In 1891 an FA Cup quarter-final between Notts County and Stoke changed the game forever. Notts County’s left-back handled the ball on the line...but penalties did not exist. Stoke were awarded a free-kick on the line which the county goalkeeper easily smothered. Notts County won 1-0 and eventually reached the final. This incident caused such controversy that later the same year the FA was obliged to introduce penalties.
Unfortunately for Stoke, the very next season they were involved in another game, this time in the league, which changed the game forever. Stoke were losing 0-1 to Aston Villa when they were awarded a penalty two minutes from time. The Villa keeper kicked the (only) ball out of the ground and by the time it had been retrieved the referee had blown full time. This incident caused such controversy that the law was changed to allow added time for penalties.
Both incidents caused huge upset among the football community, relative to the brouhaha surrounding France’s qualification for the World Cup. It was obvious that there was a problem and a solution had to be found for the good of the game. Of course, nothing changed for Stoke. They lost both games and the results stood.
It was unlucky for Stoke and all the other teams who had lost in these ways before the rule changes; similarly, it was very lucky for the teams who subsequently benefitted from the rule changes. Ireland were unlucky this week; as soon as the authorities change their archaic thinking – if the Victorians can do it so can they! – and introduce video technology other teams will benefit.
When the incident happened I was as outraged as everyone else. I swore at the TV, I tweeted, I facebooked, I blogged, I 606ed. But in the grand scheme of things, it’s another historic(al) incident in the football timeline. Shame for Ireland, but thems the breaks.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Thursday, November 19, 2009
No, he cheated
So now we’ve all slept on it and Ireland are still out. The blatant cheating and the incompetence of the refereeing trio have got the world talking, and it seems a few people are on Henry’s side. So let’s have a look at a few of the things they are saying:
“Henry didn’t mean it, it was ball to hand” – but he touched it twice, and made no attempt to take his hand away from the ball on feeling the contact.
“It was the responsibility of the referee and the linesmen” – yes, but the referee didn’t put the ball on Henry’s hand. And it’s the player’s responsibility not to cheat.
“The defenders stopped playing to protest” – true, but that just shows how honest they are.
“Ireland should have scored more” – they scored enough for penalties.
“Who says they deserved to go through?” – everyone, including the French, because Ireland were better over two legs – Domenech’s France are rubbish.
“Henry is basically an honest guy, etc”- if he’d said yes, it was handball, I had to do it for my country, I’m really sorry for the Irish, then okay, but he disdainfully passed the buck to the referee.
“It’s unfair that he should be remembered for that goal” – no, it would be unfair for Gallas to be remembered for that goal, and again, he could have made things easier for himself by not resorting to cowardice.
“He couldn’t possibly say anything at the time” – Robbie Fowler did.
“Keane handled as well” – he did, but he didn’t protest when the referee blew for handball, he just walked away.
“It’s happened before” – yes, but not with as much at stake on one particular moment.
“Move on, get over it” – God bless them, Ireland don’t get many chances.
“It’s overreacting” – as one BBC journalist said, the English STILL bring up Mexico and that was 23 years ago!
“The referee basically had a good game” – no he didn’t, the four handballs (on both sides) and the two atrocious French dives went uncarded.
And here’s a cliché to finish off with – “the French are so arrogant” – actually, they have been absolutely fabulous to the Irish. I live in Dublin and today met a huge number of French people who were anything but arrogant. Mind, it would have been a different story if it had been against England...
“Henry didn’t mean it, it was ball to hand” – but he touched it twice, and made no attempt to take his hand away from the ball on feeling the contact.
“It was the responsibility of the referee and the linesmen” – yes, but the referee didn’t put the ball on Henry’s hand. And it’s the player’s responsibility not to cheat.
“The defenders stopped playing to protest” – true, but that just shows how honest they are.
“Ireland should have scored more” – they scored enough for penalties.
“Who says they deserved to go through?” – everyone, including the French, because Ireland were better over two legs – Domenech’s France are rubbish.
“Henry is basically an honest guy, etc”- if he’d said yes, it was handball, I had to do it for my country, I’m really sorry for the Irish, then okay, but he disdainfully passed the buck to the referee.
“It’s unfair that he should be remembered for that goal” – no, it would be unfair for Gallas to be remembered for that goal, and again, he could have made things easier for himself by not resorting to cowardice.
“He couldn’t possibly say anything at the time” – Robbie Fowler did.
“Keane handled as well” – he did, but he didn’t protest when the referee blew for handball, he just walked away.
“It’s happened before” – yes, but not with as much at stake on one particular moment.
“Move on, get over it” – God bless them, Ireland don’t get many chances.
“It’s overreacting” – as one BBC journalist said, the English STILL bring up Mexico and that was 23 years ago!
“The referee basically had a good game” – no he didn’t, the four handballs (on both sides) and the two atrocious French dives went uncarded.
And here’s a cliché to finish off with – “the French are so arrogant” – actually, they have been absolutely fabulous to the Irish. I live in Dublin and today met a huge number of French people who were anything but arrogant. Mind, it would have been a different story if it had been against England...
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)