In football, the means almost always justifies the ends. The world "almost" is there merely as a courtesy. How a team wins is ultimately irrelevant, even if it is deemed entirely unwarranted by all those that were witness to it. We do not love football for it's aesthetics but for the incredible, unparalleled drama created within those ninety minutes.
The entertainment in watching a game of football is inherent, yet fragile. It does not need to be manufactured for the consequences are already well established. Defeat may be harder to swallow in a cup final than in a mundane league fixture but ultimately they are all points along the way in a season long narrative.
Careers in football are dictated by minutiae, moments of seemingly callous variables. Just ask Mauricio Pinilla. As such, managers and players are not bound to any sort of romantic notion of how the game is meant to be played. Their career can depend on being on the right end of a bounce, so it is no wonder that some would look to the so called "dark arts" to negate their opponent. I do think that there should be some sort of obligation to not actively choose to ruin whatever spectacle that there might be; especially if they have sufficient resources at their disposal to play good football (I'm looking at you Mourinho). Ultimately however that's idealism and not the pragmatism that those in football simply have to cling to.
As the world cup began to unfold, everyone marvelled at what was on display. I cannot think of any tournament which had such a high level of incident, on what was back then a daily basis. Since the ending of the group stages that has died down noticeably, with teams consistently cancelling each other out. If at first there was sense of countries showcasing their talents to the world, it has long since disappeared as the necessity to progress has acutely increased.
No comments:
Post a Comment