Topic: Diving, cheating, timewasting & theatrics in football

[ghirl67]

http://i.imgur.com/WY77S.gif

Dive.  That is all

[Prof]

I was talking to one of Lee Carsley's best mates after the dive by ngog. The one where carsley was condemning him after the match.

My point was it was rich of him to complain about ngog diving, when in that incident, if he hadn't dived over the top of his reckless tackle, it would have been a pen anyway.  Particularly a player that had a career full of 'taking a yellow for the team'.

In the stoke match, by far the worst situation of cheating, was the rugby tackle on downing.  That was a disgrace, and should have been red.  No attempt to play the ball, just took a yellow for the team.

Hypocritical oafs.

[tonysleft]

Guess it's the culture of English football. Was speaking to a Portuguese lad who brought up a pretty relevant point which was over there the cynical foul is seen as being much more dishonorable than a dive, i.e. stopping an attempted good play cynically is a lot more frowned upon than a dive in an attempt to win a free from the ref. Which is probably why teams like Stoke would be abhorred in other leagues where they are lauded for their "spirit" and "graft" here, while the more flamboyant players are scorned at every turn.

Here it's almost become necessary to simulate to some extent for any tackle. Players have to go down now to get penalties, they don't get them staying on their feet even if they're cleaned out but do their best to stay standing, it's just not how referees see it anymore which is a pity. There is a much bigger problem with overt physicality and almost anti-football than simulation that in today's footballing climate is now a necessity because of the shoddy standard of refereeing.

[BarryCrocker]

Guess it's the culture of English football. Was speaking to a Portuguese lad who brought up a pretty relevant point which was over there the cynical foul is seen as being much more dishonorable than a dive, i.e. stopping an attempted good play cynically is a lot more frowned upon than a dive in an attempt to win a free from the ref. Which is probably why teams like Stoke would be abhorred in other leagues where they are lauded for their "spirit" and "graft" here, while the more flamboyant players are scorned at every turn.

Here it's almost become necessary to simulate to some extent for any tackle. Players have to go down now to get penalties, they don't get them staying on their feet even if they're cleaned out but do their best to stay standing, it's just not how referees see it anymore which is a pity. There is a much bigger problem with overt physicality and almost anti-football than simulation that in today's footballing climate is now a necessity because of the shoddy standard of refereeing.

Worlds gone bloody soft when it's more dishonourable to make a tough and physical challenge then fall on your face rolling around like a nonce feigning injury and contact.

FFS, Football IS a contact sport.

[StevenLFC]

Worlds gone bloody soft when it's more dishonourable to make a tough and physical challenge then fall on your face rolling around like a nonce feigning injury and contact.

FFS, Football IS a contact sport.

I have no problem with tough challenges, but this Britsh macho culture of "take everything out" or "get the ball and the man" can and does lead to people getting hurt. For me it's a bigger problem than diving.

[tonysleft]

Worlds gone bloody soft when it's more dishonourable to make a tough and physical challenge then fall on your face rolling around like a nonce feigning injury and contact.

FFS, Football IS a contact sport.

There has to be a balance too though. I agree it's fucked some of the challenges you can't get away with today, but lumping the ball out of play and committing professional fouls every other minute to stop the opposition playing, or hacking down other players cynically, that isn't acceptable at all.

Diving is definitely the lesser of two evils when it comes to dangerous tackles and consistent professional fouls to kill a match, IMO.

[B0151?]

Worlds gone bloody soft when it's more dishonourable to make a tough and physical challenge then fall on your face rolling around like a nonce feigning injury and contact.

FFS, Football IS a contact sport.

Difference between 'tough and physical challenge' and cynical foul that tonysleft was talking about. Maybe you'd like to go back to the days where the more technical players were kicked out of the game, not for me though. Can go watch non-league or play Sunday league for that. Would some of the players that make the Prem a joy to watch at times have been able to thrive the way the nature of the game used to be? Don't know about you but I far prefer to watch technical teams than Stoke.

Cynically fouling someone is just as shithouse as exaggerating for me, with it being worse for the fact it is more dangerous.

[BarryCrocker]

Difference between 'tough and physical challenge' and cynical foul that tonysleft was talking about. Maybe you'd like to go back to the days where the more technical players were kicked out of the game, not for me though. Can go watch non-league or play Sunday league for that. Would some of the players that make the Prem a joy to watch at times have been able to thrive the way the nature of the game used to be? Don't know about you but I far prefer to watch technical teams than Stoke.

Cynically fouling someone is just as shithouse as exaggerating for me, with it being worse for the fact it is more dangerous.

I did say tough and physical challenge. No mention of the words, cynical or even foul. I played football when a tackle from behind was accepted. The change to the rules made a dramatic difference to the game. It opened things up for attackers and made defenders like me become better players.

[B0151?]

I did say tough and physical challenge. No mention of the words, cynical or even foul. I played football when a tackle from behind was accepted. The change to the rules made a dramatic difference to the game. It opened things up for attackers and made defenders like me become better players.

Ah, you quoted tonysleft post with the tough and physical challenge (when he'd made no mention of it) so that's why I said that.

[Keita Success]

Players who dive in English football will face bans from next season under new Football Association regulations.

Under the new rules, passed by the governing body at its annual general meeting on Thursday, a panel will review footage from the weekend each Monday looking for cases of simulation.

Any player unanimously found guilty of diving would be given a suspension.

The panel will consist of one ex-match official, one ex-manager and one ex-player.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39962886

For me, it seems like a half-step in the right direction. Doesn't effect teams that might profit from the penalty in the then and there, but it's a deterrent, at least.

[Chakan]

United must be shitting themselves.

[Dim Glas]

I am pleased they are doing this, goodness knows something needs doing in this league.

So long as it's done fairly, then all good, so I'll wait and see! The ex-manager and ex-player thing though, hmmm, intrigued to know who.

[sms1986]

Sounds like it might help, will be interesting to see it in action.

[skipper757]

I am pleased they are doing this, goodness knows something needs doing in this league.

So long as it's done fairly, then all good, so I'll wait and see! The ex-manager and ex-player thing though, hmmm, intrigued to know who.

Panel:  Howard Webb, Alex Ferguson, and Gary Neville. 

In all seriousness, it'll be interesting to see how it goes.

[Gerry Attrick]

Sounds like a good idea in theory but could be very hard to enforce. What do they define as a dive for a start?

[Purple Red]

Will be very difficult to put into practice. Could lead to players being unfairly banned and others getting away with it.

Like the idea though.

[Steady Eddie]

Sounds like a good idea in theory but could be very hard to enforce. What do they define as a dive for a start?

A player deliberately obtaining a sporting advantage through the dishonest deception of law 12.

Would be enough, no?

[Gerry Attrick]

A player deliberately obtaining a sporting advantage through the dishonest deception of law 12.

Would be enough, no?

So what would happen to a player if they initiate the contact? Is that technically a dive? For example a player is running onto a through ball and the keeper comes rushing out, the attacking player deliberately leaves their foot in a position that will create contact. Do they get banned for that?

[LovelyCushionedHeader]

Sounds like a good idea, but as people have said, needs to be policed properly. A dive isn't just when there is no contact.

It also concerns me that referees will start giving more penalties. They might start trusting players too much because they of the punishment diving brings.

[S]

In other news Ashley Young has announced his retirement.

[itsalltosh]

sounds like a definite step in the right direction

[rafathegaffa83]

It will last about 2 weeks

United must be shitting themselves.

RIP Ashley Young's career

[Thush]

This will be like Mascherano getting done then hearing nothing about it for the rest of the season.

[Sir Psycho Sexy]

Fuck yes

[mersey_paradiso]

Sounds great in principle as mentioned above.

Anyone know how it's worked in Scotland ? Has it been a success and have there been any controversies since it was introduced ?

[mersey_paradiso]

In other news Ashley Young has announced his retirement.

[ggcc14]

can of worms this.

[SerbianScouser]

Fucking finally.

However, players should be punished only if there's conclusive video evidence from as many angles as possible that there has been no contact whatsoever. For example Rashford should be punished for his dive vs Swansea while Kane against Arsenal (even though the fall wasn't consistent with the contact) shouldn't be because there was the slightest of touches and it's difficult to prove anything.

Hopefully diving will soon be eradicated after this. I absolutely deplore it.

[Steady Eddie]

So what would happen to a player if they initiate the contact? Is that technically a dive? For example a player is running onto a through ball and the keeper comes rushing out, the attacking player deliberately leaves their foot in a position that will create contact. Do they get banned for that?

To begin with i'd imagine you take it one step at a time and see how it goes. So obvious deceptions are enforced (where there is clearly no contact and the player goes to ground) and then you build on the offences based upon the ability to prove the offender has dived.

[Sir Psycho Sexy]

However

Where there is clear and overwhelming evidence to suggest a match official has been deceived by an act of simulation, and as a direct result, the offending player’s team has been awarded a penalty and/or an opposing player has been dismissed, The FA will be able to act retrospectively under its Fast Track system

[Gerry Attrick]

To begin with i'd imagine you take it one step at a time and see how it goes. So obvious deceptions are enforced (where there is clearly no contact and the player goes to ground) and then you build on the offences based upon the ability to prove the offender has dived.

If they're just going to look at situations where there was no contact at all I think it's a good idea, otherwise I think it will become too difficult to enforce and create more problems than it solves.

[stewil007]

As has been mentioned, the person diving gets banned, the outcome of the dive ie the penalty stands.  So the team the dive has affected are still punished and 2 teams get the benefit of not facing (usually) the most creative player in his banned games.

It would never happen, but I would like to see goals chalked off results.  You won 1-0 from a dive penalty.......the result is changed to 0-0 and so on

 

[Sir Psycho Sexy]

As has been mentioned, the person diving gets banned, the outcome of the dive ie the penalty stands.  So the team the dive has affected are still punished and 2 teams get the benefit of not facing (usually) the most creative player in his banned games.

It would never happen, but I would like to see goals chalked off results.  You won 1-0 from a dive penalty.......the result is changed to 0-0 and so on

you can't extrapolate football results like that though.

[stewil007]

you can't extrapolate football results like that though.

why? 

[zero zero]

United must be shitting themselves.

Chelsea according to the Mirror





http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/row-zed/revealed-premier-league-teams-worst-9643002

[Gerry Attrick]

It would never happen, but I would like to see goals chalked off results.  You won 1-0 from a dive penalty.......the result is changed to 0-0 and so on

I see what you're saying but this would be a disaster in my opinion. When a goal is scored it changes the dynamic of a game completely, you can't just take goals away retrospectively. Let's say a team needs a point to avoid relegation and they go 1-0 down to a penalty that will need to be reviewed, they can't just sit back and play as if it's still 0-0 in case the goal doesn't get chalked off.

[stewil007]

I see what you're saying but this would be a disaster in my opinion. When a goal is scored it changes the dynamic of a game completely, you can't just take goals away retrospectively. Let's say a team needs a point to avoid relegation and they go 1-0 down to a penalty that will need to be reviewed, they can't just sit back and play as if it's still 0-0 in case the goal doesn't get chalked off.

the fact that these things only get reviewed after the event is the problem - how you do it during is the $64k question and one which will never come about unless there is some kind of review system.

[Sir Psycho Sexy]

why?

Do I need to answer that?

The game changes if a goal has/hasn't been scored

[mersey_paradiso]

Chelsea according to the Mirror





http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/row-zed/revealed-premier-league-teams-worst-9643002

They've definitely improved since you know who left the club though...

[B0151?]

the fact that these things only get reviewed after the event is the problem - how you do it during is the $64k question and one which will never come about unless there is some kind of review system.

I think this is meant to be more of a deterrant than a punishment though. The aim is to stop players from diving at all and having that influence on a game to begin with.