Cheaters Never Lose

When the members of the French national soccer team step onto the field for their opening World Cup match against Uruguay on June 11, they will be playing under an ominous cloud of controversy.  Indeed there will be a few in the crowd who question whether the French team should have been admitted into the tournament in the first place.

It all started back on November 18th, 2009 during a qualifying match between France and Ireland.  With both teams needing the victory in order to qualify for next summer’s World cup, the stakes were extremely high, especially for France who enjoyed something of a dynasty during the late 90’s and early 2000’s but had underachieved on the international stage as of late.  The match was the second of a two-leg play-off and was being played in Paris’ illustrious Stade de France.  The first leg, which took place in Ireland, had ended in a 1 goal victory for France so when the scoreline once again read 1-0 for the visitors at the end of regulation, the second leg was sent into overtime to break the aggregate tie.

With 17 minutes remaining in extra time, French player Flourant Malouda lobbed a free kick into the penalty area toward striker Thierry Henry.  A slow-motion replay of the incident reveals that Henri caught the ball with his hand in order to prevent it from bouncing out of bounds, and directed toward his right foot, which he used to pass the ball to the incoming William Gallas, who then headed it into the net for the winning goal.  The Irish defenders immediately began protesting to the head referee that the ball had been handled but neither the referee nor his two assistants on the sidelines had seen the infraction and they therefore rebuffed the incensed Irish players.

After the match, Henry confessed to handling the ball but claimed it wasn’t done on purpose.  When asked why he didn’t come forward during the match Henry had this to say. “Yes, there was hand, but I'm not the referee … Obviously I would have preferred that things panned out differently but I am not the official. I do not think we have stolen qualification.”  There was talk of organizing a rematch, which Henri and the rest of the French side all agreed to, but in the end it was decided that nothing could be done and France’s ticket the to world cup was stamped.

The incident sparked debate among soccer fans and sports writers about the role of referees, and whether or not Henry's actions constituted “cheating”.  Most commentators came to Henry’s defense, agreeing that it was the job of the referee and not to player to spot and penalize violations.  In fact, by expecting the player to come forward of his own volition and ask the the referee retract the goal, Henri’s critics are holding him to a standard that virtually no athlete in professional sports has ever lived up to.  I have never seen a professional athlete in any sport challenge an official’s decision that was in his or her favour, especially not in a game of this magnitude.  Such confessionals are even less likely in a sport like soccer where players routinely commit acts of skulduggery that are much more brazen and calculated than Henry’s.  Whether it’s pulling on an opponent’s jersey to prevent him from moving into an attacking position, faking an injury to try to earn a penalty shot, or invoking the infamous hand of god soccer players will do whatever it takes to gain an advantage.

The reason for this apparent epidemic of dishonesty has to do with the way that we conceptualize the role of the official in modern sports.  With few exceptions, the referee is viewed as an adversary on the field of play, someone who,  by virtue of their position, is there to hinder your success.  Therefore, deceiving or outwhitting an official is not only accepted but it is often encouranged.  It’s not unlike tricking an opposing player into thinking you’re going to go left when you’re actually going right.  Furthermore, the presence of a uniformed arbitrator means that players can absolve themselves of any duty to uphold the principles of fairplay and integrity since, as Henry correctly pointed out, that’s the referee’s job.

Most people who’ve played sports competitively, have witnessed this phenomenon first-hand.  An example from my personal experience took place just a couple months ago.  I was playing in two recreational volleyball leagues, one with refs and one without.  The leagues were roughly even both in terms of skill level and the level of competitiveness among the players.  However, in the league that didn’t have referees, every person on the court was charged with the task of making calls.  If a ball landed near the out-of-bounds line the closest player would decide if it was in or out.  Attacking players were expected to speak up when they touched the net or if they had overstepped the back row line.  Not suprisingly, there were very few disputes over calls in that league and any dispute that did arise was quickly resolved by simply replaying the point.

By contrast, in the other league, it seemed that every rally was marred by some kind of controversy, with players from the penalized side contesting almost every call.  Because the league couldn’t afford linesmen, the referees would rely on both teams to tell her if a ball was in or out.  Again, not surprisingly, whenever this happened, players would almost always rule in their own favour.

Based on these observations, it would appear that many leagues could really benefit from elinimating the role of the referree altogether.  Unfortunately this isn’t an option for international soccer, where national pride is on the line and the players are competing for what is perhaps the most coveted prize in all of sports.  As for the question of whether Thierry Henry cheated, I believe it’s like the old addage says: It’s only cheating if you get caught.