By Vas Venkatramani
November 22nd 2009 @ 12:10am
Loading ...Related coverage
Getting the job done – the Henry hypocrisy
Every now and then when trouble’s a-brewing, the ability to reminisce seems to go on the up. Of the good old days when opposition players were best chums, the games were hard but fair, and sport was always the winner.
It’s an apt feeling currently, as Irish heartache still resounds around the globe. France may arrive at South Africa with a large dose of lady luck, but should they be blamed?
Was Thierry Henry’s bigger concern the final result, or being the moral victor? What he did may contravene FIFA’s Fair Play campaign, but in a world demanding results, a moralist simply doesn’t belong.
If Henry’s actions are described as a blow for “Fair Play”, would his honesty be celebrated, especially if France were knocked out?
Or would his place in the national team be at stake for not putting them as his best interest?
The issue of honesty varies according to circumstance. It doesn’t rate a mention in routine Premiership games, when wrongly-given penalties are shelled out ad nauseum by ignorant officials.
Yet this is supposedly the big tragedy, when a player decides to keep his gob shut when the referee makes a howler.
The Irish are right to request a replay, and more entitled to be aggrieved. But so is FIFA to knock them back for fear of the precedent. If our decisions boil down to intrinsic morality, shouldn’t we be trying to solve world poverty before complaining on something so comparatively trivial?
Or more to the topic, imagine France get knocked out next year through rotten luck.
That’s karma, not fair play.
Get Australia's best Football opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
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...
(26)
Freud of Football said | November 22nd 2009 @ 4:23am | Report comment
What comes around goes around. Expect Italy to get knocked out in the group stages to some dubious refereeing and Aus to advance thanks to some borderline calls that go their way.
All sports work like that, in cricket they seem to deal with it better than football. Obviously there was a lot more riding on this game than in other matches but the referee is human, whether it be a league match or the WC final, he’s every bit as likely to make a mistake.
pothale said | November 22nd 2009 @ 5:33am | Report comment
The referee didn’t make a mistake.
Henry cheated. Cheated the referees, and the Irish team. Full stop.
Move on.
What goes around, will come around.
Paulo Roberto Sanchotene said | November 22nd 2009 @ 6:10am | Report comment
A rematch would do more harm then good. It’s not an option. I think the only possible just solution is to punish Henry, letting him out of the Group Stage or the whole World Cup…
Freud of Football said | November 22nd 2009 @ 6:34am | Report comment
By what precedent would they do this?
pothale said | November 22nd 2009 @ 6:49am | Report comment
This is an interesting line of conversation, Freud.
I was thinking about the topic of punishment earlier. If Henry receives no response for his actions (hidden from the ref) then this perpetuates the problem for the game.
But there may be no precedent to do anything, so let’s consider the following hypothesis:
Let’s say in the next game between Ireland and France e.g. Euro ‘12 qualifier, , Richard Dunne decides to exact revenge. He clatters Henry, and unseen to the ref, gives him a serious injury. Ireland go on to win the game.
Footage afterwards shows what the ref missed. Should anything happen to Dunne, after it’s discovered that Henry will be out for four months? Or do people just say that’s football, the ref missed it, these things happen all the time in football. And everybody knows why it happened.
When questioned, Trapatoni just shrugs, and says the ref made a mistake, I don’t why we’re getting the blame for it.
Paulo Roberto Sanchotene said | November 22nd 2009 @ 8:10am | Report comment
Freud,
To me, the case is similar to doping. It was an offence to Fair Play, he acted ilegally to get an adventage over an opponent. But I wouldn’t need to go that far. Adriano, in Italy’s Serie A, was suspended because he’s scored handing the ball. The score counted, the match was upheld, but the player was punished. Exactly the same case.
Freud of Football said | November 22nd 2009 @ 8:16am | Report comment
Maradona scored with his hand, result = Won a WC.
Henry didn’t score, he stopped the ball from escaping him with his hand, poked it back across the keeper and Gallas scored. If Ireland had of defended it right or if Given had of parried, both of which should have happened, Ireland would have been through.
FIFA can’t start to punish individuals, replaying a match is a big maybe but retrospectively taking their officiating down to individual players to right wrongs, well it’s absurd to say the least.
Paulo Roberto Sanchotene said | November 22nd 2009 @ 8:24am | Report comment
Henry didn’t score
What’s the difference?! It was a goal anyway, it decided the match, it put Ireland away form WC Finals…
FIFA can’t start to punish individuals
It does all the time! It suspended Maradona past week because he said thing outrageous. Why not punish Henry for total lack of Fair Play? One of many punishment functions is to educate. It would be very educative, not only for Henry but everyone who would think that action was a good idea. The message would be as clear as possible: you can pass your team through, but you will miss the party!
Freud of Football said | November 22nd 2009 @ 8:26am | Report comment
“Exactly the same case.” – That’s what you said, obviously it wasn’t exactly the same case and there is one extremely infamous case (Maradona) where no action was taken.
UEFA tried to make an example out of Eduardo and diving is a bigger problem than handballs which might go unnoticed yet look how that blew up in their face.
Paulo Roberto Sanchotene said | November 22nd 2009 @ 8:21pm | Report comment
Freud,
If FIFA didn’t get it right 23 years ago, it does not mean it should be wrong forever. If it was the right decision 23 years ago, it does not mean it is now.
About diving, it’s the same case. Look, it’s not every single dive or handball that should be punished. There are different degrees. In Henry’s case, it was the second touch that deserve a punishment. It was obviously deliberated. The first one is a matter of interpretation. A dive can be an obvious dive or a dubious one. If there are margin for doubts, there are no margin for punishment.
Pauly Walnuts said | November 22nd 2009 @ 9:09am | Report comment
Am I the only one who has lost even more respect for Henry for saying that the game should be replayed AFTER Fifa announced their decision that it wouldn’t be?
pothale said | November 22nd 2009 @ 9:25am | Report comment
No – you’re not alone. More weasel words from the guy who went around hugging and consoling Irish players after the match. Pure PR stuff to improve his image with his own association completely ignoring their captain’s public statement in turning the request down.
He’ll have to live with it a little longer.
Bruce Walkley said | November 22nd 2009 @ 2:37pm | Report comment
In the 2005 match as part of qualification for the following year’s World Cup, which FIFA ordered replayed, the referee made the “technical error” of awarding an indirect free kick to Bahrain when he should have ordered an Uzbekistan penalty to be re-taken. In the France v Ireland fiasco, the referee also made a “technical error” by awarding a goal to France when he should have awarded a direct free kick to Ireland. It’s exactly the same principle. And Henry should be banned from the World Cup finals for bringing the game into disrepute.
Joe FC said | November 22nd 2009 @ 3:23pm | Report comment
It might be the same principle Bruce but it’s not the same facts. The referee saw the infringement in the 2005 match but applied the law incorrectly. The referee did not see the infringement in the 2009 match & thus did not put himself in a position of needing tp apply the law.
Pippinu said | November 22nd 2009 @ 3:40pm | Report comment
Yes – what Joe FC has described is exactly the way it works.
Rob said | November 22nd 2009 @ 3:03pm | Report comment
Interesting to consider things in terms of Henry’s Gillette stablemates, Woods and Federer.
How do you think Golf would react if Woods kicked his ball out of the rough to get a better lie at the US Masters?
How would tennis respond if Federer caught the ball then tossed it up to make his return more convenient..at Wimbledon?
Personally I dont buy into the whole, world is different now so grow up and deal with it philosophy that you are suggesting.
Freud of Football said | November 22nd 2009 @ 7:45pm | Report comment
Woods plays a game where you call penalties on yourself, hardly a comparison there and I think Federer simply couldn’t cheat, tennis is full of video technology and is well regulated.
The real problems here are:
A) The position of the referee – The Linesman was never going to be able to see it although correctly positioned, it was the referee who was standing nowhere and missed it
B) Handball is in itself a judgement call, if the referee saw the first incident, he might have allowed play to go on as it was ball-to-hand and the second one happened a split second afterwards and the ball obscured Henry’s hand, how was he meant to see it?
C) Why the hell do we expect referees to not make mistakes in big games? I bet Henry has played in more than one game where the referee missed a handball and Henry’s team lost. Ref’s are human, whether it is a league match or the WC, they are every bit as likely to make a mistake.
D) Blame the Irish defenders and keeper
E) How many times has Henry been called off-side or adjudged to have fouled someone and thus had a goal disallowed? More than than 1, these things even themselves out in sport.
Rob said | November 22nd 2009 @ 10:46pm | Report comment
Freud I wasnt talking about a technical comparison of the sports… i was talking about how different sports would deal with a blatant act of cheating from one of its superstars…as with most of your posts you seem to have missed the point
Freud of Football said | November 22nd 2009 @ 11:20pm | Report comment
Thanks Rob, as usual you’ve made a nothing comment following up to your not-very-well-thought-out initial rubbish.
Why mention his “Gilette stablemates” if you wanted to talk about “how different sports would deal with a blatant act of cheating from one of its superstars”? They hardly need the free publicity and still, you haven’t even commented on how the reaction would be in the golf or tennis world, you’ve asked a pointless rhetorical question that has nothing to do with the topic.
Pippinu said | November 22nd 2009 @ 11:11pm | Report comment
A point remains that the defender allowed Henry to get goal side of him – quite unnecessarily when you view the replay.
Now it’s true that a few of the Irish actually stopped playing, expecting the ref to pick up the obvious handball – but we have to admit that that’s a problem in itself (that the Irish didn’t play the whistle).
I’m pretty confident that if it had been the Irish doing the handballing, the ref would have seen it like a watermelon smashing over someone’s head.
AndyRoo said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:22am | Report comment
The Ref was not biased against the Irish. They were just unlucky…… just as Gerogia were when they played the Irish.
sledgeross said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:25am | Report comment
Its a tough call. Things do happen in sport, and this is one of those occasions.
Ultimately, its up to the officals to adjudicate the match. And they missed a blatent contravention of the laws of the game. That it was such a bug match with millions of dollars riding on it magnifies the mistake.
Having said that, Henry has admitted to cheating (breaking the rules), and as such I think FIFA should censure him in some regard. If he hadnt admitted that he did cheat, then it would be hard to prove, but he has, and as a result FIFA should be able to suspend/fine him. At the end of the day, it wont matter what they do though because:
a) France are still in the WC
b) Henry will still play in the WC
c) He has more than enough cash to pay a fine.
Jameswm said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:05am | Report comment
There is one glaring point that the Irish and others have missed.
Yes this decision went against Ireland. But a little beforehand, France should have had a penalty when the Irish keeper grabbed Anelka’s left ankle. Every replay from every angle showed this. Yes, there was some showmanship from Anelka. But it was without doubt a penalty.
How has everyone missed that? Getting the Henry goal WAS karma coming back to France, to atone for the earlier howler AGAINST them.
Australia were equally as robbed last WC, and did we bleat and whine and demand a replay like the Irish?
As for Henry’s actions, that’s a different issue. The sport needs a video ref for off sides where a goal is scored, and maybe for other crucial decisions too, like penalties. It also needs a citing commissioner to suspend attackers for the dive the ref missed.
Start suspending players for things like that and watch their actions change.
Touch the ref and automatic red is another. run at the ref and yellow, touch him and red. Simple, no dispute. The manhandling of refs is a disgrace.
And how is Henry’s handball any worse than 2,000 dives that happen every weekend in say Serie A?
Dublin Dave said | November 23rd 2009 @ 9:26am | Report comment
Australia were equally as robbed last WC, and did we bleat and whine and demand a replay like the Irish?
Beverage through the nose question, James.
Yes, yes and probably not everybody are the respective answers.
Pretty much the same as with the Irish and this predicament.
Jameswm said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:06am | Report comment
What about the penalty that France should have got? In the mass hysteria this is forgotten. I’ve got no sympathy for the Irish because the game should have already been decided in France’s favour.
Australia were desperately unlucky last WC, but we never took our whingeing to remotely near the level the Irish are at now. It’s out of control and your mob have lost all objectivity. A replay for an incorrect call? Talk about a dangerous precedent.
pothale said | December 2nd 2009 @ 7:05am | Report comment
It wasn’t a penalty. Anelka faked it and the ref saw it. (And even if it was awarded, it still had to be scored.)
It wasn’t an incorrect call by the ref. He didn’t see it. All he saw was a goal. He missed and the linesmen missed the offisde when the kick was taken.
Equaly, If the goal by Gallas had been disallowed – Ireland still had to score to go through or else win on penalty kicks.
The Irish weren’t whinging compared to the media and fans in the UK and in other countries. Is there now a certain level of complaint that should be aired and then people have to stop? Talk about a dangerous precedent.