BEHIND THE PLAY #28

I really debated whether to write on this or not as it feels like it’s been done to death the last six days but here we are.

This particular newsletter is an expansion on three tweets I put out on Sunday (yesterday). Here they are so you have the source material.

About ten years ago a friend of ours, who owns a knitting store, had a regular event when knitters could come in after hours and chat while they knitted. It was called Bitches n’ Stitches. It was a gossip-fest that was mostly for a laugh but also to bitch about things. There’s definitely an element of that in my profession. Info leaks from all levels of the structure and gets shared. Sometimes with professional intent, for humour or just for mutual head shakes in disapproval.

Lots has leaked about this, to many people besides me, and I’m going to be very careful with what and how I choose to relate here as I realize that even if I know the person who said it, most of what I’ve heard came to me second hand.

As my first tweet intimates though, the silence is deafening and that speaks volumes. I have seen very few national team spokespeople or players on national teams want to comment on this. None seem willing to pile on and call Canada a disgrace (though there are plenty of individuals willing to do this online). Is that class? Restraint? Maybe. But maybe it’s also caution in case maybe someone starts poking around their country’s past “scouting” efforts. Meanwhile, we as Canadians, for the most part, are coming down hard on this team. This attempts to ask if that’s fair and if it is what the repercussions should be.

Did We Do It? Does Everyone Do It?

Whether its drones, binoculars from a hill or planted video cameras, this stuff has been going on a long time and Canada is definitely not the only ones doing it. That said, it’s impossible to say just how many do it and to what degree they do.

As for Canada, I’ve been told by people I trust and who I know had enough access to be able to say with certainty that this has been going on for years on both the men’s and women’s teams. Continuity and degree may vary between the men’s and women’s teams but as there was a strong sense that some of their opponents were doing it so it was felt they had to as well. CONCACAF has its reputation for a reason.

I have no desire to dissect every media story, PR release, official communique from governing bodies, public notes of support for the players, refutations from alumni, etc as indicators of who knew what was happening and when or not. It’s a mess and many have legacies, careers and reputations on both sides of the “did it” / “didn’t do it” that fuel particular actions right now.

I’d just like to try to put it in some sort of perspective and offer what I feel is a reasonable resolution to the current example of spying provided by staff on the women’s national team along with a longer term solution to make it all go away.

Did the Players Know?

If you do believe it happened regularly then you have to ask why would staff risk getting caught if they didn’t plan to present it to the players? A venture like this is all about equipping players with info that can help them win a particular game. It is specific and timely. Is it possible to convey what has been gleaned from the drone footage without explicitly telling the players how staff came to obtain the info? It’s possible but unlikely and probably less effective. Here’s how that might look.

First of all, there’s only a handful of elements in the game that teams can use drone footage to benefit from. Because teams know that other teams have access to video of virtually all their previous games including recent ones played in the run up to a major tournament like the Olympics, they can either accept that any trick set pieces they’ve used will have been studied or decide to change some things up and bring in new ones right before a big tournament. Holland did this at the 2022 World Cup with their last minute goal from a free kick against Argentina in the quarter final. Argentina clearly had no idea that was coming. That last minute change to free kicks within sight of goal and maybe how you attack or defend from corner kicks is about all that can realistically be quickly inculcated into team preparation for games that are a matter of days away.

So back to the likelihood of being able to present info gained by spying to players without them knowing its origin. If there’s a team meeting two days before a game and staff tell the players, “Right, we’re now going to defend corners quite differently in our next game.” or “We want you to be aware of the possibility of this happening on a free kick 22-26 yards out from a central position.” what would the players think? Why would the team do that? What info would compel them to make such a significant structural change and how would they have got it at this late hour? Well, suspension of disbelief is a real thing and so is willful ignorance. Is it possible that it may not occur to some (most? all?) that the change in direction came from spying on their opponents a day or two prior? Again, possible but not likely. Is it more likely that players are likely to absorb and take seriously that info if the actual drone footage is shown to them and they can see what their coaches are talking about? Most definitely.

Maybe the culture is not to ask questions or question methods. I don’t know and I’m not insinuating players always know that such team meeting content is the result of recent spying efforts. But the reality remains that if you’re going to go to the effort and risk to get drone footage of your opponent, there is a clear intent that it will somehow be transmitted to players to use in the upcoming game.

The Outcome

Let’s look at the sanctions. Are they fair? Well that’s clearly subjective. The New Zealand women’s team probably feel they didn’t go far enough. Ironically many Canadians, embarrassed by the dent our reputation as being “nice” took, feel similarly. So what’s the measuring stick? This isn’t even an IOC sanction. It’s from FIFA. The overlap in jurisdictions adds another layer of complexity to this. Should it be left to people at these Olympics to decide what outcome is best or should it be the Canadian Olympic Committee who handles it as an internal matter? Then there’s the pure soccer component: FIFA and Canada Soccer. Maybe they’ll all want a say and a pound of flesh.

My third tweet above sums up how I feel about it. The sanctions, as applied now, are overkill but there must be something. What was done was wrong and there should be a meaningful punishment accompanied by a deterrent. There’s no point in us saying, “Yeah but others do it too!” because (a) it’s childish and (b) none of them seem to have been as dumb as us to try it at an event that has security measures that are perhaps only rivalled by the men’s World Cup. I say men’s because I’ve been to two recent men’s World Cups and one women’s and there’s no comparison between the two in terms of security.

Bev Priestman was the lead staff person of this team and gets a degree of credit for when things go well but also gets the overwhelming blame when things go horribly wrong. That’s the nature of the position and why these gigs generally pay so well. There’s very little latitude for gross errors on or off the field so tenure is not that long for most. I believe the CSA will relieve her of her duties and that’s a reasonable stance. I have had no information provided to me about that. It’s just purely my opinion.

Unless FIFA can prove that players saw this footage or any previous recent footage they should not be personally suspended or have their on-field efforts dramatically affected. I think the point deduction should have been limited to the three points earned against New Zealand. The fine is pointless to quibble over. Any and all organizations (and governments) will build in a monetary sanction that sees money flow to them whenever they can and stick a ‘justice’ label on it. I think the most important precedent to set is for FIFA to send the message that regardless of the immediate sanction, all countries found to have participated in spying on an opponent’s preparations for a game will be put on probation for ten years (pick your own length, that one sounded about right to me) with any proven new spying offence resulting in suspension from the next Olympics or World Cup for female teams and World Cup for male teams. That is a meaningful deterrent.

If you’re serious about ethical violations in your sport you have to both punish the infringement and create a strong disincentive to stop it happening again. Attention is on spying at the national team level now. Use this attention to put them all on notice. Whether you agree with the decision from FIFA or not, it will reverberate and cause countries who have been spying on other teams, regardless of how, to consider the risk/reward ratio; especially if the suggested deterrent is incorporated. Most will likely wind down such efforts immediately.