Yesterday's soul searching moments about my lack of guilt associated with watching the World Cup was real. Today, the confusing immorality, to the point of comedy, in football was in the limelight.
The saga of Paolo Guerrero's will-he-won't-he ban took another twist. The Peruvian captain is going to be allowed to play in the World Cup after the Swiss Supreme Court cleared him to take part. His ban hasn't been overturned, he hasn't been proven innocent. The court just said that he should not miss the opportunity to play in his first World Cup. The judge said that playing in Russia would be "without any doubt the crowning glory of his career". She also said that he benefitted from a "rare surge of solidarity". The three captains of the teams that Peru will face in the opening round signed a letter supporting him being allowed to play.
So Fifa banned him, CAS increased WADA's ban and public support made all of that redundant. Oh, how wonderful I would feel if I worked for WADA today.
Where was Carl Lewis' letter of support when Ben Johnson was kicked out of the Seoul Olympics? How come all the public emotion didn't save Lance Armstrong? If only the whole of Naples and Argentina had petitioned Fifa for Maradona's drug use to be ignored because of all the happiness his football brought to so many people.
I have an opinion about positive drug tests, most of which centre around them being a little bit ridiculous considering that you and I, as regular Joe and Jill's, are allowed to take "banned substances" without any punishment. But rules are there to give sport a structure, a code of what is acceptable. WADA have worked very hard at it. And now it all goes out the window because of unscientific, un-researched public support and because as the judge noted (as reported on Australian news website ABC) "a possible negative effect on Guerrero's teammates of being deprived of their "emblematic" captain". Oh dear.
I wonder if these same fans of Guerrero and the right for footballers to not be deprived of competing at the World Cup also believe that Sergio Ramos should be banned from football for being a "disease" to football. A "disgrace"? What else did they call him? Please. He's a dirty footballer. Yes. But he's not the only one in history. And they've all been idolized over the years, just like Guerrero is now. As I was reminded the other day, the Italians didn't ask for Claudio Gentile to be kicked out of the 1982 World Cup, or the Brazilians for Rivaldo to be sent home in disgrace in 2002. We football fans are all hypocritical.
But what is Guerrero? A clean cheat who didn't know what was in his tea? Let him play, Swiss Supreme Court, because you truly believe he didn't know what he ingested. Call the ban out for being ridiculous if you think it was. But don't allow the rules to be bent because he "deserves" to be in Russia.
Ah. When does the football start?