Simulation

CSF wrote: »

Also, there are way bigger things going without justice in football.

Priority number 1 being making sure the likes of Ashley Barnes are punished properly, not allowed away with it because an incompetent ref says he saw the incident.

What incident was this?

CSF

M!Ck^ wrote: »

What incident was this?

Tackle on Matic.

Football rule makers have successfully eliminated physicality from the modern game. As noted in a post above, the game is unrecognisable from a decade plus ago. In my view there is now a severe disparity in that we have clamped down harshly on one form of cheating while taking a shrug shoulders attitude to another.

These conversations always get bogged down and sidetracked by people wanting to focus on exceptional cases and outliers. It's high time for:

- only the Captain being allowed to speak to the referee;
- retrospective panel to apply punishment for diving and anything else;
- retrospective panels having the power to ignore the contents of the referees report;

Small weak men got their way. You can't make a living from being physically tough and combative anymore. That's fine, but you shouldn't be making a living from being a cheat either.

I'll concede that one player going out to break the leg of another sets a bad example for kids. But if you think watching a powerful fully grown adult athlete falling over at the slightest touch sets a good example for kids you are deluded.

anncoates

To be honest, I think it's far worse than OTT tackles, albeit in a moral sense.

Take something like Bilic in 1998. He should have been banned for a long time after that. It's reprehensible and dishonest. I'd rather my kids see a crunching foul than something like that, to be honest.

greendom

theoneeyedman wrote: »

Platini won a European tourney for France in which he was 'fouled' a lot back in the day.....

seriously ? - so the 9 goals he scored in the tournament and general masterful displays in the no 10 role had nothing to do with it ?

MythicalMadMan

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Football rule makers have successfully eliminated physicality from the modern game. As noted in a post above, the game is unrecognisable from a decade plus ago. In my view there is now a severe disparity in that we have clamped down harshly on one form of cheating while taking a shrug shoulders attitude to another.

These conversations always get bogged down and sidetracked by people wanting to focus on exceptional cases and outliers. It's high time for:

- only the Captain being allowed to speak to the referee;
- retrospective panel to apply punishment for diving and anything else;
- retrospective panels having the power to ignore the contents of the referees report;

Small weak men got their way. You can't make a living from being physically tough and combative anymore. That's fine, but you shouldn't be making a living from being a cheat either.

I'll concede that one player going out to break the leg of another sets a bad example for kids. But if you think watching a powerful fully grown adult athlete falling over at the slightest touch sets a good example for kids you are deluded.

Ya plus 1 to all this, its just funny the scapegoating diving gets but people dont go on about shirt holding in the box, handballs etc

A cheating review board which can cover all bases.

Also bring in technology for all the big decisions they went on about it slowing down the game, I think the goal line technology has proven to do the opposite. PLayers already appeal way less just a quick look at the ref no goal play on.

anncoates

Was thinking about this and another kinda related point.

What about the stuff like Zidane and Materazzi. It's a bad as diving in a way.

You can say to your kids, you know, XY went in on him hard there in front of the ref. It's wrong but he lost the head and got a red and a ban.

And then you can tell them, yeah well X waited until the ref wasn't looking and called Y's sister a whore so Y would lose his temper and X could roll on the floor like a bitch to get Y get sent off in the biggest game of his career.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Football rule makers have successfully eliminated physicality from the modern game. As noted in a post above, the game is unrecognisable from a decade plus ago. In my view there is now a severe disparity in that we have clamped down harshly on one form of cheating while taking a shrug shoulders attitude to another.

These conversations always get bogged down and sidetracked by people wanting to focus on exceptional cases and outliers. It's high time for:

- only the Captain being allowed to speak to the referee;
- retrospective panel to apply punishment for diving and anything else;
- retrospective panels having the power to ignore the contents of the referees report;

Small weak men got their way. You can't make a living from being physically tough and combative anymore. That's fine, but you shouldn't be making a living from being a cheat either.

I'll concede that one player going out to break the leg of another sets a bad example for kids. But if you think watching a powerful fully grown adult athlete falling over at the slightest touch sets a good example for kids you are deluded.

It's not their job to be examples for kids, it's to win games. Any parent who sees Angel Di Maria as an example for their kid is a moron plain and simple.

Do you not think the game is better now that the skilful players have more leeway to be skilful? You can't kick lumps out of players as much but that doesn't stop good defensive football. Caveman talk there tbh Lloyd.

gandalf

TBH I liken simulation as it is called to committing fraud. As some have already stated a dive can change the whole outcome of a game. A penalty, a sending off a game lost because a cheat pulled the wool over the referees eyes.

Reviews of games and retrospective banning for blatent simulation needs to be brought in. It also needs to be on a sliding scale, if a player keeps doing it they get banned for a longer period the next time they are caught. Until there is a serious sanction like this hanging over players heads I don't think you will see cheating of this type leave the game. The longer we have limp wristed rules to deal with it the more prevalent it will become in the game.

Januzaj blatantly dived on Monday night when he was in an excellent position to go on and put the Arsenal goal under threat, he saw a dive as the better opportunity and this is exactly the kind of thought process that needs to be stopped. The guy is a very talented player but he is tainting that by diving and getting a reputation as a diver. Until the powers that be take this issue seriously we will see young players like this see diving as a legitimate tactic to deploy during a game.

The referee catches 2 dives and appropriately punishes the offenders, mass outrage and calls for reform.

Every weekend, multiple dives win games in Spain, Germany, England, France etc. and nobody cares. What's different this time I wonder?

Liam O wrote: »

It's not their job to be examples for kids, it's to win games. Any parent who sees Angel Di Maria as an example for their kid is a moron plain and simple.

Do you not think the game is better now that the skilful players have more leeway to be skilful? You can't kick lumps out of players as much but that doesn't stop good defensive football. Caveman talk there tbh Lloyd.

No I don't. We always had skilful players, but we no longer have the type of epic Keane / Vieira confrontations of a previous era.

Like it or lump it, kids mimic what they see stars of the game doing. Unfortunately diving and simulation is creeping into youth football in this country over the past half decade, a very sad state of affairs I'm sure all could agree?

Liam O wrote: »

The referee catches 2 dives and appropriately punishes the offenders, mass outrage and calls for reform.

Every weekend, multiple dives win games in Spain, Germany, England, France etc. and nobody cares. What's different this time I wonder?

Incorrect. Many of us have held a very consistent position on this over the past few years.

I'd love if we had a discussion on sports which didn't revolve around 'what will the kids think'.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

No I don't. We always had skilful players, but we no longer have the type of epic Keane / Vieira confrontations of a previous era.

Like it or lump it, kids mimic what they see stars of the game doing. Unfortunately diving and simulation is creeping into youth football in this country over the past half decade, a very sad state of affairs I'm sure all could agree?

You're acting like Keane and Viera weren't 2 of the most skilful players to ever play in the PL. It's not the likes of them that needed to go, it's the players who's only skill was based around fouling and 'letting the other team know you're there'. There's still plenty of room for physicality but it's more closely monitored and anything out of order is quickly quelled.

Notice from watching the nephew on the odd weekend, there is a fair big of diving and dramatics from lads playing at that level ( seven a side), it's not so much blatant diving as getting tackled and rolling on the ground. Really embarrassing stuff, and more so that I'm not noticing coaches or parents condemn it when it's their player, but quick to shout at the ref when its an opposing player.

All through my schoolboy football I was always taught the simple mantra of when you get tackled, heavy, dirty, anything, you get back up ASAP so as not to let the opponent think they have one over on you. Mad how quickly that's changed.

Not every instance where a player hits the deck without contact is a dive. There are occasions where a player anticipates a challenge and jumps, the challenge never comes, and it looks ridiculous. That's not diving. (Although if they start rolling around or looking at the ref it is)

This craic of players attacking players throwing their leg out to try simulate contact, or dragging their foot accross the floor trying to get clipped, should be a retrospective punishment

gandalf

TheDoc wrote: »

Notice from watching the nephew on the odd weekend, there is a fair big of diving and dramatics from lads playing at that level ( seven a side), it's not so much blatant diving as getting tackled and rolling on the ground. Really embarrassing stuff, and more so that I'm not noticing coaches or parents condemn it when it's their player, but quick to shout at the ref when its an opposing player.

All through my schoolboy football I was always taught the simple mantra of when you get tackled, heavy, dirty, anything, you get back up ASAP so as not to let the opponent think they have one over on you. Mad how quickly that's changed.

Not every instance where a player hits the deck without contact is a dive. There are occasions where a player anticipates a challenge and jumps, the challenge never comes, and it looks ridiculous. That's not diving. (Although if they start rolling around or looking at the ref it is)

This craic of players attacking players throwing their leg out to try simulate contact, or dragging their foot accross the floor trying to get clipped, should be a retrospective punishment

Yep that is scary. It is now seen as a legitimate tactic to deploy during a game at all levels.

When I played eons ago no one would ever think to dive or roll around. If someone stayed down they were hurt.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

No I don't. We always had skilful players, but we no longer have the type of epic Keane / Vieira confrontations of a previous era.

Like it or lump it, kids mimic what they see stars of the game doing. Unfortunately diving and simulation is creeping into youth football in this country over the past half decade, a very sad state of affairs I'm sure all could agree?

This, it's noticable, I'm seeing it nearly ever weekend at seven aside and schoolboy level. The physical side of the game with fair but tough tackling is being eradicated. The amount of yellow cards I see at these games now is ridiculous, nevermind at elite level where it seems any tackle involving some physicality would result in a card.

Has to be the most frustrating part of the game for me, where tackling is seem as some punishable/bookable offence. The "totting" up thing is ridiculous as well.

Even just last night, Ronaldo got booked for a perfectly good tackle. He got all of the ball, and sure, his momentum took him into the player. So what? He won the ball, that should be first and foremost.

The constant removal and and diminishing of the physical side of the game irks me. Maybe it's because I find possesion football utterly boring and monotonous. Even Barca in their pomp, was only worth watching the highlights as any game I watched of theirs bored me to tears as they knocked the ball around at the back or deep in their own half. And when tackled it was like someone had just been murdered.

Watching the promo reels and things BBC did for United vs Arsenal this week, showing Keane, Viera, Bergkamp, Keown, Adams, Schmeichel etc. just reminded me how tame the game has become and how the premier league is loosing something that really set it apart from other leagues.

gandalf wrote: »

Yep that is scary. It is now seen as a legitimate tactic to deploy during a game at all levels.

When I played eons ago no one would ever think to dive or roll around. If someone stayed down they were hurt.

I'm not that long out of the game, 10 years on from schoolboy, had three years at senior before packing it in. And as you say diving just wasn't a thing. Sure players went down and didn't get a free kick for it, but it would be a tangle of legs or something like that.

When I think back to whenever I would be questioning a ref decision, it was always after contact and after I felt I'd been fouled. It was never where I'd gone down knowing I'd be pulling a sly one.

AdamD wrote: »

I'd love if we had a discussion on sports which didn't revolve around 'what will the kids think'.

Well, I'm seemingly forced to use the point because apparently fans of the game don't have a problem with elite athletes throwing themselves to the ground at every opportunity and rolling around pretending they're hurt in an effort to get opposition players booked. I mean that is absolutely and utterly indefensible and unmanly behaviour, yet it's greeted by a shrug of the shoulders.

So maybe it might drive home how wrong it is when people realise that 10 year olds are starting to do the same thing. Or maybe not. Some people have no concept of what fair play or being a sportsperson is supposed to be.

anncoates

AdamD wrote: »

I'd love if we had a discussion on sports which didn't revolve around 'what will the kids think'.

While it does come across a bit super parent sometimes, you'd point out dirtbird behaviour in general life to your kids, so why not in something like football that has a big influence on them?

It's cheating at sport, no matter how much it's tolerated in the game.

Plus, kids play ball themselves and ape it.

the kelt

Its a blight on the game to be honest.

I like the idea of a yellow card for a blatant dive outside the box and a straight red and one game ban for a dive inside the box trying to win a penalty.

Also use retrospective punishment. If a player has dived but its been missed then enforce the same punishment. One game ban if it was inside the box for example.

I tell you what id like to see though is the likes of defenders getting the same punishment. How many times have we seen a centre back in a spot of bother under pressure fake a dive to get him out of trouble and 95% of times he gets the free, thats as bad as Di Maria trying to win a free on the edge of the penalty area.

Or you could go the whole hog, if a player dives to win a free on the edge of the area, give the opposition a free on the edge of their area in the same position, if he dives to win a penalty, give a penalty to the opposition, now that would end it once and for all!!

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Some people have no concept of what fair play or being a sportsperson is supposed to be.

In fairness I've seen enough reaction from parents and managers at kids level to realise there is plenty who have no concept of the game and what their kids should be learning and doing at that level.

I'm not one of those who advocates that scores not be kept, or mental cotton wool stuff like that. But to see a parent (typically father) completely ignore their son taking a dive, or acting the clown after an innocuous challenge, then roar at the ref shouting " thats a ****ing dive" when an opposing player get's tackled, it's mad stuff.

I see all this stuff on SSN about initiatives in England to have parents keep quiet on the sideline, and would laugh thinking how extreme that is. But having gone to games now as a spectator with some vested interested on the pitch as an uncle(and I'm sure down the line my child will take up football possibly) it's incredible watching how parents and managers react to things.

When I was that age myself I never really took head of it and ignored it. My Da and Grandad used to come watch me and they'd never say a thing during the game, would have a chat after in the car on the way home praising what was good and telling me what I was doing poorly.

Like for some perspective(and it was used as a bit of a story at the club to ensure lads wore shinguards) under 15's I played a match where I made a perfectly good tackle and on the follow through shattered a fellas shinguard. He got up in a relatively short time afterwards, I apologised and did the whole " **** are you alright" lark and we shook hands, on with the game. Ref didn't even blow a foul, it was a perfectly good tackle, just my momentum went through.

I'd say if that happened now I'd get a massive ban....

OwaynOTT

M!Ck^ wrote: »

It's always a legit comparison though.

The refs have the respect from the players.
The refs have the technology to support there decisions.
Rugby players don't feign injury / simulate.

Cian Healy took at head to the face against France, got back up straight away.
Soccer player has a hand brush of his chin and he's rolling around like he's shot.

Rugby players don't feign injury as it doesn't gain them an advantage. But they will certainly cheat to gain an advantage in the game.

OwaynOTT

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Well, I'm seemingly forced to use the point because apparently fans of the game don't have a problem with elite athletes throwing themselves to the ground at every opportunity and rolling around pretending they're hurt in an effort to get opposition players booked. I mean that is absolutely and utterly indefensible and unmanly behaviour, yet it's greeted by a shrug of the shoulders.

So maybe it might drive home how wrong it is when people realise that 10 year olds are starting to do the same thing. Or maybe not. Some people have no concept of what fair play or being a sportsperson is supposed to be.

I'd much rather ten year olds to dive and simulate that is a part of modern football, than follow the example of previous generations where some players went out to take players out of the game with serious injuries. Where any sort of physicality was okay as long as the ref didn't see it.
In my younger days playing underage football, yes I played the game so my point is more valid apparently, I saw some horrific stuff that was influenced by contemporary soccer that glorified physicality and traditional masculinity role models.
At one particular match, I was substituted as I was a bit of a Scholes tackler and saw from the side line one of my teammates smash the jaw of a kid two years younger than him because he was shoved by that kid in the back.
Kid was rushed to hospital and I would have much preferred my teammate to have dropped to the floor and simulated/exaggerated injury.

A dive is harmless and to show or exaggerate pain\injury is not a bad thing it just goes against the traditional ideas around masculinity. It doesn't help support hegemonic masculinity.
What is manly behaviour?

Personally I live seeing great athletes compete against each other, using every sinew and ounce of desire to win,to push themselves further to achieve their goals.
I have no problem with cheating as it's just another weapon being utilised,when it's done right. It's the use of your brain and intelligence when done right.

If anything it teaches kids a valuable lesson, that no matter if you do everything by the rules, there will be injustice in the world and you will lose out.
Cheating represents reality. people cheat all the time, speeding up for orange lights, not paying for parking, taking 'supplements' to achieve more physicality in rugby, pretending they were fouled in a match, etc.

And if anything if a great athlete still comes out on top despite the cheating of other players, victory is even more sweet.

Hegemonic masculinity, traditional male role models and being manly is all a load of cods wallop. An invention of past ages that some people nowadays take as the only reality for being a man.
It all a load of bull****ing.
Boys use to be dressed in pink as kids, as it represented a more powerful colour and girls were in blue as it was seen as more feminine. Different nowadays and masculinity is likewise an invention.

Kirby

We wont be rid of it until the governing bodies take a hard stance against it and start banning players for it. Until that happens, all the talk in the world is irrelevant.

That wont happen. It doesn't help that apparently some fans and pundits enjoy a good dive. They use phrases like "he was clever there" or "there was contact" to excuse it. Whether a player has been touched, or fouled has no bearing on whether he has simulated falling over.....and some people just cant quite grasp this.

And sure we cant ignore the ever populur "he was moving at pace!" Because we all know the laws of gravity change when a person runs and a pull back of your shirt causes you to fall forwards.

Damn gravity!

OwaynOTT wrote: »

Rugby players don't feign injury as it doesn't gain them an advantage. But they will certainly cheat to gain an advantage in the game.

As predicted, you'll always have someone focussing on extreme outliers in threads like this. You do know that Rugby imposed a massive unprecedented penalty on those involved in the above incident?

OwaynOTT wrote: »

I'd much rather ten year olds to dive and simulate that is a part of modern football, than follow the example of previous generations where some players went out to take players out of the game with serious injuries. Where any sort of physicality was okay as long as the ref didn't see it.
In my younger days playing underage football, yes I played the game so my point is more valid apparently, I saw some horrific stuff that was influenced by contemporary soccer that glorified physicality and traditional masculinity role models.
At one particular match, I was substituted as I was a bit of a Scholes tackler and saw from the side line one of my teammates smash the jaw of a kid two years younger than him because he was shoved by that kid in the back.
Kid was rushed to hospital and I would have much preferred my teammate to have dropped to the floor and simulated/exaggerated injury.

A dive is harmless and to show or exaggerate pain\injury is not a bad thing it just goes against the traditional ideas around masculinity. It doesn't help support hegemonic masculinity.
What is manly behaviour?

Personally I live seeing great athletes compete against each other, using every sinew and ounce of desire to win,to push themselves further to achieve their goals.
I have no problem with cheating as it's just another weapon being utilised,when it's done right. It's the use of your brain and intelligence when done right.

If anything it teaches kids a valuable lesson, that no matter if you do everything by the rules, there will be injustice in the world and you will lose out.
Cheating represents reality. people cheat all the time, speeding up for orange lights, not paying for parking, taking 'supplements' to achieve more physicality in rugby, pretending they were fouled in a match, etc.

And if anything if a great athlete still comes out on top despite the cheating of other players, victory is even more sweet.

Hegemonic masculinity, traditional male role models and being manly is all a load of cods wallop. An invention of past ages that some people nowadays take as the only reality for being a man.
It all a load of bull****ing.
Boys use to be dressed in pink as kids, as it represented a more powerful colour and girls were in blue as it was seen as more feminine. Different nowadays and masculinity is likewise an invention.

The type of brutal targeting you talk about at the top of the above post is long gone from the game.

Female athletes with a good sense of sportmansship don't dive or feign injury. The fact that the elite level of the women's game is ahead on this point is so very damning. Forget being a man, being a decent human doesn't involve the kind of ridiculous behaviour you are attempting to defend above.

Qualities like honesty, bravery and Inherant fair play are worth fighting for in the face of weakness like the above.

OwaynOTT

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

As predicted, you'll always have someone focussing on extreme outliers in threads like this. You do know that Rugby imposed a massive unprecedented penalty on those involved in the above incident?

There's diving in football because it gains an advantage. There's no diving in ruby as it doesn't really give them an advantage but rugby isn't free from cheating. That was the point and sometimes it is useful to use extreme examples and sensationalise something which you yourself are not adverse to.

Diving is no worse than refusing to roll away, handling on the ground, making second moments.
Actually making second movements is akin to diving. The player is pretending that he hasn't been grounded to gain an advantage, so he is simulating that he kept his feet.
Diving is simulating not be able to keep your feet.

And no surprise that you ignored that football in the past with its extreme physicality and reckless violence being a poor example to kids.
Rather you feel diving is to be iradicated because it sets a poor example because it go against this notion of manliness.

Diving is only cheating and as such is no worse than grappling in the box.