Foul Play Soccer’S “Infamous Thespians” and the Cultural Politics of Diving Natalie Alvarez
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Foul Play Soccer’s “Infamous Thespians” and the Cultural Politics of Diving Natalie Alvarez On 25 August 2009, during a Champions League match between Arsenal and Celtic, Arsenal forward Eduardo da Silva was awarded a penalty kick after Celtic goalkeeper Artur Boruc tripped him — or so the referee thought. From the referee’s line of sight, Boruc’s leg made con- tact with da Silva’s foot, sending da Silva into an emphatic tumble. But a post-game Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) disciplinary panel reviewed video footage and deter- mined that there was, in actuality, no contact between the players and that da Silva had, in fact, deceived the referee.1 For the UEFA officials, da Silva’s fall was unmistakably staged and a clear case of what the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) calls “simulation,” defined in itsLaws of the Game as “attempts to deceive the referee by feigning injury or pretend- ing to have been fouled” (2015:125). The UEFA subsequently banned da Silva for two matches. 1. See Dailymotion (2008) for a video of match highlights that includes the da Silva–Boruc clash at the 50-second mark. Figure 1. Eduardo da Silva moves into the “archer’s bow” after Artur Boruc’s challenge during the 25 August 2009 Champions League match. (Courtesy of Andy Hooper/Daily Mail/Solo Syndication) TDR: The Drama Review 60:1 (T229) Spring 2016. ©2016 10 New York University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00521 by guest on 29 September 2021 The banning of da Silva reignited a flurry of commentary among sports journalists decrying the demise of the game as a result of rampant simulation or “diving.” These online commentar- ies circulate among a proliferation of websites and blogs that inventory the game’s most infa- mous “‘thespians’ in the field”2 with lurid video stills of theatrical dives, archiving a repertoire of “bad acting” on the soccer pitch.3 Referees share tips on how to spot a fake from a foul, while behavioral psychologists study the physical “tells” that betray the performed foul from the real injury. When examined as a performance strategy, simulation in soccer, in both its the- atrics and its reception, reveals a tacit reliance on the aesthetic criteria of realist acting, which in turn provides a discourse that services assumptions about cultural difference. A performance analysis of the da Silva simulation, with references to a select number of infamous dives, high- lights the cultural politics at work in this controversial performance strategy. An antitheatri- cal discourse emerges when theatricality — in the form of acting that becomes “bad” acting only when it becomes visible by mistake — is perceived to infiltrate the game of soccer. This dis- course serves as a means of delimiting ideas of nation and cultural difference in an increasingly transnational game “threatened” by the forces of globalization. The da Silva Dive Replay 1 At 25 minutes into the Celtic-Arsenal Champions League play-off match, with a score of nil-nil, the Brazilian-born Croatian striker Eduardo da Silva clashes with Celtic goalkeeper Artur Boruc. Boruc slides legs-first toward the ball in a challenge against da Silva’s approach. Whether by impact or in anticipation of the tackle — the nature of the encounter remains disputed — da Silva tumbles to the ground.4 Spanish official Manuel Enrique Mejuto Gonzalez sees the tumble and enrages the Celtics by awarding a penalty kick; da Silva scores, securing Arsenal’s 3-1 victory and the team’s safe passage into the Champions League group phase. Pressured, perhaps, by the Celtic clamor, a UEFA disciplinary committee reviews footage of the critical encounter between da Silva and Boruc, determines that there is, in fact, no contact between the two players, overrules the referee’s decision, and imposes the ban on da Silva on charges of simulation. 2. See for example: “Ten of the Worst Soccer Dives Ever” (Rojter 2010); “Funniest Soccer Dives and Fake Injuries Ever! (Video)” (Soccernews.com 2010); “The Worst Soccer Dives in History” (Sportige.com 2011); “Poor Acting on Soccer Flop” (Ayoub n.d.); “10 Biggest Divers in World Football” (Sunderland 2013); and “The 10 Undisputed Worst Divers in Soccer” (Harty 2014). For an impressively thorough archive documenting over 230 dives spanning several decades, see Dick van Mersbergen’s “Hall of Shame: divers in football” (2011). 3. I will be using soccer and football interchangeably in this paper, since consistency is an impossibility given that some of the sources I refer to in this paper use the U.S. term “soccer,” while others use “football.” 4. Da Silva had recently recovered from a broken leg suffered in a Premiere League match between Arsenal and Birmingham in February 2008 (Hodges 2008), so the trauma of that impact, as some argue—particularly the Croatian media and fans who embraced da Silva as their own (see for example the article “Eduardo forgives Taylor for horror tackle,” which notes that Taylor received death threats from Croatian fans after the tackle)— might have resulted in da Silva’s affective reflex response in an attempt to protect himself from another injury (Reuters/AFP 2008). “Infamous Thespians” Soccer’s Natalie Alvarez is Associate Professor in the Department of Dramatic Arts at Brock University. She is the author of Stages of Difference: Immersive Simulations and the Politics of Knowing (University of Michigan, forthcoming), Theatre & War (Palgrave Macmillan, forthcoming), and the editor of two books on Latina/o Canadian theatre and performance: Latina/o Canadian Theatre and Performance and Fronteras Vivientes: Eight Latina/o Canadian Plays (Playwrights Canada Press, 2013). She is also coeditor of Sustainable Tools for Precarious Subjects: Performance Actions and Human Rights in the Americas (Palgrave Macmillan, forthcoming). [email protected] 11 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DRAM_a_00521 by guest on 29 September 2021 The matter is taken to the UEFA Appeals Body in September of 2009, which reviews more replays of the encounter and weighs them against da Silva’s testimony and that of ref- eree Mejuto Gonzalez. For the appeals hearing, the Arsenal club produces footage demon- strating that there is, in fact, contact between the two players. However, separate footage taken from different camera angles contradicts Arsenal’s evidence and suggests that there is no con- tact between the players. Da Silva on the encounter: “All I remember of the incident is that as soon as I had possession of the ball I headed towards goal at full speed. I was very close to the Celtic goalkeeper and felt contact on my foot then lost my balance” (in Hughes 2009). The UEFA Appeals Body ultimately annuls the ban on 14 September 2009, determining that “it was not established to the panel’s satisfaction that the referee had been deceived in taking his deci- sion on the penalty” (in Hughes 2009). According to Matt Hughes, the reversal “muddie[s] the already confused area of anti-diving regulations” and the entire appeals process will likely make the UEFA hesitant about charging another high-profile player with simulation. Writing forThe Guardian, Paul Wilson’s concern is that the da Silva incident set a dangerous precedent, encour- aging players to make the most out of the slightest contact: In plainer terms, the situation now seems to be this. Players shall not be punished for making the most of any sort of contact. Indeed, they are free to try to win penalties by not just inviting the foul, but by falling ostentatiously to the floor under any sort of powder-puff contact. Stand by for half a dozen attacking players dropping like flies when a corner produces the usual amount of penalty area jostling. (Wilson 2009) As Wilson’s comment reveals, there is clearly a concern that diving is on the rise and that these ostentatious falls at the slightest “powder-puff contact” emasculates the sport.5 The ques- tion remains whether the perceived surge in simulation is a result of an increase in the use of HD cameras and Skycams that allow heightened picture quality and flexible camera angles enabling viewers to watch and review footage with greater detail and ease. As my colleague Nicholas Hanson recently remarked, “With the quality of today’s cameras, it’s hard to imagine a repeat of the ‘Hand of God’” — the infamous moment during the Argentina versus England match at the 1986 FIFA World Cup when Maradona used his hand to score a goal (Hanson 2014). But if, as UEFA President Michel Platini claims, camera footage is unable to provide conclusive evidence of diving,6 what made UEFA officials so sure in their initial “performance analysis” of the da Silva–Boruc encounter that da Silva was simulating? And further, if replays can’t reveal anything with any certainty, what hope do referees have of discerning fake from foul in the heat of the match? While UEFA panelists may not be able to rely on camera footage to verify contact, they can turn to a rather fulsome repertoire of diving behavior that has been charted by behavioral psychologists and noted by seasoned referees who, together, have logged several hundred hours observing “star turns” of infamous dives on the field. To what extent did da Silva’s tumble adhere to the traditional repertoire of dives? Simulation in soccer, and the demands it places on UEFA officials to conduct performance analyses when the pro-filmic “reality” of video footage fails to corroborate charges of fakes ver- sus fouls, is a compelling example of the ways in which an “understanding of human behav- ior,” as Richard Schechner maintains, “is changing from quantifiable differences between cause and effect, past and present, form and content, et cetera [...] to an emphasis on the decon- struction/reconstruction of actualities: the processes of framing, editing, and rehearsing [...]” (1985:33).