world cup

[Luc-Emmanuel]

Originally Posted by lawyerdad

I was thinking the same thing. Without meaning to condone the comments by Matterazzi, it doesn't seem to me that he did anything that isn't a tacitly accepted practice in football (both kinds), basketball, and undoubtedly many other sports. At exactly what point did Matterazzi "cross the line" and do something warranting a suspension? By engaging in smack-talk with Zidane? By using profanity? By directing the insults toward a family member rather than the opposing player himself? What if he had told Zidane "you're getting slow, old man, you can't keep up with me anymore"? What if he'd said "Zidane, you suck." What if he'd used a homophobic slur toward Zidane? What if he'd brought up the surrender of Paris? What if he'd offered some abstruse but intellectually stinging insult about Camus' The Stranger that could be construed, in part, as a comment on Zidane's Algerian ancestry? What if he'd said, "Zidane, your mother wears combat boots"?
To me, it seems like a effort to allow Zidane's exit from the sport to seem a little less shameful by suggesting that Zidane's absurd attack was, while unfortunate, an "understandable" manly response to intolerable "provocation", crediting Zidane's ridiculous attempt to paint it as a matter of honor or principle.
Why would it be different in sports than in real life when taunting in itself is worthy of a sentence? !luc

 

[Luc-Emmanuel]

Originally Posted by romafan

What I could have expected?

Well certainly not this - their action (punishing for verbal provocation) is unprecedneted. It has been the case in the past that the player committing the violence is punished, and not the player who goaded him in acting.

ZZ is retired, so his suspension means nothing. Matterazzi misses two game which for an older player can be the death knell of an international career. This action is being taken in an attempt to mitigate the shameful way in which that hothead stupidly chose to end his career...
matterazi benefited from Nesta's injury anyway. !luc

 

[romafan]

Originally Posted by Luc-Emmanuel

matterazi benefited from Nesta's injury anyway.

!luc

So what? Materazzi is also a putz and was most likely deserving of more than a headbutt. It doesn't change the fact that he's being scapegoated in an attempt to shade ZZ's ignominious exit from the game with a bit of dignity.

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by Luc-Emmanuel

Why would it be different in sports than in real life when taunting in itself is worthy of a sentence?

!luc
I am not certain what this means. It appears, however, to mix apples and firetrucks. As I understood them, romafan's initial query and your initial response were about the fine levied on matterazzi in the context of the FIFA "system". This statement of yours departs entirely from that context and attempts to substitute and entirely different, and apparently irrelevant, point of reference. Even assuming I knew exactly what you mean by taunting being "worthy" of a "sentence" in real life, what does that has to do with anything or not? Either the punishment makes sense when measured against discipline meted out (or not meted out) by FIFA in other circumstances (the only relevant inquiry, as I see it) or it does not. How Matterazzi's statement and Zidane's response might be viewed if they occurred in a court of law, in a public library, in a WWF wrestling match, or at a "Fight Night" gathering have nothing to do with anything, imo.

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by Luc-Emmanuel

matterazi benefited from Nesta's injury anyway.

!luc
So what? Evidently you're just trolling now.

 

[gdl203]

Originally Posted by lawyerdad

I was thinking the same thing. Without meaning to condone the comments by Matterazzi, it doesn't seem to me that he did anything that isn't a tacitly accepted practice in football (both kinds), basketball, and undoubtedly many other sports. At exactly what point did Matterazzi "cross the line" and do something warranting a suspension? By engaging in smack-talk with Zidane? By using profanity? By directing the insults toward a family member rather than the opposing player himself? What if he had told Zidane "you're getting slow, old man, you can't keep up with me anymore"? What if he'd said "Zidane, you suck." What if he'd used a homophobic slur toward Zidane? What if he'd brought up the surrender of Paris? What if he'd offered some abstruse but intellectually stinging insult about Camus' The Stranger that could be construed, in part, as a comment on Zidane's Algerian ancestry? What if he'd said, "Zidane, your mother wears combat boots"?
To me, it seems like a effort to allow Zidane's exit from the sport to seem a little less shameful by suggesting that Zidane's absurd attack was, while unfortunate, an "understandable" manly response to intolerable "provocation", crediting Zidane's ridiculous attempt to paint it as a matter of honor or principle.

Funny rant but the point is that Materazzi was investigated for breaching article 54 of the FIFA code, partly because Zidane accused him of doing so and partly because he himself admitted to doing so. He was sanctioned by the absolute minimum sanction provided by the code (2 game suspension and CHF 5,000 fine). How can anyone in his right mind argue that this is unfair to him? It is the minimal sanction for a fault he confessed. Not sanctioning him in that context would have been ridiculous and in total contempt for the code.

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by gdl203

Funny rant but the point is that Materazzi was investigated for breaching article 54 of the FIFA code, partly because Zidane accused him of doing so and partly because he himself admitted to doing so. He was sanctioned by the absolute minimum sanction provided by the code (2 game suspension and CHF 5,000 fine). How can anyone in his right mind argue that this is unfair to him? It is the minimal sanction for a fault he confessed. Not sanctioning him in that context would have been ridiculous and in total contempt for the code.
A very good point. Not being an soccer (sic: football) expert, I was unaware of the code provision you cite. Still, I think it is relevant to consider whether that code provision is routinely enforced or ignored. I had assumed that the penalty imposed on Matterazzi for his comments was relatively unprecedented, but may well be wrong.

 

[romafan]

Originally Posted by lawyerdad

A very good point. Not being an soccer (sic: football) expert, I was unaware of the code provision you cite. Still, I think it is relevant to consider whether that code provision is routinely enforced or ignored. I had assumed that the penalty imposed on Matterazzi for his comments was relatively unprecedented, but may well be wrong.

I think you are correct. Players reacting to provocation generally take their lumps w/ no comment. I think ZZ's was such a vicious meltdown that he felt compelled to give some reason for it. I don't know of any case (but I am by no means a FIFA disciplinary historian) where the provacatur has been punished for trash talking.

Look at De Rossi's punishment - 4 games for an arguably unintentional elbow while jumping and going for the ball. The retired ZZ gets 3(!) games for an especially vicious, intentional and potentially harmful, assault occurring after the play had moved downfield.

 

[gdl203]

Originally Posted by romafan

Look at De Rossi's punishment - 4 games for an arguably unintentional elbow while jumping and going for the ball. The retired ZZ gets 3(!) games for an especially vicious, intentional and potentially harmful, assault occurring after the play had moved downfield.

One was provoked, the other one was not

 

[Steve B.]

Good God- 68 pages!

Mon. Night Football is on ESPN this year...

 

[manicturncoat]

I think that only one thing has been proven in this whole mess, that the French still have not learned how to lose. I have yet to hear one word of congratulations from a Frenchman, instead, they blabber on endlessly about the headbutt while at the same time insinuating that there is something illegitimate about the Italian victory. Maybe by their sixth world cup final they will learn how to handle defeat with a little more aplomb.

 

[Etienne]

Originally Posted by manicturncoat

I have yet to hear one word of congratulations from a Frenchman, instead, they blabber on endlessly about the headbutt while at the same time insinuating that there is something illegitimate about the Italian victory.
I have never read anything about the Italian victory being "illegitimate". Sure, it is not a pretty win, but it is still a win, that's about all there is to it.

What more do you want? You expect the loser in a competition to cheer? I don't remember the Italians doing so in 2000. I don't understand your attack on the French attitude.

 

[countdemoney]

Originally Posted by romafan

Look at De Rossi's punishment - 4 games for an arguably unintentional elbow while jumping and going for the ball.

Arguably? Even his coach wasn't willing to defend it. The shame is that DeRossi got to thug it up in the finals. He should have been banned for the tourney and additional games after it.

"There is no doubt that he is a lad who is considered to be a fantastic kid and an excellent player but he has to change his ways" . . . added the Italy coach

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/st...371589&cc=5901

There's absolutely no call for play like that.

 

[gdl203]

Originally Posted by countdemoney

Arguably? Even his coach wasn't willing to defend it. The shame is that DeRossi got to thug it up in the finals. He should have been banned for the tourney and additional games after it.

"There is no doubt that he is a lad who is considered to be a fantastic kid and an excellent player but he has to change his ways" . . . added the Italy coach

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/st...371589&cc=5901

There's absolutely no call for play like that.


Not much to argue indeed...

edited

 

[odoreater]

Originally Posted by gdl203

Not much to argue indeed...

edited

If that dude ever comes to Jersey he's getting a beatdown.