Gila’s version of the Hand of God: Did He Cheat?
By: Francesco | October 28th, 2008
Today the Lega Calcio confirmed the 2 game ban for Fiorentina striker Alberto Gilardino’s goal scored with his arm. The Tuscan club had appealed hoping to have the World Cup winning striker back for Wednesday’s big clash with Inter. However the appeal was rejected and Gilardino will miss out on the big game vs Inter Wednesday and the Tuscan derby with Siena Sunday. Fiorentina used the reasoning that Gila had no intent to hit it with his arm, since he was pushed by Dellafiore from behind and then the ball hit his arm when his eyes were closed. The Lega Calcio didn’t believe Fiorentina’s alibi and confirmed the suspension. Various coaches and players have had mixed opinions; some are in favor of Gila saying he is an honest player (really?) and didn’t intend to hit it with his hand, while others say the Biella-born hitman did it on purpose. What do you think? Leave your thoughts in the comments section. Video after the jump.
What do you think? Intentional? Non-Intentional? Was Maradona’s better?
PS- I figured with the midweek action going on tomorrow I’ll just put together the weekend review and tomorrow’s review into a mega-review for Thursday.
Category: 
Tags: Calcio, Fiorentina, football, Futbol, Gilardino, Hand of God, Handball, Italy, Maradona, Palermo, Players, Serie A, SoccerSubscribe
|
Print
|
Share
      |
Comments
-
He meant it, I think.
Posted from
United States
-
No doubt about it, that handball was intentional. If anything is telling, it’s his remarks that are all over the board in discussing the handball. I mean, not only does he knowingly put the ball into the net, he celebrates afterwards. Then, he apparently says he felt bad afterwards and tried to apologize. Furthermore, he goes on to say that IF the ref would’ve asked him, he would’ve told him that he scored with his hand…but we all know that wouldn’t have happened.
Now, they’re saying even if he didn’t score with his hand, it was a penalty. Once again, doubtful. Unless Gila has the weight equivalent of a leaf and there happened to be a gust of wind behind him, that’s a petty, petty foul to be called. After all, as some have pointed out already, Gila hasn’t exactly been the bastion of good sportsmanship. He’s probably got one of the worst phantom dives in the history of football (and that’s saying something with the likes of C. Ronaldo & Co.).
His two match game is more than deserved. To think he’ll learn his lesson is like hoping for a flood in the Sahara Desert. Not gonna happen.
Posted from
United States -
def cheated. All he had to do is speak up to the ref. They dominated that game they wee going to score again.
Posted from
United States -
Joseph if you watched the game they didnt dominate at all it was actually palermo who dominated. But good try buddy.
Posted from
United States -
I wouldn’t use the term “dominated” either. Especially in the first half, it was Palermo who controlled the play and had numerous chances that they just couldn’t finish off. Fiorentina had some nice counters that led to goals against the run of play.
In the second half though, it was definitely more of a push with both sides going back and forth. I wouldn’t say “dominant”. Although, after the third goal, the wind was definitely out of the rosanero sails.
Posted from
United States -
That looked intentional, he followed through with his arm. Nowhere near as bad as Maradona’s for any number of reasons. The game wasn’t as big, and the handball wasn’t half as ridiculous. At least Gilardino’s hand was in a somewhat natural position and not a foot above his head.
The screwing of the team on the wrong end of the goal was still the same though.
Posted from
United States -
Zack, I am a HUGE Gianluigi Buffon fan and I definitely agree that it was intentional, his hand looked like it kind of swiped at the ball and it is at a very obvious angle. Overall a sloppy penalty and badly executed as well. Just like you said it isn’t nearly as bad as Maradona’s, though I do love to watch him play.
Posted from
United States -
Maradona’s was definitely better! Regardless of whether it should/would have been a penalty or not, it was wrong to not say anything and then celebrate it as if it was legitimate. There’s no defending his actions. A ban is the least he should get. He should count himself fortunate he doesn’t live in the Middle East as he might have lost his hand afterward.
Posted from
United States -
Personally, i don’t think that it was too intentional, I think a penalty kick was deserved if he doesn’t hit it, but I agree with the 2 match ban.
You have to set the policy that a goal made with a hand is bad juju. The last thing we need in Serie A is a precedent of a “eyes closed” loophole. The way our players try to squeeze every advantage… not that it’s a bad thing… they just need to say an unequivocal “no” to this.
As far as Gila being an honest player. I think that it’s probably accurate. If we call cheater to every player who went looking for a call with a little theatrics (it’s not good, it’s not bad, it’s just the way it is) we would be rooting for a six man league. And two of them (Maldini and Javier Zanetti), probably won’t be around much longer.
Posted from
United States -
I think people are missing the big issue here. Its not whether Gila did intentionally handle the ball or didn’t, its the use of video evidence by the disciplinary commission and the punishment of a two game suspension which, to me, is the most controversial. I think this incident is the first of its kinds in the Italian game. It reminds me of the infamous Materazzi-Zidane incident from the World Cup final when Materazzi received a two-game ban for ‘insulting’ Zidane, a decision which still perplexes me – how can you give a ban for someone who insults an opposition player (regardless of what exactly was said) when football is such a highly competitive and physical game, and where exactly do you draw the line with such a ruling? Its the same with using video evidence after a game to decide who should be banned, its just very controversial and up-for-debate idea, and where do you draw the line with that? Should video evidence be used for every little thing that goes on, should we use it to look at every incident and ban players for anything which is technically illegal which the referee may miss? No, I don’t think so, and its extremely harsh on Gila to use it here. It was the referee’s mistake and it should be left at that, and if anything, the ref is the one who should be punished after the game.
Posted from
United States -
Shield, it isn’t the first time the commission has used video evidence in disciplinary cases. They’ve been doing it for at least the last two seasons.
Posted from
Italy -
Agreed ursus.
RomaShield - it’s been used within reason for the past couple of seasons to review such things. You’re making it sound like they’d sit there and look over every minute of every game played that weekend and make rulings based on missed decisions (such as a ball going over the touchline that wasn’t properly called). Obviously what happened in the Palermo - Fiore game was a big thing to take note of. I think they should both (ref & gila) be penalized for their respective errors.
Posted from
United States -
Sorry, when I said its the first of its kind in the Italian game I did mean a player being suspended for scoring with his arm. I know post-game video evidence in disciplinary cases has been used before but its usually for an off-the-ball incident or a gesture toward the crowd or something like that, but not for something like this. Giving a player a two-game suspension for using his arm to score is very harsh, especially in a case like this where its extremely debatable if it were intentional or not, and the added possibility that the player in question was being fouled at the time. Its because the referee did not see the incident clearly and so it was not noted that the disciplinary commission felt they had to intervene, bit where were the referee’s assistant? Could they have not consulted the ref and made a decision then? If not, the ref’s decision to allow the goal should of been final, and using video evidence afterward is taking it too far. Its too harsh the player himself, especially when you consider that if the ref or one of his linemen did see it and believe it to be an intentional handball then what would of happened? Gila would of gotten a yellow-card. But now he has a two-game suspension.
And taking the larger picture into account, the disciplinary commission are happy to use video evidence to ban Gila for his part in the goal but do or say nothing about the goal itself, which in their eyes was an illegal goal, but yet it still stands…? Like I said, where do you draw the line?
Posted from
United States -
Maybe because it’s a lot easier to suspend a player for his action than to let both teams replay their game.
Posted from
Belgium -
And because annulling the goal wouldn’t have changed the result.
As I’ve said before, I don’t interpret the suspension as being for the handball per se. Rather it was for the entire process of handball and goal celebration that the commission interpreted to be an intentional attempt to mislead the officials as to what had actually happened.
If one takes that view, it isn’t really significantly different from other incidents in which video evidence has been used.
Posted from
Italy -
I partially agree with you ursus, steven, and lorenzo. This is, in my opinion, obviously intentional because of the follow through with his entire arm. Not only that, but also his celebration makes it appear that he didn’t score with his hand. I disagree as well with you, shield, that the whole idea of video-evidence for disciplining is controversial. Not really, think about American football, it uses instant replay for nearly the same reasons.
Posted from
United States -
soccerfreak - yes, the NFL uses video replay DURING games, but your point is also validated by the fact that players can be fined by the NFL for illegal hits they made during a game after an official review from the league.
Posted from
United States -
The difference being that American Football is a game where stops are normal. Using the same things in regular footie would kill the fun.
Posted from
Belgium -
This was of course an instance in which the review occurred after the match, so there is no question of disrupting the flow of the game.
That said, as one who has become convinced that we need a serious trial of video replays during matches with respect to goal/no goal decisions (and perhaps penalties), it’s worth pointing out that other “flowing” sports like rugby and ice hockey have instituted similar systems without “killing the fun”.
Posted from
Italy -
definitely was a handball, otherwise would have been a penalty.
Posted from
United States
Comments are closed
Home 
