Retrospective diving bans

[Postman Pat]

I'm sure there will be some (in the form of ex-playing pundits more than likely) who will speak against it by saying that not every incident can be conclusively proved via video replay. However, the threat of likely bans for dishonest behaviour should instil an honest approach from players which has, for far too long, been sorely lacking.

Will need a ref, a ex-player and an ex-manager on the panel I would think. If all agree there is a dive then there is a ban, if they can't agree then the benefit of doubt stays with the player, but they will know they are being watched and might amend their behaviour in future.

 

[TheDuke]

What about the all in wrestling in the area before corners and free kicks

You beat me to it PS. How on earth do the refs still allow all the pushing, shoving, obstruction and general fouling inside the penalty areas. It really is so blatant. I've never understood why the refs blow up for the same fouls outside the box other than the resultant penalty is more severe. A foul is a bloody foul.

 

[Easy 10]

What about the all in wrestling in the area before corners and free kicks

What about it ? This is specifically about simulation, about conning the ref into a wrong decision.

We all know wrestling in the area goes on, and its down to the ref to control it. We don't need retrospective reviews for EVERY incident, foul and decision in a match, that would be ridiculous. But simulation / diving has always stood out as a particular disease in the game, and one that has never been adequately addressed.

Retrospective reviews won't eradicate diving, but IMO, once the bans are being dished out, it will have a big impact on it.

 

[KVLT]

What about the all in wrestling in the area before corners and free kicks

The new NIKE range?

 

[Triggaaar]

I wouldn't object to that, but its dives that have seriously affected the outcome of the match, or resulted in wrongful punishment of an opponent that should be prioritised IMO.

A dive in the middle of the pitch isn't such a big deal, but it's serious when someone dives to get a penalty, even if they don't get it. If they're only punished when given a match winning penalty, it's not much of a punishment.

2 games is the starting point, with incremental increases for your repeat Zaha's.

I can see some merit in increasing the punishment for serial offenders, but since actual diving is cheating, I don't see why anyone should get off lightly. Only my opinion of course, I've long wanted to see retrospective bans.

It's not an easy law to get completely right though. For example, there are cases where someone is moving at speed and anticipates a nasty challenge so tries to protect themselves, then they don't actually get hit/hit much. Perhaps players should have to put their hand up to say they're appealing for a decision, like you would in cricket

 

[Easy 10]

A dive in the middle of the pitch isn't such a big deal, but it's serious when someone dives to get a penalty, even if they don't get it. If they're only punished when given a match winning penalty, it's not much of a punishment.

I can see some merit in increasing the punishment for serial offenders, but since actual diving is cheating, I don't see why anyone should get off lightly. Only my opinion of course, I've long wanted to see retrospective bans.

It's not an easy law to get completely right though. For example, there are cases where someone is moving at speed and anticipates a nasty challenge so tries to protect themselves, then they don't actually get hit/hit much. Perhaps players should have to put their hand up to say they're appealing for a decision, like you would in cricket

I think a starting point is to target the dives that have clearly had a material impact on the game, although I wouldn't rule out rolling it out to ALL perceived diving incidents, if we're going for a zero tolerance approach.

And you're right, its not an easy law to get right. Sometimes on review its still not obvious whether a player has dived or not, and in those instances, that player should be given the benefit of the doubt (with the exception of Zaha obviously, as he's well known to have built an entire career on it). But where we can clearly see on review that there was no contact, and no reason to go down other than seeking an advantage, that's when the perp should be clobbered.

As for players putting their hand up to appeal a decision - they do that every damn time already, be it for a foul, an offside or a bloody throw in !

 

[Arthritic Toe]

This is long overdue. If implemented it will wipe out the play acting in a stroke. Hope its also applied to players faking headbutts/punches by going down clutching their face etc.

 

[Postman Pat]

But where we can clearly see on review that there was no contact, and no reason to go down other than seeking an advantage, that's when the perp should be clobbered.

Hopefully it will also cover the instances where the attacker has instigated the contact by leaving their foot in, or dragging a trailing leg. I hate that more than diving.

 

[Doc Lynam]

#zahasrule

 

[Easy 10]

Hopefully it will also cover the instances where the attacker has instigated the contact by leaving their foot in, or dragging a trailing leg. I hate that more than diving.

A Vardy special. Yes, those are even more insidious as they're even more difficult for the ref to call.

Again, if its obvious from the video review that that's whats happened then they should be punished, same as a "fresh air diver". Although those incidents are definitely much harder to call.

 

[Gazwag]

If they added a "pretending to be injured" bit to it Preston would struggle to put a team out next week.

 

[Seasidesage]

MOM in the game he played yesterday.

Although its fun to laugh at Zaha I seem to recall one of your present wingers being all to quick to find the floor as it was mentioned over and over again in your last match thread.

(sorry I know I should not have posted on this thread)

I'd sell Winnie now if I were you. Once that comes in, you'll get about 5 games a season out of him...

 

[scamander]

I'd also welcome a holding your head/face when no contact in that area has been made ban

 

[SAC]

There are very few obvious dives like the Snodgrass one, mostly there is minimal contact, like the Ali one, but with people arguing if he should have gone down.

It seems to be that fans of the player diving can very clearly see that he was fouled whilst fans of the opposition unanimously agree that he dived. Occasionally you will get someone who breaks the mould but they will say that it just makes up for when x dived in the 1964 FA Cup replay.