Three More Games
by zunguzungu
With Ghana’s loss, I find myself with no choice but to root for the Germans; as France was last time around, the Germans are more or less the team that most looks like the kinds of nationalism I find myself least uncomfortable with. So Cacau, Özil, Khedira, Boateng and victory! But really, it was watching them take Argentina apart like that. It was beautiful, and I want to see them keep playing like that, and if they do, they will win. So that means, I guess, that I’m rooting for them.
Anyway, along with that picture of the local Ghanaian restaurant, taken the afternoon after Suarez — the master of lies and deceit and the enemy of all that is good and holy — did what it is he did, I did find this piece at Minus the Shooting entertaining enough to pass along:
…tongue ever so slightly in Zizekian cheek, I would like to suggest that, in comparison to Diego Maradona’s ‘perverse’ Hand of God, Senor Suarez’s intervention was a far more radical and destabilising act. Maradona’s gesture was, properly speaking, ‘perverse’ in that it was a direct – obscene – transgression of the rules which effectively re-inforced the status of the law: after the event “Maradona” could indeed be accorded a simple, binary, symbolic significance – as hero or villain, redeemer or cheat – whose actions merely proved the necessity of regulation. He got away with it (much like every pilled-up hedonist “gets away with it” every weekend) and there was considerable collective jouissance to be had as a result (especially given the Falklands and all that). And what was it that he and his hombres were really glorifying in if not the perverse pleasure of successful naughtiness, the ‘obscene superego supplement’? His was an act of symbolic transgression; an attempt to prove that he was ‘above’ the law – thereby revealing his implicit reliance on the law as the constitutive ground for his own megalomaniacal ego – and one that the law, for its part, was quite happy to go along with, knowing its authority was in no real way being challenged.*
In contrast, the Suarez event is more radical, more real, more disturbing, for it all happened within – the gaze of – the law. The law was not transgressed, it was followed to the letter, and thereby its failure – its groundlessness and absurdity – was revealed, its ultimate impotence laid bare for all to see.** As an arbitrary and violent imposition of order onto contingency the law makes the game (all games) possible but we need to be reminded of its all too human origins, that it is not all-powerful (is ‘non-all’) and cannot legislate for all eventualities. This opens up the possibility of our taking some minimal distance from it, appreciating once more that we, and not the gods, are responsible for the law, and that, at the end of the day, while “you’ve gotta take each game as it comes”, you mustn’t let that blind you to the fact that it is a game and as such reliant on an ineliminable element of chance (not to mention violence – as many Ghana fans would no doubt testify today).
Ergo, the Good Soldier Suarez is a radical hero!
Handball within the goal posts should just be a freaking fucking goal. That is all I will say on this matter.
I’m surprised at how much venom Suarez has gotten. The handball was the right play–you take a chance that the penalty will be missed, and pay for it by getting sent off. Ghana should’ve converted the PK, and that’s that.
The Germans have been lethal and an absolute pleasure to watch. I’ll cheer for Uruguay to dismantle Holland, and then for the Germans to win it all.
BTW, there are actually four more matches.
That is one of the rules I see the least upside to; it seems like it would be fairly easy to just say that the referee could rule a handball in the goal as a goal. I bet if the USA had thusly been robbed, that rule would be under review…
Four matches, of course, dammit. As for Suarez, I think Run of PLay’s taboo explanation makes a lot of sense; because the handball is sort of indiscriminately always-wrong, it somehow seems more dastardly for him to have done it, taboo because it’s not contextually justifiable (b/c there is no situation where a handball is alright, a situation where a handball provides a positive outcome *legally* for the handball seems perverse in the way that the Minus the Shooting writer is outlining; we get freaked out when the law rewards the flouting of taboos because it reveals the insufficency of law itself).
Of course if the US had been in Ghana’s place, the ESPN server closet would have melted. I don’t think FIFA would necessarily have changed the rule, though, since it’s clear: handling a ball in the penalty area is a penalty kick (and yellow card at least, I think), and the referee as well as FIFA can increase the punishment as they see fit (banning the player for multiple games).
I didn’t play a lot of soccer growing up, but it was understood that handling the ball like that would be controversial not because it’s “cheating,” but because it requires making the decision that “I know that if I don’t do this risky move that can result in a near certain goal (PK), there will certainly be a goal.” This, I suspect, is why one doesn’t see it more often–had the one falling Chilean fullback handled David Villa’s 40 yard strike, it would have been far more risky, since it was not obviously clear there that the strike would be going in.
I do see the situation as identical to fouling in basketball intentionally since, depending on the situation, it may be more difficult for the player to sink both free throws (and get the points) than get the basket. Basketball’s strategy is built around making sure your high percentage shooters get the ball late, etc., to maximize on this. And hoop has tried to institute its form of the red card with the flagrant foul off a breakaway.
Or it’s like the “takes damage to save time” setting on speed runs on video games. It’s funny, since I do see what happened as being “cynical,” but I can’t imagine doing anything different in the same position.
Wouldn’t the analogy be to “goaltending” in basketball? Which of course is rendered an automatic basket.
Helliw. Long time no communicate! I hope you are all dandy and well. I see you’ve had some good shows on recletny, and some good uns coming up. I shall do my utmost to get down to one soon. I’m keen to play a date in Birmingham in May this year. As I’m no longer running Bohemian Jukebox events on a regular basis, could you consider me to play a support slot for any dates you have going in May?Hope so. Take it easy,Ben.
Regarding the US and handling a ball in the closing minute, this is from a feature about an MNT goalie who was in net in 1989 in a must-win match against Costa Rica:
Eventually, the game settled down, and, in the 72nd minute, Tab Ramos had a shot deflect in for a 1-0 U.S. lead. The Costa Ricans retaliated with a goal themselves, but referee Rodolfo Martinez Mejia of Honduras disallowed it, ruling that the ball nicked the hand of the Costa Rica goal scorer. With under one minute to play, the U.S. still led 1-0.
It was no time for reckless goalkeeping, but, as the final seconds ticked off, Vanole left his goal area to intercept a crossing pass out front. He’d made that play thousands of times, all over the world, but this time the ball eluded him, giving Costa Rica’s Alvaro Solano a shot at a wide-open net. The ball seemed certain to be rolling in, just as the game clock was striking :00. But Trittschuh alertly dove and used his hands to halt the ball at the goal line. The Costa Ricans complained that the ball did in fact crawl over the line, but the referees ruled no. There would instead be a penalty kick — straight at Vanole.
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/world-cup/story/_/id/5308513/ce/us/david-vanole-esophagus-saved-us-soccer&cc=5901?ver=us
PK hit Vanole in the throat, and the US qualified. But this was after Trittschuh handled the ball. Americans cheat to win!
Nice! But instead of “Americans cheat to win” I think you meant to say “With cool deliberation, Americans exploit their knowledge of the rules to maximize success.” We believe in the rule of law, you see.
It’s also crucial that you follow these procedures to ensure that
couponing is done appropriately.