Football isn’t a red card game

Columnist

By Davidde Corran, 11 May 2009 Davidde Corran is a Roar Expert

Tagged:: A-League, Adelaide United, football, Melbourne Victory

Related coverage

Football is increasingly becoming more and more defensive. The distance between lines has been shortened, space is becoming more and more squeezed, and 4-2-4 has become 4-5-1.

At the 1954 World Cup, an average of 5.38 goals were scored per match. Fifty-two years later at Germany 2006, that had dropped to 2.31.

The financial imbalance in European Leagues isn’t helping either.

When an English Premier League side from the bottom half of the table turns up at the grounds of one of the big four, the chances of an open attacking game is about as likely as a smile from Ernie Merrick.

With all that to contend with, for a neutral, it’s not always easy to find a good game of football to settle down and watch on the weekend.

Bearing all this in mind, I’m concerned by the fact that an avenue exists to effectively kill a game of football with one single decision.

I’m talking about red cards.

In my opinion, they are an anachronism hailing from a time before football’s tactical revolution, when ‘catenaccio’ still only meant ‘padlock’.

Think back to February 28 this year.

After being humiliated at the same venue two weeks before, Adelaide United met Melbourne Victory in the A-League Grand Final.

Most thought the result would be another comfortable win for Melbourne. The opening few minutes told a different story: Adelaide had come to play.

The last time the two teams had met in a Grand Final, a red card to Ross Aloisi ended the game as a contest. Only minutes into the 2009 version, the same thing happened, albeit to a different player.

While, thanks to Adelaide’s dogged determination, it might not have been the end of the contest, that red card killed the spectacle.

Surely there has to be a better way of punishing red card offences without killing the game.

In a recent La Liga fixture, Valencia were trailing Valladolid 2-1 with ten minutes remaining when Valladolid’s Pedro Lopez was sent off. For those final ten minutes, Valladolid camped in their own half and saw out the match.

From a football perspective, the game was ruined.

In this instance, I’m willing to bet that every Valencia player and official would have preferred being awarded a penalty kick instead of Pedro Lopez being issued a red card.

That would have been a fairer outcome for Valencia (who still went on to lose) and for neutrals watching at home.

I’m not suggesting that this is the solution to this problem, but red cards, a measure which was invented before football was even professionalised, surely isn’t.

If a moment of madness can kill a game as a spectacle, then surely something is wrong.

Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.

The Crowd Says (58) | Page 1 of Comments

Pippinu said | May 11th 2009 @ 9:37am | Report comment

Davidde
I would have thought that 4-2-4 disappeared off the face of the planet a long, long time ago.

But anyway, over recent years, I too have formed the view that red cards are an anachronism (but only one of many that exist in football, which remains largely unchanged since 1870).

I have come to dislike the notion of one ref being policeman, parole officer, judge and executioner all at once.

In the modern age, the ref should have fewer responsibilities, that includes timekeeping and meting out real time punishment for offences that may or may not have happened.

I’m not saying red cards should be dispensed with, but I’d like to see red cards given only for the most serious of offences.

That means that we should stop looking at two yellows as being equivalent to a red. Perhaps a good rule change would be that two yellows means you’re off, but you can be interchanged (and clearly, if you’ve used up your bench, then you’re stuck with 10 men, but at least invariably that will be late in a game).

I agree that early reds can ruin a game, and it’s doubly worse when the red was 50/50, as it was in Cristiano’s case in the grand final.

Reply
Pippinu said | May 11th 2009 @ 9:43am | Report comment

By the way – I should add that this issue of red cards has absolutely nothing to do with the drop in the scoring rate over the last 50 years (a trend which may have been arrested in recent years, not sure).

That long term trend has everything to do with the improvement in defensive tactics and the improvement in the performance of players.

Now clearly, if you have a situation where the performance of every player has improved four fold over a fifty year period, as has defensive tactics, but you are still trying to squeeze the ball through a tiny space (and it has become unbelievably tiny with the improvement in defences and goalkeeping), then it follows that the goal scoring will be less – that’s a fact of life (although equally, the ability of those players who can squeeze the ball through that tiny space is quite unbelievable these days – way,way above the ability of players from 50 years ago).

But – the world does not care that far fewer goals are scored today than 50 years ago, or that weaker sides will camp in front of goal against superior sides – the world accepts that. End of story.

Reply
Michael C said | May 11th 2009 @ 10:19am | Report comment

Hear hear,

Although, I warn you to bunker down and be ready for criticism and soccer following credentials being question for daring to put forward what will be regarded as ‘criticism’.

I won’t say anymore, as that would just seem to be code wars and anti soccer.

Reply
whiskeymac said | May 11th 2009 @ 10:45am | Report comment

players natural cynicsm needs a punishment.
make the goals bigger. i remember reading a similar article inthe guardian in 2006 ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2006/may/04/sport.comment3 ) . the best bits, i think, being:

” After all, the average man stood at just 5ft 2in tall in the latter part of the 19th century when goalpost sizes were laid down in law – while the average Premiership keeper is now 6ft 3in. At the very least you could test it at semi-professional level, with perhaps a minor adjustment to move the posts six inches higher and a yard wider.

Another highly-flammable suggestion – sin bins – also deserves serious consideration.”

Now with some ike James at 6 foot 5, why not? the footballs and kits and boots themselves have changed, why not the rest of the equipment? it’s like in golf – the fairways get longer because the technology makes a mockery of what the player used to be expected to achieve.
i also think the sin bin rule is a good idea, and can work as a good deterrent in some sports.. powerplyas in ice hockey, union etc.

Reply
Art Sapphire said | May 11th 2009 @ 11:59am | Report comment

Davide – this is a really bad article. I am all for having a debate but you need to back it up with reasonable arguments.

1. Any connection between goal averages at World Cups going down and red cards is nonsensical.

2. You say – “When an English Premier League side from the bottom half of the table turns up at the grounds of one of the big four, the chances of an open attacking game is about as likely as a smile from Ernie Merrick. With all that to contend with, for a neutral, it’s not always easy to find a good game of football to settle down and watch on the weekend.”

This is a worrying observation – do EPL sides exist purely for the entertainment of a “neutral”

How do you expect a team like Stoke or Hull to play like when they visit the big boys with their limited resources.
Is your idea of fun a 10-0 thrashing. Do you want teams to be relegated without a fight?

The reason why Liverpool is going to fail to win the EPL this year is because they failed to beat the smaller teams at home.
Liverpool’s inability to to breakdown the resistance of smaller sides has proved their undoing this year.
They were the defining games of the season!

Liverpool fans did not complain about how the opposition teams play and they are the ones who are going to miss out on the championship. They understand football. With arguments like the ones you present in the piece it seems that you don’t.

Liverpool Home Record – 11 wins 7 draws = 40 points
Man U Home Record – 16 wins 1 draw 1 loss = 49 points

Reply
Davidde Corran said | May 11th 2009 @ 12:56pm | Report comment

The drop in goals per game and the development of defensive tactics in football is linked to the place of red cards in the modern game by virture of the fact they are representive of the climate which exists in modern football.

Art Sapphire I understand what you’re saying but what you mention doesn’t touch on the fact that, far too often, red cards kill a game as a spectacle. That’s my concern.

Reply
Tom said | May 11th 2009 @ 1:14pm | Report comment

“The drop in goals per game and the development of defensive tactics in football is linked to the place of red cards in the modern game by virture of the fact they are representive of the climate which exists in modern football.”

I don’t even know what that means.

Is there a link between defensive tactics and higher crowds and greater TV revenues, then? Is there a link between red cards and the demise of Hungary as a football power?

For the record, I agree that the effect of a red card makes it too powerful to give to a referee. But geez comments like the one above annoy me.

Reply
whiskeymac said | May 11th 2009 @ 1:25pm | Report comment

the decrease in the number of goals i think has more to do with other factors, as Pip, pointed out teams are fitter (more ably coached maybe) across the board. the cliche that there are no easy games anymore is probably true when you see how professional even so called small clubs/ teams are.

as for red cards killng a game – sometimes, although numerical advantage doesnt always transalte into results or less drama. brazil beat england with 10, italy against australia, barca beat chelsea. those games were all good “watching”. i think in a lot of respects the removal of a player in football has less impact on the game than say it does in Union or League. I have watched numerous union games where the sin binned team is suddnely a try or two down and struggles. not always but more often than not.

I initially liked Pip’s idea of replacing a player, but think that would be far too open to abuse. especially if the team had a huge and talented squad.

I must say i wld like to see the sin bin rule tried out – there needs to be a balance between ensuring players dont foul recklessly or cynically without penalty – and maybe this halfway house measure bridges the gap in throwing a meaningful advantage one way at the expense of the other. you could even break it down to 10, 20 and 30 minutes “bins” depending on the foul. the times could even flow over into the next round to circumvent the notion a bad foul might go unpunished or have no ramification late on.

Reply
Art Sapphire said | May 11th 2009 @ 1:26pm | Report comment

Davide – The first major use of the cards was in the 1970 FIFA World Cup, but they were not made mandatory at all levels until 1982.And do you know why? Because at the 1966 WC the negative, defensive tactics you are so concerned about saw Pele getted kick off the pitch by every opponent. The red card was introduced to allow skillful players to play without fear of being maimed.

1. Defensive tactics came well before the red card was introduced.
2. Red cards encourage attacking skillful football because viloent and unsportmanlike conduct is punished.

This is why your argument makes no sense!

Just because someone might get sent off early in the game is no reason to get rid of red cards.
It might detract from the specatcle of the game but the players know the rules and should avoid copping one in the first place.
If the ref makes a mistake. Thats too bad. Thats football. Mistakes always happen. No point whinging about it.

Reply
Pippinu said | May 11th 2009 @ 2:01pm | Report comment

Whiskey

Let met reiterate that I think there is definitely a place for red cards in the game (few us have a memory of just how physical and unsportsmanlike the game had become in the 60s) – so there’s no doubt in my mind that red cards have cleaned that aspect of the game right up (as Art has implied in his last post).

What I was trying to say is that there is often a world of difference between what a player does to get two yellows, and a true red card offence – so I would like to see that nexus broken.

Red cards for extreme cases of behaviour – always.

But let us make two yellows constitute a lesser offence (which it usually is), meaning that the player can be replaced within the existing subbing rules, i.e. replaced as long as the team has not used up their normal quota of subs.

Reply