Football: Short fuse, long sentence

The FA Commission got Paolo Di Canio's punishment just about right.

Trevor Haylett
Saturday 24 October 1998 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

SO WHAT would constitute a sentence severe enough to leave players at all levels of the game in no doubt that they can't go Di Canioing referees in future? A suspension of 20 games? Banned for the rest of the season? Banned for good?

Does anyone seriously believe that lengthening the term of punishment would correspondingly extend the pause on a Saturday afternoon while Paolo Di Canio's fellow professionals or batty David of Rickety Rovers Reserves weigh up the consequences of their actions? Does a player of similarly short fuse stop amid the swirling red mist and consider that it might be worth giving a hefty push to the referee because with a fair hearing he'll be back playing again at Christmas?

Football demands quick decisions and instant responses. It is a game of raw emotion and one in which the thinking processes of its participants do not always run on orderly lines. No player would transgress if he allowed himself a couple of seconds to debate the possible repercussions. Given a moment of rational thought David Beckham would probably not have flicked a boot out at Diego Simeone, England would probably have beaten Argentina and would certainly have gone on to lift the World Cup as Glenn Hoddle has long insisted was our rightful destiny.

To that extent the sanction for Di Canio of an 11-game ban (which includes the three-game penalty automatically imposed for his sending-off against Arsenal) and a pounds 10,000 fine following his two-handed shove on Paul Alcock is irrelevant in terms of the impact it will have at the level of parks football and volunteer referees. The punishments handed out there by the county FAs tend to be pretty Draconian in any case while all the fuss about the need to deliver a rigorous example to the amateur game seems to be missing the point. If they took such a lead from the professionals how come player-assaults on referees are a far more frequent occurrence among the lower orders?

Although it may not be fashionable to hand out praise to the FA, it does seem that the disciplinary commission got it just about right on Friday even though Alcock, among others have criticised the punishment as lenient. Yes Di Canio was stupid; yes, he was wrong; but no, his actions did not imperil anyone's health and safety, an argument supporters of Eric Cantona could never sustain in the aftermath of the Frenchman's fly-kick on a Crystal Palace supporter three years ago.

David Pleat, the former Sheffield Wednesday manager who signed Di Canio from Celtic at the start of last season, described the penalty as "fair and reasonable" and was pleased the FA made the distinction between the striker's petulant reaction to the red card and an attempt to do the referee harm.

"It is a fine line between what is an aggressive push against a referee and what is a gesture of frustration by a theatrical, red-blooded Italian," said the Tottenham director of football. "What Paolo did was not an assault, it was his way of saying 'What an idiot I am, I've really cocked up.' For those people who called for a long ban I would point out that every week you see players flying in with terrible tackles or giving heavy verbal abuse to referees."

For Wayne Biggins, the former Stoke, Manchester City and Norwich forward, the Di Canio case brought back unhappy memories of his own altercation with Mr Alcock. Playing for Stoke at Southend in 1995 he was dismayed when what he thought was a blatant hand-ball did not lead to a penalty for his side.

"The ref was standing right beside me and I couldn't believe he didn't give it so I grabbed his arm. He jumped back which at the time I thought was an over-reaction. He sent me off but what really upset me was that at the hearing he said that I had pushed him in the chest with both hands.

"That was a lie and I tried to tell the commission that but they told me to keep quiet. They banned me for the rest of the season [in effect nine games] but if there had been video evidence I would have had a stronger case. An Arsenal supporter who had been at the game turned up and tried to speak on my behalf. But they wouldn't let him speak.

"Every time I see the Hillsborough incident again I start laughing because the referee had no need to stumble. Three players who have served long bans, Frank Sinclair, myself and now Di Canio, have all been involved with the same referee."

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in