I've never been a fan of TV ramming a mic down players' throats seconds after the final whistle - especially, as Best Fans stated in another thread, when emotions are running high. Imagine losing a crucial game in the final minute and straight afterwards some bonehead of a reporter asks, "How do you feel?" In these circumstances, such stupid questions are like poking a stick at a bear in a cage, so who can blame the bear for retaliating?
Managers have the same problem where they're not allowed to speak their mind and express an opinion about match officials. Why bother with the interview at all if you're not allowed to speak honestly?
In Jansson's case there's no argument that he swore, but how many times have we said things that we've regretted later because we were angry at the time?
Such is the intrusion of TV where they pay to do just what they are doing in the interests of "entertainment".
And then you have the EFL who are no paragons of virtue, and you can also name FIFA and UEFA who are just as bad, if not worse.
Why are referees not interviewed directly after games? Decision-makers should be accountable for their decisions and be given the opportunity to explain themselves. Instead of the EFL hammering victims of injustices for getting things off their chest, they should be introducing VAR as a matter of urgency. Today, over 31,000 paying customers watched a player dive in the penalty area, gain a penalty for his team from which they scored, and also got the opposing goalkeeper booked.
The introduction of VAR in the World Cup was instrumental in weeding out a lot of these cheats and justice was seen to be done. For decades we've watched TV replay controversial incidents from all kinds of angles while the football authorities buried their heads in the sand - Maradona's Hand of God, Bilic being "pole-axed" by Laurent Blanc in the 1998 WC semi, causing Blanc to be banned from the biggest game and professional achievement of his life, Frank Lampard's goal against Germany that didn't stand, Rivaldo at the corner flag in 2002, collapsing, holding his head, and getting the opposing player sent off when the ball actually hit him on the thigh.
Foul language or not, you won't find me condemning Jansson for speaking honestly. I'm tired of hearing managers say "I can't tell you what I really think because I'll get into trouble". Perhaps in future, given that players are obligated to speak to TV reporters directly after matches, they should simply say, "Ask me again in 20 minutes", and then walk away.
Football generates opinions and emotions arising from a contest on the field of play. We're all human and it's unnatural to supress an emotion that is an instinctive reaction to the incident that came before it. How can a yellow card for excessively celebrating a goal be justified?
If the football authorities want exemplary behaviour from both managers and players when in front of the cameras, then it's not unreasonable to expect that they are given time to calm down and be more composed and in control of their emotions.
TV, and the money thrown at football by TV, have created the circus that the game has become. Sadly, money talks and football has sold its soul to TV.
The EFL has a responsibility to ensure that rules are adhered to in the interests of fair play, but referees are also human and can make mistakes. How often do you hear a referee apologise or admit to getting it wrong? Why should they not have all the resources possible at their disposal in order to make informed, correct decisions? Until the EFL embraces the technology that was used in the World Cup and is now used in the Premier League, injustices will continue to go unpunished and managers and players will struggle with their discipline out of frustration at those injustices.
In short, nobody wins - except for the cheats.
The TV and EFL Circus
posted on 6/10/18
Managers need more protection in interviews. Players and managers get stick week in week out when they underperform, so why can't tool box refs
posted on 6/10/18
comment by Loidis-Norvegicus (U9680)
posted 22 minutes ago
Good article. The player should not comment, straight after the game, in situations like this. That should be taught them by the club.
However, what I never get, is (and this is a bit off topic maybe)
Why is it so much worse to use those words, than to show murder, rape and violence on TV?
I'll never get that I guess.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Great point Loidis.
I've seen things on daytime TV myself that are a bit close to the knuckle, and that is considered acceptable?
And the you get a 30,000+ crowd chanting, "The referee's a w@*ker" at a mid-day live match. What they gonna do? Mute the sound or fine the club for not controlling its fans?
Laughable
posted on 6/10/18
comment by Loidis-Norvegicus (U9680)
posted 33 minutes ago
Good article. The player should not comment, straight after the game, in situations like this. That should be taught them by the club.
However, what I never get, is (and this is a bit off topic maybe)
Why is it so much worse to use those words, than to show murder, rape and violence on TV?
I'll never get that I guess.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you find Sky Sports shows a lot of rape?
posted on 6/10/18
comment by Lubo - Get Excited for Leeds United (U14008)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Loidis-Norvegicus (U9680)
posted 33 minutes ago
Good article. The player should not comment, straight after the game, in situations like this. That should be taught them by the club.
However, what I never get, is (and this is a bit off topic maybe)
Why is it so much worse to use those words, than to show murder, rape and violence on TV?
I'll never get that I guess.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you find Sky Sports shows a lot of rape?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We were raped for their goal
posted on 6/10/18
Lubo, I think you know what I meant.
Elland did, and brought a very good addition to my point.
I just asked an honest question, about what I see as a bit of hypocrisy.
You may see it different, but hey; that is why we have forums, isn't it
posted on 7/10/18
Don’t have a problem with them interviewing straight after.
Don’t have a problem with player using that language.
Do have a problem with asking that question, getting a not unsurprising answer, and then telling player off for it!
posted on 7/10/18
I find swearing an interesting concept, lots of words that are now seen as swear words used to be in common usage and perfectly acceptable, they've only acquired taboo status over time because society labels certain words as such. They are words after all and why should Sh@t be any worse than poo as a word.
Whole thing is nonsense, words are just words.
Society needs to grow up a bit in my view.
posted on 7/10/18
There are two words in Turkish for cucumber,
salatalık and hıyar, one is acceptable and the other deeply offensive and therefore taboo, yet they both mean cucumber.
posted on 7/10/18
Interestingly https://talksport.com/football/efl/430353/pontus-jansson-launches-foul-mouthed-tirade-at-referee-live-on-sky-after-leeds-united-draw-with-brentford/ and https://www.teamtalk.com/news/pontus-jansson-launches-four-letter-tirade-live-on-sky-sports see it as a tirade. Need to check definitions.
posted on 7/10/18
https://reddit.app.link/4OK0kOq9OQ