The Most Uncompetitive Match in Football’s Biggest Competition
Daniel Nicholas Pakpahan for LC Life
LE CITOYEN — Ah, losing the World Cup. We all felt the gloomy dejection, seeing the teams we wholeheartedly support receive a major blow. Those players must have been very exhausted, crestfallen, trying their best to recover from the sadness and physical weariness, thinking about nothing but boarding the plane home, enjoying the rest of holiday, having vacations with family and friends while biding their time before the start of next season. Hell, I could picture Dele Alli thinking of getting drunk and ready for another round of Fortnite with the boys after last Thursday. But wait, what’s that? Another match on Saturday? You gotta be fu… no cussing, you get the point. If you think your life is miserable and burdensome, think about World Cup semi-finalists.
“Third and fourth place play-off game is utter stupidity. Last thing any player wants,” tweeted Alan Shearer, one of England’s greatest goalscorers who scored 30 goals in his 63 matches for the national team between 1992 to 2000. Surely it may seem like a post-defeat tantrum after Croatia crushed the dream of “Football Coming Home” this year, leaving England fans gutted. But no, Shearer is not the first one to say it, and it is for good reasons.
The third-place playoff match has long been subject to intense criticism by both pundits and fans alike. Former Netherlands manager Louis Van Gaal had reiterated the notion in 2014 after losing against Argentina in semi-final. “I’ve been saying that for 10 years. We’ll have to play that match. It’s unfair — we have one day less to recover than our opponents, too, so that’s not fair play.” And he is right, because there should’ve only been one champion. World Cup does not and will never recognize a bronze medal, if that is the image this match wishes to convey. Unlike the Olympic Games which are a brief stint, mostly wrapped up in one day, World Cup is a whole month campaign with 32 best teams across continents striving for one coveted trophy. And in case somebody missed it, the “cup” in World Cup is singular. All or nothing, period.
Everything will be predictable in this particular match, fans know what is going to be offered. Those who are so crazy about scoring spree will definitely witness a game involving nearly four goals or more, when the average number of goals scored in other matches is below three. Five goals were scored in the 2002, 2006, and 2010 episodes respectively. Brazil came as sore losers in a 3–0 defeat against Netherlands in 2014. What is there to expect? There is no pressure, no expectations, just a playground of players reluctant to play.
The Europeans understand it better, there is no third-place match in UEFA competitions like the European Championship or Champions League. What else is more cold-hearted than to aggravate a team’s suffering by obliging them to play once more, when there is no more trophy to be won? The defeated semi-finalists need no one to remind them how it feels to lose the World Cup, definitely not with this game.
Then what justifies FIFA shoving such reminder by forcing these fatigued losers to compete once more? None. Well, nothing competitive. It’s all about generating more revenues, more money. One more match equals to additional ticket sales, more fortune on broadcasting license, higher television ratings and viewers. Surely FIFA with their Swiss diplomacy will try to lead us to believe that this match affects FIFA’s global team rankings. Well no sh*t Sherlock, like that even matters.
There are two common scenarios, one is teams filling the line-up with “bench warmers”, paving the way for a chance of losing twice in a row. Second is managers being totally indifferent and rotate the star players, however, sans the elbow grease. What is recurring in several commentaries supporting the match is the highlight of “the race for Golden Boot”. But let’s be honest, nobody exerts too much energy in a non-decisive match, much less risking injuries or unnecessary bookings in defending the opponent. Thus, it degenerates a game of eleven versus eleven into an individual campaign, where it poses no actual difficulty for top scorers to bag even more goals. There will be no England against Belgium, only Harry Kane (six goals) facing Romelu Lukaku (four goals).
It will be unsurprising to see England fans selling out their tickets with lower price for Saturday’s match in Saint Petersburg Stadium, and nobody blames them for it. Let’s take the trip down memory lane, Italy 1990, the last time England lost the World Cup semis. 1000 tickets had been reserved for England fans, but only 100 appeared for the third-place playoff. For this year, maybe only few English chants are going to be heard, scant number of iconic blokes with painted bare-chests, and I bet Russian or Asian spectators will take most of the seats.
Do not perceive this as a vicious hate speech, it is nothing personal but a compilation of a global abhorrence and universal disapproval of the match. Is it lucrative? Highly, in a commercial point of view. Competitive? doubtfully. If England lost tonight against Belgium, would it mean that they failed to win our hearts? Just watch and answer those questions yourself. Or don’t.
