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
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.
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- A-League, Adelaide United, football, Melbourne Victory
May 11th 2009 @ 2:03pm
Michael C said | May 11th 2009 @ 2:03pm | Report comment
whiskeymac -
re increasing avg height of goalies, don’t forget, along the fitter aspect of Pippinu is that goalies are full time professionals with the aid of digital video to plan for the sides they meet.
for me, I often relate it to cricket, and at what point that the cricket pitch might be deemed too short or too long (if ever). They haven’t reached that yet, and may never………but, then again, if improvements in training and techniques saw bowlers hitting 170-180 kmh, would the pitch have to be extended by a metre?
It is that area of each sport about what is a no go area for ‘change’? Moving the goalposts metaphorically vs actually.
May 11th 2009 @ 2:05pm
Pippinu said | May 11th 2009 @ 2:05pm | 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 want to come across as a smart @rse, but I too am having trouble making sense of that.
I’m sympathetic with the view that we should view the long term trend of fewer goals as a bit of a problem in the game – but I stress that the world disagrees with that view (so that looks like a lost cause).
I am also sympathetic with the view that a red can spoil the game – and that’s especially true when you’re talking about a one off game determining an important piece of silverware.
But I still can’t see the nexus between a declining goal scoring average and the use of red cards – I just can’t see it.
May 11th 2009 @ 2:07pm
Brian Munich said | May 11th 2009 @ 2:07pm | Report comment
Red cards go up, goals decrease – so what? You’ve provided no evidence one is determined or even affected by the other. The oil price has increased over the same period as has the number of iPods sold, but I don’t reckon they’ve affected goals either. Google “Correlation does not imply causation” to find out more…
May 11th 2009 @ 2:09pm
Slippery Jim said | May 11th 2009 @ 2:09pm | Report comment
Take away red cards and you will cause more dangerous illegal tackles. The decrease in goals is because of the highly tactical football played today – unlike years ago when there used to be 10 forwards!
May 11th 2009 @ 2:11pm
Slippery Jim said | May 11th 2009 @ 2:11pm | Report comment
From Wikipedia:
“In the football matches of the 19th century defensive football was not played, and the line-ups reflected the all-attacking nature of these games.
In the first international game, Scotland v. England on 30 November 1872, England played with seven or eight forwards in (1-1-8 or 1-2-7) and Scotland with six (2-2-6). For England, one player would remain in defence picking up loose balls and one or two players would hang around midfield and kick the ball upfield for the other players to chase.”
To quote Pippu, end of story.
May 11th 2009 @ 2:12pm
Pippinu said | May 11th 2009 @ 2:12pm | Report comment
“…and one or two players would hang around midfield and kick the ball upfield for the other players to chase…”
don’t some teams continue to play this style to the present day? (not mentioning any names…)
May 11th 2009 @ 2:14pm
whiskeymac said | May 11th 2009 @ 2:14pm | Report comment
maybe brian you have a good point there though…
ipods = kids are using ipods, and other generational electronic gadgetry more and more..er… and therefore are less inclined to participate in sport. this knock on effect has less kids playing sports, less kids means less players and a smaller pool of talent to equip a team with. the coach relies therefore on parking the bus outside the goal. less goals, and not east because fatty ipod kid cant run as much).
Oil crisis = cost of driving for parents is cutting into the mortagage too much. the choice is therefore to either keep the house and keep the family in tact or take junior to weekend training in the gas guzzler.
May 11th 2009 @ 2:15pm
Slippery Jim said | May 11th 2009 @ 2:15pm | Report comment
Hey Pippu, I know you’re into those crazy “V” formations and whatnot – you may find some of the historical formations here fascinating:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formation_(football)
May 11th 2009 @ 2:18pm
Towser said | May 11th 2009 @ 2:18pm | Report comment
Art Sapphire
I saw a picture of Peles legs after his last “kicking” & limp off. Could have been against Portugal. A good case for red cards
May 11th 2009 @ 2:18pm
Slippery Jim said | May 11th 2009 @ 2:18pm | Report comment
Ha ha! I was thinking the same, Pippu!