The honeymoon between Cesare Prandelli and Italian public opinion has officially ended. The coach of the Italian national team has been one of the most popular ever for many reasons:
- although he was a Juventus player he didn't work as a coach for Juventus, Inter nor Milan, three clubs that polarize aversions and rivalries in Italy;
- he always tried to play a brilliant and offensive football;
- he often takes a stand in delicate issues like gays in the football world, mafia and fair play.


Fair play... this was Prandelli's banana peel. Since his first days as Italy coach, he decided to apply an ethical code. To make a long story short, the logic of the ethical code is the following: if an Italian player has a violent, incorrect or unsportsmanlike conduct, he cannot wear the Azzurri jersey.
There's nothing wrong about the ethical code. Actually, it's a very good idea to restore Calcio's dignity.

The problem is the application, which lacks of coherence. In the last months, Italian fans suspected that something was going wrong with the ethical code. Probably, they were right. Giorgio Chiellini's recent case is the last proof that the situation got out of Prandelli's hand. Last Sunday Chiellini elbowed Miralem Pjanic's face and was banned for three games. The judge – whose decision was based on TV images - said that Chiellini's “harmful intention” falls under “violent behavior”.

 

Prandelli deliberately contradicted the football justice and said that Chiellini's gesture “was not violent”, so he included Juventus defender in the World Cup list without any hesitation. It's not the first time that Prandelli decides to call a player without considering the football judge's decision. In March, Roma's midfielder Daniele De Rossi clearly punched Inter's Mauro Icardi and Prandelli decided not to call him for the friendly match against Spain before any official decision was taken by the sporting judge. “I take my own decisions” Prandelli said.

In April the coach was inflexible with Mattia Destro, who punched Cagliari's defender Astori that earned him a four game ban. Destro didn't take part in the two days stage in Coverciano. Another relevant precedent was Mario Balotelli's one in September 2013: at the end of Milan-Napoli Super Mario insulted the referee “with offending and intimidating expressions” and was banned for three games. Nevertheless, two weeks later Prandelli decided to call him for the qualification games with Armenia and Denmark. Why? “He already served his term of ban and I cannot punish him a second time”, the Italian coach said, recognizing the validity of the official penalty.

There's an unsolved question: for Prandelli, are the sentences of the sporting judge relevant or not? How can he be free “to take his own decisions” irrespective of the sporting judge in some cases (Chiellini and De Rossi) and – at the same time – call Balotelli after having recognized that the sporting judge properly punished his violent behavior?

The problem with the ethical code is that football reasons are different from fair play reasons. Let's talk turkey: not calling Chiellini for the World Cup would be an insane decision as he's a pillar for Italian national team. The same for Balotelli: Prandelli “forgave” him before two official games (although the Azzurri were already qualified for Brazil) whereas De Rossi's ban wasn't a tragedy as la Nazionale had to play a friendly game.

It's about honesty: the ethical code is not so important when there's a World Cup at stake. Prandelli cannot say that Chiellini's gesture wasn't violent because it's a lie. The evidence is clear. He should abstain from exposing himself to critics with such statements, and start saying the truth.

In the meanwhile, in Italy someone started speaking ill of Prandelli, by remembering that, in the end, he's a “juventino”. On Twitter, thanks to the Roman radio ReteSport an hashtag became viral in the last hours: #veritaprandelliane. It's a collection of sarcastic sentences jokingly ascribed to Prandelli, as “Maradona's goal against England was regular”, “At Waterloo, Napoleon didn't lose: he drew”, or “Berlin's wall collapsed due to a poor quality concrete”, or “That day JFK was hit by a blackbird excrement”.

 

Follow @Federico