: Mon May 11, 2009 10:33 am
Wigan Bull wrote:
Whilst I agree with what's being said in principle, I think you are taking a non-emotional view of it. Reaching the final of that competition is the highest worldwide accolade a player can have. For some of the Chelsea lads, it may be the last chance they have.
No, I am suggetsing players keep a lid on their emotions like men, not run around screaming like little girls.
What are you saying - that what Ballack did was OK "bcause he was emotional"? Because "he wouldn't be reaching the final"? I'm sorry, but that's just disgraceful.
What you are suggesting is that because these players could not change the fact that they were out, and were very upset, they should in those circumstances be allowed to bully, abuse and vilify the referee.
Let's say that the match was the semi-final of your local schools FA Vase, and let's say that Ballack, or indeed Drogba, was your son. What would you have said to him?
Wigan Bull wrote:
A couple of points for consideration:
1. The referee was never actually touched.
And your point is? This is only relevant in how long bans are given out. It has no bearing, at all, on the behaviour in question.
Wigan Bull wrote:
2. I'd like to see anyone else put in that situation just smile, shake hands and walk off. Has anybody else experienced the adrenaline of a night like that?
Yes. I remember feeling utterly cheated out of at least 2 Finals following Bradford, for example. I was as gutted as it gets. But I did not pursue the officials or run around screaming and carrying on. In fact (as you'd expect from RL fans) we all left the ground talking about the game like adults and we got over it. You're just making abject excuses for the inexcusable. Adrenaline does not make you lose control of your emotions or actions.
Wigan Bull wrote:
3. Whilst RL players are on the whole better behaved, they aren't perfect in similar situations. E.g. Jimmy after the 2002 GF and Harris after MM 2007 to name but two.
I would not condone any such outrageous behaviour at any time, but I wasn't claiming saintdom for all RL players, and your point does not in any way change the fact that RL players' behaviour towards officials is in no way comparable to footballers; and compared to the Chelsea fiasco, it is closer to sainthood.
Wigan Bull wrote:
Just to re-iterate here, I am by no means condoning what happened post game on Wednesday, but I think there's an element of viewing this through "perfect world" glasses.
The opposite. The tougher the call, the more of a man you have to be to take it on the chin. This is what earns respect. Unfortunately, these grown men cannot behave as such as they have been irretrievably spoiled, and have an infinitely inflated sense of their own importance and, in truth, do not have the slightest respect for the official at all. They are too big for their boots, and UEFA / Chelsea or whover has power to exact discipline has an opportunity to mark that fact by exacting appropriate punishments. If they do impose severe penalties then it might just strike home with these posturing prima donnas how absurd they actually are.