Social media is full of information. I don’t track everything that interests me, but I tend to share that when I see it. Football fans have been in heaven during the past seven days, since the World Cup matches started. Bags of goals and many of them stunning. Fast, furious action. Of course, controversies within the matches.
But, beyond the goals, and fouls, and cautions, and ejections, and massive crowds, what has been of interest on the soccer field and in the stadiums? (I have not quite understood the Chilean fans’ invasion of the media centre at the Maracana Stadium.)
The Japanese see sport differently. Japan is astonishingly clean. So, Japanese fans want to show that off to the world. That’s why they stayed behind after a match to clean up the stadium. Though their team lost 2-1 to Cote d’Ivoire at the Arena Pernambuco in Recife, Japanese spectators armed with bin liners patrolled their side of the stadium and gathered up discarded litter. That is class. Social media filled up with praise for this.
FIFA is run by madmen. I came to that conclusion when I watched England lose to Uruguay last night. Raheem Sterling’s knee caught Alvaro Pereira in the head, and knocked him out cold. (Watch the incident here.) He looked dead at first. Once he was revived, officials tried to escort him from the field. He protested. Next thing, he’s running around and getting hit and heading the ball again.
FIFA has a concussion protocol (see here). By contrast, the NFL begin assessing head injuries long before training camps, and players seen or suspected of having head injuries MUST leave the field for medical assessment. Not in football. A bunch of macho know-it-alls look on idly. The NFL also monitors conditions after a match. FIFA? Hello? Anyone there?
Trying to watch television coverage of matches is like trying to win a lottery. I’m quite savvy about possible alternatives to broadcast or satellite or cable transmission of live sporting events. However, when TV rights have been sold for billions of dollars, what can one expect? FIFA are due to make US$ 6 billion in revenue and US$ 2 billion profit from this World Cup, almost all of that from selling TV broadcast rights. Remember, the rights are sold to individual countries or groups of countries. The buyers are not always national broadcasters, but may often be subscription services, so watching freely may not be an option. At home, in Jamaica, SportsMax have the rights and it’s subscription cable. On vacation in France, the rights are shared between public broadcasters and private cable companies. I have to see which is showing a match: my hosts do not subscribe to the cable channel. Frustrated, sometimes, I scour known sources to find a free online streaming provider. Those I know are good and have feeds in English, but I would take any for the visual coverage; I do not need the prattle. They have drawbacks, whether annoying pop-up ads or links to services I do not want, but overall offer great options.
The mute button is my friend. I really need little when I watch sport other than the event. I like helpful background information about the contestants, but not too much. I do not need a screen filled with statistics, especially ones that do little more than count things that may not really matter.
But, I understand the trend and I think that football needs to use what technology now offers to make it fuller in many ways. But, I wish I could choose my pundits. I get mostly inane commentary thrown at me: in Jamaica, it comes from people wearing very brightly coloured shirts–that’s how it’s done. Branding matters. In France, I was pleased to hear and see Arsenal’s manager, Arsene Wenger, as usual, in a suit and tie, talking little but making much sense; with his wonderful perspective as a successful manager. Often, all I get is what I can see for myself, or ranting and with little value. I so wish that I could choose which pundit to hear. Time to develop an app.
National values are not international values. The four yearly caravan of football, like the Olympics, offer good opportunities to sample other cultures. Many things are common; many are not. TV exposes much but explains little. Brazil’s racial history is not the USA’s and should not be made to fit into the American narrative. African countries are not all the same. Latin American teams are not all capable of playing like Brazil in 1970. Social pressures and preferences are not suddenly forgotten when players enter the field. Fans have voices that are not the social barometers of their countries. We will see and hear things we deem racist. We will see and hear behaviour that treats women badly, as seen from our viewpoint. If our stereotypical view of Italians is right, then they will be pleading their innocence even as the blood drips off the boot that kicked the man in the eye. English players are very skillful and can pass as well as most others. Not every nation thinks that faking injuries is right: more players earning their keep in a few countries has had mixed benefits in showing new tricks to old dogs, but also showing those dogs that old tricks don’t go down well everywhere. Diving is an Olympic sport and should be kept there. 🙂
Everyone loves to hate referees. The honeymoon lasted only minutes and after that, no love was lost on the men in black sometimes. FIFA has moved with the times a little bit, and brought the profile of referees up during this World Cup, so now you get little thin bios. But, players and fans may know all of that already. They only care, though, if the men do not stink up the place with their ‘bad’, ‘biased’, ‘racist’, ‘home-team-favouring’, ‘scared’, ‘idiotic’, ‘blind’ decisions.
It began well for Brazil, but Croatian coach Niko Kovac accused Japanese referee Yuichi Nishimura of being partial to his side after it lost the opener at Arena Corinthians in Sao Paulo last Thursday: “I had a feeling that the referee had one set of rules for us and the other for Brazil. I don’t want to talk about referees but everybody saw how he did his job. He didn’t have respect for Croatia. He’s not good enough to be a referee in such an important game,” read one quote from Kovac in an interview to Croatian Television after the match.
Football is full of controversy as far as decisions are concerned. The game has too few officials and decisions are mostly interpretation. The FIFA hierarchy like it that football is full of errors. Referees are human: they make mistakes, and that’s part of the fun; Sepp Blatter thinks. Who would get upset about a goal scored and seen by everyone except the match officials? Where’s your sense of fun? Ask Steven Gerrard. Who would get upset about a clear foul that is given, but no caution given because the referee realises that it would mean the expulsion of a key player? C’mon, man! It would only change the balance of the game, totally. Let’s give the man the chance to throw another elbow or kick the living daylights out of an opponent a little later.
I guess we should ask Howard Webb, who seemed perfectly placed to see De Jong plant his boot into another player’s chest. Play on! Man down!
Need I mention 1986 and England-Argentina? Well, what’s a little handball into the net between friends, or enemies?
See what? Maradona became a hero for his country. His team went on to win the World Cup. At the post-game press conference, Maradona facetiously commented that the goal was scored “un poco con la cabeza de Maradona y otro poco con la mano de Dios” (“a little with the head of Maradona and a little with the hand of God“). What of the real villain, Tunisian referee Ali Bin Nasser? He gained 6th position in the top 10 worst refereeing decisions of all time (see here). Bravo, my boy!
FIFA, not yet a swear word, loves to keep referees out of the limelight. Referees, sometimes, hog the show. How about making them more accountable to the viewing and playing public? No. That would undermine their authority. Dissent. Yellow card. It would also show them as being human and fallible; that wouldn’t do. Have to love them as we hate them. (disclaimer: I am a qualified referee, and my decisions are final.)