[Football] Cheating - pretending to be injured to disrupt the opposition

[Uh_huh_him]

Head injuries are serious, so any player that has one so bad, it forces them to the ground, should leave the game immediately for assessment.
If the team don't have any substitutes left, well tough, but the same rule as for any other serious injury.

 

[Springal]

Head injuries are serious, so any player that has one so bad, it forces them to the ground, should leave the game immediately for assessment.
If the team don't have any substitutes left, well tough, but the same rule as for any other serious injury.

So few tactical fouls and bangs to the head by Webster, Dunk, Caicedo in a few mins reduces the other team to 8? I’m all for it!

 

[Seagull58]

People are advocating retrospective action of players feigning injury (head or not), but how would that work? A post match medical to prove they weren't injured?

Video evidence will often show no contact to the Head. If VAR picks that up immediately it should be a yellow card and a free kick. If it's not picked up till after the game it should be a 1 match ban. Alternatively, red card and 3 match ban.

 

[Bozza]

Head injuries are serious, so any player that has one so bad, it forces them to the ground, should leave the game immediately for assessment.
If the team don't have any substitutes left, well tough, but the same rule as for any other serious injury.

So opposing attacker sticks one on Dunk when challenging for a header.

Dunk comes off worse.

Under your rules, Dunk goes off.

The opposition then score the winner - maybe a header from a corner, taken with Dunk off the field.

You'd be entirely OK with this - it's just "tough" on the Albion?

 

[Guinness Boy]

So opposing attacker sticks one on Dunk when challenging for a header.

Dunk comes off worse.

Under your rules, Dunk goes off.

The opposition then score the winner - maybe a header from a corner, taken with Dunk off the field.

You'd be entirely OK with this - it's just "tough" on the Albion?

I know you're replying to another poster but I genuinely think any player with even suspected concussion shouldn't be on the field.

If you go down with a head injury and come off you should be fully checked out before making it back on. Minimum five minutes. The debate is if the sub is allowed. Having thought not last night in the midst of their cheating, the rational me this morning thinks a concussion sub should come on in those circumstances. With five subs allowed and nine on the bench it should be doable.

 

[Seagull58]

Maybe the referee could have the VAR watch some video replay and make an educated guess as to whether the player was faking it or not. The VAR could draw some stupid lines on the screen to determine if the player stayed in a position of pain long enough.

VAr SHOULD be able to determine rapidly whether there has been any head contact. If not, award a free kick for simulation.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

So opposing attacker sticks one on Dunk when challenging for a header.

Dunk comes off worse.

Under your rules, Dunk goes off.

The opposition then score the winner - maybe a header from a corner, taken with Dunk off the field.

You'd be entirely OK with this - it's just "tough" on the Albion?

No I wouldn't
But if we are taking head injuries seriously, then we have to accept that a serious head injury requires more than just a quick check.

 

[Seagull58]

Exactly. The referee must stop the game if there is a ‘head injury’ - all while Maheta Malongo & The PFA, Astle Foundation etc constantly lobby the FA & PL about head injuries and the research they have on the impact in later life it quite rightly won’t change.

With the gamesmanship problem they have 2 reasonable solutions - 1) 5 minute mandatory assessment off field where they can bring on a sub. They either reserve it or make it permanent after the 5 minutes.

2) only for the real extreme blatant cases then VAR intervenes to assess the potential of a head injury being a factor. But I don’t think anyone wants that…

I want 2). If VAR can see there was no head contact whatsoever the ref should award a free kick and a yellow card for simulation.

 

[Bozza]

No I wouldn't
But if we are taking head injuries seriously, then we have to accept that a serious head injury requires more than just a quick check.

Well, yes, but "serious head injuries" aren't what is being discussed here.

It's the non-serious head injuries or the we-need-to-check-if-its-a-serious-head-injury-or-not that are the problem.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Well, yes, but "serious head injuries" aren't what is being discussed here.

It's the non-serious head injuries or the we-need-to-check-if-its-a-serious-head-injury-or-not that are the problem.

Sure, but what we're talking about is the feigning of serious injury to stop the game.

 

[willalbion]

I've not seen Fulham doing that before and I hope it isn't a new tactic but it didn't seem to affect your dominance or reduce your chances (look at the stats) and we ended up with 5 yellows to your 0.

According to my new Fulham friend (in the Guardian site naturally) it is an oft used tactic, as is general shithousery. I’ve not seen enough of their games to know, hence I asked ZeeZee.

 

[willalbion]

A near copy and paste from another thread where someone suggested similar...

Albion defend a corner.​

​

Opposition player attacks the inswinging delivery and piles into Dunk who goes down due to head impact. It's not a foul - just one of those coming togethers that happens. Dunk, who came off worse, receives treatment on the pitch lasting for some time.​

​

Dunk goes off for an extended period, as per the protocol you suggest.​

​

In that time, the opposition win another corner, sling it in and, without Dunk there to defend it, nod home the winner.​

​

Is that the fairness you seek?​

Retrospective bans for feigning head injuries would be pretty simple to enact. It would have to be clear though.

 

[willalbion]

League standings has nothing to do with it.
Fulham did what they had to do to win, go sixth, be in the box seat for a European place.

If Brighton did what they had to do to win they'd have scored a blooming goal.
In hindsight Fulham could have made the unusual decision and swapped Leno for me, and still won 0-1.
Had the ref added 15 minutes of injury time, or even 15 hours, the score would have remained 0-1.

This place has been riddled with only child syndrome.
You lot have a 'friend' over but the rules of every game played a so weighted in your favour you can't lose, or else you have a tantrum.
Fulham don't have play by your rules, neither will West Ham, palace and Brentford, they will all do what they have to do to win the game.

If the Albion want to stop this happening it's quite simple - score a goal.

Christ stat - the majority of the discussion seems to be about it as a wider issue in the game. At least that’s where I thought the conversation had gone.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

I've not seen Fulham doing that before and I hope it isn't a new tactic but it didn't seem to affect your dominance or reduce your chances (look at the stats) and we ended up with 5 yellows to your 0.

None of them were for timewasting though.
4 fouls, 1 dissent

I suspect you have been well trained in how to disrupt games effectively.
At Craven Cottage, your game management was frustrating and excellent.
Yesterday was not.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

No. He had a head injury. Had the physios come on and subsequently treated his ankle, knee or whatever (which frequently happens following a face clutching and twittching act), then yes, 5 minutes.

I see a slight flaw in that plan.

The player would just point to his head and the physio would look at it.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

VAr SHOULD be able to determine rapidly whether there has been any head contact. If not, award a free kick for simulation.

VAR refs struggle with offsides are we now expecting them to judge player injuries!!!

There is more to it than a head contact, how they fall, jarring etc etc.

I don't think it's up to the Refs to judge this.

 

[Seagull58]

VAR refs struggle with offsides are we now expecting them to judge player injuries!!!

There is more to it than a head contact, how they fall, jarring etc etc.

I don't think it's up to the Refs to judge this.

We are talking specifically about faking head injuries. Yes, VAR should be able to see very quickly whether there has been any contact with the player's head. If they cannot clearly determine there was no head contact then they cannot act.

 

[Bodian]

I've not seen Fulham doing that before and I hope it isn't a new tactic but it didn't seem to affect your dominance or reduce your chances (look at the stats) and we ended up with 5 yellows to your 0.

Not booked for time-wasting though. All fouls, except for mouthy Robinson for dissent (think it was him anyway). Let's hope Fulham don't make a habit of it - they're generally one of our favourite 'other teams' on here.

 

[Taybha]

Fulham did their homework and it paid off, nobody should be surprised at how other teams now try to manipulate the rules to their advantage when they play us,I think it's a bit shit yes but if good teams think that's the way to get a result against us then weirdly it's a sort of a compliment to just how good we actually are now,so we move on. Here's a short clip of Fulham warming up yesterday

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

We are talking specifically about faking head injuries. Yes, VAR should be able to see very quickly whether there has been any contact with the player's head. If they cannot clearly determine there was no head contact then they cannot act.

There is more to a head/neck injury than contact with another player.

Prove they didn't damage themselves falling/jumping/landing, it would be nearly impossible.