- 20 Aug 08, 06:51 PM
Workers' Stadium, Beijing
Last night I indulged an Olympic guilty pleasure. It was hot and sweaty, kept me up very late and involved lots of Brazilians. I knew it was wrong but I couldn't help it.
The men's football semi-final between defending champions Argentina and their arch-rivals Brazil was like nothing else I've witnessed at these Olympics. In fact, it was like nothing else I've witnessed full stop.
Before I continue I should state I'm not sure football - or certainly some of the players involved - should really be here. Having earlier questioned tennis's place in the Olympics, any other position would smack of bias.
The match was a cracker. Tense and tight in the first half, Argentina poached two quick goals at the start of the second. They then survived a Brazilian rally, before killing the game off with a third from the penalty spot. The team in gold ended the game in disarray, while the team in blue and white left dreaming of gold.
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions
First, though, some background. The Olympic football tournament is a "super clasico" example of administrative fudge.
Part of the schedule since 1900, the early tournaments made sense in that amateurs contested them. The standard wasn't very high and the margins of victory could be ludicrously wide. This seemed to suit Great Britain as we won three of the first four golds.
But as the sport grew, the competition got better, largely thanks to South America. Fifa noticed this and thought it was about time it justified its status as football's governing body, the first World Cup in 1930 being the result. This also meant kicking the Olympic tournament into the long grass.
A status quo developed over the next half century. Fifa's World Cup grew in size and significance, while the Olympic tournament pootered along as an event only taken seriously by the state-sponsored "amateurs" of the Eastern Bloc.
This, inevitably, drew envious glances from the International Olympic Committee (IOC). The Montreal Games in 1976 were a financial catastrophe, as were the Moscow Games of 1980 if anybody was really keeping count. The Olympics could not afford another loss-maker. Decent football had to return, even in a compromised state.
Fifa, reluctant to allow any challenge to its showpiece's primacy, gave the green light for countries from weaker regions to field their strongest sides and Europe and South America to use players who had not appeared in a World Cup. The traditional powers responded by fielding youth teams and, hey presto, a tournament, which pleased the IOC and didn't upset Fifa, was reborn.
The situation was clarified in 1992, when the Olympic competition was limited to players under 23 but with the proviso that three players older than 23 could be used too. This gave the Olympics a few more marketable sportsmen (the women would have to wait until 1996) and Fifa's under-17, under-20 and senior tournaments were left unchallenged.
It was, however, a complete carve-up. The clubs, who employ the players, were never consulted and the hosts now had to find half a dozen grounds big enough to hold these matches and squeeze them into the schedule.
Which brings me to Tuesday night.
Over these last two weeks I have seen China play the US in the most watched basketball match of all time, Usain Bolt demolish his 100m world record, Michael Phelps set a new best of eight golds in a Games and Norway thrash Kazakhstan at handball. OK, forget that last one, but the others were all massive occasions and I'm blessed to have seen them.
None, however, matched the atmosphere in the Workers' Stadium. First, the place was stuffed to the gills. Second, it was noisy, which only happens anywhere else when a Chinese athlete is winning. And third, there were global superstars out there who everybody, not just the devoted, recognised: Argentina's mini maestro Lionel Messi and Brazilian hero Ronaldinho.
It was also immediately evident this was part of the Olympics but somehow bigger than it too. No other contest can or should be able to say that. And I have no idea how any newspaper, magazine or news bulletin was prepared in Argentina or Brazil that day, as surely every working journalist was at this game.
As soon as Atletico Madrid star Sergio Aguero scored his second tap-in, the press pack was on the move to mark some territory for post-match reaction. Sensing something big, I followed a crew from Brazil's top channel, Globo.
The press conference room appeared to be under siege so we dodged the crowds and got to a TV in the media area outside the changing rooms in time to see Juan Riquelme seal the victory (Argentina's first against the old enemy for three years) and Brazil lose the plot with two late red cards.
The Globo boys, and their respective numbers from every corner of the globe (apart from Britain), were going nuts. This, they told me, would top the news and colour the entire Olympics for Brazilians. Never mind Bolt, forget Phelps, this is football, it's different. And we've just been whipped by them. Anybody but them.
So we waited. During this time, the press conference was cancelled, the rest of the media pack attempted to storm our area and all semblance of Olympic spirit was trampled under foot. The army of smiling Chinese volunteers were utterly routed. They were not ready for a story like this.
The Brazilian players started to traipse out first. Impressively accessorised and extravagantly tattooed, they looked devastated. My friends from Globo (we had been talking for an hour...about football, obviously) translated. Manchester United's Anderson wasn't sure went wrong but admitted Argentina played well, AC Milan prodigy Pato was sullen and thought his offside goal should have counted (he was right) and Sao Paulo midfielder Hernanes was just heartbroken.
"I don't know if the people back at home will remember this for long," he said. "But I will never forget this defeat."
The reporters told me the fans would not forget that quickly. Brazil's inability to win an Olympic football gold continues to frustrate and manager Dunga will now need two very impressive results in the upcoming World Cup qualifiers to save his job.
I managed to get a few words in with Lucas, who was shown red for kicking his Liverpool team-mate Javier Mascherano, and he too seemed very down but did say he felt the effort to get the team together was worthwhile. The clubs, you see, have got wise to the over-age trick and challenged the authorities' right to enforce the policy. The clubs won the argument but let it slide this time. They are unlikely to do so again.
The Argentine players, as you can imagine, were in high spirits. Real Madrid star Fernando Gago talked about being pleased to win playing "Argentine" football (lots of short passing, lung-busting support play and tireless harrying in defence) but admitted the win was all the sweeter for who it came against.
Riquelme tried hard to wipe the smirk from his face but failed. He settled for a policy of restating again and again the victory would be nothing without a gold medal on Saturday.
And that was largely that. But I was given one more rare treat, a front-row seat to watch an infamous Argentine bus party. Long before all the Brazilian players had reached their transport, the chanting and window drumming started from the victors' coach. I now know what Alan Shearer was talking about post-St Etienne 1998.
So this was sport of rare beauty, remarkable intensity, tangible passion and raw cruelty. But was it Olympic sport?
I don't know but I felt lucky to be there.
About this blog
Links to the blogs of all the contributors can be found below.
Subscribe to BBC Sport: Olympics blog
You can stay up to date with BBC Sport: Olympics blog via these feeds.
BBC Sport: Olympics blog Feed(RSS)
BBC Sport: Olympics blog Feed(ATOM)
If you aren't sure what RSS is you'll find our beginner's guide to RSS useful.
Olympics headlines
Visit the BBC Sport website
Visit the Olympics index
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Yes it was an Olympic Sport.
Complain about this comment
Why is softball in there? Why are sports only popular in one country in there? Football is universally popular so deserves to be an Olympic sport. We should question why other sports are in there before football.
Complain about this comment
The Olympics are essentially meant to be a place for amateur sportsmen to compete on a worldwide stage. To be honest, it's arguable whether any sportsperson who competes at the olympics is "amateur" in their ability to compete at such a high level. The issue most have with football is that it's flooded with money, and is on no level an amateur sport. The same with tennis and golf. I don't think those sports should be at the olympics because of the amount of money involved in them, but I suppose all sports are like that now.
Sport isn't a competition anymore, it's a business, and where the olympics are concerned, it's politics.
Complain about this comment
the olympics without football will be a loss-making event, and this will never happen.
And, it is only the British that call these (olympics, U-20, U-17 WC) tournaments "mickey-mouse tournaments". Why is this?
Complain about this comment
I love football, but i think any sport that doesnt see the olympics as the pinnacle of its sport shouldnt be an olympic sport, most teams and players see the olympics as an inconveince for the new season, its the same with tennis and basketball,
Complain about this comment
UTD3inarow - I couldn't agree more, it's why I don't think Tennis should be in it or anything like that, football has the World Cup and that's what all football is really about, it's the ultimate medal, Olympic football just shows understrength sides play it out though it has been good, I don't really see the passion as there is in World Cups or Euros or even the Champions League.
Complain about this comment
I know exactly what Matt Slater means: it feels odd seeing football at the Olympics, as I normally associate the latter with sports that I don't already watch international tournaments in. Although, after an impressive Euro 2008, it's good to get one last taste of international football this summer.
And if Nigeria can play again like they did against Belgium, I think the feared Argentina may have to settle for silver.
Complain about this comment
Matt, earlier today you twittered that you had just heard from M Phelps coach how his victories were achieved. Are you going to write about this or just keep it to yourself? Twit.
Complain about this comment
Typical FIFA, they have way, way to much influence over football and only seem to care about defending their status. Thankfully they gave way over this and we have had some fantastic matches. Great article!
Complain about this comment
Olympic sports should:
1. Be the pinnacle of that particular discipline. It should represent the ultimate goal for the athlete taking part.
2. Be a global sport.
Football and tennis fail on point 1. softball and baseball on point 2.
Beach volleyball just fails full stop.
I've heard a lot of people say basketball shouldn't be in it, but it's actually the most played sport in the world so I think it should be left in.
Complain about this comment
hahaha softball is very popular in MANY countries! Except in the UK of course..
Complain about this comment
GunnerImmy, Twit? Oh I see, Twitter, very good.
Give me a chance, sunshine. I only finished talking to BB 14 hours ago. Since then I've had to go see something else, eat a warm meal, sleep and get myself up and out again for another full day. But don't worry, it's chucking it down here so there'll be in no beach volleyball (I'm here for the first US v China showdown for gold, obviously) for a while. I'll start writing BB on Phelps now.
Complain about this comment
Interesting article and especially to learn how football has developed as an Olympic discipline. However, it's not the issue of politics or popularity of a sport that concern me.
I always thought that the Olympics are well characterised by great acts of bravery, commitment, heroism and true sportsmanship (if you overlook the doping scandals...) - and I don't think that these are qualities displayed by many footballers.
It's bad enough having to watch these overpaid idiots rolling around on the floor feigning injury during the World Cup every four years without having to endure their selfishness during such a great occasion as the Olympics.
The majority of athletes at these games have achieved their lifelong dream and become the pinnacle of world sport as a result of great dedication and personal sacrifice. I think this attitude certainly puts the spoilt footballers to shame, and they should only be allowed to compete when they've learnt a little humility.
Complain about this comment
Great article - we may never witness the quality of players displayed on ARG side again.
Its perfectly fitting that the world's fiercest sports rivalry would rear its head in the Olympics.
Its also not surprising that the American media paid no attention to the match, despite the fact it was the hot ticket.
I joked w/a friend that its not a FIFA sanctioned world tourney unless ARG must face BRASIL in the semi-finals. The winner, beaten up and tired from the prior night
s celebration, is never as sharp in the final. Whenever the two nations square off, its deserving to be the final.
Complain about this comment
Yada, yada, yada...first it was Phelps, then Hoy, now Argentina, one shooting star after another, "like nothing else ever witnessed". Anyhow, it's really not necessary to state the obvious, everybody knows it's true, football shouldn't be there, to be sure - or many other team sports or frivilous games that hardly qualify as 'sports' like ping pong or shooting. Football has long since ougrown the Olympics, the World Cup has become a bigger attraction than the Olympics in total. A rump football tournament, especially one with artificial selection constraints is largely irrelevant so it's a little hard to get too incandescent over a semi-final match that has teams with big names but doesn't carry much weight. Even if Argentina goes on to win the gold, it will be a somewhat hollow victory given their poor showing in recent tournaments that do matter. Since 1990, Argentina hasn't made it past the quarter-finals at a WC. During the same span, Brazil has been in three WC championship matches, winning two of them. In the football universe, winning an Olympics youth tournament is pretty small potatoes compared to that.
Complain about this comment
I'm glad you enjoyed the game, Mr Slater, but to be blunt, nobody cares. The football has, quite rightly, been given little or know coverage over here. England / Team GB are not competing and it's only the 4th most important international football contest in the world, so I hope you can understand our apathy. Instead, we get to watch another lacklustre performance by England against the Czechs - what is Frank Lampard for, is John Terry international class and where are all the Arsenal players in the England team?
Having said all that, I'd rather watch an insignificant Olympics football match, or even an England friendly, than those dancing horses they call Dressage.
Complain about this comment
Morning all. Yes, quickquip, you're right it is one "shooting star after another"...it's the Olympics, they're all here. As for football outgrowing, the Olympics, I think it's you who is stating the obvious there. I deal with that in a sentence in the 8th par. The more interesting thing about that is the fact that the Olympics badly needed football when it was struggling during the "boycott" (not Geoff) era. Whether it still "needs" it now is debatable, as I'm not so sure the World Cup is a bigger attraction than the Olympics. I knew which one I prefer but millions around the globe would disagree with me and you, by the sound of things.
I also take issue with who you're aiming that incandescent remark at....it wasn't me who got "incandescent", it was the S Americans....this game clearly mattered to them.
As for Argentina's youth successes (five of the last seven age-group tournaments at world level) not being equal to Brazil's senior triumphs, again, you're not telling me anything I didn't know...or correcting anything I have written. But Brazil wanted to win this tournament, I can assure you of that.
Moutarde, you might be right about it being only 4th most important international tournament in the world (it may even be less "important" than the African Cup of Nations, Asian Cup and women's World Cup) but don't think that just because "we" don't care it's not important to other regions. The S Americans are right up for it, always have been. It was on the Olympic stage that they first started to beat European teams and Brazil's inability to win a gold has been a long source of national frustration....why else do you think the national coach Dunga, Ronaldinho, Diego, Pato, Anderson and all their other top young talent is here? Argentina have also pulled out all the stops to get the best possible side out.
As for little or no coverage in the UK, I couldn't comment. I haven't seen a second of British coverage since I've been here. But aren't all the games live on BBC3?
Complain about this comment
BBC3? I think the point I was making still stands; it's not that interesting to the British viewing public.
Complain about this comment
FYI... Football is not that hugely popular as what all of you have been stating... if you go to the eastern side of the globe... football is just a minimi of basketball... hence, basketball rules... =)
Anyways, I already starting to like football... just watched the Euro 2008 championship and it was stunning ... viva espanya... (FYI, I'm not from Spain.)
Complain about this comment
My thoughts ...
1) We, the UK, get stuffy about it because we don't take part. South America have competed in this for longer and really do see how it matters. You might also link failures at age-group level to failures at senior level but I wouldn't want to comment.
2) Perhaps futsal or a 5-a-side tournament with the teams could be interesting. It is still clearly football but also different enough.
3) We, the UK, get stuffy about 'minority' sports such as basketball, volleyball and handball which are, if I remember correctly, as or possibly more popular worldwide than cricket and rugby.
Complain about this comment
It's not entirely true that the football World Cup displaced the Olympic competition as the top event in the game from the 1930's (I'm not sure if that's what Matt Slater meant but it could be read that way). The pre-1939 WCs were very thinly contested (two European sides went to South America in 1930, few South American sides turned up in 1934 and 1938) and the Olympic tournaments in 1932 and 1936 had a much better geographical representation. Even after 1945 the two tournaments were about equal in status (the Soviets were so obsessed with winning in 1952 that the fall out of failure was very serious for players and coaches alike). GB were putting amateur sides into competition into the late 1950's- Bobby Simpson, goalkeeper of the great Celtic side who won the European Cup in 1967 played for the GB Olympic side early in his career
What probably did for the Olympic tournament old model was that domestic leagues in the major West European and then Latin America increasingly went over to open professionalism on the British model in the post war years, thereby draining the pool of top class players available for selection (especially with many of the best Argentinians playing professionally in Italy). The Soviets didn't invent the state favoured pseudo-amateur. He was a fixture of the game in Mussolini's Italy and Hitler's Germany, precisely because both regimes wanted to win the Olympics- incidentally, as far as the average German sports fan was concerned, the real horror story of the 1936 games probably wasn't Jessie Owens' track golds but a strongly fancied German side losing 1-0 to Norway in what I believe was the only football international that Hitler ever attended. They were however happy enough to pick up the model when it was made clear that they'd be allowed to do so (which wasn't a foregone conclusion at the time), even though the game had been overtly at least semi-pro in the 1930's.
As far as football in the modern Olympics is concerned, it's an anomaly. It's not the only anomaly in the Games but it (and tennis?) are perhaps the two most egregious ones now that baseball is on its way out- though football at least has a genuine pedigree in the competition. Clearly it's a money spinner in China; I suspect it will stink the house out in London 2012 when the clubs really put their collective foot down over player release and you won't see any known names appearing even for Brazil and Argentina. I suspect that might see it killed off- very tough on the women's game, for which the Olympics still has the status that they had in the men's game up to, say, 1956.
Complain about this comment
I thought this was a fantastic match, a great competition, and worthy of any tournament. National pride was never so present, and is that not was the Olympics is all about?
Olympic Gold may not be football's top prize but this did not take anything away from the intensity and quality this game was played at. And for all those that think this isn't a worthwhile event, maybe you should ask yourselves how, with no financial gain, it can still attract the most highly paid footballers in the world. Its not the money but the glory these players are seeking, and, as seemingly forgotten mentality in football, maybe this should be encouraged instead of critisized.
As long as it is taken this seriously, I cant think of any reason why football should ever be excluded from the Olympics.
Complain about this comment
Thanks Cleverbatum, I always thought of Olympic footie as a guilty pleasure, but you've just turned my feelings from mixed to positive. Glory-over-money is an almost forgotten ideal in modern football, and we need to have it back.
Complain about this comment
You lucky, lucky ****** Matt. No, it wasn't Olympic sport. But as an expression of skill, athleticism, passion and tribal identity it was sport turned up to 11.
It's interesting that you mentioned the basketball, which was the only other "game" (as opposed to "event") of any broader interest in the Olympics (although the likes of Spain v Oz in the hockey were great games in themselves). How did the atmosphere compare between the two? But I guess the difference is that a) both teams were trying in the football and b) even if they had lost, the average American wouldn't have felt that kick in the stomach that the Brazilians did.
It's just a shame that it barely registered in our supposedly football-mad media - just goes to show that they're not quite the fans of the game that they profess to be. So you're just left with the likes of the incomparable Tim Vickery to fly the flag - he's been banging on about the importance of the Olympic tournament to Brazil all year, that article you linked to was just a small fraction of his output on the subject. ;-/ It'd be great if you could join him on 5 Live's World Football phonein, you'd certainly have an "educated" audience there who would appreciate your experiences. Dunno if there is one this week, it's normally 0230 Saturday morning.
As to the status of the 11-aside game - it's gotta go. I hear the "Ryder Cup" argument - but IMO the professional game is too corrupted to be rescued by a token bit of selflessness, and in any case the clubs won't let the crown jewels go and play (even if it might be a bit easier to clear them for a trip down the Jubilee Line than all the way to Beijing). I think that by 2016 the women's game will be sufficiently well established for it not to need the crutch of Olympic recognition.
OTOH, I do quite like the notion of Olympic 5-aside. It's a major sport in its own right, with massive participation at the grass roots, and no major global "championship". So you could still have the big stars, but it would weaken the (very important IMO) argument of "the Olympics isn't the biggest event in the sport".
There's lots of parallels with rugby sevens, which has really come on in the last few years as a sport in its own right. How you sort the player releases I've no idea, but at least you should have a lot fewer of them compared to 11 aside, it might make it palatable to the clubs.
Complain about this comment
Great article. There seems to be a delicate balancing act going on at the moment which has already started to wobble a little bit.
If football is so financially important to the Games, then any suggestions such as 5-a-side or my own preference, just making it a women's tournament, are pretty redundant. It could be that the IOC will have to decide soon enough should the clubs decide not to release players for London 2012, we shall see.
Matt, just one point - you've said that the atmosphere surrounding the match was obviously quite something, but possibly not the Olympics. But isn't it true that sometimes major tournaments have individual matches which take on a status and identity seperate to the tournament? USA v Iran in the World Cup a while back springs to mind as one example. England v Argentina '86 perhaps? (I'm sure you can come up with far more examples than I could.) I'm not sure that the atmosphere in one match should define football in the Olympics.
Complain about this comment
Hello all, just going around the blogs and tieing up loose ends. Not many to tie here, though, which is a rarity for me!
Anyway, thanks for reading and taking the time to comment. Much appreciated.
Stop_it_Aggers, I would say the Brazil v Argentina game had a much better atmosphere than the US v China basketball game. It was a genuine contest for a start and there was a real sense that these 90 minutes really mattered to both sets of fans and everybody watching at home. It was also a knock-out game.
I like your 5-a-side chat but I fear it will be difficult to pull off/sell to the IOC and clubs.
Forthview, you make some great points re: the evolution of the two tournaments. I'm not sure I agree with you 100% about all of it but we are broadly in agreement. I also think you're right about the future of the tournament.
And Mr_Vic, you're right to point out the specialness of this game. I did go to another Olympic game, though. It was Argentina v Serbia, and that was pretty good too. And I'm told by colleagues that the atmos was great at most of the football here and elsewhere in China. I think the reason for this is that the Chinese love football and have been watching it for 20 years or so, whereas the smaller Olympic sports were all a bit new and strange for them. Totally understandable, though.
Complain about this comment
Why is Gordon Brown fussing about a GB football team for 2012, let's face it, he and most labour MPs will be either out of office or on the back benches then, none of the home FAs want it and I doubt you can find any serious football supporter who wants it, the euro champs will have just ended, players will be in pre season training or in european qualifying matches, no serious manager will want to do it, I believe Ferguson would rather retire than coach this joke outfit, we would become a laughing stock should Beckham be offered the job, I ask all who have pride for this nation to knock this idea on the head.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS