Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Cure for diving?

  • 27-02-2008 02:03AM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,608 ✭✭✭


    Right I'm not sure how this will be received but anyway my (simplistic)idea is this:

    Set up a citing committee that review matches and if a player is adjudged to have dived he gets a one match ban. Thoughts?


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,227 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    3 things are needed for an instant cure.

    1. Mr T
    2. A tank
    3. Chocolate bar.


    But seriously, yes, retrospective bars for diing ftw.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 609 ✭✭✭Dubit10


    Give em 100 lashs.That'll sort them:)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,306 ✭✭✭gucci


    simple, if they go down clutching their knee, issue a retrospective knee injury as a punishment, break their ankle if they hold their ankle, nose if they hold their face and so on and so forth.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 41,926 ✭✭✭✭_blank_


    Yep, ban 'em.

    But only for blatant dives, not for "going down easy"

    Difference?

    Torres "went down easy" vs Inter.

    Adebayor dived against ManYoo in the FA Cup recently.

    Ronaldo sometimes goes down easy, but he dived to win that penalty, I forget which game it was in though.


    (please note, I am not trying to start a "who dives more" scenario, that has been done to death, but these are the most high profile example I can think of)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,097 ✭✭✭✭Tusky


    DesF wrote: »
    Yep, ban 'em.

    But only for blatant dives, not for "going down easy"

    Difference?

    Torres "went down easy" vs Inter.

    Adebayor dived against ManYoo in the FA Cup recently.

    Ronaldo sometimes goes down easy, but he dived to win that penalty, I forget which game it was in though.


    (please note, I am not trying to start a "who dives more" scenario, that has been done to death, but these are the most high profile example I can think of)

    I agree with this. Example. Player x fouls player y but its not a bad foul and player y can stay on his feet but is unlikely to get a free kick if he does. so player y goes down 'easy'. This was the case with Torres against Inter. He was held back but could have easily stayed on his feet but instead he fell to the ground to win the free.

    Diving is going to the ground trying to get a free/penalty when there hasnt been a foul of any sort. I definitely think a 1 match ban should be implemented for this.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,014 ✭✭✭Eirebear


    DesF wrote: »
    Yep, ban 'em.

    But only for blatant dives, not for "going down easy"

    Difference?

    Torres "went down easy" vs Inter.

    Adebayor dived against ManYoo in the FA Cup recently.

    Ronaldo sometimes goes down easy, but he dived to win that penalty, I forget which game it was in though.


    (please note, I am not trying to start a "who dives more" scenario, that has been done to death, but these are the most high profile example I can think of)
    Tusky wrote: »
    I agree with this. Example. Player x fouls player y but its not a bad foul and player y can stay on his feet but is unlikely to get a free kick if he does. so player y goes down 'easy'. This was the case with Torres against Inter. He was held back but could have easily stayed on his feet but instead he fell to the ground to win the free.

    Diving is going to the ground trying to get a free/penalty when there hasnt been a foul of any sort. I definitely think a 1 match ban should be implemented for this.

    And there lies why this idea would never work.
    Its all about opinion.

    We have all seen our teams concede "soft" penalties and shouted Oh FFS ya dirty divin bastard there was never enough contact to make you go down!" or word to that effect.
    We have all seen our teams given "soft" penalties and made the statement that "there was contact, so the player had every right to go down and "win" the penalty"

    Where is the line drawn?
    I hate diving as much as the next person, but we can all rationalise it or just blatantly ignore it when it suits us.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,097 ✭✭✭✭Tusky


    Eirebear wrote: »
    And there lies why this idea would never work.
    Its all about opinion.

    We have all seen our teams concede "soft" penalties and shouted Oh FFS ya dirty divin bastard there was never enough contact to make you go down!" or word to that effect.
    We have all seen our teams given "soft" penalties and made the statement that "there was contact, so the player had every right to go down and "win" the penalty"

    Where is the line drawn?
    I hate diving as much as the next person, but we can all rationalise it or just blatantly ignore it when it suits us.

    Thats what Im saying. It should only be given for blatant diving. Diving in which no argument could be had in regards to if it were a dive or not.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,048 ✭✭✭DerekD Goldfish


    Retrospective bans for diving have already been given in Seire A most notably to Adriano


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,014 ✭✭✭Eirebear


    Tusky wrote: »
    Thats what Im saying. It should only be given for blatant diving. Diving in which no argument could be had in regards to if it were a dive or not.

    Yeah but where does the line between blatant diving, and falling over under slight contact start?
    Fotball players are generally big guys, yet when they get into a penalty area their balance seems extremely wobbly after a a slight brush against them from someones arm...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,617 ✭✭✭✭PHB


    I have no problem with going down easy.
    I have a huge problem with full stop diving. Ronaldo did it recently (against Fulham I think?), my favorite one was Ashley Cole against United, where he literally jumped 2 metres into the air.

    The line can be drawn very simply at contact or no contact. If there is no contact, and they fall over of their own accord looking for a foul, it is a dive.

    The review committee, if they decide that it is a dive, should issue a 5 game ban. If they did this, diving would be cut down incredibly overnight.
    Not only would all those obvious dives but cut out, but because the players couldn't be sure that they will be able to dive correctly without contact. If they **** it up, they risk a 5 game ban, hence most won't do it.
    You can address the going down easy by addressing the flat out dives, not perfectly, but the best we can do.

    As I said, I've no problem with going down easy to be honest. I think in some cases, it's utterly justified. Saha did that a while ago. It was a foul, the ref wasn't going to give it unless he fell over, so Saha fell over. I'm ok with this in general, when other players do it too, from other teams. Once it's a foul, I'm ok with people doing whatever.
    Just flat out diving is another question imo, and needs to be aggressively attacked.

    I don't blame the players. They want to win, will do anything to win, and I want my players to do the same. The authorities have to step in and fix this.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,014 ✭✭✭Eirebear


    PHB wrote: »

    As I said, I've no problem with going down easy to be honest. I think in some cases, it's utterly justified. Saha did that a while ago. It was a foul, the ref wasn't going to give it unless he fell over, so Saha fell over. I'm ok with this in general, when other players do it too, from other teams. Once it's a foul, I'm ok with people doing whatever.
    Just flat out diving is another question imo, and needs to be aggressively attacked.

    I don't blame the players. They want to win, will do anything to win, and I want my players to do the same. The authorities have to step in and fix this.


    But theres a difference between an actual foul and going down as soon as there is any contact whasoever, which to my eyes is diving.

    A player who is having his shirt pulled wont generally be forced to fall over, but if he does than theres a chance he will win the foul...i dont mind that in the slightest.
    A player who goes down ever time there is the slightest bit of contact is a diver, but under this idea he would get away with it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,193 ✭✭✭pd101


    If they are caught diving in a match, the punishment is a yellow card. Would it not make more sense to give them a yellow card retrospectively?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,617 ✭✭✭✭PHB


    He would 'get away with it'.
    But there's nothing you can do about that.

    However, if you ban people for doing it with no contact, then those people who do it with very very little contact will think twice about it.
    Personally, I think if there was a 5 match ban, pretty much all the regular divers would stop doing it instantly. It's not an inherent character trait, it's something they choose to do to win.

    One yellow card is not enough. People will always choose the possibility of a yellow card and dive rather than not. Especially since people who dive tend to be attacking players who normally get booked less.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,117 ✭✭✭✭MrJoeSoap


    +1 for retrospective bans.

    Its quite clear for most people to tell a blatant dive from just someone who went down a bit too easily. A three man panel who have to all agree on it would do the trick I'd say.
    PHB wrote: »
    I have no problem with going down easy.

    Ooh ooh ooh, I wanna say something here!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,014 ✭✭✭Eirebear


    PHB wrote: »
    It's not an inherent character trait, it's something they choose to do to win.
    .

    I dont agree, it is taught to players at a very very young age, i have seen this first hand with continental youth teams, it has become part of the culture of football and is every bit as instinctive as the tricks and turns they learn at the same age.

    I do agree something needs to be done about it, but i really dont see how.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,193 ✭✭✭pd101


    PHB wrote: »

    One yellow card is not enough. People will always choose the possibility of a yellow card and dive rather than not. Especially since people who dive tend to be attacking players who normally get booked less.

    Yeah but you cant have one punishment for a player caught diving by the referee and another for a player who wasn't.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,921 ✭✭✭✭Pigman II


    Stekelly wrote: »
    3 things are needed for an instant cure.

    1. Mr T
    2. A tank
    3. Chocolate bar.


    But seriously, yes, retrospective bars for diing ftw.

    Snickers bars? Or perhaps Marathons because they're retrospective?

    I like the idea, but I'd prefer if Martin Taylor was in the tank. "Meet my friend pain"


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,625 ✭✭✭✭BaZmO*


    Pigman II wrote: »
    Snickers bars? Or perhaps Marathons because they're retrospective?
    Never mind Marathons, he wants to give bars for diing!! What good is a bar after you've died?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,921 ✭✭✭✭Pigman II


    BaZmO* wrote: »
    Never mind Marathons, he wants to give bars for diing!! What good is a bar after you've died?

    Just because you've changed your hair colouring doesn't mean you can't still enjoy the delicious sugary taste of a Marathon/Snickers.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,617 ✭✭✭✭PHB


    pd101 wrote: »
    Yeah but you cant have one punishment for a player caught diving by the referee and another for a player who wasn't.

    Indeed, but there's no reason for the rule, if the ref saw it and already punished it. The ref should be alllowed to review his decisions, and is in the case of yellow and red cards given out, as in he can take them back, but he can't change a yellow to a red for some absurd reason.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 41,926 ✭✭✭✭_blank_


    PHB wrote: »
    The ref should be alllowed to review his decisions,
    Seriously dodgy territory imo.

    You start letting the refs review stuff, then why not let them review EVERY decision they make, post-match.

    Goal line calls?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,617 ✭✭✭✭PHB


    That's different, and you know why.
    They are already allowed review stuff! They can review yellow cards they give and riscend them!!!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,099 ✭✭✭RealJohn


    I have an idea on this one, though part of me thinks it's stupid. I played amateur football (as I'm sure most of you probably have at some point) and it was rare I fell over at all. Same was true of the other people I played with and the people I played against. Now sure, the intensity wasn't the same as it would be in the premiership but if a bunch of amateur players can stay on their feet, surely bringing in limits to the number of times professional athletes are allowed to fall over during a game isn't unreasonable.

    Of course, this should be a matter of judgement for the referee to a point but if a player was only allowed to fall over say three times during a game and get booked for every subsequent fall unless the referee decided it was unavoidable, we'd see diving drop dramatically.

    I know it sounds like a stupid plan but it'd be pretty easy to enforce. Falling over is easier to spot than a dive and it would reduce both diving and "going down easy" (which if you ask me is almost as bad and just compounds the problem anyway).


    Failing that, definitely retrospective bans should be brought in, as well as increasing the sanction for a dive to a straight red card and a three match ban. Soccer used to be a man's game. Now it's being laughed at and it's getting harder and harder to defend it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,525 ✭✭✭vorbis


    exactly RealJohn, soccer must be one of the few sports where the pro version of it is drastically different to the amateur version. Even when you're playing a casual game of soccer, you don't fall over with little contact. You would be laughed at by your friends. Yet its acceptable at the highest level of the sport!

    Imo, the rot started when this idea of contact being all important set in. Its not basketball ffs. The aim should be for players to stay on their feet rather than dive to the ground if slight contact is made.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,625 ✭✭✭✭BaZmO*


    Get Real John!!! That's a ridiculous idea.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,227 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    PHB wrote: »
    I have no problem with going down easy..

    I do. A footballer should be doing his best to stay on his feet. "allowing" going down easy encourages players to push he boundries.

    The George best one where Ron Harris tries to take him down on the edge of the area is the best example I can think of of this. 99 times out of 100 nowadays , players go down under that tackle. A free on the edge of the area seems to be more acceptable to a player nowadays than a 70/30 chance of scoring if they stay up.


    BaZmO* wrote: »
    Never mind Marathons, he wants to give bars for diing!! What good is a bar after you've died?


    Giving a body a good clubbing lets he family know that theres no escaping punishment for cheating. :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,099 ✭✭✭RealJohn


    BaZmO* wrote: »
    Get Real John!!! That's a ridiculous idea.
    Why exactly?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,617 ✭✭✭✭PHB


    Well here's my problem with that.

    Refs are not consistant and don't like to give penos in case they get it wrong. Best staying up was great, but imagine that he had missed?
    Saha 'dived' a while ago, and it was a foul, it impeded his chances of scoring significantly, and he fell down more than he naturally would have.
    In an ideal world, the ref would have given the penalty either way.
    But because he won't, the player has two choices
    A. Be 'Honest', and try to continue
    B. Go down easy and win the penalty

    I know which one I would choose and which one I would want my players to choose.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,227 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    PHB wrote: »

    Refs are not consistant and don't like to give penos in case they get it wrong. Best staying up was great, but imagine that he had missed?
    .

    I still dont see the problem. He'd have gotten his shot off honestly and missed. Cant see anythin wrong here.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,617 ✭✭✭✭PHB


    But the defender who fouled him would be let off. It was a foul, it impeded his shot, but the ref is never gona give it.


Advertisement