It’s one thing if this is a one off occurrence. It’s nearly every week with Inter. That’s something entirely else.

Your explanation for why the press has jumped on this bandwagon clarifies things very well for me, Ursus — it’s a bit depressing, though, that calcio’s obsession with this psychological slavery thing is really truly sustained at a level far beyond that of football elsewhere. The only other time I remember such a fuss being made over a bad decision this season, was when it went against Liverpool, against Villa, I think. [Which really says a lot about the levels of paranoia in Serie A, dunnit.] Since the ‘comedy Inter’ thing is not working so well anymore, I suppose football journalism does need to find a new peg to hang them on.

Thank you as always, Ursus, for your thoughts. I can’t imagine something like this happening without “sudditanza psicologica” being mentioned at this point — it’s become almost as big of a cliche as saying the big clubs always get the calls. They’re both so easy to say, and there are closely related truths in there somewhere, but it’s hard for me to dig them out because the responses of the media, public, and clubs to this sort of Incident are so almost choreographed now. I mean, the moment that penalty was called, I think 95% of us could described in great detail what the next 48 hours would be like — it strikes me that the baggage is so heavy and the context so dense that it’s impossible for anyone to respond ONLY to what happened on the pitch. If that makes any sense.

Romanista raises the classic Italian concept of “sudditanza psicologica”, the literal (and useless) translation of which is “psychological subjection”, but which actually means what he/she has outlined, that when faced with a 50/50 (or 45/55) decision in a stressful situation many Italians are inclined to go with the choice that they feel will be the least likely to get them into trouble and the one most likely to appeal to the “powerful”. It obviously is a concept of universal application, but among the G8 countries it tends to be thought to be particularly true here, where a belief in (and references to) “powerful forces” and “strong men” and the practice of “dietrologia” (literally “the study of what’s behind”, i.e., what the “real reasons” behind virtually any public or private action) are particularly strong.

Does “sudditanza psicologica” explain why the ref called the penalty against Couto but didn’t call one for Cordoba’s foul on Corradi? I don’t happen to think so (we were there, and I think the Couto decision was correct, if close, due to the fact that the ball would have gone in if it hadn’t hit his arm, and that a combination of the fog and an inattentive linesman was responsible for the Corradi mistake), but roughly two-thirds of the respondents to a Gazzetta poll on the subject believe the opposite, and this happens to be one of those cases in which perception is almost as important as reality. It is also true that the penalty that the Nerazzuri were given at Siena the week before was (to my mind) a worse mistake (more of the magnitude of Zalayeta dive bis or Trezeguet’s offside goal in the derby).

Declaring a “silenzio stampa” is one of the great traditions of Italian football, and it is probably more likely than not that on any given day during the season at least one club in the top three divisions isn’t talking to the press. In this particular case, it is a bit hard to see what the club could possibly say that wouldn’t be used to fuel a new set of speculative and sensational headlines. And the context of those headlines is largely commercial. Even putting house organs like Tuttosport aside, the Gazzetta and the other “quality” papers are very well aware that somewhere between half and two-thirds of their readers don’t support Inter, and that the large majority of that population support clubs that believe (with or without justification) that they were hard done by in Calciopoli and/or unfairly disadvantaged in this year’s competition by pro-Inter decisions. The commercial appeal of headlines that can fuel a sense of anti-Inter indignation is obvious (it works just the same way for Juve and Milan, btw).

And roswitha is (as always) very wise. Milan never do shut up, do they?

Surely you didn’t miss Carletto saying, “… but I wouldn’t know, we never have that sort of thing over here!” while making said defence, though. :D

Although to be honest, I don’t think it’s a conspiracy or another scandal.

I just think that in such an intimidating atmosphere as the San Siro, with Inter 2 – 1 down, a last minute penalty appeal comes along and if it’s 50 50 or even 40 60, the ref gives it.

Inter will cause a lot more trouble than Parma if it goes against them and the repurcussions will be worse.

Human nature I think