at stake.

As for the neurotic conspiracy theories, fuelled by sections of the English media, that Uefa did not want an all-English Champions League final for the second year running, how on earth did Ovrebo's mistaken decision to send off Barcelona's Eric Abidal for a dubious foul on Nicolas Anelka fit in with these claims of favouritism?

David Taylor, the Uefa general secretary, was understandably unimpressed by talk of an anti-English agenda. Back in 2005, Taylor was the chief executive of the SFA. During a controversial match between Hearts and Rangers at Tyncastle, Saulius Mikoliunas barged into linesman Andy Davis after the assistant flagged for a mysterious incident in the box which handed Rangers a penalty and victory. After Hearts asked the SFA to investigate the integrity of that decision, Mikoliunas was handed a hefty ban and Vladimir Romanov, the club owner, was fined for accusing Scottish referees of bias. Don't expect the miscreants at Chelsea to be treated any more leniently. Then, as now, there's no doubt the outcome of both games were decided by dubious decisions. But Uefa's response will be as peremptory as the SFA's.

Having said all of that, any fair minded person could only look on in disbelief as Barcelona reached the final thanks to the Norwegian rejecting four Chelsea penalty claims, consisting of two hand balls, a jersey tug and a shoulder in the throat. At least three of them were stonewall and all four could have been awarded without so much as an eyebrow being raised.

It was a breathtakingly incompetent display from a referee who looked out of his depth handling such a high speed, furious encounter. Ovrebo, remember, also erroneously overruled Luca Toni's 'goal' for Italy against Romania at Euro 2008. After such high-profile cock-ups, his future in the game must now lie with refereeing Norway's part-timers, rather than the cream of European football.





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 07 May 2009 10:06 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Mike Aitken
 
1

SOFBTRC,

Far, far from Glasgow 08/05/2009 01:37:58
While the behaviour of the Chelsea players was absolutely disgraceful, it was also understandable.

Appearing in a CL final may be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for many players, while 95% of players will never get even one chance to do that. To be robbed of that chance by refereeing that was incompetent in the extreme when, had he done his job, Chelsea would undoubtedly have gone through, is frustrating beyond belief. Chelsea were cheated out of a CL final appearance, just like Dundee United were cheated out of playing in Europe by McCurry, and cheated out of a League Cup win. This happens far too often. Sometimes it's incompetence, and sometimes there's more to it than that. The paying fans are the ones who are being cheated. It has to stop.

If the referee had done his job in the first place, then the unacceptable response by Chelsea's players would never have happened. You can not look at what should be done with regard to the players' behaviour unless you are also serious about taking severe punitive action against the referee.

BTW - I write as someone who has no time for Chelsea and who wanted Barcelona to win through to the final.
2

Star o' Rabbie Burns,

New Cumnock, CUMNOCK 08/05/2009 10:08:29
Come on, a bit of balance please.

A Champions League semi-final lasts 180 odd minutes; after 90 odd minutes in Barcelona, Chelsea were lucky to still be in the game; Barca had played them off the park, been denied one stonewall penalty while Michael Ballack should surely have been sent off and been out of the second 90 minutes.OK Drogba missed perhaps the best chance of the night, but Cech still emerged as Chelsea's hero.

Then in London, Chelsea score early, then see Barca get almost as many breaks from the referee as they themselves had had in Barcelona, not least from the sending-off of Abidal.

Ballack again, somehow, manages to avoid a red card, as does Drogba and Barca hit them with an injury time sucker punch.

I feel, over the 180-plus minutes, Barca probably narrowly deserved to progress - Chelsea, get over it.

Mind you, top-flight football will still throw up terrible episodes of players behaving badly, until FIFA, UEFA and the national associations grasp the nettle and insist on zero tolerance of dissent and bad sportsmanship.

Referees aren't perfect, but the game is lost without them, so they deserve respect and in particular the accetance of Law V (1): "The referee is the sole judge of fact".
3

,

08/05/2009 12:57:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
4

,

08/05/2009 12:57:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
5

SOFBTRC,

Far, far from Glasgow 08/05/2009 20:33:36
#2

While referees may be the sole judge of fact, it is what happens that is the "fact", and not their interpretation of the fact that is, in itself, the fact. Not only do referees make mistakes, but there are currently several European referees serving prison terms for cheating (match-fixing and betting scandals in Germany, Italy, and possibly in one of the old Eastern bloc countries). What this says to me is that not only can referees make mistakes, but they can be out of their depth, they can be incompetent, and worst of all, they CAN be corrupt. The referee in the Chelsea game likely wasn't corrupt, but he made a right bloody shambles of that game, and he was the primary cause of a lot of what went on at the end of the game.

I have no problem with the blazers clamping down on dissent and bad sportsmanship stemming from refereeing decisions. But first, they must get their own house in order, and ensure that referees are up to the job at hand, won't be out of their depth, and are entirely unbiased. If you take away the valid reasons for dissent, then there can be no good excuse for it and players can be hammered for doing it. But you can't hammer players for expressing their opinions "vigorously" when there are still referees like McCurry, referees willing to step over the line to further their own agenda, being put in charge of games that we are paying to watch.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.