Review
It was to be Diego Maradona's tournament - the player who graced and dominated the World Cup with his epic performances was able to lift the trophy after Argentina's dramatic three-two defeat of West Germany in the final at the Estadio Azteca. More than any other player at any other World Cup, Maradona tested the adage that one man doesn't make a team, very close to destruction.
Football cognoscenti generally consider Mexico 1986 to be a brilliant World Cup on the continuum of international tournaments - and having watched every game myself in the last two months or so, I'd agree. The sporting drama and quality of the knockout stages were really quite something to behold, even if my authoritative memories from it are probably slightly different to the general punter.
Football cognoscenti generally consider Mexico 1986 to be a brilliant World Cup on the continuum of international tournaments - and having watched every game myself in the last two months or so, I'd agree. The sporting drama and quality of the knockout stages were really quite something to behold, even if my authoritative memories from it are probably slightly different to the general punter.
Officiating
It is fair to say that refereeing has changed in the now thirty-five years since this tournament. Most certainly, Mexico 1986 had its fair share of capricious officiating moments (and capricious might be describing them quite politely), but at the same time, my general impression of the level of the referees at the tournament is genuinely quite positive overall. (preamble describing the pre-tournement instructions)The piece written by then referee supremo Sepp Blatter in the tournament review is quite interesting:
Some very interesting points for discussion presented there by Mr Blatter :)
The differences between now and then are extremely vast, but on the whole, I think the officials did a good job at FIFA World Cup 1986 - with some notable exceptions, the referees generally showed a sophisticated level of football understanding in their games, and could mostly deliver good performances with the whistle. Without doubt, there was a fair share of disaster moments (even if we compare to 1994), but the overall level of the whole refs squad generally speaking, was not too much different to 1994, 1998 and 2002 in my eyes - some excruciatingly poor officials who shouldn't have been there, a general core of solid officials, and a small gaggle of really top class officials who could handle even the hardest games.
The key technical difference was in disciplinary control to nowadays. Ignoring the FIFA guidelines and so, and just generally talking about the mid-1980s thesis for elite refereeing, I'd suggest the following points are key to remember: the concept of an objective clear booking didn't really exist, how 'the game' saw foul sliding tackles was very different, SPA and DOGSO as concepts didn't exist at all, tactical value was therefore king, and cards generally offered much less munition for the men in the middle. Referees were forced to pay much closer attention to verbal warnings, general management, and game flow - the (other) players simply weren't that impressed by a yellow card being shown.
Whereas at World Cup 2006, FIFA wanted referees almost exclusively to control the players by showing (or not showing) yellow cards, we can say that 1986 was a total opposite. Even if the referees had have been more strict, it simply wasn't possible to be in control of the players actions anymore than they otherwise would have - showing a yellow card was almost always a reactive, not proactive choice, because of the attitude of the players. The result was that we had referees officiating largely in a very pure way - staying on top of the players actions through a variety of means, not just the waving of cards. For those deeply interested in refereeing as an art, for all the issues, made for a quite enchanting tournament.
As we could expect, the level of linesmanship was less enchanting. I assume, that FIFA's pre-WC 1994 meeting in Dallas, described by Englishman Roy Pearson as "brainwashing", was the first attempt to educate referees about the flash-lag effect and how to assess crossovers by video; this was many years before. While as team members they also often struggled (the idea that lining five(!) games in the months prior was in any way enough to prepare them for working in the role during a World Cup finals is ludicrous). Specialist linesman was the only way to go (the level in big national leagues where these de facto existed must have been better than at the World Cup) and only after Italia 1990 did FIFA realise this.
The differences between now and then are extremely vast, but on the whole, I think the officials did a good job at FIFA World Cup 1986 - with some notable exceptions, the referees generally showed a sophisticated level of football understanding in their games, and could mostly deliver good performances with the whistle. Without doubt, there was a fair share of disaster moments (even if we compare to 1994), but the overall level of the whole refs squad generally speaking, was not too much different to 1994, 1998 and 2002 in my eyes - some excruciatingly poor officials who shouldn't have been there, a general core of solid officials, and a small gaggle of really top class officials who could handle even the hardest games.
The key technical difference was in disciplinary control to nowadays. Ignoring the FIFA guidelines and so, and just generally talking about the mid-1980s thesis for elite refereeing, I'd suggest the following points are key to remember: the concept of an objective clear booking didn't really exist, how 'the game' saw foul sliding tackles was very different, SPA and DOGSO as concepts didn't exist at all, tactical value was therefore king, and cards generally offered much less munition for the men in the middle. Referees were forced to pay much closer attention to verbal warnings, general management, and game flow - the (other) players simply weren't that impressed by a yellow card being shown.
Whereas at World Cup 2006, FIFA wanted referees almost exclusively to control the players by showing (or not showing) yellow cards, we can say that 1986 was a total opposite. Even if the referees had have been more strict, it simply wasn't possible to be in control of the players actions anymore than they otherwise would have - showing a yellow card was almost always a reactive, not proactive choice, because of the attitude of the players. The result was that we had referees officiating largely in a very pure way - staying on top of the players actions through a variety of means, not just the waving of cards. For those deeply interested in refereeing as an art, for all the issues, made for a quite enchanting tournament.
As we could expect, the level of linesmanship was less enchanting. I assume, that FIFA's pre-WC 1994 meeting in Dallas, described by Englishman Roy Pearson as "brainwashing", was the first attempt to educate referees about the flash-lag effect and how to assess crossovers by video; this was many years before. While as team members they also often struggled (the idea that lining five(!) games in the months prior was in any way enough to prepare them for working in the role during a World Cup finals is ludicrous). Specialist linesman was the only way to go (the level in big national leagues where these de facto existed must have been better than at the World Cup) and only after Italia 1990 did FIFA realise this.
Final Appointment
We can caveat this with quite a bombshell revelation: Jan Keizer had been controversially sent home before the semifinals. FIFA didn't like his dissent management at the first penalty in Denmark vs. Spain, they said, plus with all four qualifying nations referees (Espósito, Roth, Ponnet, Quiniou) being removed at this stage, Netherlands was considered too close to Belgium. So Keizer was on the plane home.
Fourteen referees remained, and with six of them working on the semifinal (+ two reserve squadists), the final choice between eight could be whittled down. José Luis Martínez, Jamal Al-Sharif, Hernán Silva, Berny Ulloa Morera can quickly be ruled out of being in the middle for the final due to performance reasons, though they would work on the finals weekend in other roles.
Sources differ on why Ioan Igna was not considered, he reports that handling West Germany in the group stage made him ineligible for their final, while others suggest that he hadn't sufficiently physically recovered from Brazil vs. France for him to be in the race. George Courtney suffered from the Falklands conflict, and hence was appointed as the third place playoff ref as compensation.
Fourteen referees remained, and with six of them working on the semifinal (+ two reserve squadists), the final choice between eight could be whittled down. José Luis Martínez, Jamal Al-Sharif, Hernán Silva, Berny Ulloa Morera can quickly be ruled out of being in the middle for the final due to performance reasons, though they would work on the finals weekend in other roles.
Sources differ on why Ioan Igna was not considered, he reports that handling West Germany in the group stage made him ineligible for their final, while others suggest that he hadn't sufficiently physically recovered from Brazil vs. France for him to be in the race. George Courtney suffered from the Falklands conflict, and hence was appointed as the third place playoff ref as compensation.
That left Romualdo Arppi Filho from Brazil and Erik Fredriksson from Sweden, both representing the two spheres (Americas; Europe) of the FIFA world. Of much surprise to the referees committee members, unlike previous World Cup final appointing sessions, they wouldn't talk to a unanimous conclusion, but members would cast a vote, with a simple majority needed, award the appointment to the winning ref.
There were seven sitting committee members. Voting went like this:
There were seven sitting committee members. Voting went like this:
Arriaga (Mexican) for Arppi Filho (1-0)
Machin (French) for Fredriksson (1-1)
Sey (Gambian) for Arppi Filho (2-1)
Reginato (Chilean) for Arppi Filho (3-1)
Álvarez (Philippine) for Arppi Filho (4-1)
Wharton (Scottish) for Arppi Filho (5-1)
The final member, Italian Campanati's, was therefore going to be irrelevant under this system and the final was going to be given to Romualdo Arppi Filho. Campanati didn't accept this though - he was furious that Agnolin had been ruled out of the final race because of Sergio Gonella being given the final of World Cup 1978, and only on that premise, had not lobbied harder against his semifinal appointment.
What infuriated Campanati so much was that it was more recently, namely 1982, that it was a Brazilian (Arnaldo Cézar Coelho) had taken charge of the final. Campanati lodged his protest to the committee chairman, Cavan from Northern Ireland, who rejected it. With Sepp Blatter and João Havelange in the room, Campanati withdrew from the meeting, this annulling the vote, and forcing FIFA into a rethink.
Or not. Havelange, until then silent in the meeting room, stated, "great, thanks, goodbye" - the majority vote of the six members for Arppi Filho was enough for him, and he imposed the choice of Arppi Filho on the final without the blessing of the referees committee. This caused a huge storm amongst the (European) referees and associations, who accused Havelange of acting like a dictator.
The final member, Italian Campanati's, was therefore going to be irrelevant under this system and the final was going to be given to Romualdo Arppi Filho. Campanati didn't accept this though - he was furious that Agnolin had been ruled out of the final race because of Sergio Gonella being given the final of World Cup 1978, and only on that premise, had not lobbied harder against his semifinal appointment.
What infuriated Campanati so much was that it was more recently, namely 1982, that it was a Brazilian (Arnaldo Cézar Coelho) had taken charge of the final. Campanati lodged his protest to the committee chairman, Cavan from Northern Ireland, who rejected it. With Sepp Blatter and João Havelange in the room, Campanati withdrew from the meeting, this annulling the vote, and forcing FIFA into a rethink.
Or not. Havelange, until then silent in the meeting room, stated, "great, thanks, goodbye" - the majority vote of the six members for Arppi Filho was enough for him, and he imposed the choice of Arppi Filho on the final without the blessing of the referees committee. This caused a huge storm amongst the (European) referees and associations, who accused Havelange of acting like a dictator.
So Arppi Filho got it, and naturally, Erik Fredriksson was appointed as first linesman for compensation, despite not having featured at all in the whole knockout stage with the flag. FIFA didn't have much choice after the controversy of Arppi Filho getting it this way, even if it seems they were beginning to realise that specialist linesmen were the way forward.
So who would stand as the other linesman in the final; the battle was realistically between Hernán Silva, José Luis Martínez and Berny Ulloa Morera. Not featuring, in any role, in the round of sixteen, quarterfinals and semifinals was too much of a stumbling block for the Chilean, so he was out. Probably committee member Reginato helped him get a line on the third place playoff, too.
Uruguay's Martínez would have been a better choice than Ulloa Morera, but two things counted against him: 1) he was removed, for unknown reasons, from his linesman appointment to quarterfinal Spain vs. Belgium, replaced by reservist Codesal, and, 2) he was a South American, like Arppi Filho. So, Martínez worked as fourth official surely as compensation for not being linesman in the final.
Berny Ulloa Morera, despite his very egregious mistake in his only challenging prior game with the flag (Paraguay vs. Iraq), had got the ticket. Quietly passing through Argentina vs. England (despite one quite important mistake) was enough for the Costa Rican to be a slightly unlikely man in the World Cup final team, but such is how it happened.
Uruguay's Martínez would have been a better choice than Ulloa Morera, but two things counted against him: 1) he was removed, for unknown reasons, from his linesman appointment to quarterfinal Spain vs. Belgium, replaced by reservist Codesal, and, 2) he was a South American, like Arppi Filho. So, Martínez worked as fourth official surely as compensation for not being linesman in the final.
Berny Ulloa Morera, despite his very egregious mistake in his only challenging prior game with the flag (Paraguay vs. Iraq), had got the ticket. Quietly passing through Argentina vs. England (despite one quite important mistake) was enough for the Costa Rican to be a slightly unlikely man in the World Cup final team, but such is how it happened.
In spite of the raucousness of how the crack quartet for the 86 final came about, we can finish with some really lovely and heartwarming photos of the officials team for the final, given by Berny Ulloa Morera to a news agency in Costa Rica to publicly distribute.
Comments
Post a Comment