So…Will They Book Dida for Cheating?
This article is a submission for the Soccerlens Football Writing Competition; to participate, please read the details here.
Written by Joe Groff
Who’s more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him? Thursday’s headlines proclaimed that Celtic’s victory at Parkhead was marred by an incident of a fan that broke onto the pitch and ‘struck’ Milan goalkeeper, Dida, during Celtic’s second goal celebrations. The BBC posted within an hour of the match end, “Uefa to probe Celtic fan attack”. Cataracts patients sitting in hospital could see that the incident was hardly an attack.
Anyone who believes for a second that Dida was ‘attacked’ needs to contact me about the oceanfront property in Slovakia that I’m selling. Watching the match, I actually started questioning whether the fan went for his jugular with a knife. Alas, no blood. The fan tickled Dida on the neck and as the keeper turned to make chase, he thought to himself, “I’m going to get that guy . . . Oh wait! I can use this to my advantage” and dropped like a ton of bricks. Did he really think that nobody would see? Did he expect anyone to actually believe that he was so badly injured that he needed an ice-pack and a stretcher?
In a year full of negative press in the sporting world, Dida’s actions should be ranked right up at the top of the list. While Celtic certainly ought to be held accountable for allowing a fan to enter the pitch, a much heavier penalty should be dealt to Dida the Disgraceful. It’s hard enough to deal day in and day out with the histrionics of some modern players, grabbing their faces every time they take a knock on the shin as Milan did throughout the course of the game. But as an American, I have to defend the sport that I love against critics who think it’s a game for pansies. The defence is made none the easier after events like these.
What Dida did was the most dishonourable and deceitful display of sporting behaviour I have ever seen. More infuriating, is that the media actually gives an ounce of sympathy to him. The only thing Dida got hurt was his ego, having failed to capture the initial shot, he gave McDonald a wide open chance to take the victory for Celtic. While the events that followed admittedly should have been prevented by the Celtic Park stewards, nothing changes the fact that Dida took the opportunity to try to deceive the officials, UEFA and the broader football community for his team’s advantage.
Of course I want the teams I support to win, but not at any cost. I remember my sporting days when my main goals were to go out and give my 110%, leaving nothing on the field, and to play with pride, with a respect for the game itself. I would be ashamed at what my father would think if he ever caught me play-acting to get a call to go my way. My sons will know what pride means. The same goes for the teams I support. I would much rather watch my team lose with their heads held high, than watch a team full of Dida’s go on to win.
That type of spirit is fading in today’s sporting society. Its decline is advanced by giving these types of antics any kind of validation. It’s terrible that there are still idiots out there who think it’s alright to break the divide between fans and players. Far worse when our idols act shamefully, let us down, and we fail to chastise them.
This article is a submission for the Soccerlens Football Writing Competition; to participate, please read the details here.
The 2008 Soccerlens Awards: Vote For Your Favourite Football Sites Here
It’s pretty obvious that the foolish fan used “5 point move” from “Kill Bill” on Dida. Dida had only 5 steps left before he fainted…
[...] So…Will They Book Dida for Cheating? [...]
@Zegora: ROFL!
Dida was a disgrace. Either that or somehow, the fan mastered the lost art of 一阳指 (Yi Yang Zhi).
It was the stranger in sunglasses on the grassy knoll.
There are three possibilities;
1. he dropped to get Celtic disqualified, therefore he feigned it.
2. he dropped because he was hit with something thrown from the crowd.
3. he had some kind of heart attack.
I would initially have gone for 2 because he really doesn’t look the type, but after weighing it out a bit and remembering that he passes his morning with Gilardino and Inzaghi, (not to mention the biggest thief of them all Silvio Berlusconi) I decided that it must have been a dive.
he was making sweet love to the grass- what dyu lot mean he was feignting a heart attack. It’s the done thing these days, fornicating with the pitch…
It’s ironic because Dida has been the target of worse attacks in the past (when searching for the image for this picture I came across the ones where he’s hit by a flare from the crowd), so with Dida your first instinct is that ‘oh no’, something serious has happened..
Anyway, the fan’s banned, but I’d like to see Dida get a 3-match suspension for trying to get Celtic disqualified (because there’s no other reason a keeper would waste that much time after conceding a goal in the 90th minute).
Dida’s reaction was despicable, but it’s largely irrelevant. Had he stayed on his feet, I would still have called for a massive punishment to be handed out to Celtic - the fan might have had a knife. Inter were thrown out of the Champions League after the Dida flare incident, Denmark’s result against Sweden was overturned, and there is little reason why Celtic should be spared (other than the fact that it tugs at the Scottish heart strings). I say, overturn the result of the match, AND ban Dida for at least three matches. Anyone calling for Dida to be banned but for Celtic to be pardoned is clearly overwhelmingly biased. If a team can be threatened with expulsion from a competition because their fans sing despective songs (and NO, I am not a Rangers fan), then having a pan approach a player deserves severe punishment.
A fan, not a pan
Dida, like Rivaldo a few years ago will get away with it because you can’t prove he didn’t have a late reaction to the Vulcan Nerve Pinch he recieved.
However, more importantly, Celtic will get no punishment as Scottish football falls into the “can’t upset them or we’ll be accused of being biased against the smaller nations” category. For example, Inter (quite rightly) got kicked out of CL a few years ago, whereas when England played Macedonia away a couple of years back their own security had umbrellas (yes, umbrellas) to shield the players during the game from objects being thrown, result - no punishment ‘cos we can’t upset the smaller football nations.
PS - I’m not anti Scottish football or trying to belittle it, but Rangers and Celtic aside it has to be considered a lesser nation in club football terms.
Things are getting interesting. EUFA have asked Milan to “clarify the reason” for Dida’s substitution.
What are Milan they going to say? Is it, that in the aftermath of just having committed a goal-keeping howler and having lost the match for Milan, Dida was suffering from PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) and imagined that he had been hit by a sniper in the crowd? Is there a better explanation?
Hugo
Dida getting hit by a flare was dangerous.
The Sweden incident, the ref got physically attacked.
In this incident Milan have stated that they are NOT putting a complaint and have stated they do NOT believe it effected the result (which it did not). Milan must be embaressed and had little choice but to do this.
Celtic therefore do not deserve the same treatment as Inter or the Sweden/denmark match. They will get a fine and possibly ordered to play 1/2 matches behind closed doors.
On the article, it reads more like a fans opinion than an article that makes you ‘think’ or ‘laugh’ would be my constructive criticism. Still interesting and quite well written.
The severity of the touch is largely irrelevant - by modern rules, clubs are held responsible for failing to control their fans (is this the right approach? I don’t know, but it’s the way things work), and a fan running onto the pitch and confronting a player is about as bad a scenario as possible (apart from personally arming all of their fans with rifles). Celtic do not deserve to be excepted just because Dida reacted histrionically.
For football’s greatest actors (or con-artists ) see link: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/article2588440.ece Where do Dida’s antics against Celtic rank in the all time list? Pretty high up I would have thought.
Football needs to clean up its act and move against cheats. Cheating includes simulation, hand-balling the ball into the net, feigning injury, holding onto players’ shirts in the penalty area at set pieces etc. If something like a deliberate hand-ball into the net is missed by the referee, a disciplinary panel should use video evidence to nail the culprit. In bad cases, the match result should be changed.
Diego Maradona was not only a great footballer, he was also a great cheat. His handball “goal” against England (1986) should never have been allowed to stand. Peter Crouch’s pulling on the dreadlocks of the Trinidadian defender in the 2006 world cup to stop him getting airborne so that England could score was also cheating. At the very least, the perpetrators should be heavily punished if caught out on video evidence.
Why is it appropriate to change a match result if a fan assaults a referee (eg. Denmark v. Sweden - Euro 2008 qualifying: from 3:3 to 0:3) but not appropriate to use video evidence during the game to establish whether a “goal” should be allowed. For instance, with the Maradona and Crouch like incidents, why shouldn’t a match referee in 2007 be able to refer such incidents to a video ref and ask the simple question: “is there any reason why I should not award a goal?” The system works well in Rugby and as the recent England v. Tonga match shows even lends to the excitement of the moment. It is rather like waiting to see whether a football player is going to convert a penalty.
Football cheats should be made to understand: there is no hiding place; they and their teams must gain nothing from cheating, except heavy punishment.
Is committing a foul really the same as “cheating”?
Good question, Hugo. The answer is: not always.
Not every foul amounts to “cheating”. Cheating is really about gaining an unfair advantage by deception and contrary to the rules of the game. It is a question of fact and degree in each individual circumstance. Kicking or attemting to kick, tripping or attempting to trip, or spitting at an opponent are all “fouls” within the rules of the games but do not necessarily amount to cheating.
On the other hand, intentionally handling the ball into the net or holding an opponent down by his dreadlocks in other to give oneself leverage to head the ball into the net and then claiming a “goal” are not only fouls, but may also amount to cheating if an element of deception is present. If the player commits the offence unseen by the match officials, knows full well that he has broken the rules but then tries to “con” the match officials into awarding a goal, then he is attempting to cheat.
Tripping another player, intentionally or recklessly in full view of the referee is a foul but is not cheating because there is no element of deception involved. The referee simply needs to be make a judgment call on what he has seen.
Consequently, the basic difference between mere fouls on the one hand and cheating on the one other hand, is the element of “deception” involved on the player’s part. Is a player who has committed a foul unseen by the referee trying to con the referee? If he tries to con the ref, he is attempting to cheat: if he gets away with it, he has cheated.
this was friggin hilarious! the way he tried to chase, but gave up and then decided to hit the ground like something shot him real bad. and whats worse was he had to be STRETCHED OFF! HAHAHAHA what a joke! he should really be in hollywood instead of becks..
Of all the people on the field to go down as if they’ve been shot and then to leave the field - it should NEVER be a goalkeeper. I’m not going to get into the argument about Celtic’s fate, or anything else but as a goalkeeper myself I can’t believe it. What a Jessy. It was worse than the Rivaldo incident by a long way. I only wish Celtic had stuck another past them - how a keeper can leave his team after a wee pat is beyond me.
Frankie - that’s all well and good, and on a theoretical level I salute your reasoning. However, when one starts punishing players based on a largely hypothetical “intent to deceive” the referee, one gets into pretty muddy water. Let me give you an example: Messi’s Maradona reincarnation for Barca last year. Now you will tell me that he was “cheating” because he made a deliberate attempt to play the ball with his hands and to conceal that fact. What if I tell you that he meant to use his head but the ball hit his hand and flew into the net? Formally, there is no difference between the two offences; but according to your reasoning, one should be punished far more severely than the other. How do you intend to prove that such a distinction exists?
I get the feeling that you are aiming at a scenario in which Peter Crouch uses the dreadlocks as leverage (fouls and aggression are part of the game at all levels, from 6 to 60 year olds), scores the goal before running over to the referee to confess to what he’s done in order to have the goal annulled. Is this really realistic?
[...] word for disaster. Dida surely deserve an Oscar for his act as Gabriele Capasso at Calcio blog said Dida’s sudden fall was “the show of the [...]
Hugo, let’s take your two examples.
First, the Messi incident. It’s really quite simple. Messi’s cheating lies not simply in the fact that he intended to cheat. The real gravamen of his offence is that he knows he has handled the ball into the net, but still claims a goal. It is irrelevant whether it was his initial intention to cheat or not. The reality is that most players who handball in these situations will have gone up for the ball intending to head it, find it is out of reach and then used their hand instead. The fact remains, however, that by claiming a goal when he has knowingly put the ball in the net with his hand, the player is cheating.
The punishment should be the same whether the player initially intended to use his head or his hand, because what is being punished is not the intention, but the cheating, i.e. the blatant deception involved in claiming a goal when he knows that he has put it in the net with his hand. Usually at least one player on the opposing side sees the handball. A referee could then ask the video ref: “is there any reason why I should not award a goal?” The video ref could then say, “Yes, Messi/Maradona handled the ball. Free kick to defending team”. The match referee could then mete out appropriate punishment to the Messi/Maradona miscreant, i.e., red/yellow card.
Second, with regards to the Crouch type incident. I would agree with you that this is a less clear cut example of cheating than the Maradona/Messi hand ball situations. What it does do, however, is illustrate the advantage of introducing a video ref. You speak of fouls and aggression being part of the game at all levels. True. But I hope we would agree that all fouls should be punished. There is no more aggressive team sport than Rugby. Yet, if a player unlawfully holds another player back off the ball, to allow his team mate to run in and score a try, a video ref could inform the match referee that the try should not be allowed because of the off-the-ball incident (we saw this happen in a recent Rugby world cup game).
If an incident of the Crouch-dreadlocks kind is missed by the match officials, I see no reason why a player should not subsequently be punished. Pulling another player’s hair, like raising your hands to his face, is completely unacceptable. But doing so - not out of anger - but calculated to gain an advantage i.e. score a goal, is not only contrary to the rules of the game but is also cheating.
The thrust of your contentions appear to be to condone cheating, or at the very least permit players to continue to get away with it. My concern is to prevent it. Where blatant cheating on critical decisions does occur, the players and (when appropriate) their teams should be punished.
[...] then fell to the ground as if mortally wounded, holding his head. But we all know that story [...]
I am a huge football fan. But it is hard to justify why we like football so much to someone (like an American lets say) when we have players like Dida showing such despicable sportsmanship. As good as some of these players maybe they are ruining the game! Comparing with other sports like hockey, american football, and rugby, football players tend to act like sissies for every contact (when those guys get hurt they are actually hurt). It happens in every match - Dida being one of the more worst recent case.
I am very disappointed in everyone who puts up with this type of crap. I don’t understand how fans and coaches can tolerate it, and honestly support it. I think all football organizations should crack down hard on these antics and dish out costly punishments for it. I think referees need help. I cannot accept that referees are part of the problem for then the game is totally lost, but I think they need help - even if it means that they use instant reply.
We need to save the game of football from the prima donnas. I have been in awe of the competitiveness, integrity and sportmanship of the rugby world cup. Hopefully we can get some of this back in football soon.
TWO GAME BAN!!! I think that is the kind of statement that needs to be made to jokers like Dida. I just hope the spineless jellyfish at UEFA don’t back down on appeal.