English Unimpressed As Uefa Slaps Inter’s Wrist
Reaction in England to Uefa’s punishment of Internazionale has been, in a word, incredulous. Inter have been fined £132,000 by Uefa and must play their next four European games behind closed doors following the crowd disorder that caused Tuesday's Champions League quarter-final second leg tie against AC Milan to be abandoned.
Milan were leading 1-0 at the time, and have been awarded the tie 3-0, for an aggregate victory of 5-0.
Two games will be added to the ban on Inter’s fans if they re-offend within the next three years. The club can appeal against the decision and have three days in which to do so.
Milan goalkeeper Dida was struck on the shoulder by a burning flare as the Inter tifosi rained a hail of missiles onto the pitch following referee Markus Merk’s decision to disallow their team a ‘goal.’
A range of much harsher sanctions was available to Uefa, and when the decision of its Disciplinary Committee was announced on BBC Radio Five Live, the station was inundated with calls and e-mails from English listeners expressing disgust at its leniency.
Reactions ranged from amazement to unsurprised cynicism. Virtually every respondent called the punishment was totally inadequate.
The consensus in England was firstly that Uefa had once again shamefully ‘ducked’ the opportunity to come down hard on a serious situation by throwing Inter out of its competitions. Secondly that such mild punishment – seen in the UK as little more than a slap on the wrist for a club of Inter’s financial resources – would provide little or no deterrence to fans of Inter or any other Italian club from staging such disturbances again. And thirdly that, had the perpetrators of the mayhem been fans of an English club, that club would have been summarily kicked out of the Champions League for at least the following season – the implication being that Uefa is terrified of standing up to powerful Italian clubs.
Of course, a powerful counter argument to this somewhat cynical point of view is that when English clubs were banned – for five years – it was because violence by some of them had triggered a stampede that led to 39 deaths. The consequences of the mayhem at the San Siro were mercifully far less disastrous.
On the other hand, it is now 20 years since Heysel, and all the experience and intelligence that is now available to clubs, in the wake of largely successful English attempts to eradicate hooliganism inside stadiums, should be routinely deployed. Clubs and football authorities who fail to take adequate steps to control the problem rightly risk being accused of wilful neglect.
As for Uefa, many increasingly despair of its lack of moral leadership. The derisory attempts to admonish clubs whose fans feel free to indyulge in crass racism is a case in point. The response to the goings on at the San Siro will be seen by many as another abdication of responsibility.
For its part, Uefa believes it has acted tough. Uefa spokesman William Gaillard defended the level of punishment saying: "There will be some people who think it is lenient and some people who think it harsh.
"This is the largest fine in Uefa’s history. The loss of four home games amounts to seven or eight million euros.
"It is a hefty punishment compared to anything that has been done for over five years.
"This kind of behaviour is clearly not acceptable and if any more trouble occurs it is obvious that they would get something heavier."
Inter, it should be noted, have ‘previous.’ In 2001 they were ordered to play two European matches away from the San Siro and fined £35,000 after similar crowd trouble at their Uefa Cup tie against Spanish side Alaves.
Uefa clearly believes more of the same will do the trick. We shall have to wait and see if they are right.
www.goal.com
four European games behind closed doors home match is really hurt.....
IMO 2~3 European games behind closed door home game enough!!!!! scare elimination. :scared:
