Abel Xavier's infamous handball (Euro 2000)

So, when I saw what this was about, I was certain we had discussed it before. But then I realized I didn't join until 2001, so it had to have been a retroactive discussion. The AR's name is Igor Sramka of Slovakia (trios were not used at this tournament), who was praised by UEFA for this call. He got several big assignments after this and, one might argue, helped launch Lubos Michel's career. So, I punched Sramka's name into the search function (because I figured it was the term that would narrow the results most) to see what came up. To my surprise, there has been no long discussion about this incident. But, I did find this:

https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=676521&highlight=sramka

Kebbie, it looks like a real-life case of deja vu! No complaints from me, as this is one of my favorite "famous" incidents, but you seemed to have brought the same topic up 3 years ago.

Anyway, to your questions...

1) Penalty for me. I see a deliberate attempt to make himself bigger and make sure the near post is protected. And yes, a hugely brave decision by the referee given the stage (EURO semifinals), the consequence (penalty and likely game over) and the fact that this was probably one of the few times this AR and referee ever worked together (if not the first time).

2) More likely to be awarded today. This was a big deal back then. The usual junk about an AR from a "minor" country who got the assignment as a political prize was spread around. When, in reality, UEFA backed this call completely and it was a brave call from an exceptional AR. For those newish to officiating in the last 5-10 years, this call really was a milestone in international officiating. FIFA had been teaching through the 90s for ARs to become more involved, and it was slowly happening. But this was the first time I ever saw a massive, game-changing call made from the AR in dynamic, on-the-ball play (rather than violent conduct unseen). Nowadays, this sort of intervention from ARs is much more common. So for that alone, it's more likely to be awarded. As far as the instructions related to deliberate handling, I'm not sure they've evolved all that much. We've had several papers here within USSF, but deliberate handling has always been deliberate handling for the last decade at the international level. Don't think the instructions relative to Law XII would affect the way this call is interpreted at the FIFA-level.

On related notes, Hugh Dallas was exemplary as a fourth official here. He was down, protecting the AR, before Benko (the CR) even got over there. I don't fault Benko too much here and actually think the three of them worked very well together. Dallas could afford to be the "bad cop" and used his position on the touch line to intervene. Benko knew what Sramka was going to tell him when he got called over and he needed to be measured, deliberate and unflappable. Racing over to intercept the dissenters would have only raised the temperature of an extremely volatile situation. Dallas did his job, Sramka did his and Benko oversaw it all. Given the circumstances, very-well handled all told. That said, the manhandling by all the Portuguese players would, I hope, not go over as easily now. Benko had to pick his spot and he did caution one player before the penalty (which you don't see) and sent off Gomes after the goal. Could he have sent 5-6 players? Sure. But what would it get you in a situation like this? UEFA did intervene after-the-fact, as Kebbie alluded to in his original post. Unfortunately, this wouldn't be the last instance of this generation of Portuguese players behaving badly on the world stage, as Pinto and others didn't exactly cover themselves in glory upon their 2002 exit either.

 

It's not red because you can't be certain it's going on net (in fact, the irony is it probably wasn't--I think someone pieced together the evidence back then to show it would have hit the post). And the argument for yellow is tricky, too. In the last World Cup, apparently it would have been a yellow as all handling in the area was treated as such. But the standard is supposed to be tactical handling foul that stops an attacking opportunity. In this case, you can't even be sure the ball was going to stay in play so it's hard to argue an attacking opportunity was prevented. Could you get away with giving one? Sure. But I don't think it's mandated.

More to the point, think practically. Look at the protests over this call. Then add in the fact that there's about a 90% chance the game is going to be over with the penalty kick. And, if the game isn't over, you have 3 minutes to play. Xavier doesn't already have a yellow and this one is, quite clearly, a judgment call. What effect is a yellow going to have on the game here? What does it get you? As the whole video should so, you've got bigger fish to fry. Whether it could be justified technically or not, there is no good practical reason to book Xavier for this.

 

Because Slovakians hate Portugal but not France?!

This, in a nutshell, encompasses almost everything that is wrong about our game.

Because emotions were high and they didn't notice the actual infringement, you implicitly justify their bad behavior. That's completely and totally unacceptable. The problem is, a lot of people around our sport agree with you.

 

So now you're implying that the referees are solely there to do the bidding of the tournament organizers and help arrange the most profitable matchup. This is not progress.

With respect, you did justify the behavior. "The Portuguese behaved badly but..." Everything after that word is a justification. You are saying you understood why they did what they did. Look, I played in some competitions where I knew (forget just thinking it) our team got screwed and I wasn't happy. I understand the visceral reaction and human emotion. But there's absolutely no justification for putting hands on the referee like they did. There's no justification for prolonged visual and verbal dissent that delays the restart of the game.

When behavior like what was seen in EURO 2000 gets justified, you end up with behavior like this (start of video & at 2:18), where in addition to what you see, Pinto punched the referee in the stomach:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHR0IFyGD_Y"]2002 World Cup SOUTH KOREA v PORTUGAL - YouTube[/ame]

and this:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIiaXWq1KHY"]Player steals referees red card - YouTube[/ame]

Implying that the posters here are immature is also probably not a way to win people over.

 

And there have been lots of questionable decisions against bigger teams. Mistakes happen, even at the highest levels. I'm a ref and so are 90%+ of the posters here. None of the current posters are active FIFAs, to my knowledge, but there are former FIFAs that post and current FIFAs that lurk here. It's insulting to say their work at the top levels is rigged. It's insulting to say Sramka would have made a different call had it been at the other end of the pitch.

As I said, everything after your "but" is a justification. You admitted you were trying to explain what was going on in their heads and were rationalizing it. There is no rationalization for putting your hands on the referee in an aggressive manner. The fact that such behavior can occur means that, in some form, it's considered acceptable--efforts to understand it further that problem.

But that's not entirely true. The worst transgressors, in the eyes of UEFA, were punished (Xavier, Gomes and Bento) with bans. If you watch that video, nearly the entire team could have been sanctioned for their behavior. One might even make an argument that the team should have been punished, with having to play EURO 04 or WC 02 qualifying matches at neutral sites or behind closed doors.

I think my point flew over your head, to be frank. My point is that the behavior at the end of EURO 2000, when "explained" or "understood" by fans and others in the culture, does not get altered and leads to the scenes that we saw in WC2002 and WYC2007. Do you think the Portuguese players said, "wow, what we did at the end of EURO 2000 was embarrassing and unacceptable and we'll never do it again?" Or did they see WC2002 as another situation where they were "getting screwed" and it was okay to lash out at the referees because their previous behavior (aside from 3 suspensions) was not punished heavily? I think the evidence speaks for itself. If you don't see the connection between these three situations on the international stage, I don't know how I can change your mind.

Not to belabor the issue, but the point is that I don't think anyone here cares why they might have done it. There is no excuse and the culture needs to change to a point where there truly is no excuse and no attempt to explain such behavior. It's not a human nature issue, either; we had comparisons to international rugby on this board a few weeks ago and the two sports are night-and-day. Such behavior would never happen in rugby and it shouldn't happen in soccer.

And nothing is wrong with sharing your opinion. But you shouldn't expect it to be agreed with or to go unchallenged.

Well, without knowing who sent you PMs, my assumption was that they are regular posters here. Ergo, you would be implying certain posters in this forum were immature. If I'm wrong, and the people who PMed you don't regularly contribute on this board, then I apologize for putting words in your mouth.

 

Actually, Trezegut immediately appeals for it and he was really the only French player in position to see. Also, it's off-camera, but I believe Sramka immediately signaled or called Benko over, because Baia rushes over to dissent with Sramka before any decision is indicated from Benko. So I don't think the possibility of France taking a quick corner existed (Sramka would have prevented it) and I don't believe, based on how quickly Baia was off his line, that Portugal thought they got away with it. I think it's much more likely that, given the angle of play, very few people other than Trezegut, Xavier and Sramka knew it was a foul and they were protesting the decision itself (EDIT: Witford and Costa probably saw it cleanly, too).

That was part of my point above and one of the reasons I tried to illustrate the "evolution" of their behavior at the top level. To be fair, though, while I think Portugal has been the most habitual high-profile offender, there are plenty of other national sides and federations that have engaged in unsavory and unacceptable behavior.

To clarify my position a little. IF I thought this was a DOGSO situation, I would have given the red no matter what. My point about inflaming the situation only relates to the yellow card, which is a judgment call and certainly not mandatory in any regard.

Since we're re-legislating stuff, it's worth noting that the majority opinion here among referees at the time was that Dallas got this call right (and was backed, if I recall, by USSF). There are plenty of people who think Xavier deliberately handled and Fring's did not--I'm one of them.