Euro 2008 seems destined to be remembered for open, attacking football thanks to the referees who have not hogged the headlines for a change. By Paul Wilson.
It was a hugely enjoyable European Championship. The UEFA, Austria, Switzerland and everyone else responsible can congratulate themselves on a tournament that seemed to please just about everyone.
The only complaint that could possibly be levelled against Euro 2008, before the television pictures went on the blink anyway, is that too few people were able to see it live in the grounds. As with Portugal four years ago some of the stadiums were on the small side, but unlike Euro 2004 this was an event co-hosted by two sizeable countries right in the middle of Europe, and it seemed a shame to stage Croatia versus Germany, say, in a ground with a capacity of 30,000.
That is a small quibble, however, compared to everything the organisers got right. As you would expect, UEFA boffins are hard at work right now coming up with schemes to spoil the competition next time round — faced with even greater distances and less established infrastructure in Poland and Ukraine in 2012, the plan is to dilute the entertainment on offer by expanding the number of finalists — but Euro 2008 deserves to be remembered for a high number of memorable matches, a high number of unexpected results, and an uncommonly low number of referee’s whistles.
That is to say, this is a tournament that has not been dominated by over-fussy refereeing or too strict an adherence to edicts or new guidelines. There has not been a rash of red cards, barely a game has been distorted or devalued by insensitive refereeing and, for the most part, the players have proved restrained and responsible.
There may have been too much exaggeration of injury for some tastes, but the tournament has not been plagued by diving, cheating or obvious foul play. Perhaps the truism that you don’t notice good refereeing applies to tournaments as well as individual games. One of the reasons Euro 2008 seems destined to be remembered for open, attacking football is that the referees have not hogged the headlines for a change.
Just about the only decision that everyone could agree was silly and uncalled for did not involve players at all, but the managers of Austria and Germany who were sent to the stands. The set-piece debate early on in the tournament — about whether Ruud van Nistelrooy’s ‘offside’ goal against Italy should have stood — was comprehensively won by the referees and the rulebook, with some commentators’ reputations and familiarity with the rules suffering collateral damage. Criticism of referees by managers has been rare and has usually been desperate; Luiz Felipe Scolari’s mime of a push by Michael Ballack comes to mind, as does Slaven Bilic’s complaint about a few added seconds in overtime and Poland’s massive over-reaction to the late but legitimate penalty Howard Webb awarded Austria.
This is not to suggest there have been no refereeing mistakes — we might have heard a lot more about the second-half penalty Philipp Lahm was denied against Turkey had his late goal not decided the semifinal in Germany’s favour — just that it has been a refreshing change to be able to concentrate on the football instead of the fouls.
Refereeing has been a hot topic at tournaments these past 20 years precisely because of the changes made to protect skilful players after Marco van Basten was forced to retire early through being kicked. At first the intention to outlaw tackles from behind and penalise any form of contact other than with the ball was laughed at and deemed unworkable. The first World Cup played under the new spirit in America in 1994 featured all sorts of arguments and inconsistencies over referees’ interpretation of what was allowable; hardly surprising, since FIFA’s original edict had suggested every single tackle from behind was an automatic foul that had to be punished by dismissal.
The authorities eventually backed down from that ludicrous stance in time for the World Cup to proceed edgily, although David Beckham’s dismissal at France 98 showed the contact issue was still hugely subjective. It seemed clear to most people that while Beckham was guilty of a foul, and perhaps deserving of a yellow card, he had not done anything sufficiently heinous to warrant red. Neither did Ronaldinho four years later against England in Japan, though as Brazil with 10 men were still comfortable winners in Shizuoka not so much of a fuss was made about that.
The last World Cup was notable for the famous Cristiano Ronaldo wink and the infamous Graham Poll three-card trick — or at least these things were noted in England — whereas this tournament has passed off with barely a controversy to its name and has been all the better for it.
Even Volkan Demirel’s otherwise mystifying last-minute dismissal against the Czech Republic was explainable once the TV replays hit on the right bit of footage, and Turkey’s goalkeeper could hardly claim accidental or incidental contact when it was Jan Koller who went over like a skittle. Amusing as it is to note that Volkan Demirel translates into something like Volcanic Ironhand, the goalkeeper has no one else to blame for sitting out the next two matches and watching the elderly Rustu Recber make expensive mistakes against Germany. What Turkey might have gone on to achieve with their first-choice goalkeeper is anyone’s guess.
Comments
SHARE