52 BRAITA Puhl

 

Roberto Baggio famously missed the decisive penalty as Brazil defeated Italy in a penalty competition at the end of a final seen as rather drab to win World Cup 1994. As Barry Davies excellently quipped in BBC commentary as Baggio ran up to take his kick "the man who brought his team to final, now has to save them". He couldn't; can't life be cruel sometimes. A victorious Brazil team who perhaps lacked the flair of tournaments past, but no matter; for the first time since 1970, they were world champions - deservedly so, over the piece of the final and the tournament as a whole.

Sándor Puhl from Hungary was chosen to referee to the final, analysis of his selection (and that of his teammates Venancio Zárate and Mohammad Fanaei) can be found here. To be quite honest, I am not really sure what to think after that performance, which is widely considered "very good" by observers around the world. In fairness, that analysis is in some senses correct; in others, I would politely disagree.

Acknowledging that Puhl did not face any crucial decisions that influenced the outcome of the match (though that is kind of not true), this time the round-up is split tripartitely - the good, the bad and the ugly.

Analysis

The Good:

Sándor Puhl certainly succeeded in terms of guiding the players through this two-hour match, for which he should be strongly praised. Unlike his first three matches, this one was played at a rather slow pace, which allowed him to dictate and control the flow of the match, often using his characteristic "play on" gesture (which rather reminds me of landing planes :)).

In terms of disciplinary control, he seemed to have a very good understanding of what the players were trying to do on the pitch; he gave four cautions, and was in full control throughout. He correctly saw through an easy Branco fall in the second half, and did not give a penalty. 

He did not give the opening caution at 4' immediately and having waited, took the most tactically proficient decision. Unlike many of the players (quite understandably), Puhl did not seem to tire at all during the one-hundred and twenty minutes of play. Very impressive in such midday heat!

Perhaps chiefly, his performance is widely considered to have been a really successful one according to people in refereeing. So, to speak crudely, he must have done something right!

The Bad:

While there was no doubt who was in charge, Puhl's leadership style was not my favourite one - can refereeing not do a bit better than in 1994 having someone who issues a caution because the wall won't listen to him as at 43'? He essentially succeeded by subjugating nervous players whom he showed "that he could p*ss higher up the wall than they could". Though I suppose one must do what works in the biggest game of all. 

In disciplinary control, while he sensed the important moments to give cards at the start of the first half and end of both halves of regulation time, there was no clear detectable line from Puhl. But I wouldn't criticise him too much for that, even if there were at least three tackles I would like to see result in a red card nowadays; again, the World Cup final is all about refereeing practically.

I find his foul detection less forgivable - it really was something of a lottery guessing which offences he would and would not blow up for. I had the strong impression that he was ready to not simply miss, but blatantly ignore clear fouls if they did not follow his idea of match flow (48', 98' et al.). 

But in the end I can live with all that, Puhl's appointment was a decision at FIFA's discretion and such a style did indeed work.

The Ugly:

What I can't forgive is the contemptuous and belittling way that Puhl treated his two linesmen, Paraguayan Venancio Zárate and Mohammad Fanaei from Iran. The dominant narrative is that Puhl was given two teammates who, if one wishes to be vulgar, didn't know their asses from their elbows. Having reviewed the final with a close eye, I would strongly like to challenge that.

But first, there are some things that need to be said. While in my analysis post reviewing how each official reached their World Cup final, there was a lot of focus on the political value of their appointments, and it is true that in FIFA Refereeing that plays a huge part. However, in all their matches (with one exception) Mohammad Fanaei and Venancio Zárate showed that they belonged to the top linesmen of the competition and had earned their place in the final.

Secondly - refereeing is team game. As a referee, you have a duty to make your assistant referees (linemen) feel part of the team and feel valued, even though they are lower on the hierarchy in the team on the day. 

And finally - officiating the World Cup final is the pinnacle of anybody's life who is bestowed such an honour. It is an experience to be cherished for your every living day and very often defines your whole life.

So when Sándor Puhl overruled an onside played by Venancio Zárate at 22' in a very important - even crucial - situation, one would hope that the Paraguayan linesmen was clearly incorrect. And to clarify, this was not informing him that a deflection had taken place he had not seen, this was simply determining his judgement of the offside position was wrong, despite him being in a better place than referee Puhl.

Close frame-by-frame analysis shows that Zárate almost definitely has taken one of the expert decisions of the competition, and decision well ahead of his time. But no, Sándor Puhl scandalously decided to take the decision by himself, a decision that if I ever get my minds on the NHK full high definition version of this game, I can prove to be totally, totally wrong.

But even that is to miss the point a bit - even if the decision was wrong, it was a) tight enough to give the benefit of the doubt to the better-placed official and b) Zárate is one of the best linesmen in the world, he received high marks for his performances this far, he has been appointed to the World Cup final! Who is Sándor Puhl to tell him he is apparently so bad at his job and he won't listen to him. I was absolutely stunned by the arrogance Puhl showed and to be perfectly honest I found it rather disgusting. 

Puhl again ignored a flag by Zárate, a clearly correct one (32') - Paraguayan extremely courageously kept his flag up at and did not give in to what constituted bullying from the Hungarian referee. Zárate also played an excellent onside at 65', and Puhl on his own decided to flag for offside, though the decision didn't matter in the end. 

Seeing this, both Zárate's and Mohammed Fanaei's nerves were clearly shot, and commentators noted in the stadium that both were hesitant on one occasion each when raising their flag (I don't want to think what kind of pre-match they got from Puhl...). Of course, one can say that if they are good enough for a World Cup final they should be able to respond better to that, but come on - they are human beings!

On another occasion, Puhl ignored Fanaei's flag without so much as even a glance in his direction. He did not reassure either man once during the final. He simply treated them like sh*t; do you think he would have done the same to European linesmen taking exactly the same decisions? Not a chance...

I feel immensely sorry for both Zárate and Fanaei who had the achievement of their life ruined by their teammates's hubris. 

Balance

Sándor Puhl refereed the World Cup 1994 final in a way that observers around in the world found satisfying, and probably nobody can remember any of the decisions he took in the match. A great achievement for Puhl and he executed the job that FIFA wished him to. Well done for that.

But I found the haughty way he not only ignored his teammates, but overruled their decisions as if they were club linesmen in the World Cup final totally unacceptable principally, but even worse as he was totally wrong when he did so, in one situation where Brazil would have been in 1-on-1. So actually, he did take a decision - totally out of his remit - which could have seriously changed this final.

As it happens, Venancio Zárate had an excellent performance controlling the near side, I did not note one mistake made by him in eight situations. Mohammad Fanaei made a poor mistake by flagging at 81' (if Puhl wanted to overrule, then was the moment) but besides did quite well, especially with an onside from which at 110', Brazil should have scored. It mattered not. 

Francisco Lamolina executed his role as fourth official without greater note; which is how, in the annuals of history, the refereeing of the 1994 World Cup final as a whole will be considered. 

Brazil win FIFA World Cup 1994
Sándor Puhl - 8,0 Venancio Zárate - 8,7 Mohammad Fanaei - 8,3 Francisco Lamolina HUN, PAR, IRN	Brazil 0-0 Italy (Brazil win 3-2 in a penalty competition) Final
Mazinho (4') - Tackle Cafu (87') - Tripping	Apolloni (42') - SPA (Tripping) Albertini (43') - Not Respecting 9.15m

Thank you to everyone who participated and silent readers alike of this project - hope you enjoyed it as much as I did!