By Jesse Fink
December 4th 2009 @ 4:45am
Related coverage
FIFA drops the ball again
FIFA President Sepp Blatter answers journalists' questions during a press conference in Zurich, Switzerland. AP Photo/Keystone, Steffen Schmidt
Republic of Ireland assistant coach Liam Brady has called Sepp Blatter an “embarrassment” to FIFA after the most powerful man in world football revealed this week he’d been petitioned by the Irish to have them join 32 already-qualified nations in South Africa.
More indiscreet, in my view, than an embarrassment and the Irish idea got what it deserved: knocked on the head.
What Blatter most clearly is, however, is a politician as two-faced as they come.
Not so long ago, in the wake of the Hand of Gaul affair, Blatter went public to tell the world he’d called Henry to offer him his support, comparing the French player’s indiscretion to some of his old antics as a player in Switzerland: “[Henry] was honest by admitting that he did use his hand, but it wasn’t his responsibility to tell the referee.
When I was a centre forward in my junior team, I definitely gained an advantage by pulling a defender’s jersey in order to score a goal. And I didn’t go and see the referee to tell him about it.”
Essentially, then, telling Henry he would have done the same thing if he had ever been in a similar position, as would most other park footballers.
But just three days later, following virulent criticism of his comments, he has announced Henry will be investigated by FIFA’s disciplinary committee for the double-handball at the Stade de France and described Henry’s actions as “blatant unfair play… seen all around the world. I don’t know the outcome of the disciplinary committee. Let them make the decision. Fair play must be maintained in our game.”
A complete 360-degree turn. If it was so blatant (a subject of debate) why hasn’t the referee Martin Hansson and his assistants been called to account?
If it really mattered what the world thinks why wasn’t a replay ordered when the world was clamouring for it, despite what the
rules state? And if Blatter cared a fig for due process why is he determining Henry’s guilt even before the disciplinary committee has had a chance to sit down and review the evidence?
The truth is Blatter is sensing there will be dark moral clouds over this next World Cup unless he and his organisation are seen to punish the French and specifically Henry. This on top of the severe damage the affair has done to FIFA’s own credibility and Blatter’s leadership by exposing the emptiness of his rhetoric.
Henry, basically, is being made an example of. But the punishment, whatever it may be, has come too late. Ireland is out of the World Cup due to French trickery and the tournament next June will be immeasurably tarnished because of it.
If FIFA wanted to make amends to the football world its executive committee this week would have agreed to basic improvements in the way the game is run: like having two goal-line assistant referees, like introducing a modicum of video technology. But yet again they failed to take the initiative when the opportunity to make a big statement was there for the taking.
Henry might be a cheat but FIFA is cheating us all out of having a better World Cup.
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...
(38)
Midfielder said | December 4th 2009 @ 5:52am | Report comment
Jes
Powerful stuff… tend to agree .. however for a living I work in tax and often at the more legal side of things.. once you do something for one it becomes open to all … thus making every game open to appeal…
My call is FIFA got it right on the no replay bit, as it could open a can of worms and create many appeals hopefully Kama will get the Frogs and they will not get out of the group stage. Love Australia to be the team to knock them out.
But I totally agree on your two other calls… first for FIFA to appoint the addition refs…. and I will take you other point a stage further set up a committee to work out a way to punish players / clubs for blatant cheating even if seen by the ref and improperly dealt with the ref… As an example say a player goes down in the box and appeals for a penalty … A penalty is given BUT to who, a video ref is asked whether it was a foul or a dive…. a foul a penalty … a dive also a penalty to the defending team..
Tifosi said | December 4th 2009 @ 6:00am | Report comment
In six months no one will care about the Henry incident, Move on already Jesse.
And FIFA were right not to introduce additional referees or video footage at the world cup.
These need to be tested in another arena first and analyzed. Maybe the next world cup or euro 2012 can implement it depending on the findings of the Europa league experiment.
Derryn said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:18am | Report comment
“In six months no one will care about the Henry incident, Move on already Jesse.”
I doubt very much the Irish will have forgotten about it. It’s a total disgrace and if Australia got knocked out in that fashion I’d probably never support the game again.
Something really needs to be done about the diving and obvious cheating incidents. I’m not in favour of a video ref but players should be reprimanded for doing such things. If FIFA were serious about ridding this sort of stuff from the game players should be getting 4 weeks for diving. The worst thing about the diving is that players stay down for so long afterwards and it slows up the game. Handball is a tougher one to police because incidents similar to Henry’s don’t happen that often. I think a fair punishment for Henry for that blatant cheating incident would be missing the three group games of the World Cup.
I have no respect for Fifa and especially Blatter. They have handled incidents poorly and only try and look after the ‘bigger’ teams.
Pippinu said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:40am | Report comment
Tifosi is right – in terms of the marjority of World fans – they could not care less – it could happen in a World Cup final and they couldn’t care less.
As in previous World Cups, minor nations will be cheated out of valuable points by incompetent or biased refs favouring “world powers” – no one will give a toss about that.
Blatter has always been two-faced and corrupt, as is the rest of FIFA – that’s not news either.
FIFA is about as progressive as the Catholic Church.
The rules committee have received dozens of proposals for minor changes over the past decade – have a guess how many of those proposals have been given the tick?
AGO74 said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:46am | Report comment
You are not wrong Pip. I think every Australian was cheeering on Harry when he gave Markus Merk a gobful after the Brazil game in Munich! The reffing that day was a disgrace.
Pippinu said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:55am | Report comment
AGO
I know it’s not politically correct to say it – but I was rapt at seeing Harry give that German git a spray – he deserved every bit of it – it was a woefully biased performance – I mean, how often did we have to watch him blow against Dukes when he had front position and was controlling the ball while the defender was all over him!
Same thing with the next game and Poll when Dukes was rugby tackled to the ground in the box.
Best of all – Harry got away with it!!! (giving it to the German)
Tom said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:56am | Report comment
Yep.
And the latest round of World Cup seedings just underlines that fact. There is no earthly reason for FIFA to wait until two days before the draw to decide upon criteria for World Cup seedings, except to benefit the nations they want to favour.
And lo and behold, the most controversial team in the world cup missed out, four years after making the final.
But if there’s anyone in Australia who still has a touch of naivety about FIFA politics, thats going to be throttled out of them by the vicious cynicism of the next twelve months leading up to the 2018/22 world cup decision.
Now there is a process in need of reform.
Norm said | December 4th 2009 @ 1:51pm | Report comment
-”FIFA is about as progressive as the Catholic Church”..pippy boy Fr Bernie might be surprised to hear you say that.
AGO74 said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:45am | Report comment
My two favourite sports are football and rugby league. Video ref works pretty well in rugby league – most of the time, but in terms of the flow of the game video reffing has a more natural fit to league (or union for that matter) than football. So I don’t agree with the usage of it for football. However, I can’t see any reason why the world’s biggest tournament can’t benefit from having two assistant refs behind the goal to help out the main ref and his two linesmen. If there was an assistant behind the goal in Paris, there is no way the ‘hand of Gaul’ goal would have been allowed and all this hoopla would never have occurred. If an assistant behind the goal was to pick up one similar incident at the world cup next year and advise the main ref not to allow it then $$$ investment of having to fly another 20 odd ref assistants down to Sth Africa would be worth it. As for Blatter, he’s a joke with no credibility. Mr Flip-flop. What he says is wholly dependent on who is the audience.
AndyRoo said | December 4th 2009 @ 9:39am | Report comment
I actually thought the Video refs were shocking in Rugby League this year….. it’s the first year since they have been introduced that I wouldn’t care if they were scrapped.
I would prefer there was reform though. A two replay limit or such and if they can’t be sure then make it a refs call and rule a try.
What about in SOO when they wasted what felt like 5 hours just to get an answer that I still think was wrong.
AGO74 said | December 4th 2009 @ 11:34am | Report comment
Hi AndyRoo,
I don’t disagree with you which is why I qualified it with a “most of the time”. The video reffing took a shocking length of time in too many instances this year and I agree that i you can’t definitively say “no try” after two or three attempts then the benefit of the doubt must go to the attacking team.
Jameswm said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:58am | Report comment
It’s a joke.
1. you need a video ref. You just can’t have such obviously wrong decisions stand where everyone else can see they are wrong, and especially not in such important games.
2. there should be a citing system and retrospective penalties. If cheating (be it diving, tugging a jersey or handball) has a particular sanction, issue it later via the citing commissioner.
Look at it this way though. If the ref had seen the handball during the match, what would the decision have been? Handball and free kick Ireland. Why then are they proposing a different penalty for Henry, because a goal was scored and there’s been a public outcry? I can’t see what sanction you can impose on Henry – it’s not foul play.
In rugby, if a ref misses something then the citing commissioner can watch it later, cite the player and issue the appropriate penalty. But the sanction imposed is no different to what it would have been if the ref saw it during the match.
You can’t have double standards based on the level of embarrassment caused to the game.
Spiro Zavos said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:59am | Report comment
This is just a thought but without video referees, especially for goal mouth infringements,it is easier for cheating to be carried out. Again, just a thought, why would a sporting organisation make it easier for cheats to be successful? Especially in a code where betting on results is a malignant part of the game?
The manipulation of results to get a specific outcome is a blight on football in many parts of the world. You would think that FIFA would use every resource to kill this off, rather than doing the opposite.
Pippinu said | December 4th 2009 @ 8:09am | Report comment
Why aren’t members of the FIFA Executive willing to stamp out rigged games? There’s a pretty good answer for that.
KB said | December 4th 2009 @ 8:23am | Report comment
What is it…???
The Bear said | December 4th 2009 @ 8:03am | Report comment
Well said, Jesse. The absence of goal line asst refs is astonishing given what has transpired. Tifo may be right that it hasn’t been fully tested… perhaps that is what has delayed the introduction. Maybe.
KB said | December 4th 2009 @ 8:42am | Report comment
If anyone wants to see what video refereeing can do to a code of football you need to look no further than the NRL video ref and what it has done to the game as a free flowing spectacle … Ask Gus Gould what the video ref has done to the game of Rugby League..
This game was refereed by a incompetent ref and no matter how many more officials are added to a game there will always be another incident you will complain about … Sepp was right and he and his committee have ruled correctly on the matter… To do anything else would mean that you would not have a world cup every four years but a world cup every six years with so many teams calling for a replay of a result that did not go there way… Move on everybody, this incident will make the Irish a stronger team next time around…
~~~~~~
KB
Greg Russell said | December 4th 2009 @ 8:49am | Report comment
Reading this article, the phrase that kept occurring to me was “two wrongs don’t make a right”. It seems to apply not just to Blatter’s actions, but also to people’s reactions to Blatter’s actions.
Yes, the guy is a “two-faced politician”, but for many years now, from well before he took charge, this has been the job description for FIFA President. If he doesn’t keep telling everyone what they want to hear, then he loses his job. Maybe it could be otherwise – i.e., a President with genuine integrity and honesty – but I doubt it. I mean, if most of the Confederations were to hear the honest truth about themselves, they’d be furious, even if it came from someone with the stature of Pele. So what other option does Blatter have? It’s called Realpolitik.
AGO74 said | December 4th 2009 @ 11:39am | Report comment
Might be wrong but I believe that UEFA President Michel Platini is ‘trying’ to be an ethical leader. He has had some minor success (e.g. change to way CL qualifiers occur this year allowing smaller countries to qualify) but the reality of the football world that has been created is that money and self-interest dominates and overrides the best of intentions of any leader.
Freud of Football said | December 5th 2009 @ 2:03am | Report comment
Yes, you are wrong.
Platini aligned himself with Blatter to get where he is. If he was ethical, he wouldn’t have done this to begin with, further, Blatter would have chopped him down to size by now as he can’t afford to have ethical people looking over his shoulder or be threatening to his position.
Hammer said | December 4th 2009 @ 9:19am | Report comment
KB is right re the video ref – look at the NRL and also look at cricket as another classic – there we’ve basically got to the stage where umpires are too scared to make a decision and defer to the video far too often … football potentially will be more affected as refs look to get every decision right it will be far to stop start …
The Henry incident was despicable – the bloke is a cheat and won’t live it down – but over the entire qualification process in all the confederations how many games have such controversy .. sure there’s offside goals etc – but that’s football …
As for Ireland / France clash – Midfielder is right – the no reply was the right decision – to do so would open a can of worms (ie Costa Rica would surely have bunged in a request for a replay against Uruguay) Henry himself – then there’s definitely a case to argue he’s brought the game into disrepute – and a ban from the W/cup would certainly be warranted ….
Jeb said | December 4th 2009 @ 2:54pm | Report comment
Totally disagree with you hammer and KB. It’s purely hypothetical to say that football will become stop start if video refs are introduced. You’d think that the ball never went into touch… Surely introducing video and maintaining the flow of the game aren’t mutually exclusive. It’s been said many times that it only took one replay for Henry’s handball to be seen and this one replay happened a lot faster than the goal celebrations.
Pippinu said | December 4th 2009 @ 3:16pm | Report comment
It certainly is a nonsense argument to say that video technology in relation to goals would slow down the flow of the game.
For starters, the ball is only alive for 50 mintues of a 90 minute game – so there are stacks of breaks in a game of soccer.
But most importantly – any time a goal is scored, the celebrations go for 2 or 3 minutes – so to argue that to take 10 seconds out to quickly replay something would disrupt the flow of the game is a nonsense.
But all that aside – I really like the suggestion that came from that Fox Sports news panel, the idea that each coach gets one right of appeal per game – and to be honest – that’s all you need.
In other words, if a game changing decision has gone against you, the coach can exercise his one right of appeal and the 4th official would quickly check what the complaint is (bad offside call, handball, whatever).
That would eliminate 90% of all contentious issues overnight.
Jeb said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:27pm | Report comment
Not a bad plan Pip. I’m sure that there’s many other variations that deserve a trial. I don’t know too much about the history of replay technology in football – has anything been tried?
I wouldn’t suggest that video be introduced hastily, and we should accept that the system will need refinement over an extended period through trial and error. I would suggest that the a-league would be an ideal place to begin the trials as it isn’t really high-stakes top flight football, yet every game is covered by multiple cameras. It’s far from unanimous, but it seems a fair chunk of the australian football public agree with video replay as a concept. Perhaps because we are accustomed to it’s use in other sports and other cultural reasons plenty of people speculate on.
Trialling technology in the a-league may have other benefits – increasing the international exposure of the league, getting brownie points from fifa, etc… But we’d need fifa’s or the afc’s permission first wouldn’t we?
Ben of Phnom Penh said | December 4th 2009 @ 10:40am | Report comment
Perhaps it may enhance the world cup. Now everyone has a team to cheer against bringing otherwise lower profile games, such as France vs DPR Korea, into stark relief. The world cheering on the North Koreans, now that would be football at its finest.
KB said | December 4th 2009 @ 10:55am | Report comment
All of Middlesbrough were cheering on the Nth Koreans in the 1966 world cup after England of course; they were the peoples favourite back then…
Tom said | December 4th 2009 @ 12:51pm | Report comment
I don’t think I’ll be cheering on North Korea. As much as I like to see the underdog do well, the thought of the world cup being turned into a propaganda drive by Kim Jong-Il makes me uneasy.
phil said | December 4th 2009 @ 11:35am | Report comment
FIFA and IFAB are absolute dinasaurs. Each have four votes and it is impossible to have any changes in the game. I suggest a new world football organization be established which gives votes to every country then we might see the game progress. I believe things like video evidence, unlimited interchange and more goals would be great for the game.
Michael C said | December 4th 2009 @ 11:56am | Report comment
ON the first paragraph – - I was dumbfounded when smug Blatter was seen making a mockery of the Irish for asking to be number 33 team…..after all, it’s on Blatters ‘watch’ that such a blatant error is permitted to happen.
At any rate – Blatter just came across as supremely arrogant……I guess no surprises there either.
The Bear said | December 4th 2009 @ 1:52pm | Report comment
You are in the majority of sport lovers there MC, but careful you don’t stumble off the moral high ground. Your second sentence indicates the “fall”; the first sentence, evidence of the “pride”, the same arrogance that so offends your sensibilities.
Jaredsbro said | December 4th 2009 @ 2:27pm | Report comment
What so hypocrisy is inevitable, you better be the most deceitful, swiftest to turncoat, most heartless (that should read most professional) slimeball out there?
FIFA have their sins to fight and must turnface but Henry’s sins are just part of the game and he can fake apologise and just get away with it?
Btw I hate this victim of the system crap and I highly doubt that the average striker will deliberately try and deceive the ref, maybe go with the flow, but not seek to get away with WC qualification murder
Jaredsbro said | December 4th 2009 @ 2:24pm | Report comment
Hmm I haven’t commented on Henry or Soccer’s cheating ever before, because I’m quite biased in the matter. Soccer as a game always has a potential to be awesome, but rarely lives up to that potential. It is my least favourite footy code and to be frank I can’t see it changing any time soon. But it is the world sporting code and thus I think it would be a true travesty if everyone were to move on (to just get on with following the WC) without taking a pause and reflecting about this. It’s very easy to think that we can never make a difference, but to let this just get away from us (as sports fans may well be the greater travesty)
Y’see if sport was merely entertainment maybe I wouldn’t have a case but it means so much more to (allegedly) Billions of people as a game so like religion there has to be justice or there has to be justice taken into the hands of those who have the conviction for justice (Soccer vigilante time). But the most aggravating thing about this whole mess is the fact that players and referees could not be more cool with each other than at the present time. Maybe the players need to reacquaint themselves with the law-givers, maybe they need to have the opportunity to confess their sins (pardon the religious overtones by the way) to the refs and in the process gain an easier route out of their sanctions. Of course that means the sanctions need to hit them like a ton of bricks.
Of course the easier option is to have 2 goal referees, but easier is not FIFA’s way, for them it is about the easiest route which means sliming their way through the path of least resistance ie settle for the old-time Spartan justice: flog them so hard you stop them from contemplating a second go but then when they’re half-naked on the ground you whisper in their ear “That’s what you get for getting caught!”
Jeb said | December 4th 2009 @ 3:10pm | Report comment
Jaredsbro, I agree with you saying “that the players and referees could not be more cool with each other”. What’s more there’s heaps of football supporters who seem to be totally ok with the status quo. Of course through the vast majority of the world they don’t know any better than to say ‘that’s football’, but we also watch games where there aren’t dodgy decisions galore and where cheating isn’t part of the culture. This is why its so infuriating to see Blatter act like there is not other way.
jimbo said | December 4th 2009 @ 3:04pm | Report comment
It wouldn’t be an easy job running FIFA.
The refereeing appointment was made by EUFA not FIFA and FIFA or EUFA are not responsible for the referee (or the other 3 match officials) decisions and not seeing a blatant hand ball.
If the 4 of them didn’t see that, then they definitely need some help – goal line officials or video review (or gamblers anonymous).
FIFA have their hands well and truly tied on this and there is over 50 years of cheatery in the game that will never be reversed either.
FIFA should put aside everyone’s self interests wipe the slate clean and bring the game into the 21st century especially FIFA sponsored international games.
But FIFA is probably the world’s biggest political organisation and has a number of wealthy and powerful people and groups, who try and influence things for their own benefit.
Oceania and Australia in particular, hasn’t been well treated by FIFA in the past.
We were promised automatic qualification for Oceania for a WC spot, only to have it taken away from us by South American representatives.
Before joining Asia we played the fifth best South American team 3 times in four WC Qualification campaigns, when it is supposed to be evenly divided amongst the confederations. Why?
The refereeing in the Australia v Brazil WC game of 2006 was a biased disgrace.
Why is everyone bidding for the WC of 2018 and 2022 to make it so difficult for the FFA and no one challenged Brazil for 2014?
The only way we got better treatment from FIFA tomodachi, was to manoeuvre ourselves out of Oceania and into Asia.
Ganbatte Kudasai Socceroo San!
The Bear said | December 4th 2009 @ 4:01pm | Report comment
Nice post.
Jaredsbro said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:04pm | Report comment
Good luck in Asia mate
There’s absolutely no secret that FIFA want Asia really badly and now Australia’s joined up they want Australia, Japan, South Korea (and unfortunately for those democracy-enthusiasts out there FIFA want a strong) North Korea and of course China. They can’t care less about the Middle East even with all that black gold bribe money. So again I say good luck, now you’re on the radar it won’t be possible for Italy to get away with murder when you play them in the round of 16 class next year
marinator4LYF said | December 5th 2009 @ 9:44am | Report comment
why not enhance or upgrade the fourth official to include video replays on that little monitor, he doesnt need to say anything to the ref unless he sees a wrong call or a dive or hand ball, this way we get video evidence introduced while still keeping the game a free flowing spectacle, essentially he shouldn’t interfere with the ref or the game at all until he sees something on the monitor that the ref missed, this way the ref can concentrate on the game all the time without second guessing himself becoz he knows the fourth official will pick up anything he missed!?!?!? Thoughts guys?
AlexMilic said | December 7th 2009 @ 2:02pm | Report comment
Fifa is a joke sepp is a clown leading a circus