En taking everyone back, making a choice that he was no longer really criticized for not making, Didier Deschamps knew that he was finally going to play with his hand, at the moment he had chosen, on a ground where until then he had only opposed the inertia of his refusal. The recall of Karim Benzema in the France team is a nice tactical move, with several bands.
The exceptional performances of the Madrilenian this season had certainly put a little pressure on him. It will be suggested, with a little mischief, that this extended ban helped to motivate the player, in a way to prove the coach wrong. However, his non-selection would have been a non-event, as it seemed acquired.
This return undoubtedly obeys a sporting logic, that is to say, for the France team, a necessity to which Deschamps would have sided in the name of his famous “Pragmatism”. However, as he himself recalled, the selection nevertheless won the World Cup without Benzema. An attack made up of Griezmann, Mbappé and Giroud does not need to be dramatically reinforced.
Benzema would have remained this sacred player in Madrid, lost for France, inexhaustible subject of controversy which not only divided football fans, but also served as a pretext for bad passions: point of fixation of national identity psychodramas, we have him always blamed many more wrongs than he did.
Deschamps, the great reconciler
By summoning him, Didier Deschamps cuts the grass from under the feet of those who made this banishment an element against him. It arouses a broad consensus, barely disturbed by the outpouring of editorialists and elected far-right. Deschamps, great reconciler of a torn France, and great beneficiary of the operation.
Some people lend him, half-ironically only, the ulterior motive of covering himself in the event of sports failure. They exaggerate his Machiavellianism. However cunning he is, he is not the man to make a decision potentially harmful to the team and to the cohesion of the group. It is not Raymond Domenech, to put it another way.
Simply, the coach considers himself in a strong position to manage this return internally and its general impact on opinion. At the time when the status quo would be reproached to him in case of failure, where his management of the Blues could dull in the routine and his executives soften in comfort, he shakes the basket and recalls his power.
“For me, Didier will be a winner in all cases. He’s very smart about that. I expect nothing from Didier, nothing from anyone. “ Mathieu Valbuena’s reaction to RMC reminded us that it was not just a question of politics. Valbuena, irreproachable player of the France team between 2012 and 2015, the first victim of the case that started it all, will never have worn the blue jersey again.
Karim Benzema played the middleman in an attempt to extort his teammate – in good faith and to help, according to his defense, but in such an ambiguous manner that she justified an indictment for “complicity in the attempted blackmail”. The Versailles Criminal Court will judge the case in October, but, whatever the judicial verdict, the moral aspect will remain problematic.
Amnesty, with a dose of amnesia
Far from assuming an error, if not a fault, the Real striker then criticized Deschamps for having “Yielded under the pressure of a racist part of France”, has withdrawn into a position of victim certainly effective with his supporters, but very ungrateful to the one who had supported him when he was in the hot seat, and unworthy when the player “liked” insulting messages on social networks .
It is not known if one apologized to the other, nor how the dispute was approached and settled between them… only to be finally cleared. Their exchanges remained confidential; their communication, minimal and agreed. We pass the sponge, we wash the liability: amnesty, with a dose of amnesia.
It is up to everyone to determine whether it is a rehabilitation or a remission of sentence. Some see it as sporting justice and the reward of “merit” in the field, which alone should count. For others, the moral of the story will be that the strongest are not really accountable for their actions.
It is not surprising that Didier Deschamps, who knew Tapie’s OM and Doctor Agricola’s Juventus, is a supporter of the right to be forgotten – after all, the latter is sometimes necessary to move forward. The arrangement benefits its two protagonists, and theoretically the France team. We will verify it on the ground, with more excitement than ulterior motives.
