Back in 1997, David Elleray a former top referee in England was asked
to review the 1970 FA Cup Final between Chelsea and Leeds United. That
final now enjoys iconic status while at the same time being infamous for
violence and brutality.
In the view of Elleray six red cards and twenty yellow cards would have been handed out if the game had been officiated at a “modern” day level.
Now I am no David Elleray and only 24 hours had past since the Brazil and Colombia quarter –final match at the World Cup. But I could not resist watching the game one more time. The reason? It seemed to me that the game I had watched on Friday was somehow out of step with the prevailing view of most pundits, bloggers and tweeters.
Over the last two days I have read columns describing a game of “lawlessness,” “brutality,” and a “bloodbath” amongst other inflammatory descriptions.
So yesterday, I watched the game again willing to accept that maybe I was out of step with reality. Let’s start with a timeline of the fouls and a description of each. Fouls by Brazil in bold type; Colombia in italics. Foul count – Brazil then Colombia.
A summary of the offenders.
And here are some of the narratives that bother me.
Brazil set out to bully Colombia from the start
The statistics don’t support that conclusion. At half time the foul count was Brazil 13 to Colombia’s 12. It wasn’t until the 28th minute of the game that Brazil’s fouls exceeded those of Colombia.
There also seems to be some selective recall of the first half of the match. Of the 25 fouls that were called the worst by far was the 45th minute challenge by Colombia’s Zuniga on Hulk. Zuniga caught Hulk just below the knee and the foul was deserving of a yellow card. It was, in my opinion, the only individual foul in the first half that warranted a caution from the referee.
Further to quote match commentator Jon Roder in the 58th minute “It’s not been a dirty game at all.”
Brazil brutalized Colombia and in particular James Rodriguez
I found Brazil’s approach to Colombia very similar to the methods used by the Netherlands in the group game against Chile. Alexis Sanchez was the focus of Dutch attention that day and of the 25 fouls (Brazil had 6 more on Friday) 9 were on the Chilean attacker.
Remember the outrage that spilled over after that match and how the Dutch were vilified for their treatment of Sanchez? Yeah, me neither.
James Rodriguez was on the receiving end of six fouls. Three by Fernandinho, one by Oscar and two by Maicon – three trips, two pushes and one block. None could possibly be construed as a threat to his safety. The times of the fouls were 9th, 14th, 24th, 45th minutes in first half and 48th and 49th (Maicon in quick succession) in the second half.
This column in the New York Times even defended Rodriguez in questioning why he was booked for “an innocuous trip.” The fact is the trip may have been innocuous but when Rodriguez tripped Hulk the Brazilian was a step away from a shooting opportunity in front of the Colombia goal twenty two yards out. Rodriguez wasn’t booked for the trip he was booked on account of the context and positioning of the play.
Over the ninety minutes I did not see one individual foul by Brazil that warranted a yellow card with the exception of the two that were rightly given to Thiago Silva and Julio Cesar.
Persistent fouling by Brazil
This one is more difficult to refute with Fernandinho and Marcelo (in particular) the main culprits. The purpose of issuing a yellow card is to stop such consistent infringement and much has been made of the four fouls by Fernandinho in the first half. But in the interests of full disclosure shouldn’t it be mentioned that the same player went through the second half without committing another foul? If the point was to stop Fernandinho fouling it seems that self-regulation achieved the same end.
Some saw the number of Brazil fouls as tactical fouling – a way to disrupt the flow of the opposition’s game with fouls not bad enough to incur the card -wrath of the referee. Brazil has shown over many years (2002) that tactical fouling is part of their armory. But in this game I am not so sure. It seemed to me that given the positions of the fouls it was a case of petty fouling rather than tactical.
Brazil repeat offenders
No team has committed more fouls at this tournament than Brazil but before the quarter final Colombia had committed more fouls than Brazil. And just for good measure in between Brazil (96 fouls) and Colombia (91 fouls) is Costa Rica. The team that many have described as bringing a refreshing attitude to the World Cup have committed 94 fouls.
Open Season on Spanish Referee Carlos Velasco Carballo
Did someone just cut their hand in a shark tank? It seems that almost everyone and their uncle were lining up to take shots at the referee. The problem is that so many writers go overboard and start to pick on the wrong things.
One article I read took Carballo to task for allowing Colombia to take a quick free kick. Rodrigues was tripped by Fernandinho in the 24th minute and several Colombians rushed to Rodriguez’s defence. While Brazilian and Colombian players milled around exchanging multilingual insults (I assume) Rodriguez got up and played a quick free kick.
Immediately the throng dispersed because the ball was in play. According to the writer the free kick should have been retaken and the referee should have then calmed the players down before restarting the match. Something – the calming of the players – that happened immediately when Rodriguez took the quick free kick!!
The officiating was on the laissez-faire side but it was not as bad as has been made out.
Neymar injury
A number of writers apparently see the injury to Neymar as some sort of Karma. Or to put it in plainer language – blame the victim. The rationale goes something like this. Brazil started the brutality so they should not be shocked when it rebounds and seriously injures their star player.
First of all there was no initial brutality and second of all it infers that when a serious injury happens it is the inevitable result of something that could have been stopped.
Serious injuries happen with saddening regularity but the vast majority are isolated incidents and often the result of innocent contact or no contact whatsoever. It is a convenient narrative but not one that holds together.
Zuniga meant to injure Neyma
Only Zuniga knows what the intent of his clumsy challenge actually was. But that has not stopped the inference from Zuniga’s post game interview that somehow he intended Neymar physical harm.
Take a step back. There are three minutes left in the quarter final of the World Cup. Your team is 2-1 down and pushing for an equalizer. The ball is cleared to just outside the opposition’s penalty area and only their star striker is between you and the ball.
Do you (a) decide to take a whack at him and gain retribution for past wrongs?
Or (b) try to win the ball and get it back into the danger area?
Two additional points and honest answers only please.
When Neymar went down under the challenge who thought that he was playing for time?
Would you have questioned the referee’s decision if he had immediately blown for a foul and not allowed Brazil advantage?
The Spectacle
The petty fouling certainly impacted the game and lessened it as a spectacle. But to describe the game in the inflammatory terms that have been used so freely misrepresents what actually happened.
On Sunday morning Jeff Bradley (@JerseyJBradley) tweeted something that seems very appropriate – “Deadlines and soccer are a tough match. You learn so much more after seeing statistics and re-watching in an emotion-free state of mind.”
It is a pity that those who have the time to think don’t use it more productively instead of simply echoing the initial thoughts of others.
In the view of Elleray six red cards and twenty yellow cards would have been handed out if the game had been officiated at a “modern” day level.
Now I am no David Elleray and only 24 hours had past since the Brazil and Colombia quarter –final match at the World Cup. But I could not resist watching the game one more time. The reason? It seemed to me that the game I had watched on Friday was somehow out of step with the prevailing view of most pundits, bloggers and tweeters.
Over the last two days I have read columns describing a game of “lawlessness,” “brutality,” and a “bloodbath” amongst other inflammatory descriptions.
So yesterday, I watched the game again willing to accept that maybe I was out of step with reality. Let’s start with a timeline of the fouls and a description of each. Fouls by Brazil in bold type; Colombia in italics. Foul count – Brazil then Colombia.
| Minute | Foul | Foul Count |
| 1 | Cuadrado tug on Marcelo | 0-1 |
| 3 | Sanchez pull back on Fred | 0-2 |
| 4 | Teo push on Fernandinho | 0-3 |
| 9 | Oscar push from behind on Rodriguez | 1-3 |
| 12 | Oscar push on Armero | 2-3 |
| 13 | Teo on Luiz late challenge | 2-4 |
| 14 | Fernandinho block on Rodriguez | 3-4 |
| 15 | Cuadrado push on Fred | 3-5 |
| Guarin trip on Neymar | 3-6 | |
| Marcelo nudge on Cuadrado | 4-6 | |
| 19 | Ibarbo foot high on Maicon | 4-7 |
| 24 | Hulk created back for Zapata | 5-7 |
| Fernandinho trip on Rodriguez | 6-7 | |
| 25 | Luiz late challenge on Ibarbo | 7-7 |
| 27 | Sanchez block on Neymar | 7-8 |
| 28 | Paulinho push on Ibarbo | 8-8 |
| Marcelo holds back Cuadrado | 9-8 | |
| 35 | Fernandinho late challenge on Ibarbo | 10-8 |
| 38 | Thiago Silva push on Cuadrado | 11-8 |
| Zapata pulls Paulinho back | 11-9 | |
| 40 | Fred push on Sanchez | 12-9 |
| 42 | Ibarbo push on Hulk | 12-10 |
| 43 | Zuniga trip on Neymar | 12-11 |
| 45 | Zuniga high challenge on Hulk knee |
12-12 |
| 45+ | Fernandinho push from behind on Rodriguez | 13-12 |
| Half time | ||
| 47 | Neymar hand ball | 14-12 |
| 48 | Maicon trip on Rodriguez | 15-12 |
| 49 | Maicon trips Rodriguez from behind | 16-12 |
| 50 | Hulk trip on Zuniga | 17-12 |
| 51 | Guarin push on Fernandinho | 17-13 |
| Marcello push on unknown defender | 18-13 | |
| 54 | Fred push on Ospina | 19-13 |
| Marcelo trip on Cuadrado | 20-13 | |
| 55 | Hulk trip on Zapata | 21-13 |
| Ramos holds Luiz | 21-14 | |
| 58 | Fred pulls back Armero | 22-14 |
| 61 | Yepes holding Fred from behind | 22-15 |
| Luiz blocks Cuadrado | 23-15 | |
| 62 | Marcelo trip on Cuadrado | 24-15 |
| 63 | Cuadrado block on Neymar | 24-16 |
| 64 | Thiago Silva (yellow card) blocks clearance by Ospina | 25-16 |
| 65 | Paulinho trip on Zuniga | 26-16 |
| 67 | Rodriguez (yellow card) trip on Hulk | 26-17 |
| 72 | Bacca foul on unknown Brazil defender | 26-18 |
| 73 | Hulk trip on Zapata | 27-18 |
| 74 | Paulinho high boot on Guarin | 28-18 |
| 76 | Bacca push on Thiago Silva | 28-19 |
| 77 | Julio Cesar (yellow card) trips Bacca for penalty | 29-19 |
| 84 | Zapata push on Fernandinho | 29-20 |
| 87 | Quintero holds Oscar back | 29-21 |
| 90 | Rodriguez barges Marcelo | 29-22 |
| 90+ | Fred push on Sanchez | 30-22 |
| 90+ | Hernanes blocks Zuniga | 31-22 |
| 90+ | Zapata foul | 31-23 |
| Fouls | ||
| Player | Brz | Col |
| Marcelo | 5 | |
| Fernandinho | 4 | |
| Hulk | 4 | |
| Fred | 4 | |
| Zapata | 3 | |
| Cuadrado | 3 | |
| Paulinho | 3 | |
| Sanchez | 2 | |
| Teo | 2 | |
| Oscar | 2 | |
| Rodriguez | 2 | |
| Ibarbo | 2 | |
| Bacca | 2 | |
| Thiago Silva | 2 | |
| Luiz | 2 | |
| Maicon | 2 | |
| Zuniga | 2 | |
| Guarin | 2 | |
| Hernanes | 1 | |
| Quintero | 1 | |
| Julio Cesar | 1 | |
| Yepes | 1 | |
| Neymar | 1 | |
| Ramos | 1 | |
| TOTALS | 31 | 23 |
Brazil set out to bully Colombia from the start
The statistics don’t support that conclusion. At half time the foul count was Brazil 13 to Colombia’s 12. It wasn’t until the 28th minute of the game that Brazil’s fouls exceeded those of Colombia.
There also seems to be some selective recall of the first half of the match. Of the 25 fouls that were called the worst by far was the 45th minute challenge by Colombia’s Zuniga on Hulk. Zuniga caught Hulk just below the knee and the foul was deserving of a yellow card. It was, in my opinion, the only individual foul in the first half that warranted a caution from the referee.
Further to quote match commentator Jon Roder in the 58th minute “It’s not been a dirty game at all.”
Brazil brutalized Colombia and in particular James Rodriguez
I found Brazil’s approach to Colombia very similar to the methods used by the Netherlands in the group game against Chile. Alexis Sanchez was the focus of Dutch attention that day and of the 25 fouls (Brazil had 6 more on Friday) 9 were on the Chilean attacker.
Remember the outrage that spilled over after that match and how the Dutch were vilified for their treatment of Sanchez? Yeah, me neither.
James Rodriguez was on the receiving end of six fouls. Three by Fernandinho, one by Oscar and two by Maicon – three trips, two pushes and one block. None could possibly be construed as a threat to his safety. The times of the fouls were 9th, 14th, 24th, 45th minutes in first half and 48th and 49th (Maicon in quick succession) in the second half.
This column in the New York Times even defended Rodriguez in questioning why he was booked for “an innocuous trip.” The fact is the trip may have been innocuous but when Rodriguez tripped Hulk the Brazilian was a step away from a shooting opportunity in front of the Colombia goal twenty two yards out. Rodriguez wasn’t booked for the trip he was booked on account of the context and positioning of the play.
Over the ninety minutes I did not see one individual foul by Brazil that warranted a yellow card with the exception of the two that were rightly given to Thiago Silva and Julio Cesar.
Persistent fouling by Brazil
This one is more difficult to refute with Fernandinho and Marcelo (in particular) the main culprits. The purpose of issuing a yellow card is to stop such consistent infringement and much has been made of the four fouls by Fernandinho in the first half. But in the interests of full disclosure shouldn’t it be mentioned that the same player went through the second half without committing another foul? If the point was to stop Fernandinho fouling it seems that self-regulation achieved the same end.
Some saw the number of Brazil fouls as tactical fouling – a way to disrupt the flow of the opposition’s game with fouls not bad enough to incur the card -wrath of the referee. Brazil has shown over many years (2002) that tactical fouling is part of their armory. But in this game I am not so sure. It seemed to me that given the positions of the fouls it was a case of petty fouling rather than tactical.
Brazil repeat offenders
No team has committed more fouls at this tournament than Brazil but before the quarter final Colombia had committed more fouls than Brazil. And just for good measure in between Brazil (96 fouls) and Colombia (91 fouls) is Costa Rica. The team that many have described as bringing a refreshing attitude to the World Cup have committed 94 fouls.
Open Season on Spanish Referee Carlos Velasco Carballo
Did someone just cut their hand in a shark tank? It seems that almost everyone and their uncle were lining up to take shots at the referee. The problem is that so many writers go overboard and start to pick on the wrong things.
One article I read took Carballo to task for allowing Colombia to take a quick free kick. Rodrigues was tripped by Fernandinho in the 24th minute and several Colombians rushed to Rodriguez’s defence. While Brazilian and Colombian players milled around exchanging multilingual insults (I assume) Rodriguez got up and played a quick free kick.
Immediately the throng dispersed because the ball was in play. According to the writer the free kick should have been retaken and the referee should have then calmed the players down before restarting the match. Something – the calming of the players – that happened immediately when Rodriguez took the quick free kick!!
The officiating was on the laissez-faire side but it was not as bad as has been made out.
Neymar injury
A number of writers apparently see the injury to Neymar as some sort of Karma. Or to put it in plainer language – blame the victim. The rationale goes something like this. Brazil started the brutality so they should not be shocked when it rebounds and seriously injures their star player.
First of all there was no initial brutality and second of all it infers that when a serious injury happens it is the inevitable result of something that could have been stopped.
Serious injuries happen with saddening regularity but the vast majority are isolated incidents and often the result of innocent contact or no contact whatsoever. It is a convenient narrative but not one that holds together.
Zuniga meant to injure Neyma
Only Zuniga knows what the intent of his clumsy challenge actually was. But that has not stopped the inference from Zuniga’s post game interview that somehow he intended Neymar physical harm.
Take a step back. There are three minutes left in the quarter final of the World Cup. Your team is 2-1 down and pushing for an equalizer. The ball is cleared to just outside the opposition’s penalty area and only their star striker is between you and the ball.
Do you (a) decide to take a whack at him and gain retribution for past wrongs?
Or (b) try to win the ball and get it back into the danger area?
Two additional points and honest answers only please.
When Neymar went down under the challenge who thought that he was playing for time?
Would you have questioned the referee’s decision if he had immediately blown for a foul and not allowed Brazil advantage?
The Spectacle
The petty fouling certainly impacted the game and lessened it as a spectacle. But to describe the game in the inflammatory terms that have been used so freely misrepresents what actually happened.
On Sunday morning Jeff Bradley (@JerseyJBradley) tweeted something that seems very appropriate – “Deadlines and soccer are a tough match. You learn so much more after seeing statistics and re-watching in an emotion-free state of mind.”
It is a pity that those who have the time to think don’t use it more productively instead of simply echoing the initial thoughts of others.
No comments:
Post a Comment