The recent controversial match between Real Madrid and Barcelona in the Champions League semi-final was certainly a heated one. It was a match that has split many opinions in regards to officiating, coaching and tactics.
However, the so-called conspiracy theory suggested by Jose Mourinho are completely incorrect. An unbiased analysis of big matches involving Barcelona over the last couple of years proves the conspiracy to be pure myth.
MYTH 1: There’s a conspiracy in favour of Barcelona in the Classicos this season as Madrid have had a player sent off in all four installments to date.
False. Three out of four red cards in this year’s Classicos have been perfectly justified. The first red card was committed by Sergio Ramos in Barcelona’s 5-0 win at the Nou Camp in November.
Ramos hacked Messi down from behind maliciously. It was in stoppage time at the end of the game with Madrid down 5-0; it is quite common for a player to lash out in frustration because of the result of the game.
The second red card was also a clear cut red card. David Villa was bearing down on goal one-on-one with the goalkeeper in the penalty box when Raul Albiol pulled him down. Considering the circumstances this is a clear cut red card, in accordance with FIFA laws of the game.
The third red card was always perfectly fair. Angel Di Maria committed a reckless challenge early in the first half of the Copa Del Rey, which earned him a yellow card. He played perfectly cleanly for the rest of the game up until the 119th minute when he dragged down a Barcelona player he was breaking away late in search of an equaliser.
Fouls that aren’t violent yet are highly tactical and cynical always warrant a yellow card. He was duelly sent off in perfectly reasonable circumstances.
The fourth red card was incorrect. Although the studs were showing in the tackle there was no malice involved and the ball was clearly Pepe’s intended target. However, Pepe’s growing reputation as a player who plays ‘on the edge’ did not help him in this case. Given the time the referee took to show the red card suggests he may have been talking to the fourth official.
This was a highly controversial decision which does need an explanation from the referee.
MYTH 2: Favouritism in the Van Persie red card.
In the round of sixteen second leg, with the match locked at 1-1 meaning that Arsenal would progress, Robin Van Persie was given a second yellow card for kicking the ball away (time wasting). It was certainly a tough call. For me there was too many factors suggesting that he definitely heard the whistle.
Firstly, given the fact that Arsenal were at the time going through there certainly was a motivation to waste time. But for me, van Persie’s body language was a telltale sign that he had heard the whistle. Van Persie halfheartedly kicked the ball in the rough direction of the goal without really suggesting scoring intent. He also showed no reaction of dissapointment for missing a genuine scoring chance.
Also, immediately after missing, he turned around to look at the referee suggesting that he was waiting to see his reaction. Normally if a player misses a chance on goal, the referee isn’t in the forefront of their thinking. I also don’t really believe that the sending off had much of an impact on the game.
Yeah, Barcelona went on to score two more goals after the sending off, but Barcelona frequently score late goals at the Nou Camp in the Champions League. They’ve been doing it for years. Also, considering that Van Persie is a striker and Barcelona had 80 per cent possession and were playing almost always in Arsenal’s half, what is Van Persie’s impact on the game? Virtually nothing.
MYTH 3: Favouritism in the infamous Barcelona versus Chelsea semi-final of the Champions League in 2008/2009.
This is one of the most controversial matches in the Champions League’s recent history. The controversy largely stems from Chelsea’s numerous penalty claims in the second leg at Stamford Bridge. Firstly, there was a clear cut penalty in the first leg when Thierry Henry was pulled down in the box with only the keeper to beat. However, play went on. Chelsea had five penalty claims in the return leg, now to analyse them.
Claim 1: Florent Malouda is in a tussle with Daniel Alves. Malouda superbly controls the ball out wide about 35 yards from the by line. Shortly after he and Daniel Alves engage in a tight tussle both have arms over each other. Eventually Malouda enters the box edge of the penalty box and falls over. This was not a penalty. Malouda clearly waited until he was inside the box before falling to the ground in search of a penalty. The referee correctly gave a free-kick outside the box, as this was were the tussle was at it’s worst.
Claim 2: Drogba is through on goal with Abidal pressuring him. There is some contact from Abidal, however it is largely him brushing up against Drogba, there is not enough contact to really make Drogba fall over. With the goalkeeper bearing down Drogba falls over. Drogba largely dives to the ground as there was no contact at the time of his fall to cause him to fall over. However, the earlier contact may have been close to warranting a penalty. Also considering that it was practically one-on-one makes this a tough 50/50 call.
The referee waved play on, this was certainly a tight call.
Claim 3: A bouncing ball lands equally between Drogba and Yaya Toure, about 25 yards from goal. They both have their hands on each other while the ball is in the air. However, Drogba is largely the more physical using his arms and muscle to get some space on Toure and win the ball. Toure catches up and performs a risky but perfectly clean tackle inside the box, the ball is clearly diverted away from Drogba path of travel by the challenge of Toure. The only claim could be a possible free kick to Chelsea about five or so metres outside the box, even that is somewhat questionable. The final challenge in the box was a textbook tackle.
There was absolutely no way that this was a penalty. The referee correctly allowed play to continue.
Claim 4: In the 81st minute a long ball drops to the feet of Nicolas Anelka just inside the box. In attempting to get around Gerrard Pique he flicks the ball at about waist height. The ball clearly hits Pique in the hand. Although Pique doesn’t move his hand towards the ball to intentionally block it. His hand is away from his body meaning that it is a hand ball. This should 100 per cent have been a penalty. The only reason I can imagine that it wasn’t was because the referee’s vision was obstructed by the rest of Pique’s body, regardless the linesman should have seen it. The referee allowed play to continue this was incorrect.
Claim 5: Deep into stoppage time after Barcelona equalise a corner falls to Ballack at the corner of the penalty box. He lashes a shot at goal that hits Eto’o in the armpit. Replays show that Eto’o jumped to block the shot with his back turned away from the shot. Firstly, this means that any handball is unintentional as he cannot see the ball. Secondly, the ball hits him in the armpit of his slightly outstretched arm. Knowing that a ball striking one’s shoulder is not a handball, it is touch and go as to if a ball striking a player in the armpit is a handball. Also, it is extremely hard to jump without the use of arms as a form of propulsion, just look at how high jumpers use their arms while jumping. It is perfectly natural for arms to be raised while jumping. This was not a penalty. The referee had a clear view and made the correct call to allow play to continue.
Another contentious point in the game was the sending off of Eric Abidal. A long ball bounced over the head of Abidal, he then proceeded to chase after the ball. Anelka cut across Abidal and in the process kicked his own heel causing him to fall over. Considering that Abidal was the last man, he was sent off. This was completely incorrect as no contact was made between Abidal and Anelka.
So over the two legs Barcelona had a clear penalty disallowed as did Chelsea. That is equal. In the second leg, Chelsea had a close penalty waved away and Barcelona had a man incorrectly sent off; sounds even to me. Clearly despite all the claims from Ballack and Drogba and conspiracy theories from Chelsea supporters, this was a overall a fair couple of matches.
MYTH 4: Referees are against Jose Mourinho whenever he plays against Barcelona. As already explained above this is largely not the case this year, the only genuinely contentious call in Classico’s this year was the Pepe send off. Although it was a very harsh call, unnecessary red cards are common in world football. We saw two examples at the World Cup, one involving the send off of Tim Cahill and another in the Spain vs Chile game were a Chilean player was sent off after bumping into Torres purely out of accident.
The semi finals between Jose Mourinho’s Inter Milan and Barcelona last year was also rather controversial. The first leg was game largely void of controversy, however the cetainly were questions raised about whether or not Chelsea’s last goal was offside. Replays certainly suggested that Milito was offside by maybe half a metre. Although it didn’t seem to be at the time, it was the tie deciding goal.
The return leg at the Nou Camp wasn’t without controversy. Thiago Motta was sent off about 30 minutes into the match for a stray arm. It was an extremely harsh call. Nonetheless he deliberately but his arm in the face of Busquets. A fair outcome would have been a yellow card for Motta and a yellow card for Busquets for his pathetic over-reaction.
Probably the most controversial moment over the two legs occurred in stoppage time with Barcelona up 1-0 looking for a goal that would qualify them into the final. The ball was bouncing on the edge of the box, when an Inter player kicked the ball into Yaya Toure’s hand. Toure’s hand was infront of his stomach at the time meaning that without his hand the ball would have hit him anyway. The ball fell for Bojan Krkic who went on to put the ball in the back of the net, however the goal was disallowed. By definition this was an incorrect call.
The handball call on Toure was the equivalent of a player being his on the hand while protecting his groin in a wall, it is not a handball. Considering the context this was a massive call, and a call that fell against Barcelona, atoning for the earlier mistake in sending off Motta. Unsurprisingly Jose Mourinho made no comment on the matter, pretending he didn’t see it. In all unbiased honesty, there is nothing to suggest that Jose Mourinho’s sides have fallen victim to some kind of conspiracy when he plays Barcelona.
So there you go. After a deep analysis it is obvious that there is no UEFA/FIFA conspiracy to favour Barcelona.
Let’s all hope that the next time that Madrid and Barcelona meet, which is next Thursday morning (AEST) the match is more of a spectacle compared the the all out niggle and verbal war that marred the first leg of the semi-final.
Wendy
Guest
Honestly, I disagree with most of your article. But, I disagree the most with the claims you made for the Chelsea game. 1. Malouda was bear-hugged inside of the box by Dani Alves. 2. Abidal clearly knocked Drogba down. 3. On this one I do agree that there was nothing to call between Yaya Toure and Drogba, it was a clean tackle. 4. Pique's handball was the clearest of all as his hand was clearly stretched away from his body, if the central referee did not see this then his assisstant must have seen it. 5. The ball does not his Etoo in his armpit it hits him in his upper arm, below the shoulder, and he clearly does not jump up in front of the ball, just turns his body, and as he turns his body he raises his arm way above his head. Now, this is just for me, but when I turn my back, I don't feel the need to raise one of my hands above my head, but you clearly feel the need to make excues as to why he made certain movements and then as to why the penalty wasn't called. So, that's it for my little rant.
Chris Sullivan
Guest
Ok, well in some of your examples you wrong. The van persie call was absolute --- and you know it. He controlled the ball took a shot. If you understand anything about soccer you would know that that's what a shot would look like in that situation. Also a good referee wouldn't send a player off in that situation. Mabey in a league game that does'nt mean that much but not in the nockout round of the champions league. In the final of the world cup about 5 min in there was a situation where a Spanish player (i forget the player) shoved robben to the ground and deserved a straight red. But you dont do that in the FINAL OF THE WORLD CUP in the beginning. You preserve the integrity of the game. Thats why howard webb is the best referee in the game. Also Chelsea deserved those penalties end of story. You just cant argue that. It would be ridiculous to. You make a good argument for a lot of the other cases, but the thing that your missing is that those cases happened in the first place. One of the points that Muhrino made is that almost Evrey tie out of the group stages barcelona plays, there are always controversial calls and they always favor barcelona. Soccer is an imperfect game because mistakes are made by the referees. And this usually evens out over the course of time. But no other team has benefited from these mistakes like barcelona has. It seems like every time there is any case to be made for a penalty or a red card or yello card, barcelona get it. That is so highly unlikely. It makes more sense that euefa instructs the referee to make calls in favor of barcelona whenever there is a case to be made. And it's not just barcelona. Every major team has had help from the referee. The major clubs are favored by the governing bodies of soccer. Look at what happened to crouch in the beginning of the madrid game. He was sent off in the first 10 minuits. Yes the calls are controversial and might not be mistakes. But it seems the referees make these mistakes and they continually happen. Look at the france ireland game where henry had 2 BACK TO BACK HAND BALLS which put france through to the world cup. At the end of the day, bigger teams bring in more viewership. And when all of these organizations have a monetary incentive to favor bigger teams then they will favor the bigger teams. Especially when there is no one to hold fifa and uefa accountable. you cant deny this. There are so many examples of this that it's a statistical improbability for there not to be a conspiracy.
Observer
Guest
http://twitter.com/#!/catalconspiracy (No I'm NOT a manureuporter, neither real)
John
Guest
Couldn't disagree more. People like the writer of this article disgust me, from reading the article it's obvious you favour Barcelona. There is no almost no arguing with people who have already made their minds up.You, like many others, have fallen for the propaganda of 'Beautiful football' by Barca. You people automatically favour Barca in every situation. But they also have a filthy side that most people CHOOSE to ignore because they are sheep. Barca consistently con referees, diving, cheating and play-acting as they see fit. Also, Barca always get favorable calls from refs in 50-50 type situations, where other teams do not get such favoritism. Lastly, their most disgusting player, Busquets, made a racist comment towards Marcelo. But of course Uefa dismiss this claim even though there was VIDEO evidence. Said evidence is not conclusive, but Uefa has been known to hand out heavy punishments for much less, and also in cases where there was hardly any evidence at all. When Mourinho supposedly instructed some of his players to intentionally get a yellow card against Ajax in the CL a couple months ago, there was NO conclusive evidence that Mourinho had given these instructions. No audio or anything of the sort. HOWEVER, he got a 2 match ban the next day. Uefa is all about respect and fairness, well I say fairness my ass! When Rooney uses profanity he gets banned, when Mourinho does ANYTHING he gets banned, but when Barca play unfairly (diving, play-acting) and one of their players possibly makes a RACIST remark, NOTHING happens. I mean be honest with yourself, if it were ANY other team Uefa would have done something. They would have given Barca players a ban for unfair/unsportsmanlike behaviour, they would have AT LEAST investigated the racism claim more seriously. I can't say for certain that Busquests made the racist comment, but it seems very likely he did. However Uefa obviously dismissed the claim without properly investigating it. In short, Barca is not the glorious team a lot of people think it is. They play fantastic football but they also have a very ugly side. I doubt there is an actual conspiracy to help Barca. But the fact is they are the subject of favouritism by Uefa, if you deny this you are simply being ignorant. Don't just believe everything you hear, look at things objectively and you will see everything is not as it seems.
Alex
Guest
Roarlover34, are you pep guardiola's boyfriend? Dani Alves, Sergio and Pedro consistently con the referee into giving cards to the opposition. Even Spain's heralded hard man Puyol has been known to throw himself to the ground after a light brushing with opposition. When the tough gets going for the Catalan giants they fall over and deceive the ref. On the the other hand when they come up against weaker oppostion than for example Man Utd, Chelsea, Madrid and Inter Milan they can play sublime football like Arsenal can do yet seem to make it work. Messi is without doubt the best player since Maradona and has the world at his feet. Yet when they come up against these strong teams as mentioned they employ these tactics and clearly aim to get people sent off! Even though they lost against Inter Milan Busquets clearly acted his soul out to get Motta sent off, go youtube that and tell me that him and the above mentioned do not play dirty? Uefa conspiracy, probably not. Cheating and Diving more common in the Barca team than other teams? Certainly.
Makoto
Guest
Go ahead then Yousuf, go ahead and point out all the flaws in his argument. Stop talking around it and do it. Let's hear it, argue away. You say you have better things to do but you take time to respond as slam his arguments. Obviously you don't have anything else to do, so let's hear YOUR reasoning as to way his arguments are wrong. Also, you say are unbiased, but really you are not. Mourinho has you wrapped around his finger?
Yousuf
Guest
This article is absolutely infuriating. You basically just analyze all the moments where barca got the favorable calls and attempt to debunk them by using an utterly biased and flawed methodology. Next time you want to publish an article like this I suggest you publish it in the barcelona forums because maybe then you will get some positive feedback. The truth is that the only people that will actually agree with you are barca fans because anyone who is unbiased, such as myself, will realize what is transpiring before them. I could go through each argument you make and expose it for its flaws but I would rather spend my time doing something more productive. Especially seeing as you are already a barcelona fanboy yourself thus it is rendered completely useless to initiate an un biased discussion.
cmfany2k3
Guest
then what do u hv 2 say bout sergio B's lounge on Alonso. http://www.101greatgoals.com/videodisplay/busquets-alonso-copa-del-rey-final-9171703/
Carlito
Guest
Barcelona plays good football, but not clean specially at the defense side. When they play a decisive game, they use all means to provoke their opponent. I watched the 5-0 game and saw when Ronaldo pushed Guardiola but did not see why he did that. After the game, I saw that Ronaldo went to take the ball from Gurdiola, but Guardiola wanted to provoke him, he threw the ball. This is act should not come from the coach of a great team. It is an insult to the game, the FIFA, and to the spectators.
roarlover34
Roar Pro
I agree with your 1 and 3 points. However, the 2 one is blatantly not true as they beat Madrid 5-0 earlier in the season with the only controversial moment coming when Ramos hacked Messi down as was correctly shown a red card. No Materazzi style there.
roarlover34
Roar Pro
yes busquets does dive. Considering that there is a sissi of the week means that there are 51 other weeks were a different player get's sissi of the week. Busquets dives, however he is clearly not the only one.
Carlito
Guest
1. Real Madrid and Barcelona have shown the world, one more time, how to make a beautiful game dirty. 2. Barcelona has proved that the only way to win over Real Madrid, is by usin Materazzi's Style. 3. The FIFA should change its regulations to force teams to play beautiful and not dirty.
dasilva
Guest
"Pep mentioned refreeing prior to the match and I am tempted to think that it was pre planned" To be honest I actually agree with you. Pep responded to the cynical over-physical gameplay by Mourinho in the Cope Del Ray final where Real MAdrid were the referee was over lenient and Real should have had a few more red cards for persistant fouling and industrious challenge with his own brand of cynicism. Which is play acting, diving, referee intimidation etc. It was definitely cynical and wrong but no more cynical and wrong by having your team set up to rough up the opposition and persistently foul them. Barcalona aren't saints and are just like any other football club that resort to cynical unsporting behaviour to win matches but they shouldn't be singled out for that as I don't think they are any worst then any other club. "The same real madrid plays other teams without red cards" That's becasue the same Real Madrid team don't park the bus and give the opposing team 70-80% possession and take a defensive spoiling game plan with a great focus on disrupting the other teams build up against other teams. When you have that type of game plan, inevitably you commit more fouls and have more yellow cards and red cards.
dasilva
Guest
great article When Barcalona wins against Mourinho with a few controversial decisions going there way, he shout conspiracy When Barcalona lose with a few controversial decisions going against them (like the Inter Milan match a year ago where I believed that if all the correct decisions were made, Barcalona would have gone through and won the CL that year), then Mourinho becomes a tactical genious whilst at the same time forgetting about the controversial referee decisions. Mourinho is a complete sore loser.
Tifosi
Guest
Sissi of the Week (17 2010) Sergio Busquets http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhoBrOvs0DE&NR=1
roarlover34
Roar Pro
barcelona vs shahktar was really controversial wasn't it! not. There was no controversy in the round of 16 last year against stuttgart, there was no controversy against arsenal last year in the quarter finals, there was some controversy both ways in the semi final last year. There was no controversy when they beat Man Utd in the final a few years back. Maybe you should bang on about a Chelsea conspiracy after the 'goal' against tottenham last night. Oh wait, your a one eyed Chelsea fan! I'm sick of arguing with you mate, your arguments are hollow misinformed and very narrow.
roarlover34
Roar Pro
the whole jumping without using the arms is to clarify that there was no other place that his arms could have been. In regards to alves, Please explain the biomechanics of how a touch to the throat of a person causes them to lose their footing? Players get at each others throats quite often whenever there is a scuffle there is always grabbing of the upper part of their shirt and pushing etc. It only becomes an issue when a player takes a dive becuase of it trying to get the referee's attention.
Riess
Guest
Also, the fact they seem to be surrounded in controversy every single time they play in the latter stages of Champions League doesn't strike you as odd? I guess every other team full of professionals who complain should consult you. The rule genius.
Riess
Guest
You're probably right. There weren't ex players, people who watch the game and the majority against you. So we've gone from it hit his underarm to "you try jumping high without arms". Childish argument to say te least, regardless of the immaturity of it, if you handball the ball, you handball the ball. Just beause you "didn't mean it" or "couldn't help it", doesn't make it okay. I must be blind. Or you might be. But it's Alves who reaches for Malouda as he streams forward. He tries to pull him back. Malouda tries to push him off. This continues and when they are in the box he grabs Malouda. He puts his hands all over him, as well as hitting his throat, inside the box. But just because you're a man machine and wouldn't go down it shouldn't be a penalty. But just to clear this up... Because my knowledge of the rules is not as good as yours. You can grab someone by the throat like what happened to Van Persie? Because you haven't said a word about that.
roarlover34
Roar Pro
Don, did you look at the title then comment??? Some of your remarks are embarassingly clueless. In the article i suggested that ONLY ONE of these calls MAY have been because the referee was obstructed.