|
Post by eusebio13 on Mar 23, 2009 7:50:01 GMT
Some people need to work on there interpersonal skills www.101greatgoals.com/2009/03/bad-loser-pedro-silva-throws-away-his-silver-medal-sporting-lisbon-benfica/“Why did I throw my loser’s medal away? Because why should I keep it? I tell you if that was a penalty I’m willing for my son to die!” - Pedro Silva. Yesterday’s Portuguese Carlsberg Cup final between local powerhouses Sporting Lisbon and Benfica ended in controversy when Sporting’s Pedro Silva disrespectfully chucked away his silver medal after seeing his side lose on 3-2 penalties. But Silva did have cause for his actions. Having taken the lead through Bruno Pereirinha after just three minutes, referee Lucilio Baptista made a horrible call against the Sporting centre half when he adjudged the number 5 of handballing in the box when camera replays clearly evidenced that the ball had only run across the defender’s chest. And to then make a bad situation worse, Pedro Silva was shown his second yellow card and thus ordered to an early bath. With emotions running at boiling point at the game’s end, Silva publicly refused to accept the silver medal, opting to hurl the runner’s-up award on the turf rather than walk away with the second-prize. The incident, including footage of the poor penalty decision, can be seen here.
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on Mar 23, 2009 7:54:00 GMT
Mind you he had a point about the decision, Benfica got the penalty for a hand ball
|
|
|
Post by Markqpr on Mar 23, 2009 10:15:13 GMT
Reminded me a bit of when Sir Les got sent off at Everton. I really thought he was going to hit the ref!
That referee makes Atwell look good! Shocking decision. All Silva did was show the kind of passion we demand from our players. Real footballers have real emotions, so good on him for expressing them!
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Mar 23, 2009 10:16:28 GMT
Speaking of bad losers, Sir Alex wouldn't do any interviews after Saturday's loss. I know he won't talk to the Beeb but on Saturday his only comment to any of the media was a statement on the ManU website.
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Mar 23, 2009 13:00:04 GMT
Wonder if he would have thrown away the winner's medal if his team had been the lucky one.
This player who, it goes without saying, never makes important mistakes himself.
I'm not impressed by the 'bad luck' that so many complain about. If you're that good, the bad luck won't make any difference. If I miss the train by a few seconds, I'm convinced the guard should have let me on. But if I'd arrived at the station 5 minutes earlier, it wouldn't have been an issue.
So if your team isn't already in a position where the bad luck doesn't matter, whose fault is that? Why weren't they six goals to the good, if they were so good, and the game was so important?
Was that the ref's fault too? We have all these brilliant players who win little or nothing, betrayed by all these dreadful refs who have the temerity to make a mistake in the other side's favour.
Dear, dear.
Play better, mate, then you won't need to invoke the Goddess of Luck if something goes against you.
I'd have some sympathy with players if they were sportsmen, and, like snooker players do, and cricketers once did, they immediately notified the referees of their own bits of 'luck' where the ref failed to notice something invisible to him, which favoured the opposition.
Wonder how often Silva has done that. Frequently, I'm sure.
Not to mention their own late tackles, dives, encroachments and other gamesmanship they get away with.
If players were like that, perhaps the refs would be more compassionate - and given some leeway by the authorities - about reversing a decision.
But I daresay the ref - and the authorities - have had all the compassion squeezed out of them by the barrage of condemnation and abuse they get whatever decision they make, even if it is right, because it doesn't suit one side or the other.
Do referees really make more mistakes than the players? I've tried counting, but the players make so many in even a minute or two it's no contest.
These things apart, I feel for poor old Silva.
And his son.
|
|
|
Post by Markqpr on Mar 23, 2009 14:04:40 GMT
ingham, undoubtably after the game, away from the emotion and tension built up on the pitch, Silva may have sat down, calmed down and come to the same conclusion about it that you have reached. He may not have, he may be a hot headed individual prone to making rash decisions in his everyday life, though in matters like this he should be judged on the moment. Some of his behaviour was also due to some guilt on his part, i'm sure, as it was he who got sent off and he who was adjudged to have given the penalty away. In such an important game he probably felt he let his team mates down and who better to blame than the ref? Passion for me is always great to see, though your right, shame for the son and put like that Silva is probably more than a little gutted at the moment!
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Mar 23, 2009 17:38:17 GMT
I'm sure you're right, Mark. We all understand hot-headedness, and a tendency to blame someone else because we've not got it quite right. And the someone else is usually the ref or the manager in football.
They say Alf Ramsey wouldn't hammer a player after a bad game. the manager and the player might be too emotional, too close to it. He'd talk to him privately at training on the Monday, avoiding blame, but making some constructive suggestion.
But I think there's something more interesting at the bottom of it all. Stanley Matthews - going back a bit, ha ha - was noted for his astounding training regime, on the sand dunes at dawn and all that stuff. As well as his sportsmanship.
Coolness, or even gentleness, is partly temperament or disposition. But Matthews was highly competitive, hence the strict training regime.
So we might say that his apparent detachment wasn't temperamental at all. He was very calm in the dressing room when the team lost, which made some think that he wasn't all that bothered. But he'd been bothered enough to go out and work at his game when today's players would still be struggling home from the nightclub.
I think his commitment wasn't aimed at others. Shout at the ref, lash out at the opposition. But at himself. Not just in the dressing room after the game, when - rather conveniently - it's too late to do anything constructive, but you can annoy everyone else by kicking the tea tray over. He saved it for when it would do most good. Before the next game, as well as during it. At his own expense, in his own time.
I heard him on the radio once, not all that long ago, and the interviewer, as they often did, asserted that Matthews never had a bad game. SM denied this, and the interviewer said but that was because it was the strikers' fault when Matthews' crosses failed to produce the goals. SM's reply was 'if the striker couldn't score from my crosses, it was my job to give him crosses he could score from'.
What an attitude! Not 'blame him' but 'it's down to me, I'll sort it'.
But I also think his sportsmanship served the same purpose. Who is the cheat really cheating? In many ways, he's cheating himself and his team mates. He's making himself look better than he really is, and that raises false expectations he won't be able to fulfil.
Whereas the sportsman who knows there's a great deal of luck, even for deserving winners, and for losers whose luck only just ran out, is living in the real world. By recognising the other team's achievement, he is realistic about what he needs to do next time to run out the winner himself.
So I tend to take the view that blaming the ref is a way of directing our attention away from the real cause of the team's problems. And, of course, that was your point. The player is doubly frustrated because he knows he's at fault, and is compounding his fault by overreacting.
Perhaps a true professional, and a true sportsman, Matthews and his like, would see the late tackle is an admission that you're too slow, your positioning is dodgy, you're too one-footed to tackle properly, or some other flaw which the player is desperately trying to hide. something for them to exploit. Or, if it's part of their game, something to deal with to make them more effective.
So excusing an outburst because it's human has its place, of course it does. And I hope the Club doesn't react angrily and discipline him in a pointless way. Why shouldn't his hotheaded reaction send him to the training ground to work on all the things he doesn't do very well. Then something good will come out of it.
But how often do we hear of Clubs doing that? At least he wasn't an Arsenal player, or Wenger would have gone blind again.
After all, referees usually seem to know how to blow their whistle, and for my part, that's all I expect of them. How on earth are they supposed to work out what actually happened most of the time. Not just becasue of the fouls and cheating, but also the fact that the players, even at the top level, struggle to do the most basic things, like controlling the ball and passing it.
I often wondered if Clough was thinking in another dimension when he went all ref-friendly. Why rant and rave at the players himself? why not let the ref do his job for him. So if the ref sent a Forest player off, he'd say 'you were right to send him off, ref'. Let the player ponder. Consider, was it my fault? Was it wrong? have I let the side down - all the things you pointed out in your post.
Maybe Silva could remind himself to thank the ref for working so hard. Whatever decisions he gave. Without the ref, there would be no game. No way could we trust the players to be honest. Still less ourselves. We know what we want in advance. The ref has to go with what we're actually capable of, and what he thinks we've actually done.
We do a lot of damage with our expectations, inflated as they often seem to be. Not just to refs, but to our managers as well.
For me, football isn't about believing we'll win, it's a trial of strength and skill, and the whole point of having a trial every week is to find out how good we really are. Not merely to confirm our own assumption that we must be.
Assumptions of that kind produce just the sort of frustration that leads to players abusing refs, and supporters booing the players or the manager. And make it difficult to do anything about their shortcomings, because we assume strengths which aren't there, and wish away weaknesses which are.
And surely success depends to a large extent on understanding how bad we are - in order to address the problems - as well as exploiting our strengths.
Anyway, a great thread on a fascinating topic, mate.
|
|