Paul Thomas: Amid the fakers Zidane's hurt may have been real

The Deep thinkers and amateur psychologists have been out in force this week applying their minds to the burning question: why on earth did he do it?

He, of course, being Zinedine Zidane; it being the head butt that was felt around the world.

As Jerry Collins discovered, even the most mundane act can have far-reaching reverberations if it's performed in front of a global audience.

Zidane cracked under the strain of being the poster boy for France's fragile multiculturalism, pontificated the man from the Independent.

"It was an act of cosmic discontent," burbled the man from the Times, "a futile gesture of protest against the cruelties of sport and the far greater cruelties of time".

No doubt someone, somewhere, called it a cry for help.

Well, who knows? In prosaic terms, it was a spectacular brainstorm by a player who's had a few in his time. Zidane's career tally of 14 red cards surpasses that of the notorious Vinnie Jones who played football as if he was filling in time between street-fights.

It was also a big week for lip-readers as the media had them poring over the footage to determine what Italian defender Marco Materazzi said to transform Zidane from serene virtuoso into feral billygoat.

It seems lip-reading is an art rather than a science because their various conclusions ran the gamut of blood-feud insults, from impugning Zidane's sister's morals to simply wishing him and his entire family dead.

Whatever was said, if the object of sledging is to put your opponent off his game, this must go down as the mother of all sledges.

Steve Waugh, a distinguished practitioner, called it "mental disintegration" which is as good a description of Zidane's meltdown as any.

At the 2003 cricket World Cup, the Indian spinner Harbhajan Singh had to be restrained from attacking a Pakistani player who, in nine carefully-chosen words, lampooned Singh's mother, his religion and his appearance.

But all the versions of Materazzi's taunt are worse; they positively drip with malice and toxic intent.

When the truth comes out, Materazzi's private victory may prove to be pyrrhic and Italy's World Cup triumph may be more tarnished than Zidane's career.

Or not. No matter what depths Materazzi plumbed, it won't change the fact that Italy won.

And Fifa and other bodies can vow to stamp out verbal provocation until they're blue in the face but as long as the retaliators cop it on the spot and instigators after the game, if at all, players will continue trying to make opponents lose their rags.


Some of the comparisons trotted out - Hansie Cronje, Ben Johnson - were invalid and unfair.

To use the journalistic cliche, this was a moment of madness rather than a calculated betrayal of sport's fundamental principles.

And while Zidane's thinking was obviously clouded by red mist, he might have seen himself as defending the honour of his family or his people as opposed to cheating his way to riches or glory.

Analogies were made with Mike Tyson's biting of Evander Holyfield's ear.

But then Tyson was a disturbed individual and there was an element of calculation in the sense that it was triggered by his panicky realisation that first, he was no longer the baddest man on the planet and second, Holyfield had already worked that out for himself.

Zidane isn't the first captain to have a costly brain explosion in a World Cup final.

In the 1987 cricket World Cup final in Calcutta, England were cruising at 135 for two chasing Australia's 253 when Mike Gatting - the last man to lead England to an Ashes series victory in Australia - decided to reverse sweep occasional spinner Allan Border's first delivery.

He was caught behind; England lost the initiative and never regained it, falling seven runs short.

Things went downhill from there for the man they called "Breadvan" because of his squat physique and prodigious appetite.

A few months later in Pakistan Gatting almost caused an international incident by getting into a screaming match with a local umpire and during a test against the West Indies; the following year he had a close encounter with a barmaid which led to him being stripped of the captaincy.

Will Carling was one of those Englishmen who can get people's backs up simply by clearing his throat or raising an eyebrow.

At the 1991 rugby World Cup, he decided to abandon the forward grind that had got England to the final in favour of a run-it-from-anywhere approach for which his team hadn't prepared and wasn't suited.

There was speculation that David Campese's pre-game needling on the theme of England being boring got to Carling but his coach, Roger Uttley, had a simpler and more damning explanation: "One man's ego took over."

A former Army officer known as "Bumface" because of his cleft chin, Carling later achieved tabloid fame for various bedroom manoeuvres, one of which supposedly involved Diana, Princess of Wales.

But perhaps the most pertinent comparison is with another mad-headed act by another French soccer captain: Eric Cantona's kung-fu kick on a Crystal Palace fan who abused him as he was traipsing off the field after being red-carded.

Cantona's claim that the abuse was racist ("**** off back to France, you French ****") didn't cut much ice at the time but the incident didn't do terminal damage to his standing in the game.

Despite the condemnation and sorrow based on the hasty assumption that this was a career-defining act, the storm will blow over and Zidane will be remembered as one of the greatest players of his era.

If he's also remembered as a flawed individual rather than a shining example, I doubt he'll complain.

And after the hand-wringing and attempts to saddle both Zidane and his folly with a significance they don't warrant, we're left with the irony that amidst all the faked injuries and simulated agony that disfigured this tournament, the heaviest censure was reserved for someone who might very well have suffered a genuine hurt.