footballportugal

liga
fiztures/results

videos

**********
podcast
**********

footballportugal

22/07/08

(A version of this article appeared in the August 2008 edition of the British magazine When Saturday Comes)

Third time lucky, then, for Luíz Felipe Scolari: courted by Benfica at the time of Euro 2004 and by England at the last World Cup, now Chelsea's bottomless coffers have lured him away from the Selecção . But after five and a half years, what is Felipão's final report card as Portugal's Seleccionador? And what can Chelsea fans expect of him?

Portuguese Football Federation president Gilberto Madaíl recently set out the main requirement for Scolari's successor: he must speak Portuguese. One columnist in sports daily A Bola suggested that actually a knowledge of tactics might also be a good idea.

Because for all his qualities, this is one major criticism levelled at Scolari: when it came to the crunch (against Greece in 2004, against Germany in 2006, against the same team this time around), Portugal just did not have the organization and flexibility to deal with opponents that had done their homework and were clinical in the execution of their game plans. Meanwhile the Sargentão's main gambit appeared to be huddles and dependence upon his favourite Catholic symbol, Nossa Senhora da Caravaggio for luck. Not enough, however, to deal with Schweinsteiger free-kicks delivered into the heart of a defence which had apparently never seen such a thing.

Add to this the highly questionable selection of players in some positions and you have a ready recipe for failure. Petit in midfield, after a season of injury and underperforming at Benfica? All-at-sea Paulo Ferreira converted to left back, with qualification stalwart Marco Caneira left at home? Ricardo in goal, with his now legendary flapping at crosses and fresh from a stinker of a season at Bétis?

Faith in his favourites got Scolari unquestioning loyalty from players, but it blinded him to other possibilities: apart from one or two question marks, he had his squad in mind months in advance of Euro 2008, players' form and fitness seemingly of secondary importance to 'The Group' dynamic. He rarely went to stadiums to see games, preferring the sofa and reports from assistants.

But that was one thing that he was able to do: create a family spirit – the paternalistic figurehead and his "meninos". And after the ramshackle affair that was the World Cup 2002 under António Oliveira, Scolari's shepherding of the rabble into a squad that could reach the Final of Euro 2004 was nothing short of a minor miracle.

Euro 2004 also saw an explosion of nationalistic fervour in Portugal; yes because the tournament was played here but also because of a mass response to Scolari's populist discourse. Flag manufacturers had never had it so good, with windows, verandas and cars up and down the country draped in red and green. Four years later, Portuguese emigrants were buying black market tickets for sold-out training sessions in Neuchâtel at ten times their face value.

This will be one of Scolari's great legacies – the approximation of the people to their Selecção. On Portuguese discussion boards, it is the main factor in the Brazilian's defence. Nevertheless, opinion is overwhelmingly critical of the man.

Many feel he treated his time in Portugal as something of a holiday and an opportunity to line his pockets; his substantial salary was supplemented with lucrative advertising contracts (for which the tax authorities are currently after him due to alleged tax-dodging).

His lack of tactical nous is held up as the reason for Portugal not doing better in the last three tournaments, coming up shorter each time: from finalist in 2004, to semi-finalist in 2006, to quarter-finalist now – a 'nearly man' in fact (c.f. Avram Grant).

And his stubbornness, especially in terms of selection, still has the country divided: FC Porto fans will never, for example, forgive the exclusion of Vítor Baía in 2003/04 in favour of Ricardo, a case study in obstinacy on a par with Romário's exclusion from the Brazilian squad in 2002. One visitor to the website Maisfutebol's discussion board commented: "I'd like to remind him that there isn't a dictatorship in Portugal any more … and that being flexible and recognising your mistakes is a virtue."

As for his relationship with the media, it was rocky at best. His manner at press conferences was invariably an uncomfortable mixture of arrogant, supercilious and defensive; in Switzerland, his monosyllabic responses to questions about the timing of the announcement of the Chelsea appointment struck all the wrong notes but were, frankly, par for the course.

Psychologist Regina Brandão, who has worked with Scolari for ten years, told the free weekly newspaper Sexta that "Felipão can't treat the English as he did the Portuguese." It seems clear that Scolari will have to change many of his ways in the demanding Premier League. Oh, and learn English. And quickly.

07/06/08

(A version of this article appeared in the July 2008 edition of the British magazine When Saturday Comes)

While the so-called Apito Dourado ('Golden Whistle') referee-bribing case trundles its leisurely way through the Portuguese criminal courts four years after events, the Liga de Clubes, keen to show that it's on the ball, recently acted in what has come to be known as the Apito Final ('Final Whistle'): various clubs, club presidents and match officials have been found guilty of dirty deeds and dealt a range of penalties including fines, suspensions, point-docking and, in one high-profile instance, relegation.

In the 2003/04 season, when José Mourinho's FC Porto were strutting their irrepressible stuff throughout the continent, the club and its charismatic president Jorge Nuno Pinto da Costa are accused of having bribed the match officials in two relatively meaningless Liga encounters, on one occasion allegedly providing the men in black with ladies of the night, code-named 'fruit' and 'coffee with milk', on request. As with all the similar accusations in Apito Dourado, this has yet to be proven in a court of law, but the Disciplinary Committee (DC) of the Liga de Clubes couldn't wait; it borrowed the Public Prosecutor's evidence, including thousands of tapped mobile phone conversations, and came to its own conclusions: Pinto da Costa and, by extension, FC Porto were guilty as charged.

At the press conference to announce the Liga's decisions and respective penalties, the DC chairman Ricardo Costa confirmed, perhaps with a shade too much relish, that FC Porto were to be docked six points and Pinto da Costa suspended for two years. 

The champions opted to accept the decision so that the points would be docked from this season's already insurmountable 20-point lead over their nearest rivals, Sporting. But what seemed like a clever move at the time may have backfired: failure to appeal has been seen as tantamount to admission of guilt, which leaves Pinto da Costa, who has appealed, hanging out to dry, and has jeopardised FC Porto's participation in next season's Champions League after UEFA got wind of events. [UEFA have subsequently barred FC Porto from competing in next season's European competitions, subject to appeal].

Porto and Pinto da Costa's alleged offence was 'attempted' corruption: there was an offer of reward and a request for favours, but the CD deemed that there was no practical result on the pitch. The same went for União de Leiria, docked three points (they were already rock bottom of the Liga, ten points from safety). Unfortunately for Boavista, the CD thought that they had benefited in certain games and were thus guilty of 'consummated' corruption; Valentim Loureiro, at the time president of the Liga de Clubes (the body ultimately in charge of referees) and son João Loureiro (the then president of Boavista) had allegedly "put pressure on referees". The penalty? Relegation of the club to the Liga de Honra and a fine of 180,000 euros. A club with a 105-year history and champions just seven years ago, but with chronic financial problems, could now go to the wall.

However, Boavista, as everyone else apart from FC Porto the club, have appealed. The next stop is the Portuguese Football Federation's Council of Justice (CJ), which will have to digest 110,000 pages of reports and hand down a decision before June 11 when last season's results and tables are due to be officially approved. But the CJ are notoriously stingy when it comes to appeals, and if it rejects them, then Pinto da Costa for one has said that he could well take the case to the European civil courts, meaning that the process may drag on into next season.

Meanwhile, Apito Final has thrown up various legal/ethical quandaries. Should a private association like the Liga de Clubes be able to use evidence from a criminal trial, especially phone taps which are already of dubious constitutional validity, to support its decisions? How can the presidents accused of corruption be penalised with suspensions of months when the referees involved in the same cases pick up suspensions of years (referee Augusto Duarte got hit for six)? And why do clubs accused of very similar acts of corruption (FC Porto/União de Leiria vs Boavista) cop very different penalties.

And then what if the decisions from Apito Dourado, when (if …) they are finally handed down, actually contradict Apito Final? Will the Liga de Clubes, and the Federation, have to retract their decisions? And if so, what if the season has already begun or even finished? What then?

But despite doubts as to their fairness, constitutionality and practicality, many have welcomed Apito Dourado and its bastard offspring Apito Final as being the brooms needed to at last sweep corruption from the Portuguese game. At the very least, the fact that they are happening at all is, it is widely felt, a healthy development.