Football once again finds itself at one of those moments when the scoreline fades into the background and what is really at stake is the message sent from the pitch to society. What happened this week in Lisbon, in the match between Real Madrid and Benfica, with Vinicius Jr and the Argentine Gianluca Prestianni as protagonists, has opened up a scenario that is as delicate as it is difficult to interpret.
According to the version handled by the environment of the Spanish club, the Benfica player allegedly uttered a racist insult —“mono (monkey)”— directed at Vinicius in the middle of a moment of maximum tension. The problem is that Prestianni covered his mouth with his shirt while addressing the Brazilian, which considerably complicates any attempt to objectively establish what exactly came out of his mouth, whether it was a racist insult, an inappropriate comment or even congratulations for the excellent goal he had scored minutes earlier.
The difficulty of proving what cannot be heard
Real Madrid submitted all the evidence gathered to UEFA on Thursday, including images and reactions following the incident, but the possibility of obtaining scientific proof of the insult is remote if there is no audio recording or conclusive lip reading. Everything therefore remains in the realm of gestures, looks, immediate reactions and the interpretation of a context that, on its own, already suggests that something serious may have occurred.
And that is where a new debate opens up that goes beyond this specific case. Because if a player covers his mouth in the middle of a scuffle, an argument or a moment of extreme tension, it is hardly to deliver a compliment. The gesture, increasingly common in modern football, acts as a kind of shield against cameras and microphones, an improvised barrier to prevent a possible insult from leading to a sanction.
A measure already under consideration
In this regard and as a result of this incident, the FIFA Players’ Voice Panel is already studying the possibility that covering the mouth in these situations could in itself be considered an indication liable to disciplinary punishment. Not because of what is said —which will continue to require proof— but because of the explicit intention to conceal it. Because the implicit message conveyed by that gesture is hardly that of someone afraid their compliment might be misunderstood. In the NFL, this type of conduct is also pursued through the directional microphones placed around the field that report any insult or inappropriate comment to the referees.
Beyond Vinicius, who in recent years has taken on a visible role as a symbol of the fight against racism in football, the focus now shifts to the individual responsibility of professionals in moments of maximum pressure.
Something more than a result
What is at stake is not only a possible sanction, three points or European qualification. What is being decided is the credibility of a sport that seeks to project values of transparency, respect and exemplary behaviour. That not everything goes. That what matters is not avoiding being caught, but not doing it in the first place.
Tension is part of elite football, but precisely for that reason those who play it are also obliged to control their impulses at certain moments. Not only because of the rules, but because of the example they set for millions of fans who understand sport as something more than just a competition.
