He may be a nasty piece of work but there’s a grudging admiration for Costa
Suzann PETTERSEn lasted less than 24 hours as the Diego Costa of women’s golf. She awoke on Monday morning and decided she did not, after all, want to be That Guy. You know That Guy. The one everyone hates; the bad seed; the villain.
Pettersen took one look at what the world thought of her, and crumbled. and that is why, in the bubble of competitive sport at least, there remains some grudging admiration for Costa. He is That Guy. and he just doesn’t care.
Maybe that’s what Jose Mourinho loves about him, too. Mourinho is not averse to conflict, either. Yet managers can get away with extremes. Higher motives are often attributed to inimical behaviour.
On the first day of the season, when Mourinho completely lost his cool with his medical staff, in a way that was professionally humiliating to them and harmful to his club, some dismissed his outburst as a clever ploy to take attention away from a 2-2 draw at home to Swansea. It wasn’t, but there are always folk willing to see sophistication in the excesses of football management. Many of Sir alex Ferguson’s much-vaunted mind games were mere outbreaks of one- eyed irrationality.
It is not the same for players, as Pettersen discovered. nobody credited her with being smartly pragmatic when she claimed the 17th hole by default in the Solheim Cup foursomes. Instead, she was repeatedly accused of poor sportsmanship. Yet having remained bullish about her decision on Sunday night, the following day Pettersen published a lengthy apology to everybody from the united States team to armchair fans of golf. She had spent less than 24 hours as the baddie and it had broken her.
Would Pettersen still have felt this way had her gamesmanship secured a European victory? We will never know. But it is a lonely place, the badlands, the pressure so much greater than the antipathy that comes with the territory in sport.
all Blacks captain Richie McCaw was booed at Wembley Stadium on Sunday. His coach, Steve Hansen, being a sensitive soul, was outraged by this and accused the crowd of showing a lack of respect. One imagines, though, that McCaw doesn’t much care. It’s part of being an all-time great. He’d be more worried if his rivals stopped booing. It would mean they were happy to see him.
Yet what Costa signs up for isn’t the standard opprobrium directed at McCaw, Wayne Rooney, Ricky Ponting or Stuart Broad. He is different. It is not about his talent. It is about who he is, what he represents and how he behaves.
Costa is having an ordinary season, by his standards. He was dropped for a Champions League game. Rival fans should be very relaxed in his presence right now. He has scored two goals all season. Yet Costa goes out of his way to infuriate. He is a provocateur, an antagonist, a nasty piece of work.
The players who profess to love him are usually the ones who have retired. Gary neville is a fan — maybe recognising in Costa the attitude he often displayed for Manchester united at Liverpool. Contemporaries such as Laurent Koscielny, Gabriel, David Luiz or Emre Can, however, may take a different view.
Old footballers like old-fashioned hard men, but Costa isn’t even that. He brandishes imaginary cards when he is fouled. He runs screaming to the referee if his provocation results in the intended retaliation. Gabriel would not have been sent off for his foolish little heel tap on Saturday, had Costa not made such a fuss about it. He is not a bruising centre forward in the sense of being a Sixties throwback. He scratches, he slaps, he makes a big fuss. He isn’t Ron Davies, or Joe Jordan, even Mark Hughes (below). no wonder
arsene Wenger is outraged. First, his team lose a match to hated rivals in a frustrating manner, with Costa’s incendiary tactics a significant factor, then he has to put up with editorials saying this confrontational behaviour is exactly what his arsenal team need to succeed, and he is at fault for not installing such a character in his side.
and yes, there are weaknesses at arsenal this season, we can all see that. Yet they mostly concern the absence of prolific goalscorers, not prolific eye-pokers.
arsenal need someone to play like Costa? Really? We’re advocating that now? We are advocating the performance witnessed at Stamford Bridge on Saturday as a positive contribution to English football, as a way forward, a standard to be followed?
Then why are so many of the same commentators applauding the Football association’s decision to charge? We can’t have it both ways. Either Costa was wrong and deserves punishment, or his style is the one to which arsenal must aspire.
You’d like him on your side is the argument — but is Costa really a potent weapon this season? He was ferociously prolific in the months following his arrival at Chelsea but has scored only five goals since January 17 — against Southampton, Hull, Sunderland, West Bromwich albion and Maccabi Tel aviv, mostly weak opponents. His contribution lately has been inconsistent and now, just as Chelsea are getting going, he seems likely to be banned for three games. Do arsenal need this? Do Chelsea for that matter? Costa may be That Guy but there are other guys who could do a similar job — with considerably less aggravation for all.