Showing posts with label controversy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label controversy. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Game Over

That's all folks ... for the Needham girls that is.

The Needham Rockets fell to the Brockton Boxers 7 - 1 in Massachusetts high school soccer playoff action. This after a failed attempt by parents of (5) suspended players to get their suspensions overturned by a Norfolk County Superior Court Judge.

Here is a good report from a local news station (NECN):



While what happened to cause this series of suspensions will unfold in the days ahead, I for one am glad the match seemed to go well for the referees as not a single story referred to the match, except for the score and the circumstances surrounding it.

As more is learned about how the players and coach will be dealt with, I'll bring it here.

Saturday, November 6, 2010

FA killed the video star

For all who looked in the last couple of days at Nah Nah Nani, you may have noticed a change.

The video is gone as the FA has claimed a copyright violation.

Strange huh ...

Not really I think. In fact I am surprised it took this long.

To me while I am all for protection of intellectual property rights, and being trained in the law I understand that it is necessary to patrol such marks to effectively enforce them in the future, I do not think this is why the video was pulled.

If so, this one would not be available:



Right?

How about this one?



Nope, not that one either ... Hmmm, that's odd. What could it be?

My guess, the FA is deathly embarrassed about this one and while it can serve as a great lesson for those who view it, they are not looking at the larger picture, and pulled it.

Too bad actually, as it is a good lesson on many fronts.

Here was the live look ... also still on You Tube:



I don't expect any of these to get pulled any time soon.

Finally, and just to rub salt in the wound, here is a post game interview with Harry Redknapp, manager of the Spurs on the incident by ESPN back on 30-OCT-10:



I don't expect this to get pulled either, but Harry while threatened with getting pulled himself, or at least fined substantially, was let off free with a rap on the knuckles and a lecture from the FA about the responsibility of the manager.

For me this compounds just how embarrassed the FA is about the whole thing.

Next time I've saving the video.

Nah Nah Nani

Kicking Back gives special thanks to Steve for bringing this one forward for publishing.

For those who have not seen this bizarre goal between Man U and Tottenham back on 30-OCT-2010, take a look below, or at the link here.


A disclaimer - My answer here is not a "book" answer. While I will answer the more technical aspects of this catastrophe, I will not cite chapter and verse the LOTG, but rather reference it, this will focus more on management than rules of THE game.

In this clip, we are treated to a chain of events where several mistakes were made by the players, and I would opine the referee. Lets review the sequence of major events:
  • Man U #17 (Nani) received a ball in the Tottenham penalty area and was possibly fouled by Tottenham #4 (Kaboul) at the corner of the 6 yard box, in front of the Tottenham net.
  • The ball is picked up by the Tottenham GK (da Silva Gomes) and placed at about 12 yards from goal. His demeanor indicated he believed there was a free kick.
  • From the video and reports the referee had not stopped play in any way, and the JAR had not indicated anything.
  • All the players (all that can be seen in the video) react as if the play was stopped and a free kick was about to be taken.
  • Nani jogs to the ball, steps up, and shoots the ball into the net while the GK looked to about to take what seemed to be a free kick.
  • Referee and JAR allow the goal making it 2 - 0 Man U in about the 86'.
  • Understandable protests erupt inside the field.
Now, take a close look at the video, at 0:30 and 0:34. The referee, Mark Clattenburg, pretty clearly signals something strikingly resembling a play on signal. This first signal seemed to be at the GK (as Nani was on the floor) and the second one seemed to be at Nani as he was looking in that direction.

So that's what happened. What do I think?
The referee blew this one - badly.

Why?
This whole episode did not comport with the spirit of the game, despite complying with the LOTG.

Now, technically, if the referee or JAR believed there was no foul by either Kaboul (trip), or Nani (offside or handball) and allowed the play to continue, the result is a valid goal. No stoppage. Goal. There is no reason for another result. Shame on the GK for putting the ball down, and bravo for Nani for taking advantage.

If a foul was called on any of the above, the restart should have been for the foul. It would stand to reason that the referee did not call one, as he allowed the goal to stand. Reports of the incident agree that no foul was called.

So now what? Do we allow such a goal to stand as referees? One that while technically correct, is against the spirit of the game? Where is the spirit of the game enumerated in the LOTG?

It's not in text, and that's why this is such a difficult decision.

So a couple of folks may be leaning back in their chair and saying, "So we are supposed to not allow a goal, not based in the LOTG, but some ethereal aspect that is not in text anywhere, called "spirit"?"

Yes.

This is the type of decision that turns a person who "enforces the rules", into a referee that is respected by players, coaches, and those who love the game.

It's easy to enforce the rules really. The most difficult part is to manage the players in such a way as to let them know you have THE games best interest at heart.

Letting Man U score a goal in a way that openly takes advantage of such confusion is contrary to the spirit of THE game, and as the referee was the cause for some of that confusion, part of this is on him.

So now what? How does a referee legitimately restart the game in such a case to nullify the goal? Making something up out of whole cloth is just as detrimental to the spirit of the game as is what actually happened.

  1. If they believe there was a foul, call the foul. In this case Nani may well have been legitimately busted for handling when he got up off the floor. Restart there. This may very well have been what the GK was reacting to.
  2. Drop the ball. Law 8 allows the referee to drop the ball if the ball is in play and required to stop play for any reason not mentioned in the LOTG. This situation could be such a reason. Now I will say, this would be a tough sell at the EPL level ... but just as allowed per the LOTG.
For me, at the heart of this issue is the question if a player should be allowed to use the LOTG to circumvent the spirit of THE game.

My answer is a clear no. Exceptional referees apply the laws to obtain the right result for THE game, not just follow them like a set of directions that can result in unjust results, such as this goal.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Hijo got the Benzo

Our little friend to the left here, benzodiazepine, is a psychoactive drug.

In gardening vernacular, it gets into your squash and affects your central nervous system. It is a sedative and anti-anxiety drug.

The first benzodiazepine, chlordiazepoxide (Librium), was discovered accidentally by Leo Sternbach in 1955, and made available in 1960 by Hoffmann–La Roche, which has also marketed diazepam (Valium) since 1963 ... or so says Wikipedia.

No, I am not engineer, turned lawyer (almost), turned pharmacist. This is the latest drama to unfold in front of our eyes at a 2nd division soccer match in Peru.

Seems that an unidentified member of Sport Ancash’s coaching staff has been accused of giving players from opposing team Hijos de Acosvinchos water laced with Benzo. This after four of them passed out in the waning moments of their Peruvian second-division game.

Seeing is believing, so look at the article and video here.

Seeking comments after the match, reporters asked Sport Ancash President José Mallaqui how the opposing players wound up with benzo in their bloodstream.

In confirming the hospital results, Mallaqui said to generaccion.com, and I quote:
“I was able to find out that the players ate rotisserie chicken and had some energy drinks before the game, which ended up hurting them ...".
KFC and Red Bull caused this?

Wow. 

Best part of the whole thing was that Sporting Ancash still lost the game 3-0.

Sunday, September 5, 2010

MLS losing control?

If you are asking about their web site, the answer to some is a resounding YES!

Kudos to MLS Rumors who broke this story about how the MLS Goal Of The Week (GOTW) has been tampered with by some (very) knowledgeable fans, and assisted by a seemingly very poor quality web site from MLS.

Also, if you read the comments posted, this apparently is not new to most avid MLS'ers. Go figure. One particularly humerous comment stated:

wait. are you telling me that something about the wonderful league website mlssoccer.com is screwed up, amateurish, or down right stupid? i am shocked. shocked i say. and in other news: water is wet, the sun is very hot and the sky is up.

Ouch.

Now I am not going to go all grassy knoll, but it is worth asking the question if MLS has known about this ... or is participating condoning the acts? Just a question, and not a statement or accusation. (MLS legal please take note.)

For now apparently the page for this weeks GOTW is down and MLS may be rethinking its technology choices to avoid such obvious tampering in the future.

I highly recommend reading the full article here, courtesy of MLS Rumors.