By Jesse Fink
September 19th 2008 @ 4:39am
Qatar has no business coming to Queensland
A few months back your Roar correspondent wrote a column about the disgraceful decision of FIFA, football’s world governing body, to not take any action against the Qatar Football Association for fielding an ineligible player during the just completed third round of Asian World Cup qualifying.
Qatar is in Australia’s group in the final elimination round for the Asian Football Confederation’s four automatic spots (and one half spot) at South Africa 2010 and is currently leading the group of five on four points with two games played.
Australia, one game in, is on three points. Both meet in Brisbane next month.
The reality, of course, at least as any fair-minded football follower is concerned, is that Qatar shouldn’t be there at all. Instead it is the Iraqis who should be facing off against Pim Verbeek’s Socceroos.
But all FIFA decided to do when faced with a clear breach of its own rules (to wit: a team “found guilty of fielding an ineligible player shall forfeit the match in question”) was let the Qataris get off on a technicality for its fielding of the Brazilian Emerson in March in a WCQ.
That technicality was the timing of the complaint. Any protest was to be delivered 24 hours before the match in question.
The Iraqis complained three months later.
Really it shouldn’t be an issue, but FIFA, politically motivated, always find a way to help West Asian teams when they’re in a pickle. (While on the topic, what strikes me most about the absurdity of that clause is that coaches, by habit, tend to release their teamsheets or starting line-ups as late as possible. It is asking a lot for the affected federation in question to be able to file their protest, with all the necessary paperwork, the moment they know the make-up of the team they’ll be facing. Such things tend to take quite a bit of time.)
In a just world, the onus should have been on the Qataris to play by the rules, not for Iraq to have a forensic knowledge of the statutes and their myriad intricacies and loopholes.
But we don’t live in a just world. Especially when it comes to international football.
To cut a long and boring story short, the Iraqis didn’t accept FIFA’s decision and they were right not to.
So they took their case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland, a body that normally rights wrongs and lends some commonsense to disputes such as these.
Understandably, the Iraq FA asked FIFA to postpone the qualifying rounds featuring Qatar until a determination was made but were rebuffed. The Qataris, not surprisingly, wanted the games to go ahead and were – shake me down – granted their wish.
From beginning to end, FIFA has well and truly screwed the Iraqis.
However, what is surprising is that Iraq has been let down by the CAS as well.
Rather than address the situation immediately the CAS has delayed making any decision and probably won’t announce its finding until for another fortnight, with no clear date set for the announcement.
It could happen before or after the WCQ in Brisbane.
The only explanation they have proffered for their tardiness is, according to CAS Secretary-General Matthieu Reeb, “there was no request by the parties involved for an urgent release of the court’s findings”.
Another case of the Iraq FA expecting professionalism, swiftness, diligence and natural justice from the authorities but being punished for procedural oversight.
It’s a total crock. The Iraqi people have copped enough injustice over the past decade. And it looks like there isn’t going to be any let-up any time soon.
Jesse Fink's columns now appear every Wednesday and Friday on The Roar.
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(20)
Midfielder said | September 19th 2008 @ 8:26am | Report comment
Jes, a sorry state of affairs ……………. makes you wonder what oil can buy.
Dickroo said | September 19th 2008 @ 8:46am | Report comment
It is not fair for the Iraqis, but Qatar is a blessing for the Socceroos. Possible another 6 points for the Aussies.
With the in-form Kewell, Chippers, Cahill and Moore’s back to the centre, I can’t see the Qatari would take any point from Brisbane.
Mick of Newie said | September 19th 2008 @ 8:48am | Report comment
Jes the only problem with this as a blog topic is finding anyone who would argue against you. It is an absurd situation and the CAS should swiftly deal with it.
The Bear said | September 19th 2008 @ 8:55am | Report comment
Could have Iraq pressed for a quicker response from CAS, Jesse? Sec-Gen saying “there was no request by the parties involved for an urgent release of the court’s findings”. Que?
It seems that by prolonging this decision, the iraqi’s may presume that if the decision goes their way, that FIFA will have to just “let them take Qatar’s place”, and perhaps the Iraqi’s are banking on Qatar making it to at least the next round play offs against 3rd place in Group B.
I feel sympathy for them, absolutely, but i do not think they would ever spare us any charity, if the shoe was on the other foot.
And maybe they are playing their own games, even now? By prolonging the assessment?
Graciously,
The Bear
The Bear said | September 19th 2008 @ 8:58am | Report comment
And In the meantime, Australia is caught up in this prolonged haze of uncertainty, surrounding the outcome of our group.
Not so good for us.
Millster said | September 19th 2008 @ 11:14am | Report comment
The Bear, Dickroo - while I agree that all things equal I would prefer to face Qatar than Iraq, I have to stand firmly with Jesse on this one. Football is about Fair Play and the World Cup is the pinnacle event in the sport. I’m not going to get into the broader geo-politics of how much ‘fairness’ Iraq has copped over the past decade, or the oil equation with gulf states, or FIFA favouritism. Because I’d have the same position if we were talking of Mongolia, of Tahiti or of Venezuela.
A team was promoted to the next round at the expense of another despite breaking the accepted rules about player eligibility. There is no way in which I can twist my sense of natural justice - however hard I try - that makes me believe that the rule-breaking team should not be disqualified and the displaced team should not be reinstated.
To me its a sad situation with a simple resolution which is to allow Iraq back in at Qatar’s expense.
The only complexity, now that the round has started, is how best to make the switch in terms of group points to neither disadvantage Iraq nor the teams that have played Qatar already. For mine I would scrub Qatars results against the Uzbeks and Bahrain, and give Iraq 1-1 draws against both. Bahrain wouldn’t be affected as its result against Qatar was 1-1. The Uzbeks would gain a point and lose 3 goals against but would stay bottom of table. Iraq would enter the group on 2 points - in third position - with a goal difference of zero. The group tabulated would look like this, and would remain wide open:
Team MP W D L GF GA Pts
Japan 1 1 0 0 3 2 3
Aust 1 1 0 0 1 0 3
Iraq 2 0 2 0 2 2 2
Bahr 2 0 1 1 3 4 1
Uzb 2 0 1 1 1 2 1
Of course, the chances of this happening before October 15 - well enough before that the Iraqis can prepare - are zip, and as time goes one and games are played the complexity and unfairness on everyone of this situation compounds upon itself.
Ben of Phnom Penh said | September 19th 2008 @ 11:36am | Report comment
One concern I have is that the decision will be made on the eve of our game against Qatar resulting in a debacle of ticket refunds and a loss of goodwill from a footballing public in Queensland that may already be feeling slightly miffed from the Australia-China game. I’d rather a decision be made quickly to lessen the impact, however truth be told I think the problem is the rules and that Qatar will be found to be in the clear. The question is as to whether a revision of the rules will result from this scenario to better reflect natural justice. If not then insult will indeed have been added to injury.
Mick of Newie said | September 19th 2008 @ 11:40am | Report comment
Millster
The only fair way is for Iraq to play the games against Uzbek and Bahrain. There is enough time to replay the games if there is the will. I hope the Iraqi team are preparing to come to Brisbane so they don’t lose another fixture.
Forget about what is good for Australia, we control our destiny, we are off to a great start if we don’t qualify from here it will be solely Aust fault.
The Bear said | September 19th 2008 @ 11:51am | Report comment
Millster, i guess what i am trying to point out, that the Iraqi’s may not be in a hurry to sort this out. Which they may feel is to THEIR advantage. And subsequently, not to ours. Make no mistake, the Iraqi’s are looking after their own interests here, and i think that they are in no hurry to play us right now. Perhaps, i am being purely speculative. Thoughts?
Graciously,
The Bear
Millster said | September 19th 2008 @ 12:16pm | Report comment
Bear, I do agree that there are some potential resolution of this that could seriously advantage Iraq, and that they would be wanting to influence any proceedings to achieve those outcomes. So yes I thoroughly agree with your pragmatic caution. With what’s at stake, everyone is understandably self-interested. This makes it all the bigger a pity that FIFA - as the supposedly independent arbiter - is not following due and fair process.
From an Australian point of view I would not want to have won 3 points against Qatar on an international date when all our stars were available, only to have them scrubbed and to have to face Iraq - a stronger team - in a make-shift fixture, probably not on a sanctioned date, and therefore with our B team. I think a quick resolution is very much in our interests whichever way it goes so we know what we are facing. It also tells me that getting the reamining 3 points against the Uzbeks, and getting all 6 against Bahrain, is now an absolute priority. I’m not counting on any against Japan, and the Iraq/Qatar thing is the great unknown and a potential problem.
jimbo said | September 19th 2008 @ 12:49pm | Report comment
I also read that the reason the Iraqis couldn’t lodge an appeal in time was because the cash strapped IFA couldn’t afford to pay the huge fee that FIFA charges for lodging appeals.
On the other hand, the Guitaris are not short of a dollar are they, and they regularly contribute to the AFC and FIFA coffers.
The real issue isn’t whether Iraq lodged the appeal on time but to answer the simple question: is Emerson an ineligible player or not?
Surely wouldn’t take that long to determine would it?
phil said | September 19th 2008 @ 12:53pm | Report comment
My biggest concern is that if Iraq come into the group at Qatar’s expense we will have rearranged fixtures eg. Aust v Iraq possibly played on non-FIFA dates. This won’t bother Iraq but will be a major disadvantage for the Aussies.
dasilva said | September 19th 2008 @ 1:01pm | Report comment
I have heard from Craig Foster in one of the shootouts that Pim Verbeek told FFA not to appeal the decision and support Iraqs appeal as he prefer to have Qatar in the next round rather than Iraq. FFA aren’t completely innocent in this affair.
The Bear said | September 19th 2008 @ 1:21pm | Report comment
I agree the whole thing is not good for the game.
Look how the world responds to drug cheats at the Tour de France, and match fixing slurs on international Cricket. This whole affair has the potential to severely undermine our tilt at South Africa…and if we get there?…what does it really show? A better footballing side, or one that knows how to play politics, with backroom deals?
And to think if FFA has some dirt on it’s hands, too. Well it brings shame on the Green and Gold. If we don’t have any part in this, we should try to ensure that we keep clear of any distinct disadvantages, the ad hoc games could be devastating (Lawyers ready, i hope).
It really is bizarre to think that the Asian Champions will be going to the Confeds in 2009, but not the World Cup, the following year.
Graciously,
The Bear
Millster said | September 19th 2008 @ 1:45pm | Report comment
The Bear - not so bizarre. Greece 2004 anyone?
Kazama said | September 19th 2008 @ 2:21pm | Report comment
dasilva
If that is the case, it is very disappointing. We are no different from the nations that have tried to hold us back.
We complain about Italy ‘cheating’ to beat us but we won’t lift a finger to help a nation that has been robbed of a spot in this round of qualifying so our path is easier. A bit hypocritical, wouldn’t you say?
I guess World Cup campaigns are like wars; morals won’t stand in the way of gaining an advantage. So much for Fair Play.
clayton said | September 19th 2008 @ 2:46pm | Report comment
in the last game of the last round - iraq had a chance to take the qataris spot. it was iraq vs qatar with the 2nd round spot on the line. a draw would have been enough for iraq. but they bottled it. they tried to shut down the game, the qataris dared, and won.
qatar through. iraq out. qatar was the better team.
and what about this regulation that qatar breached? their naturalised player didn`t count because he played for brazil at youth level. so what. didn`t our timmy cahill play a game for samoa as a youngster? if this guy hadn`t played for a brazillian youth team, he would have been eligible. everything else was fine. he was naturalised etc etc. sounds like a technicality to me.
dasilva said | September 19th 2008 @ 4:55pm | Report comment
Clayton - the rule is that you can only change nations before you reach 21. After 21 you are stuck with the nation you played at youth level.
WIth cahill - that nation changing rule wasn’t there yet. Cahill wanted to play for Australia for a long time and took FIFA to court. He won the case causing FIFa to introduce the changing nation rule. Cahill was 24 at the time but if that nation changing rule was there earlier he would have played for the soccerroos at a much earlier date.
Márcio Emerson Passos - played for Brazil under 20 side and then played for Qatar after his 21st birthday.
The only grey area I see is that he faked his passport and deceived Qatar that he was 3 years younger then he really is. This made Qatar believe they weren’t breaking the rule of the game when they played him.
Should Qatar get punish for a player faking a passport?
My belief is that Qatar had an unfair advantage whether they knew about his age or not and therefore should be punish for it.
ExExpat said | September 19th 2008 @ 6:43pm | Report comment
As an ex-football correspondent from Qatar, I agree wholehearedly with this analysis. Everything in Qatar is rotten to the core and football is no exception. The club’s insistence on buy success and bending the rules, particularly over nationality, make the English Premier League look like a worker’s cooperative. I would regularly socialise with footballers who would openly admit that the authorities had lied about their age in order to ensure they could play in the Olympic sides and the question of nationality is dealt with in a sickening fashion. If you have any talent at sport, they can’t wait to throw a passport at you. Meanwhile the workers who are building the ‘fastest growing economy in the world’ are condemned to slave-like conditions, isolated from the wealth of the nation and sent packing as soon as their no longer of use. Many Qataris themselves are the antithesis of athletic, with SUVs and the width of motorways being seemingly designed to accomodate their monstrous posteriors. It is probably naive of us to expect any semblence of justice from FIFA when its own leader could not shake accusations of bribery over his election but Qatar’s habitual cheating should not be tolerated.
dasilva said | September 19th 2008 @ 7:14pm | Report comment
Actually I got it a little bit wrong - it turns out that even if Qatar was duped into believing he was 3 years younger then he is really is. It doesn’t make any difference. Instead of being 29 in changing country he would be 26. Both cases would still be illegal.
I think what stuff up Qatar was the faked passport had the name Márcio Emerson Passos. His original birth certificate was Márcio Passos de Albuquerque. Perhaps they thought they were different person and hence thought he was elegible.