Just what is wrong with Arsene Wenger's head?

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Any any other sport or in the real world anyone caught cheating is dealt with so in this case why should there be any difference? What Quins did in rugby was a deliberate attempt to cheat the ref and opposition and have paid for it and so should Arsenal

 

[sten_super]

As I stated in the other thread, the problem is that this should now be treated as a precedent (indeed, I hope it is). Anyone caught deliberately diving should be punished after the event with a charge and a two-match ban. Unfortunately, what will happen, similarly to the case of the Lithuanian who was banned for diving after doing so to win a penalty against Scotland, is that it will only be in cases where a fuss is kicked up (generally those involving Scottish teams, with full plaudits to the SFA) that the offence will be punished.

Oh and just to add, for a day or so now I didn't bother opening this thread as I assumed it was someone laughing at a silly photo of Wenger. Disappointing!

 

[drew]

Any any other sport or in the real world anyone caught cheating is dealt with so in this case why should there be any difference? What Quins did in rugby was a deliberate attempt to cheat the ref and opposition and have paid for it and so should Arsenal

The trouble is you are totalling missing the point. Nobody is denying Eduardo cheated and was rewarded with a penalty, the problem is the total lack of any consistency or even a signal of intent. They have singled out Eduardo when this is something that has been going on for years, probably more so on the continent. It is just one element of cheating so why don't Uefa state what exactly they are now going to crack down on.

It would also be useful if they and Fifa confirm they have no objection to the FA using video evidence to sanction players and or clubs irrespective of whether the referee saw the original incident. Presumably, they will as this is exaclty what they are doing now.

 

[Superphil]

Once again there are some very dumb comments on an NSC thread. .....

As for video refs, I don't want to start watching a game of football at 3.00pm on a Saturday and still be ther come 6.00 because of video interruptions and sitting around wating for a decision.

I think that is a bit of a dumb comment. In sports that do use the video evidence that does not happen, I'm talking rugby and cricket in particular, where the use of the video judge is quick, simple and effective. In addition, if it were added to our game, it would almost certainly stop some of the cheating, the situation at Bristol City the other night would have simply been dealt with, a goal to Palace as it rightly should do, as well as instantly confirming whether the ball was over the line or not in countless other instances.

As for additional linesmen behind the goal, again, the effect would be to reduce the instances of diving, because the cheats would know they are more likely to be found out, along with much much heavier punishments from the authorities, 90% of cheating could be removed almost overnight. The other benefit being that they could more closely see if the ball was over the line, meaning it would be effective for football at all levels, where vidoe kit would be too expensive to install (Blue Square, Ryman etc.)

 

[Superphil]

The trouble is you are totalling missing the point. Nobody is denying Eduardo cheated and was rewarded with a penalty, the problem is the total lack of any consistency or even a signal of intent. They have singled out Eduardo when this is something that has been going on for years, probably more so on the continent. It is just one element of cheating so why don't Uefa state what exactly they are now going to crack down on.

Absolutley right, IMO, UEFA and FIFA need to do this, and perhaps this is the event that will encourage them to do it sooner rather than later.

 

[Gazwag]

I am not necessarily going to defend Wenger as in the past he has been a bit myopic but how can you criticize him when he was probably over 50 yrds from the incident and the ref who was closer, gave a pen. He has subsequently stated he didn't think it was a penalty.

I was only being flippant comparing the fact that I didnt actually watch the game so didnt see the incident with the fact that in some interviews directly after games in the PAST Wenger has said he didnt see an incident he was being asked to comment on.

 

[Finch]

Any any other sport or in the real world anyone caught cheating is dealt with so in this case why should there be any difference?

Thats not really the case. One of the things that drives me nuts with rugby at the moment is the constant cheating at the breakdown. Its not called cheating though, its called a "professional foul".

The Eduardo dive was dodgy, he may have got a slight clip from the keepers knee, but he was going down regardless.

Singling him out all of a sudden though is ludicrous and to call it a Witch hunt is fairly accurate.

1-2 video challenges per team per match should be all it takes. Make it so if the video ref cant make up his mind after viewing 60 seconds of replays, its not clear cut enough for a penalty. The video ref can recommend a yellow card for diving, then all of a sudden the payoff is unlikely, and the risk of punishment is high.

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

How can people say Eduardo has been singled out? UEFA has to start somewhere to try and eradicate this cheating, who do people on NSC suggest that UEFA start on then?

My solution would not be bans, or referees behind goals, it would retrospective points deductions or for games like the one Eduardo dived in replays. The club which felt they have been cheated against would have to provide video evidence to support this, there would also be measures in place to stop clubs from claiming too much and for dives that everyone can see weren't. Perhaps allow each club ten claims a year?

 

[auschr]

As I stated in the other thread, the problem is that this should now be treated as a precedent (indeed, I hope it is). Anyone caught deliberately diving should be punished after the event with a charge and a two-match ban. Unfortunately, what will happen, similarly to the case of the Lithuanian who was banned for diving after doing so to win a penalty against Scotland, is that it will only be in cases where a fuss is kicked up (generally those involving Scottish teams, with full plaudits to the SFA) that the offence will be punished.

Oh and just to add, for a day or so now I didn't bother opening this thread as I assumed it was someone laughing at a silly photo of Wenger. Disappointing!

Except banning the Lithuanian did nothing to the Scottish game, Hearts were vilified as they always are, while the "proper" Scotchmen that headbutt, dive, and cheat their way to victory are acceptable, just blame it on the foreigners and pretend it never happens to one of our own.

 

[sten_super]

Except banning the Lithuanian did nothing to the Scottish game, Hearts were vilified as they always are, while the "proper" Scotchmen that headbutt, dive, and cheat their way to victory are acceptable, just blame it on the foreigners and pretend it never happens to one of our own.

Absolutely, and as I say that is part of the problem. It is important that the Eduardo decision becomes a precedent for all incidents that follow, rather than a red herring of a decision.

 

[auschr]

Something does need to be done, video refs, giving managers a number of attempts to challenge a decision, or just punishing play acting for what it is. Make it so players want to stay on their feet instead of going down. I wouldn't mind a few minutes of finding out the truth about a dive, than using those same minutes with the players surrounding the ref and the managers going ballistic. However, I know the Football League did some tests with goal line technology but Fifa/Uefa said they couldn't use it outside of reserve matches. So the chances of the governing bodies accepting technology seems to be slim.

 

[drew]

I was only being flippant comparing the fact that I didnt actually watch the game so didnt see the incident with the fact that in some interviews directly after games in the PAST Wenger has said he didnt see an incident he was being asked to comment on.

Don't necessarily disagree with you but most of his comments are made the moment he enters the tunnel and is dragged away for the baying armchair audience and an immediate interview with whatever channel. If I was in his shoes and hadn't seen proper replays of any incident I was being asked to comment on then I would plead the fifth aswell. You only have to look at some comments from other managers who rant about the ref only for considered replays on MOTD to show the ref was right. Steve Bruce is a good one at that. Alternatively, they could all take the Fergie approach and not give post match interviews.

I think that is a bit of a dumb comment. In sports that do use the video evidence that does not happen, I'm talking rugby and cricket in particular, where the use of the video judge is quick, simple and effective. In addition, if it were added to our game, it would almost certainly stop some of the cheating, the situation at Bristol City the other night would have simply been dealt with, a goal to Palace as it rightly should do, as well as instantly confirming whether the ball was over the line or not in countless other instances./QUOTE]

The difference between the sports you mention and Football is that there are far more stoppages. In cricket there is a natural stoppage after every ball is bowled. In Rugby, you don't get a situation where there is a massive pile of players over the try line and someone gets up and runs down the other end of the pitch and scores a try.

I am not keen on video interrupting football during the course of the match. I would however agree to any system that immediately detects when the whol of the ball has crossed the goal line, possibly by sounding a buzz in the ref's earpiece.

As for additional linesmen behind the goal, again, the effect would be to reduce the instances of diving, because the cheats would know they are more likely to be found out, along with much much heavier punishments from the authorities, 90% of cheating could be removed almost overnight. The other benefit being that they could more closely see if the ball was over the line, meaning it would be effective for football at all levels, where vidoe kit would be too expensive to install (Blue Square, Ryman etc.)

You are talking about an additional two officials at every game and that costs money, assistant refs in the first round of the cup earn £145 so that is likely to be another £300 per match x 23 so that is £6,900 per season. Also, how exactly is someone behind the goal going to be decisive in determining if the ball is over the line?

I believe the best deterrent would be using video retrospectively and suspending guilty players for say 10 games. Clubs would soon put pressure on players to stop diving as the alternative is to pay their weekly salaries for them to be sitting in the stand.

How can people say Eduardo has been singled out? UEFA has to start somewhere to try and eradicate this cheating, who do people on NSC suggest that UEFA start on then?

My solution would not be bans, or referees behind goals, it would retrospective points deductions or for games like the one Eduardo dived in replays. The club which felt they have been cheated against would have to provide video evidence to support this, there would also be measures in place to stop clubs from claiming too much and for dives that everyone can see weren't. Perhaps allow each club ten claims a year?

If he hasn't been singled out then are you telling me that in all the televised games so far in Europe this season there hasn't been one single instance of a player going to ground without being touched prior to Eduardo? It is irrelevant if it has happened and not resulted in a penalty, it is still cheating in whatever part of the pitch it takes place.

 

[The Uninvited Guest]

The Spik took a dive. Just accept the fact that he's a cheating foreign Bastard, you frog tosser.

 

[The Large One]

But Wenger's issues are on two levels.

1. Eduardo didn't dive
2. He is being singled out for diving

To which, in my opinion, I'd say

1. Bollocks. Even the thought of 'going down' is in itself fraudulent to the spirit of the game. There is nothing that goalkeeper did to make Eduardo fall to the ground, yet down he went.

2. Conjecture. It's the inconsistency from UEFA that drives everyone nuts. However, it doesn't mean to say UEFA are wrong to be punishing Eduardo. It means they are wrong to not punish everyone else.

So for Wenger is missing the central point. Again.

Seeing as he would be the first to moan his bollocks off if Arsenal had been the victim of this, he also has a polarised and hypocritical view of the concept of fair play.

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

If he hasn't been singled out then are you telling me that in all the televised games so far in Europe this season there hasn't been one single instance of a player going to ground without being touched prior to Eduardo? It is irrelevant if it has happened and not resulted in a penalty, it is still cheating in whatever part of the pitch it takes place.

OK I take your point then, perhaps he was singled out, but you could accuse UEFA that with whoever they chose to hopefully start a purge on cheating.
They have to start somewhere and continue to do it whenever a case like this comes up.
I would like to see the FA start up something similar to this but with points deductions or replays (if the dive or cheating had a direct result on the game) instead of bans.

 

[Superphil]

You are talking about an additional two officials at every game and that costs money, assistant refs in the first round of the cup earn £145 so that is likely to be another £300 per match x 23 so that is £6,900 per season. Also, how exactly is someone behind the goal going to be decisive in determining if the ball is over the line?

Small change comepared to installing video equipment and operators for the equipment at 92 league grounds, also assistant refs don't earn that much in Div 3 games. As for decisions, the Bristol City one would have been decided, the Tottenham one at OT woud have been decided, Watford v Reading would have been decided, as would a huge number of other instances, of ball over the line, diving, shoving in the penalty box etc. It wouldn't be perfect, but neither would video evidence, as has been said before. Buzzers and bells, all very well, but can it feasibly be done at 92 grounds, plus Conferences, plus Ryman, where do you draw the line?

I believe the best deterrent would be using video retrospectively and suspending guilty players for say 10 games. Clubs would soon put pressure on players to stop diving as the alternative is to pay their weekly salaries for them to be sitting in the stand.

Absolutely, that would be an almost perfect solution, add into that the players have a clause in their contracts whereby they do not earn when they are banned for these offenses, and you have a solution, IMO. You don't need to take away the refs human interaction, you don't need to stop/start the game.

 

[drew]

The Spik took a dive. Just accept the fact that he's a cheating foreign Bastard, you frog tosser.

Take it from that that you are from the very deepest darkest rural Sussex, still probably speaking a dialect that is unintelligable to most!!!! (are you still entrenched in preparation for the invasion by Napoleon?

 

[Buffalo Seagull]

In addition to any bans, perhaps players caught diving could face a bit of public humiliation

 

[withdeanwombat]

Clear penalty.

Saw it from here.

 

[Two Professors]

If a professional footballer jumps over a keeper, to avoid personal injury,costing him, & possibly his club, loads of beer tokens,would that make him a cheating,diving,etc!