I am an Atheist…

…Just thought I ought to reiterate that before taking a step away from Professor Dawkins for this post.

Yesterday (saturday 28th November 2009) was the Diocese of Winchester’s emergency Synod Meeting to approve thier budget for 2010, and it was a brilliant display of institutional betrayal by the Diocese toward the University of Southampton’s Chaplaincy, whose funds will now be withdrawn next year, despite the good work of Rev. Simon Stevens (the anglican chaplain), Sister Catherine Cruz and all the volunteers who have worked with him over the past four or so years.

There are about 24,000 students at the university of southampton, and whilst the majority of them are probably not Christians, let alone Anglicans, the Chaplaincy is a place for anyone, of any denomination, religion, or indeed those students like me who are of no religion. The Chaplaincy is a place where anyone can get pastoral care, in the true ‘christian’ spirit.

 Having met Simon (some of you may know him as “Yellow”) on at least one occasion, and seen his involvement in many student societies and with the SUSU.TV station at the union, I for one think it’s a damnable disgrace to be making such a jolly good chap redundant, especially when the Diocese knows damn well that neither the University nor the Students Union are in a position to help because of secular constitutions.

Perhaps it’s just me, but it seems like the high and mighty of the church would rather line their own nests than support people who really do work for the good of their communities!

You can see Simon’s account of what happened at the synod on his blog: – http://darksidechaplaincy.blogspot.com/2009/11/diocesan-synod.html

You can find more details of the SaveSotonChaplaincy campaign at their website: – http://www.savesotonchaplaincy.co.uk/

Or for information on just the Chaplaincy, here’s their site: http://www.chaplaincy.soton.ac.uk

So in the interest of a jolly good chap, please take some interest in the campaign and show your support, even if it just means popping in to the chaplaincy to give some words of encouragement.

Benjamin David Brooks

Dacă cumva aţi intrat în posesia filmuleţului din 1999 când m-am bătut cu Dan Voinea de la mine din clasă pentru că îmi luase locul din banca a 2-a, în laboratorul de tehnologie, vă rog foarte frumos să-l ştergeţi. Altfel, peste câţiva ani, s-ar putea să ajungă la presă şi să mă discrediteze. Vă rog mult. Şi să ştiţi că el a dat primul.
.. a semnat Hoinaru.ro

Don’t point the finger at deeper ills. The violence in Cairo was just thuggery cynically fomented by President Mubarak

It really is about football. Local and international media can argue about the underlying reasons for the violence in Cairo that saw the Algerian embassy attacked, hundreds of riot police on the streets and a general atmosphere of fear. But if Egypt had beaten Algeria last Wednesday, instead of losing 1-0, it is clear that the riots would not have happened.

Reports that Egyptians were venting their anger over years of government neglect, corruption and poor living conditions are somewhat right. Egyptians may have plenty of reasons to be depressed, angry or frustrated but to blame that for the violence last week, which saw dozens of large police trucks roll into Cairo’s posh Zamalek neighbourhood, would be taking the easy way out.

The real answer is that Egyptians have had little to cheer about in recent years. Only the Cup of African Nations championships – won by Egypt in 2006 and 2008 – brought the country together more than its recent effort to qualify for next year’s World Cup finals in South Africa.

The loss left a nation wounded, unable to deal with the fact that even on the football pitch, they cannot achieve success.

It is easy to blame the “other” for what occurred in Cairo last weekend. President Hosni Mubarak attempted to do just that by fomenting anger and hatred toward Algeria over alleged attacks on Egyptian fans in Sudan following Wednesday’s match. Actors and other “stars” of Egyptian society went on national television detailing attacks against Egyptians by Algerians. This is what the government wanted: to whip up fear and anger over football. And the media helped them out, with headlines such as “Algerian terrorism” following the loss, and reports of violence in Sudan.

The result was a preoccupation with football and raw nationalism rarely seen in the country. Mubarak and the ruling party took the opportunity to enrage a segment of society that has long been excluded from any political or social advancement. It was a chance to create anger against the “other” (in this case, Algerians) for what may or may not have occurred.

The false sense of nationalism created in the wake of the defeat in Khartoum created a wave of angry supporters who remained at home on Thursday morning, lamenting their national team’s failure to secure a place in South Africa. It was about football then. By the evening, when word spread that Egyptians had been attacked by Algerians, all hell broke loose.

As the riots raged, the Egyptian leadership were most likely sitting in their villas smiling, knowing that for now, the Algerian conundrum would occupy the people, take their minds away from the real issues at hand and create weeks of “diplomatic” tension with Algeria.

On Friday evening, when I traversed the “war zone” in Zamalek, the generals were cordial, pointing the direction to go. As a foreigner, I found it easy to slip through the checkpoints at every corner. The Algerian embassy was damaged, but not too badly.

Talking with local shopkeepers, who stood only metres from destroyed windows, what they said was shocking but highlights the entire situation of Egyptian denial. “Nothing happened here, it is all the media’s hype trying to show how bad the Egyptians are,” said one shopkeeper. This, of course, was said as scores of soldiers blocked the middle of the street.

A number of Egyptians, when the reporting began to analyse the riots, began talking about the need to put it all in the proper “context”. They said the mob was responding to the attacks against their fellow citizens in Sudan. Yes, they probably were, but to attack one’s fellow citizens, their shops and their property because of reports from celebrities does not seem the proper response.

Many people agree that it was barbaric and childish, but they still want to argue it away as an attack against the government. No way was it an attack against the government. It was simply a riot out of depression for the loss of a football match and the loss of one’s perceived honour.

Women’s activists rightly object when sexual harassment is described within the context of frustration; the canard of young men and boys harassing women because they “have no other outlet”. Similarly, why should a riot against Algeria and Algerians be argued away as the frustration of a people? It cannot and should not.

In the end, observers and analysts, Egyptians and foreign, should put the blame on the people who fomented the anger and hostility, on the government and on the rioters themselves. Police did their job properly on Friday and we should not condemn the heavy hand of the state in this, but we should condemn the government for not openly chastising their own citizens who took the loss of a football match as a chance to lash out at the enemy: Algeria.

By next June, after the anger toward Algerians is spent, Egyptians will be supporting their Arab counterparts for the World Cup: Algeria again. [Source: Guardian Nov. 24 2009]

Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak ratcheted up the diplomatic tension with Algeria yesterday as football-related violence continued to spread across both countries. In a statement to parliament, he told cheering MPs that “Egypt will not be lax with those who harm the dignity of its sons”.

It is the president’s first public intervention in a row that has seen thousands of protesters flood the streets of Cairo and Algiers and a wave of attacks against Egyptian targets in Algeria and vice versa. The trouble started when Egypt won a World Cup qualifier against Algeria in Cairo, setting up a play-off between the two sides in Sudan to decide which country would progress to the 2010 World Cup finals in South Africa.

Last week Egypt recalled its envoy from Algeria after expressing its “outrage” at the treatment faced by Egyptian fans in Khartoum, where Algeria won 1-0. Despite appeals for calm by the general secretary of the Arab League, Amr Moussa, rioting has spread to both capitals. In Algiers the offices of Egypt’s national airline were destroyed, while in Cairo security forces battled with protesters trying to reach the Algerian embassy, which was reportedly hit by firebombs. Parts of the city are under police lockdown.

Mubarak’s speech did nothing to calm the frenzy, as he swore to protect the rights of Egyptians. “The welfare of our citizens abroad is the responsibility of the country,” he said.

However, there were signs last night that a public backlash against the government’s handling of the football storm was gaining strength. “Hosni Mubarak’s thugs have beaten and killed more Egyptians than any hooligans,” said Hossam el-Hamalawy, a journalist and opposition activist.[Source Guardian | Nov. 22 2009]

Le secrétaire général de la FIFA, Jérôme Valcke a estimé hier, à Dubaï que “la qualification de l’Algérie au Mondial en Afrique du Sud est indiscutable”. S’exprimant devant la presse en marge du Mondial de “beach-ball” (football sur plage), Jérôme Valcke a précisé que “la rencontre (de Khartoum) s’est déroulée normalement et aucun incident notable pouvant influer sur le résultat n’a été enregistré”.
Le secrétaire général de la FIFA a, en outre, félicité les dirigeants soudanais pour le bon déroulement du match.

Last Wednesday I was watching Bosnia versus Portugal, a qualifying game for the 2010 World Soccer Championships in South Africa. The score was 0-1, and it was not a very good game. At that point the commentator mentioned that the situation in another match was interesting, so I switched the channel to France versus Ireland.

When I switched the score was 0-1, which would have meant a penalty shootout to decide the outcome. As it was clear that Ireland were the better team, I hoped that they would go through. The fact that I have a dislike for french soccer teams probably also increases my support for any team that plays France.

There was no score in the regular time, despite a very good opportunity for Ireland, so the game went into extra time (2 x 15 minutes). Towards the end of the second overtime, the unthinkable happened. I was so outraged that I started screaming, waking up my wife and cat. Watch what happens:

This is an absolute disgrace. Period. IMHO Henry should simply be suspended from playing in the World Cup. Period. And BTW, when is soccer going to start living in 2009, and adopt video replays for crucial situations?

But the bigger question is this: what if your son or daughter is a young soccer player, and idolizes Thierry Henry? Would you be OK for your kid to have a role model who demonstrates that it is OK to cheat?

And don’t say the referee did not give a foul, there are numerous sports where a foul is acknowledged by the player. In snooker e.g. a player will say that he or she has made a foul in 99.99% of the cases. At all levels. I do it all the time, and there are countless examples of pro players doing the same.

Why can’t soccer players act the same? Talking about fair play is fine, but acting on it is much much more important.

By Abigail Hauslohner / Cairo Sunday, Nov. 22, 2009

There’s nothing like the threat of war to mobilize the support of a nation. So perhaps it’s not surprising that posturing over a soccer war with Algeria may be the most popular move the thoroughly unpopular Egyptian President, Hosni Mubarak, has made in a long time.

On Nov. 14 and again on Nov. 18, Egypt went head to head with its archrival Algeria in an intense bid for a spot at next year’s World Cup in South Africa. It was the first time the two had played a World Cup qualifying match in 20 years, and in the weeks leading up to the first game and the days that followed, everyone from the Egyptian regime to local industries was busy ratcheting up support for the home team.
(Read “Cairo Braces for a Soccer Bombshell.”)

“[Mubarak] gave the game a sort of political character,” says Mustapha al-Sayyid, a political scientist at Cairo University. “Official newspapers depicted the encounter between the two teams as something very decisive, very important.”

It worked. In the aftermath, Egyptian and foreign observers alike marveled at a level of nationalist fervor and mass mobilization rarely seen before, and at a time when Mubarak, 81, is facing a rising tide of domestic dissent. On the night of the first game, which Egypt won, thousands of Egyptians flooded into the main thoroughfares of their capital, screaming, dancing and wreaking havoc. After the second game in Khartoum, in which Egypt lost its shot at the World Cup, the emphasis shifted to seeking revenge: hundreds amassed in front of the Algerian embassy in Cairo, burning Algerian flags, and eventually clashing with scores of riot police.

Even when the energy took a dark turn, the wave of emotion may have still served the interests of the 27-year-old Egyptian regime. “Football is the opium of the people,” says Hossam el-Hamalawy, a prominent Egyptian blogger, journalist and activist. “Both Egypt and Algeria have been going through severe economic turmoil recently, in addition to political crises. What better way to divert the people’s attention than a football war?”

Of course, he adds, attention doesn’t stay diverted forever. “You cannot keep fooling people with football. People at the end of the day — even after trashing the Algerian embassy — are still going to go home on empty stomachs. The economic turmoil is still there,” Hamalawy says.
(See pictures: “Johannesburg Prepares for Soccer’s World Cup.”)

And now there’s soccer-related turmoil to cope with. Dozens of Algerian and Egyptian fans were injured in assaults and clashes following the Nov. 14 match. Sudan and Algeria have accused the Egyptian press of unfair treatment. And in a particularly humiliating blow, the sport’s governing body FIFA launched formal disciplinary procedures against the Egyptian Football Association last week, in response to an attack by Egyptian fans on the Algerian team bus ahead of the Nov. 14 match.

The Egyptian Foreign Ministry summoned the Algerian ambassador in Cairo last week to hear complaints about violence against Egyptians and Egyptian businesses in Algiers; and Algeria slapped Egyptian telecommunications giant Orascom Telecom with a $596.6 million bill for outstanding taxes, sending Orascom shares — a popular Middle East stock — tumbling. On Nov. 19, Egypt recalled its ambassador to Algeria “for consultations.”

In a televised statement to parliament over the weekend, Mubarak said, “Egypt will not tolerate those who hurt the dignity of its sons” — a statement that drew praise from the Egyptian public. But at the same time, Mubarak also seemed to be calculating his retreat. “We don’t want to be drawn into compulsive actions,” he added.
(See the top 10 sporting cheats.)

Analysts say it’s unlikely that this North Africa soccer war could result in a lasting diplomatic split. But no one seemed to think it would go this far to begin with.

“My view is that the regime was planning to continue whipping up hysteria, and to try to retaliate diplomatically against Algeria in international and Arab circles — whether in the Arab League, or FIFA or the North African Football Association — to keep scoring local points,” says Hamalawy. “But I guess they reached the conclusion yesterday that they’re not really going anywhere with this, since most of the responses from other Arab states, international states and FIFA are like, ‘Egypt, please grow up!’.“

Had Egypt won its place in the World Cup, soccer pride might have been a boost to a regime under fire. Unrequited, it may ultimately serve to undermine it. [Time.com]

By JOHN LEICESTER
Sunday, November 22, 2009

The first rock was thrown with such force that it traveled through the bus, smashing windows on its way in and out, Michel Gaillaud, a French doctor, recalls.

Panicked, he and the soccer players he treats dived for cover.

“We were bombarded with stones,” Gaillaud says. “People were screaming. We were lying on the floor. Someone started shouting, ‘There’s blood! There’s blood!’”

And fair play died.

Imagine the outrage and quick condemnations that would have followed had this been a star-studded team like England, Spain, France or Portugal that was attacked by hooligans in Egypt before a vital World Cup qualifier.

Imagine the stern repercussions had David Beckham, Fernando Torres, Thierry Henry or Cristiano Ronaldo ended up, like midfielder Khaled Lemmouchia, with a chunk of glass embedded in his scalp.

But these victims were Algerians. Africans. Nobodies, apparently. Because, to soccer’s shame, the show went on as if nothing had happened. Having to field two players with head bandages, as Algeria did, is no way to play the game.

Not surprisingly, it lost 2-0.

A lucky escape for soccer officials. Who knows how Cairo might have boiled over had Saturday’s result not kept alive Egyptian hopes of qualifying for the World Cup?

Even in victory, tempers flared. Egypt’s Health Ministry says 12 Egyptians and 20 Algerians were hurt in post-match scuffles.

“Letting us play this match was reckless. I scarcely dare think what would have happened if we had equalized. We, the players, would have been in danger,” Lemmouchia told French sports newspaper L’Equipe.

And what says FIFA, the supposed guardian of international soccer and the rules meant to govern it?

Nothing.

It is at a loss to explain why the match wasn’t postponed or moved to another less heated venue after the Algerian bus was pelted with stones two days before the encounter, on a short trip from Cairo’s airport to their hotel.

When called, FIFA’s media office asked for a list of written questions and then provided this e-mailed response: “FIFA is currently reviewing the reports and documentation received on this matter. We are therefore not in a position to make any comments at this time, as the process is still ongoing.”

The 2-0 result was enough for Egypt to finish tied with Algeria in their qualifying group. To decide which squad goes to South Africa next June, they’ll compete in a playoff in Sudan on Wednesday.

Egypt is lucky to get this second chance.

As host, it was responsible for the Algerians’ security. FIFA rules are clear: “Match organizers must guarantee, in cooperation with the local police authorities, the safety of the participating teams and their officials as well as the FIFA match officials during their whole stay, from arrival to departure.”

The violence has precedent. In 1993, FIFA annulled Egypt’s 2-1 win against Zimbabwe in Cairo in World Cup qualifying after Zimbabwe goalkeeper Bruce Grobbelaar says he was struck on the head by concrete and coach Reinhard Fabisch says he was hit by a rock and had a wound stitched at the stadium. Egyptian officials say fans hurled oranges, not rocks.

FIFA ordered the match replayed in neutral France. The scoreless draw ended Egypt’s qualifying hopes.

This time, FIFA braced for trouble. It wrote to soccer authorities in both Egypt and Algeria asking for fair play.

One might think that Egyptian police could have protected a few players had they put their mind to it. Yet Gaillaud, the French doctor, says he was struck by how little security there was for the team bus to the hotel. He recalls just one police van, carrying four or five officers, traveling with it.

French journalist Guillaume Pivot, who was following behind in a car, says the bus had police motorcycle outriders, too.

“It was the sort of convoy that you get for a League One match in France. It was completely ill-adapted to the situation,” he says.

Lemmouchia needed three stitches for his cut scalp; strips and a bandage were used to close a cut on the left eyebrow of defender Rafik Halliche; a couple of other players suffered minor cuts.

Less visible was the shock.

The first missile, for example, narrowly missed forward Karim Matmour.

“He felt the stone whizz past his head,” Gaillaud says. “He was as white as a sheet.”

Matmour lasted just half the match and was substituted.

“They were physically capable of playing, but were they mentally is a whole other question,” the doctor says. “I doubt that they were at 100 percent of their capacities and, with that in mind, I think things were skewed.”

“The match shouldn’t have gone ahead.”

John Leicester is an international sports columnist for The Associated Press.

A very welcome call from Brian Cowan, for fair play. This is a very welcome sign for those on the margins, for those who are vulnerable, coming up to the forthcoming Budget. What! I hear you SHOUT, he was not talking about the economy, he was talking about the Ireland/ France football match. Well I suppose it gives some indication where his priorities lie.

On next Tuesday let us all shout FOUL to the Fianna Fail/ Green govern ment, and don’t copy  Thierry Henry and keep their hands off the Vulnerable

When I was young I practiced different sports: Basket-ball, Dance, I played Football with my friends… and the first rules that I learned was the fair play!

The same Fair Play that the FIFA promotes in their website: “The generic concept of fair play is a fundamental part of the game of football. It represents the positive benefits of playing by the rules, using common sense and respecting fellow players, referees, opponents and fans.”

However, watching the last football games Egypt/Algeria and France/Ireland I am wondering what happens to this “fundamental part” of the sport?

Egypt/Algeria

The first meeting in Cairo was already announced as Dangerous. An Egyptian friend of mine explained me that the government try to secure as much as it can for it. Unfortunately, since the Algerian team was on the Egyptian land, the supporters started to fight. Then, the Fifa ” asked the Egyptian Football Association and the highest national authorities through the relevant ministries to provide written guarantees that confirm the implementation of the necessary additional safety and security measures at any time for the Algerian delegation. “

Fifa called again to Fair Play for the second game in Sudan….and it seems that no one hear it. Reading comments on Twitter, Facebook, we learned that it is a massacre in Karthoum, not only supporters but women and children may have been hurt during inexplicable furious attacks… Suddenly the Fifa stops commenting it! The media too… what is the reason?

… They are all busy trying to resolve the questioning victory of France vs Ireland.

If the problem of Algeria/Egypt is primarily visible in a supporter context and is symbol of extreme violence, besides France/Ireland game is relax. so what’s the problem?

Thierry Henry just forgot that Football it’s a game to play with the foot… nothing really important, if it was not the reason why France is now selected for the World Cup.

Ireland, angry that the referee did not notice the fault, asked for another game against France, claiming a fair one that time.

Ireland’s manager, Giovanni Trapattoni said earlier to the Telegraph: “All European people saw the situation. I am sure that, if the referee had asked Henry, he would have admitted to the handball. “I am upset for fair play because we are told many times about fair play.”

But this morning, the Fifa replied to the Football Association of Ireland, which asked to replay the match held on 18 November “that the result of the match cannot be changed and the match cannot be replayed. As is clearly mentioned in the Laws of the Game, during matches, decisions are taken by the referee and these decisions are final.”

France are once really quite about its victory. Happy to go to the World Cup, everyone feels ashamed to speak about the reason why, thinking “Is-it really fair”…

Fair Play seems to have been fairly contested this last days and the Fifa has a lot to improve to make that rules to be respected by supporters and players… World Cup, we will be watching you!

Quello che è accaduto è stato visto dal mondo intero tranne che da un arbitro incapace e presuntuoso o… , da non sentire neanche il dovere di interpellare i propri collaboratori. Però suona strano il fatto che dai collegamenti auricolari non siano arrivate informazioni nemmeno dal quarto uomo: il tutto puzza di beffa e di imbroglio. La mano di Maradona fu un caso molto diverso in tempi diversi e con regole diverse da quelle attuali improntate verso il ” fair play “. La “ Mano di Dio ” fu un atto sleale, ma istintivo e geniale nella sua rapidità, tant’è che si nascose perfino ai primi replay, e quasi impossibile da poter essere notato dall’arbitro o da chiunque altro. In Francia Eire, no: tutti hanno visto, tranne chi doveva vedere, che la mano di Henry era proprio un’altra storia.

La Francia che ha sempre guardato il mondo da un gradino più alto farebbe bene in questo caso a scendere in terra ed a rimediare a tanta volgare ingiustizia chiedendo, attraverso le autorità competenti, il rifacimento della partita, anche se più giusto sarebbe ripartire dall’attimo del gol irregolare. Non può limitarsi a dire, attraverso una laconica dichiarazione del suo Presidente Sarkozy, “ decida il calcio “. Ponzio Pilato è vissuto 2000 anni fa e Gesù non rappresentava un problema di Roma, Nicolas Sarkozy si lava le mani in un caso che lede l’onore di un’ intera Nazione. Una Francia già messa in discussione per il suo difendere ed ospitare personaggi ricercati ovunque perché autori di delitti e soprusi sociali, una Francia che si scandalizzò e rese onore ad un atto antisportivo come la testata di Zidane a Materazzi.

Una Francia, però, e non dobbiamo dimenticarlo mai, che con la sua rivoluzione restituì all’Europa ed al mondo intero i sacri valori dei diritti umani e della libertà… non può una partita di pallone offuscare tutto ciò. L’Eire, Stato Libero d’Irlanda, ha diritto di giocarsi onestamente, insieme al condottiero Giovanni Trapattoni, tutte le sue chance mondiali pallonare, come la Francia e il suo popolo non possono accettare  che una soluzione talmente iniqua e vergognosa ne accompagni la partecipazione al prossimo mondiale per l’eternità. Il mondo del calcio si attiene ai regolamenti a volte giustamente ed a volte solo per comodità, indipendentemente dalla necessità di pulizia e di esempi leali: la nostra speranza è che l’orgoglio francese gli dia ora una mano a non essere complice di un’ ulteriore ed evidente ingiustizia.

Umberto Napolitano

  click on per visitare il blog

For several years now FIFA has been pushing its Fair Play programme around the world. So much so that we even see players in the state league shake hands prior to a game. But this whole program is now in the balance thanks to Thierry Henry’s handball in the World Cup Qualifier against the Republic of Ireland.

What are FIFA to do? If they replay the game it will open doors for games the world over to be replayed when players admit foul play and officials miss the incident.

If they allow France to get away with such blatant cheating then their Fair Play programme is in tatters.

Not only that should France – which is highly unlikely – win the World Cup in South Africa next year it will tarnish the tournament, as everyone knows that they do not deserve to be there in the first place.

What is the right thing to do?

Will FIFA make a stand and set a precedent, and simply hand victory to the Irish? That would be a bold move, especially when it was in fact two Frenchmen who invented the World Cup.

Something has to be done and it has to be done quickly, in other words in the next 24hours or the game will be made to look foolish.

If they do replay it, will the English request a replay of the Argentina v England game in 1986 which saw Maradona’s infamous ‘hand of God’ goal assist in securing victory for the Argentines who then won the World Cup?

Last night football and a lot of the people connected with it lost their integrity once and for all. It was a sad night at Stade de France in Paris where Thierry Henry qualified in the same group of cheaters as Maradona entered much in the same way in 1986. Not only once but twice Henry handball his way to the pass that paved the way for France’s 1-1 goal against the Republic of Ireland. Of course it is incredible that none of the referees saw it but it is even more incredible that Henry can stand himself.

After this it will be difficult for those in the game tasked with going out to schools and youth clubs to talk about fair play and sportsmanship. The message is loud and clear – Football is not about what is right or wrong. Whatever the referee does not see is allowed. Imagine what that would be like outside the pitch – whatever the police does not see is perfectly fine?

No, if integrity is something we value and would like to teach I know another sport where this still exists. Two England players competed out in Argentina last week. The rules were slightly different from what they were used to and after the round one of them were confronted with having done wrong. He admitted and was subsequently disqualified. It could have stopped there and still be a good story. Even better was that the other player realised that he had done the same mistake. What he did? As he had signed and handed in his card already, he disqualified himself!

Imagine what a society based on such values would be like!

Thierry Henry handset Frankrike til fotball-VM i Sør Afrika. I ekstraomgangene mot Irland, og etter at Frankrike langt fra hadde levert en overbevisende kamp, tok den franske kapteinen ballen med hånda, først en gang, så en gang til for å legge den litt bedre til rette, før han la opp til vinnermålet som sikret Frankrike VM-billett. På den måten sikret han seg også plass i historiebøkene på linje med Diego Maradona, Marion Jones og Ben Johnsen  som en av de store jukserne i idretten.

Fair play blir ofte fremhevet som et ideal både på fotballbanene og ellers i samfunnet. I dette ligger at man skal vise sportsånd og medmenneskelighet når man oppnår en urettmessig fordel som medfører ulempe for en annen part. Som regel snakker man om en direkte handling fra den som får fordelen, der vedkommende kan velge selv om handlingen skal omsettes i resultat eller ikke.

foto · Wise

Henry handset og sentret i løpet av noen tiendels sekund. Handlingen kom spontant fundert i hans eget grunnleggende verdisyn. Refleksen i venstrehånda der kapteinsbindet var festet resulterte i en urettmessig fordel og scoring til Frankrike som verken dommere eller andre hadde muligheten til å avdekke der og da. Publikum, motspillere, TV-kameraer, pressefotografer og journalister derimot så hva som egentlig skjedde, og i ettertid blir en slik urettmessig handling svært vanskelig å fraskrive seg. Da nytter det lite å være brydd, flau eller unnskyldende ovenfor omgivelsene.

Da Maradona handset mot England i 1986 var det litt verre. Til tross for TV-bilder og fotografier måtte man vente lenge på tilståelsen og bekreftelsen på det alle egentlig hadde visst hele tiden. Bevis er en ting, det personen som utfører handlingen vet og gjør i ettertid er en annen. Før eller siden kommer behovet for å bli tilgitt fram i dagen, gjerne lenge etter at personen selv er “glemt” i andre sammenhenger enn de kontroversielle. Ben Johnsen dopet seg til verdensrekord og OL-gull i 1988, siden har mange fulgt i hans fotspor, til tross for at Johnson i ettertid er strøket fra alle resultatlister. Doping er i ferd med å rive ryktet til sykkelsporten i fillebiter. Er det koblingen mellom næringsinteresser og idrett som virker inn? Det diskuteres om å etablere “profesjonelle skilag” utenfor skilandslagene etter modell av sykkelsporten. Er dette virkelig en god idé?

I samfunnet forøvrig blir det stadig tydeligere at “fair play” egentlig ikke betyr så mye. Undersøkelser viser at det kan gå lang tid før noen prøver å hjelpe en person som ligger tilsynelatende livløs på gata. Folk haster videre og vil helst ikke bli involvert. Piratkopiering av musikk og film viser at allmennheten i liten grad tar notis av hva som er mitt og ditt. I næringslivet kopieres og stjeles andres ideer for å oppnå suksess, og de store overkjører de små i jakten på større inntjening. I arbeidslivet er det den sterkestes rett som gjelder. Fremhev deg selv og det du står for først, og så deg selv en gang til. Det går så langt som at enkeltpersoner og selskaper bevisst påfører andre mennesker fysisk skade i forsøket på å oppnå en kortsiktig urettmessig fordel. Ignorering av sikkerhetsbestemmelser og hviletider, dumping av giftig avfall, barnearbeid, kidnappinger, væpnede ran og voldtekter er bare noen få slike områder.

Grensene tøyes daglig for hva som anses som akseptabel risiko i forhold til måloppnåelse. Alle er selvsagt imot krig og sult og nød og sånn når vi sitter i sofakroken, men hvem spør seg selv om den nyeste mobiltelefonen er satt sammen av komponenter produsert ved hjelp av slavearbeid, eller om mindreårige barn på luselønn har pakket eskene til de nye joggeskoene du nettopp kjøpte? Og ser du virkelig etter “fair trade” proukter når handlevogna skal fylles i butikken?

Slik sett er Thierry Henrys hands bare en bekreftelse på det vi alle vet: De fleste hadde valgt samme aksjon dersom det var de som hadde valget. Faktum er at i idrett står usportslig opptreden (gamemanship) like høyt som sportslig opptreden, det er bare ikke politisk korrekt å si det. Dessverre gjenspeiler dette seg helt nede på aldersbestemt nivå, og derfor kommer det stadig nye Maradonaer og Henryer som handser seg til neste sluttspillkamp fremfor å utvise fair play.

Den kollektive hukommelsen er sannsynligvis Fair Plays eneste skikkelige våpen. Det at spillere som Maradona, Zidane og Henry blir husket for de valgene de tok og de aksjonene de lot passere. Maradona var kanskje verdens beste fotballspiller gjennom tidene, men det er fair play at Pele har denne statusen i dag, og at Zidane og Henry ikke en gang er alternativer i denne sammenhengen.

Kanskje er det håp for fair play likevel?

Allez, il a fait une main. Il l’a reconnu. Soit, pas aussi franchement qu’on l’aurait souhaité. Mais, même la main dans le sac, les fautifs, mettons-nous un peu à leur place, ont du mal à passer à confesse.

Problème, cette “mimine” rend Thierry Henry l’homme le plus exécré d’Irlande. Et par voie de conséquence fait de la France un pays de tricheurs et d’escrocs. Henry est-il défendable ? Je me fais l’avocat du diable et je dis oui. Certes, le capitaine des Bleus a sciemment, et les images sont terribles pour lui, fait usage de sa main (il a tant de fois contrôlé le ballon avec la même efficacité avec ses pieds !) pour délivrer ensuite la passe décisive à Gallas. Mais, ce type de mauvais – très mauvais – réflexe, s’est produit à dix, vingt ou trente reprises durant ces deux matches de barrage (tacles par derrière, coups de coude, insultes entre joueurs et envers l’arbitre…) sans bien évidemment engendrer la fatale conséquence pour les Irlandais de celui d’Henry.

Vous me direz: mais pourquoi Titi n’a-t-il pas sur le terrain immédiatement, au moins en le laissant entendre par des gestes ou en en parlant avec ses adversaires, qui avaient tout vu, reconnu sa faute ? Il l’a dit après le match. Il n’est pas arbitre. Sur un million de gestes semblables, j’affirme qu’aucun sportif, professionnel ou amateur, ne vient spontanément avouer son forfait. Très rares sont les exemples contraires. Je me souviens d’un cas, en Angleterre je crois, où Bergkamp était allé indiquer à l’arbitre qu’il avait commis une faute avant de marquer.

Henry est un compétiteur. Et un homme, avec ses faiblesses. Il plaidera complètement coupable, un jour ou l’autre. Mais pas aujourd’hui.

PS: ma petite tête et ma mémoire m’ont joué des tours. Les cas de fair-play spontané de ces dernières années sur des terrains sont un peu plus nombreux que je pensais.

Thierry Henry is a gifted footballer, one of the best of all time, but why must such genius always self-destruct. The Frenchman did the most despicable thing in sport last night, he cheated an opponent. What makes it worse is that he cheated them out of the chance to qualify for a tournament that only comes around once every four years.

For some of the Irish players who fell victim to his handball assist which led to an extra-time winning goal for France in the World Cup qualifier second leg, this was their last chance to play in a World Cup finals.

But they have been robbed because a man who should have been able to win fairly, won instead by foul. Fifa often spout off about fair play but if they mean that they will either order a replay or strike France from the World Cup, replacing them with Ireland.

Fair play is nothing if those who fall foul are not punished retrospectively. If you preach fair play without this sanction then people’s competitive desire to win will take over at times, safe in the knowledge there will be no repercussions.

And as for Thierry Henry, his legacy will forever be tarnished.

in questo blog ci sono persone molto piu’ titolate (e brave) di me per scrivere un post sul rugby…

ma non potevo esimermi dal pubblicare questo video…

abbiamo messo un altro tassello, siamo entrati nella storia di questo spendido sport…. dove ancora conta il rispetto per l’avversario, il pubblico e’ sempre corretto, l’arbitro puo’ rivedere le sue decisioni “post moviola”…

nel rugby francia – irlanda di ieri sarebbe finita diversamente…

alla prossima sfida!

la Stevenage-Port Vale , insa a fost un meci pe cinste. Sase mii de suporteri in the stands, fair-play, kick and run cat cuprinde, o bara, multe ocazii bune ratate, spectacol asigurat. Doua ore din viata am simtit ca sunt ca ei si asta conteaza cel mai mult pentru mine.

Representaciones para entender qué es el FAIR PLAY en 6º

EQUIPO: LOS ROCKYS

ATLETISMO: LA DEPORTIVIDAD SE APODERA DEL DEPORTE

Actores: Julio, Tatiana, Bryan, Anis y Daniel. Presentador: Daniel

EQUIPO: LOS PEDROLEROS

FÚTBOL: LA FINAL DEPORTIVA

Actores: Andrea, Alberto, Esther, Sara y Carlos. Presentador: Carlos

EQUIPO: PAJAI

TENIS: EL MAL PERDER ES MALO

Actores: Aaron, Julia, Isabel G, Ainoa, Pilar, Acharf. Presentador: Acharf

El video de RIBER sobre BALONCESTO titulado DEPORTIVIDAD 100% e interpretado por Ariadna, Isabel G, Rebeca, Raúl y Victor no pudo se grabados por problemas técnicos pero os podemos contar que lo hicieron fenomenal….jejeje

A selecção portuguesa foi recebida com insultos e cuspidelas à chegada a este país terceiro-mundista, de seu nome Bósnia-Herzegovina. Já sabemos que é gente que não sabe viver em paz, até porque são gerações que nunca a conheceram e que para eles a vida ‘ só ‘ faz sentido com uma metralhadora na mão. Desta forma e para começar, ficamos logo com a ideia do que nos espera no jogo de amanhã em Zenica: uma guerra aberta.

Chegaram também os ecos de um atraso propositado, uma vez que na alfândega fizeram abrir todas as malas da delegação portuguesa. Gente canalha esta que foi ( e é ) bem recebida em Portugal e que conta com o nosso apoio ( Estado via GNR ) para se restabelecer da guerra. Pobres e mal-agradecidos

E aqui chegados, resta-nos protestar à UEFA e à FIFA, duas das mais vergonhosas corporações de interesses do futebol. Tão zelosos em tantas ‘ coisinhas ‘, tão permissivos e inoperantes noutras. Obviamente se fosse a França, a Alemanha, o Brasil ou outra selecção da sua simpatia, isto não acontecia.

Para além da chegada atribulada , vimos as imagens do campo de cebolas onde o jogo vai decorrer: a proximidade entre as bancadas e o ‘ ervado ‘ é assustadora, o banco de suplentes fica ali mesmo à mão de semear, as condições do campo são miseráveis e qualquer semelhança entre aquele rectângulo verde e um relvado para a prática do futebol, é pura e mera coincidência. Mas é Portugal que lá vai jogar e a UEFA e a FIFA estão muito bem a ‘ defecar-se ‘ para nós…

Esperando que esta pressão declarada dos Bósnios-Herzegovinos e falta de ‘fair play‘ demonstrada sirva para nos dar forças extra para o jogo, vou torcer para mais uma vitória da nossa selecção, nem que seja com um golo marcado com a mão. E se vir um Bósnio na rua vou cuspir-lhe na cara, pode ser que ele goste do tratamento hospitaleiro… escumalha!!!

La società LEVENTINA CALCIO grazie alla sua correttezza nei confronti degli avversari, degli arbitri e dell’ASF, ha conquistato il quarto posto nel Trofeo fair play della Suva meritandosi un premio di 6.000 franchi.

Entrate a gambe tese, falli da dietro, placcaggi stile rugby…ogni domenica situazione diventate oramai normali anche nei campi di calcio della Svizzera. L’Associazione svizzera di football (ASF) e la Suva intendono promuovere maggiormente il fair play nel calcio. Ogni anno lanciano nel calcio amatoriale svizzero il Trofeo fair play. Vi partecipano tutte le associazioni con squadre nei campionati regionali attivi, seniores e veterani nonché le leghe del calcio femminile. Nel quadro di questo Trofeo vengono premiate le dieci squadre di calcio più corrette; quelle che si impegnano in modo particolare per il fair play contribuendo in tal modo ad evitare gli infortuni e a promuovere il rispetto verso gli avversari.

Nella valutazione vengono consideriati: il comportamento dei giocatori nei confronti degli arbitri e degli avversari,  l’atteggiamento dei tifosi e dei funzionari e naturalmente i cartellini gialli e rossi.