Why Eduardo shouldn't be banned by UEFA

We all hate diving. It's a blight on the game, for a start, and it doesn't sit well with the sense of fair play which we English supposedly hold so dear. I despise diving as much as the next fan, and I abhor the players who do it. Now that that's out of the way, let's get down to business.

On Wednesday night I found myself at the Emirates watching Arsenal put in a sub-par performance and still breeze past a very poor Celtic side to qualify for the group stages of the Champions League. Just before the half-hour mark, Eduardo da Silva broke into the box and was challenged on the goal-line by Celtic goalkeeper Artur Boruc.

From my point of view in the stadium, it looked like one of those challenges where the goalkeeper made contact but the player - as they so often these days - took a bit of a tumble to make sure the penalty was given. Sure enough, after a Boruc rage which should have seen him booked, Eduardo dispatched the kick.

As we all know now, of course, it was an obvious dive. The Celtic fans had a perfect view and were rightly furious, as I would've been had my view not been obstructed by the body of the goalkeeper. The media storm has been huge and way over the top. UEFA has charged Eduardo with "deceiving the referee", and look set to ban him for two matches.

I think a two-match ban would be an outrageous decision, even though the player is bang to rights.

Game changer?

Arsenal won 3-1 on the night, 5-1 on aggregate. I often see bad decisions being excused on the basis that they don't change the game if the benefiting team goes on to win by more goals. I don't buy that, and I generally agree with the comments of Celtic boss Tony Mowbray:

"The first goal was always going to be crucial. If we had got it, you would have had a more interesting spectacle. The fact that Arsenal scored it allows their real high-quality players to relax a bit more and play at their own pace. When you try and play high up against such quality players, you are asking for trouble."

Clearly, these decisions do change games, but on this occasion Celtic offered almost nothing to suggest they deserved to win the match. Mowbray himself has admitted as much, and to his credit has bleated rather less than some of his players.

Arsenal were miles better than Celtic over the two legs and while it's sometimes all too easy to dismiss a claim of foul play on the grounds that it didn't change the match, this one was one which really didn't - not, I should add, that that makes it right to cheat.

Bookable offence

Pop quiz: what's the usual punishment for a player caught diving? That's right...NOTHING. Even when the idiot referees spot diving, they almost never pull out a card. When they do, it's yellow and it's quickly forgotten by all concerned.

So why on earth is UEFA considering a two-match ban? Does retrospection suddenly make diving a serious red card offence? I agree in principle that players should get their just desserts, but in this case that is a yellow card. So go on, UEFA. Give Eduardo his yellow card and be done with it.

But you can't amplify the severity of his offence just because the referee missed it. It simply can't be justified.

Making an example

Over to you, Arsene Wenger:

"It singles out a player to be a cheat and that is not acceptable. We will not accept the way Uefa have treated this."

Quite. Why is Eduardo the player being made an example of? It's especially galling when the likes of Cristiano Ronaldo and Didier Drogba have earned reputations as divers and Steven Gerrard has mastered the art but gets away with it because he's the golden boy...and English.

Diving happens in every game at most levels, and usually goes unpunished. I watch Ashley Young every week, so I should know. So the question must be asked, and we should be asking 'why now?' as well. Why is UEFA now embarking upon one of its rare crusades against cheating? Either it's tackling cheating, or it's not. It can't pick and choose its targets.

So what's going on? Well, the media have pulled Eduardo apart in the last couple of days, but UEFA isn't really an organisation to give in to pressure. After all, most of the planet knows racism is wrong, but UEFA continues to hand out paltry fines to clubs and national teams whose supporters are guilty of loudly vocalising it.

More pressure has come from Scottish FA chief executive Gordon Smith, who's made himself look a complete prat over this affair with comments like this one:

"Eduardo showed disrespect to the game by his actions. We have shown courage to use retrospective punishment when it comes to simulation. I'd urge Uefa to do so."

The SFA has form in this area, of course, and one could argue that it would be admirable if only its most high-profile cases weren't simply attempts to protect Scottish interests. Regardless, since when did UEFA give a toss what local associations thought?

A friend reminded me today of some comments made by UEFA chief suit Michel Platini about Arsene Wenger not so long ago:

"Me, I only want to talk about football, he (Wenger) only cares about business. We must shut up with Wenger and everything. He is an extremely selfish person...I would not mind if the technology is introduced, just as long as Arsène Wenger is not around to see it."

Subtle, Monsieur Platini. So I'll ask again: why punish Arsenal and Eduardo, when countless opportunities to crack down on diving have been shunned in the past?

(Pic via BBC Sport)