Here is the press release regarding Joao Pinto's suspension: http://www.fifa.com/Service/MR_M/41299_E.html I am very surprised that the suspension is not longer. The 6 month ban from all activity for punching the referee seems short in my mind, especially with the partial ban, as play for his club team is barely affected. Moreover, there are absolutely no ramifications for him at the national team level. Typically, FIFA suspends players receiving red cards in their competitions from either the next FIFA competition or the next confederational competition. In this case, Portugal's next meaningful matches are at EURO 2004 (in Portugal). According to this press release, Pinto is allowed to play at EURO04, which is a joke to me. A 6 month ban for the assault seems short to begin with, but has FIFA forgotten about the atrocious tackle that led to his send off? That tackle alone--based on suspensions handed out in WC98--was worth a 3 game suspension--minimum. Marquez of Mexico got a 4 match suspension (from international play) for his headbutt to Cobi Jones and I would argue that Pinto's tackle was far more dangerous of a play. If you think about it for a second, a 6 month ban sounds bad, but how many matches will Pinto actually miss? None with the national team. And maybe, what, 4-5 with his club team? All of which are at the beginning of the season. The more I think about this punishment, the more ridiculous it seems. FIFA could have banned him from all soccer for one calendar year and tacked on a 3 match suspension in EURO 2004 for the tackle and I don't think anyone (outside of fiercely partisan Portuguese fans) would have felt the sentence was harsh.
It has nothing to do with doing what is morally required. It's all politics. Doubtless there is some sort of quid pro quo with FIFA / Sepp Blatter ...
I agree the ban could have been harsher,but to thing politics had something to do with it. Believe me Portugal is to small a country to win the political games. I think there were other things overlooked at the WC2002
I don't agree that the Pinto tackle was more dangerous than the Marquez headbutt, but I wholeheartedly agree that this is extremely soft. And, as the article makes clear, it's not even 6 months, but really only 4 (2 of which, July and August, are offseason). I also thought that at least a year would be appropriate and would probablly have voted for significantly more than that if I was in charge. As for why, I can only wonder if they viewed it merely as a "light" or "soft" punch. If I recall correctly, I was watching the game and didn't even realize that there was a punch, only hearing or reeading about it after the fact. So, it wasn't like he laid the ref out (and, of course, the ref didn't do the typical Rivaldo dive to draw attention to the incident). We all know the rule is don't touch the refs -- ever -- but I wonder if they viewed it as more of a touch, than a punch. Also, is it possible that he still has the two-game ban from international competition for the redcard and that this only relates to the referee incident? I thought this was mandatory unless they make an exception.
Re: Re: Joao Pinto Suspension I was thinking that too, but the end of the article says that the incident leading up to the send off was taken into account. So, I assume, unfortunately, that there is no additional sanction for the tackle itself.
For what it's worth Actually, you can't see the punch because the camera was in tight with a shot at shoulder height of Sanchez, Pinto and company. I bet the pleading by Eusebio and others along with no prior history of this type of misconduct on Pinto's part had a lot to do with the length of the suspension. As MassRef points out, Pinto misses 4-5 club matches and several preparatory matches for the fall season. This is a case of the punishment not equal to the crime. Personally, Pinto should have been suspended for 6 months. Therefore, he should have been next able to play in January of 2003. An unjust decision. FIFA needs to be clear no violence against referees will be tolerated and will result in lengthy suspensions.
As you say, Alberto, I'm mad about the the assault. However, as you and others point out, the evidence isn't conclusive there. What I'm most upset about is the tackle. That play, by itself, is the worst foul I've ever seen. And, to have it happen at the WC level is ridiculous. Pinto--and I'm talking about for just the tackle--should have been forced to miss the first round of EURO04. The assault should be a separate issue.
I would love to have an opportunity to read the official match report. The fact that Eusebio and the president of the Portugese Football Confederation went to the referees dressing room to plead mercy on Pinto's part says ton's about his culpability. Personally, I have seen worse tackles. It is a very bad tackle and was worthy of a send off, but just in this world cup alone, I would say the following fouls were equal to Pinto's scissor tackle. Marquez head butt of Jones or the subsequent play in the corner when a Mexican player stomped on the back of Jones leg. Each foul was potentially career ending. I will say Pinto's tackle should be on any subsequent FIFA or USSF referee clinic video as an exmple of a scissors tackle. By the way, Roy Keane has produced some of the worst tackles of any major footballer I have ever had the disgrace to see.
Personally, I think that it was a TERRIBLE foul and the more I saw it the worse I thought it was, but for you to say that it was the worse foul you ever saw doesn't say much about you as a referee.
Now I have a question for this forum, what do the referee's get for shut poor officiating??? They cost some teams the opportunity to advance. On some occasions, it actually looked like they were getting money in there pockets. It was a terrible WC and alot of it had to do with the poor officiating by the refs.
I'm sorry, but I don't understand. We are in a discussion and I just asked a simple question. Why would you consider what I said a personal attack. I am pretty new to BigSoccer. And actually very taken back by what you just said. You don't think what is being siad here is a personal attack on Joao V. Pinto. How come no one answers the question I proposed?
I have just read back and if you are speaking about what I said below: Personally, I think that it was a TERRIBLE foul and the more I saw it the worse I thought it was, but for you to say that it was the worse foul you ever saw doesn't say much about you as a referee. Then you are correct, and I will watch it in the future. I thought you were upset at my question. But it still puzzles me how that could be the worse foul ever. It was a bad foul as I have said, but I've seen plenty like them and all should be punished. I just don't see why JVP is being targeted so hard. And please, I would still like an answer: Now I have a question for this forum, what do the referee's get for such poor officiating???
I don't know, I think losing 6 months salary probably hits close to home for Joao Pinto...yeah, maybe he should miss a few meaningful games with the national team, but the suspension seems fairly strict in that he'll miss club play for an extended period.
Guys, His suspension was for 4 months total, which means he can start playing on October 17. He also received 2 months probation which would only take affect if he was to do something like this again within the one year probation period. So it boils down to only 4 months and not 6 months. Plus some fine money he has to pay.
As to your earlier post, a lot of discussion took place during the world cup regarding the level or lack thereof of the officiating. The main problem was with the assistant referees in their recognition of offside and along with some other questionable calls on the ball crossing over the goal line or staying in play. FIFA is well aware of the problem and the public perception. I think at the next world cup you will see less representation by third world confederations and more by UEFA (though they had their share of questionable calls too). Regarding Joao Pinto's call, my beef is not so much with his tackle, but his striking the referee. He deserved 6 months for his act. If players think they can get away with manhandling the referees were is this game going to end up. Let MassRef answer why he felt that was the worst foul he ever saw. As to what referee's get for poor officiating? Do this. Write down the names of the referees and assistant referees you felt did a poor job. In February of 2003, visit FIFA's website and check to see who is on the Panel for 2003. If FIFA felt they did a bad job at the world cup, they will get the promise of never refereeing another world cup match or qualifier, and of losing their FIFA badge for the rest of their career. That's pretty harsh punishment for one or two mistakes in the several hundred decisions referees have to make over the course of a match.
I agree that JVP could have gotten up to a year and he would not have anything to complain about. And I also agree that no one should touch a referee. Losing your FIFA license or not doing another WC game because of one or two mistakes over the hundred decisions being made is harsh. But so is looking to ban a player for one mistake even though he has had a great career and never had this type of problem before. Those referees that made significant mistakes should also be punished with 4 months, 6 months, or even longer. It should be the same for players and referees.
But they're in UEFA and hosting Euro 2004 and have players like Figo bringing attention to them. Ya, they're small in terms of people but decent size in the footballing world.
I don't disagree at all with that. But if we look at everything in life, its a big political game. Sure Euro2004, Figo, Eusebio, but if it was an Italian player, Spanish player, French player, Brazilian player, etc.... They would have given the same break. JVP has been playing for years with a great career and he has never done anything close to this in his life. This was BAD and very humiliating to him and Portuguese soccer. Let's just hope this doesn't happen again, at any level.
First, Pinto will not go unpaid by his club, as someone suggested. This suspension is from FIFA, not from the local national association. FIFA didn't say he was suspended "without pay", they only imposed a fine. Secondly, he will only miss 4-5 club games, none of which will be truly that meaningful. Finally, to respond to nas2nj, let me modify my remark. I should have said it was the worst "tackle" (not foul) I've ever seen. I stand by that statement and I don't know what you think that says about me as a referee. The Pinto tackle just had too many aspects to it. It was directly from behind, in the midfield, the opponent was going sideways (not towards goal), he basically jumped (rather than slid) to make the tackle, both feet had his studs exposed, he struck the opponent halfway up the leg with one foot and then scissored him with the other, and he got no ball whatsoever, nor was he even attempting to.
I agree it was a bad tackle and I don't know what he was thinking when he did it. He let his emtions get the best of him. Nothing that I would have expected from him.
Re: Re: Joao Pinto Suspension I doubt it. If you look at the mistakes each confederations had their share, UEFA included (Spain's ref yellow card disaster, Denmark's AR disallows 2 goals). When politics get into the selection process again for 2006 there will be "equal' distribution again. Maybe CONCACAF will decide to send more than one from each country and Ocenia may have less representation, but rest assured that Trinidad & Tobago will still have someone there.
Re: Re: Re: Joao Pinto Suspension I thank you and Robert Guillame evil twin thank you for not mentioning his name.