Carragher, Neville & MNF On Sky

Warper · 17-04-2012 02:24PM

RVP 11 wrote: »

Last night, Rosicky cheated, and i'm an Arsenal fan.
I think Nial Quinn had a good piont, a few restrospective red cards will definately help.

Agreed its the only thing that can sort it out. Why soccer hasnt moved on is mind-boggling. Look at most other sports where if someone is caught cheating on camera, then they can be reprimanded for it irrespective if an official spotted it. This whole thing it was not in the referee's report is bullsh1t. Players found to have dived like Ashley Young at the weekend need to be suspended and fined, otherwise it will only get worse and more referreeing decisions will go the way of the cheats.

Likewise if someone was booked for diving by mistake, obv. the card should be rescinded. By suspending players for diving may not eradicate the problem, it can only help in the long-run. Obv. a player diving in a big match like a CL Final would happily take a 3 game ban if it meant a peno for their side but thats another days argument. 3 game ban for first offense in a season and 6 for the second offense. The FA should have a panel set up who vote on whether they think it was a dive or not to avoid any confusion, likewise UEFA etc.. Something needs to be done rapidly though.

Marco85 · 17-04-2012 02:28PM

kryogen wrote: »

Neil3030 wrote: »

Pre-season friendly for working with Dunphy.

??

I assume this is a joke but I would absolutely love to see Nevilles head explode sitting in between Eamo and Gilesy!

He definitely wouldnt make it through that without killin
g someone

was in the indo last week that rte approached him to be pundit for the euros but sky blocked it.

prettyboy81 · 17-04-2012 02:29PM

As a LFC fan & it shouldn't matter what club you support, Mr. Neville has brought a freshness to SKY coverage along with top class analysis!

PhlegmyMoses · 17-04-2012 02:29PM

The FA do not rescind yellow cards. So if you are booked for diving, they will have to mete out 3 game punishments to players incorrectly carded as well.

Retroactively banning players would cause havoc as there is too much subjectivity involved. No way the FA will start that up unless it is incredibly obvious.

17-04-2012 02:34PM

As Martin Tyler said last night, the people who watch the games on tv or in the stadiums will decide, and it should be their decision if they want to see it, and if they don't retro-bans is the only solution.
Wage fines wouldn't do anything, look at Ballowelli

PhlegmyMoses · 17-04-2012 02:36PM

RVP 11 wrote: »

As Martin Tyler said last night, the people who watch the games on tv or in the stadiums will decide, and it should be their decision if they want to see it, and if they don't retro-bans is the only solution.
Wage fines wouldn't do anything, look at Ballowelli

The people in the stands do not understand the logistics or realities of what they are asking for. That is a trite comment from Tyler. The people in the stands would ruin football if the lunatics were allowed to run the asylum.

17-04-2012 02:38PM

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

The people in the stands do not understand the logistics or realities of what they are asking for. That is a trite comment from Tyler. The people in the stands would ruin football if the lunatics were allowed to run the asylum.

What are you talking about?
We are talking about cheating/diving here, not asking Jimmy baldy bollix to setup the FA guidelines.
Cheating is an offence, it's refs who don't have the balls to action it LIVE because of pressure from the stands (team supporters booing etc)

PhlegmyMoses · 17-04-2012 02:54PM

RVP 11 wrote: »

What are you talking about?
We are talking about cheating/diving here, not asking Jimmy baldy bollix to setup the FA guidelines.
Cheating is an offence, it's refs who don't have the balls to action it LIVE because of pressure from the stands (team supporters booing etc)

And yet they action everything else, like giving pens, sending players off ruling out goals.

This is not a case of being about refs not having the balls to do their job. It's the fact that it's very hard to prove diving in most cases. As I said previously, it's easy to prove that Carroll dived a few weeks ago or Gilardino that time for Milan, as there was no contact at all but there will be plenty of people feeling very hard done by if the FA brought this in.

Neville thinks that almost all of the incidents looked at last night were pens but players reacted to them to ensure that they got the pen. For the Samba incident with Berba, Berbatov was surely impeding him by holding his shirt but Samba went down like a tonne of bricks in an unnatural way. Should we give him a 3 game ban?

Where do you draw the line? This is why I'm talking about practicalities and the realities of actually implementing what "the people" want? Tyler's comment was trite. There is a reason why this is so hard to implement.

Could somebody who wants this brought in maybe offer some sort of guideline as to what exactly they would be looking for? It's all very outragey at the moment.

17-04-2012 02:56PM

It's very hard to prove, yet we see the evidence within seconds.
It's very hard to prove allright if you dismiss Video Technology.

PhlegmyMoses · 17-04-2012 02:58PM

You see an incident in seconds yet I may disagree with you. Discussions on whether a player dived or not are usually the most divisive topics in football. This may work for absolutely obvious examples but I'd be worried about the 50-50s, of which there are many more.

17-04-2012 03:03PM

I understand that, but a few retro-red cards will reduce the amount and will put doubt in players minds about going down easy, thats' all we need.
I think in retrospect, 50/50's won't be judged by knee-jerk decisions, unlike some penalties and cards by referees instantly.

PhlegmyMoses · 17-04-2012 03:09PM

RVP 11 wrote: »

I understand that, but a few retro-red cards will reduce the amount and will put doubt in players minds about going down easy, thats' all we need.
I think in retrospect, 50/50's won't be judged by knee-jerk decisions, unlike some penalties and cards by referees instantly.

Who decides what is 50-50? For example, Ashley Young clearly over-exaggerated the contact at the weekend but there was clearly contact. Should he be banned? Again, what about Samba who over-emphasized his fall when Berba tugged his shirt? He was clearly fouled but also clearly dived, exaggerated, whatever. This is my point. It's very hard to legislate for and will have practical problems that Neville alludes to in his analysis. Basically, everyone should be careful what they wish for.

RasTa · 17-04-2012 03:12PM

Didn't some Arsenal player get a retrospective red for a dive awhile back? Haven't seen much change if so

Fuhrer · 17-04-2012 03:13PM

RasTa wrote: »

Didn't some Arsenal player get a retrospective red for a dive awhile back? Haven't seen much change if so

Eduardo did, then they just cancelled it for some reason.

17-04-2012 03:14PM

Well one thing would be to look at the effort made to stay on your feet, flailing arms is a dead give away.
You know if a decision isn't quite clear cut, then they could just have no action at all, but most of the time it's quite obvious when someone has no intention of chasing after the ball when they see they won't get there.
I'm not talking about every situation here, but the ones that are so blatant, need actioning, otherwise the game will be forever marred with cheating.

DM_7 · 17-04-2012 03:37PM

Neville was right as usual.

for a starts diving is only a yellow card offence so you can't just ban a player.

yellow cards can't be appealed so if a ref decides you dive then thats it.

if you open it up to retrospective action you have to prove simulation. How do you prove that? A player can claim whatever contact there is (minimal or otherwise) made him fall. You can't prove him wrong.

a player can also say he just slipped, fell to the ground due to a brain fart but wasn't actually trying to pretend he was fouled.

It would be a nightmare to implement.

I really like Neville. He is straight up and just says, get on with it, stop moaning about everything.

du Maurier · 17-04-2012 03:41PM

He sounds like Keith Lemon. One of the myriad of reasons I'd switch over.

bucketybuck · 17-04-2012 04:22PM

RVP 11 wrote: »

As Martin Tyler said last night, the people who watch the games on tv or in the stadiums will decide, and it should be their decision if they want to see it, and if they don't retro-bans is the only solution.
Wage fines wouldn't do anything, look at Ballowelli

The people in the stadiums would be the first to cry bloody murder if one of "their" team were given a three match ban for a borderline decision they didn't agree with.

Rarely will a dive be clear cut. How many times was Ronaldo called a diver, when the fact was that at the speed he ran it didn't actually take massive contact to spin his centre of balance and check his run. If the general public had their way he would have been banned every ten minutes, and driven out of England even sooner.

Don't look to the general public for rational decision making, they are not equipped for it.

Mitch Connor · 17-04-2012 04:38PM

bucketybuck wrote: »

The people in the stadiums would be the first to cry bloody murder if one of "their" team were given a three match ban for a borderline decision they didn't agree with.

Rarely will a dive be clear cut. How many times was Ronaldo called a diver, when the fact was that at the speed he ran it didn't actually take massive contact to spin his centre of balance and check his run. If the general public had their way he would have been banned every ten minutes, and driven out of England even sooner.

Don't look to the general public for rational decision making, they are not equipped for it.

a person can be smart, people are stupid.

17-04-2012 04:42PM

I like Neville as an analyst, but as a commentator he's pretty annoying, talks too much for a co-commentator imo.

PhlegmyMoses · 17-04-2012 04:44PM

I think he gets quite nervous so just talks a lot. His accent is grating as well. I'd keep him in the studio where he does great work.

Mitch Connor · 17-04-2012 04:49PM

rarnes1 wrote: »

I like Neville as an analyst, but as a commentator he's pretty annoying, talks too much for a co-commentator imo.

I think he just needs more experience in the role - he is new to it, hasn't done it much, so is likely unsure of when to talk and how long to talk for. He has proven himself, imo, as an excellent analyst - i'll give him the benefit of the doubt on the co-commentating duties for the time being.

17-04-2012 04:55PM

bucketybuck wrote: »

The people in the stadiums would be the first to cry bloody murder if one of "their" team were given a three match ban for a borderline decision they didn't agree with.

Rarely will a dive be clear cut. How many times was Ronaldo called a diver, when the fact was that at the speed he ran it didn't actually take massive contact to spin his centre of balance and check his run. If the general public had their way he would have been banned every ten minutes, and driven out of England even sooner.

Don't look to the general public for rational decision making, they are not equipped for it.

Rarely are they clear cut when people use the excuse of "there was contact" even if the player going down makes the contact by extending his leg or leaving his leg behind him as he pretends to run on past.
We can all see it's cheating even if the letter of the law deems it a foul based on any contact.
The contact is the MO of the cheater, should we allow it to continue because it happens even though it's only happening through deceit?

willmunny1990 · 17-04-2012 05:06PM

Gary Neville is a great analyst and a breath of fresh air on Sky imo.

His commentary during matches isn't the best at the moment but i think he will get better at commentating as he gains more experience.