Should Ref's Red Card divers?

[Marc]

Rugby - the players get studs scrapped down their legs, heavily tackled all over the pitch yet they dont moan about it at all and get on with it.

Football - the players get a slight fair challenge and dive off into the air like the mighty Klinsmann and roll about in "agony" for awhile before the ref gives the free-kick, if he does'nt they get straight up and run about again as if fully fit. They also dive to get penalties as we all know too well.

Now take this scenario:

Ball going towards goal, defender sticks out arm and stops ball, Ref awards Penalty and sends off player for deliberate handball (form of cheating as he stopped a possible goal)- Red Card

Player runs into penalty box and dives claiming a penalty, ref Yellow Cards player and gives free kick to opposition (form of cheating as he;s trying to get a possible goal)- Yellow Card

Now the thing to look at here is that BOTH ways end up being a penalty if the player diving gets away with it, BOTH are considered cheating.

So is it time for refs to Red Card divers?

Simple question but lots to....discuss

 

[Blue&WhiteSea]

Yes but only in severe cases like guddjonsen (sp?) for chesea last week!

 

[REDLAND]

They already do in the UK, in Europe it appears to be as much part of the game as objects being thrown on to the pitch.

UEFA need to sort it out, and quickly !!

 

[Beeneys gloves]

I f***ing hate divers, especially when they do it like Gudjohnson on Saturday when he left his leg in to make it look like he was tripped.

Id like to see players sent off for it because then it might reduce the amount of diving in the game, but I cant see any referees being bold enough to do it.

Also theres bound to be players who are sent off when theyv been genuinely fouled so cant see it ever catching on, but I see your points.

 

[Marc]

They already do in the UK, in Europe it appears to be as much part of the game as objects being thrown on to the pitch.

UEFA need to sort it out, and quickly !!

they do? i aint seen an immediate Red Card for diving yet. Gets right on my tits when they get yellows.

 

[CHAPPERS]

Yup, but in a lot of cases it is hard to tell if a player has dived or not.

Authorities should be given the power to impose bans on repeat offenders.

 

[REDLAND]

they do? i aint seen an immediate Red Card for diving yet. Gets right on my tits when they get yellows.

Ohh a stright red for diving, i see ya point, but i don't see why not either,

 

[Icy Gull]

Leon most weekends then

 

[Easy 10]

It's dangerous to say "straight red for diving". I see where you're coming from Crabbers, but I think its often a very, VERY tough call for a ref to make on the spot. Its not always blatant, and I think you could end up with players getting sent off after they have been genuinly fouled, or genuinly lost their balance. So I'd say "no" to bringing in such a rule.

HOWEVER

I've said this before - there should be more retrospective action taken against players for this type of offence. Diving to win penalties and free kicks, feigning injury to get players carded, basically anything that cons the ref into the wrong decision should be punishable by a ban. A panel should sit and watch the entire match on video, looking SPECIFICALLY for those type of offences. If players know that their every move is being watched by a panel of officials, and that they could end up with a 3 match ban for diving or feigning injury, then they might think twice before they do it.

Mandatory 3 match ban for a dive in the box. Mandatory 4 match ban for getting a player booked or sent off (Ashley Cole should beware). If some of the decisions turn out to be harsh - well, tough. You live by the sword, you die by the sword. I am fed up to the back teeth of seeing players rolling around in mock agony, and then springing up right as rain less than a minute later. If they know they're flirting with a ban for doing that kind of crap, they might not do it at all.

 

[Jason Speaks]

I had a housemate at University who was in the Sporting lisbon youth team when he was about 14 and he told me they actually teach them to dive from a young age.
Instant dismissals is the only way to clamp down on this

 

[Marc]

It's dangerous to say "straight red for diving". I see where you're coming from Crabbers, but I think its often a very, VERY tough call for a ref to make on the spot. Its not always blatant, and I think you could end up with players getting sent off after they have been genuinly fouled, or genuinly lost their balance. So I'd say "no" to bringing in such a rule.

same can be said for hand balls though, was it deliberate? did ball strike hand? was the player moving his arm out the way but not quick enough? etc etc etc

These issues (that we are discussing in length today) need to be addressed and fast.

Agree with the panel, I've been longing for a panel of judges to watch games and see the elbows/dives/stuff the ref did'nt see. Footballers get away with too much and a panel watching over them will cut down on most illegal gameplay.

 

[Beeneys gloves]

Good point Easy 10, it would have made the punishment on Rivaldo in the World Cup much harsher, think it was Turkey they were playing, someone threw the ball at him and he went down clasping his head in agony so the Turk was sent off, tv showed him being hit in the midriff and it was disgusting, but he got off with just a fine if my memory serves me correctly.

Money doesnt hurt players these days as a fine is about the same as night out for them, missing matches penalises both them and the team, so it might make them think twice before throwing themselves too the floor.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Agree totally with Easy- people seem to think that it's black or white, that if a player goes down in the box and the ref declines to give a penalty then they're screaming for the attacker to be booked for diving.

But sometimes you can't help falling over as a result of a tackle, sometimes you just trip, or your momentum takes you down, without necessarily appealing to the ref for a penalty. That's why it's so hard for the ref, because he has to judge whether it was a foul or not, and whether the player was deliberately trying to con him.

Not a bad idea for all matches to be reviewed afterwards for "simulation" (as FIFA like to call it). As you say, that would makes the likes of Ashley Cole, Bellamy, Knight even think twice.

The only problem is that if you have it in the Premiership, you have to extend it to the Nationwide out of fairness. And while Sky might have 30 cameras covering every possible angle of Arsenal v Tottenham, the Albion would have to rely on one lone Meridian cameraman, who doesn't care about the game anyway, who's stuck up in the shed above the South Stand or behind a pillar at QPR and is more interested in drinking his tea than keeping up with play.

 

[Marc]

The only problem is that if you have it in the Premiership, you have to extend it to the Nationwide out of fairness. And while Sky might have 30 cameras covering every possible angle of Arsenal v Tottenham, the Albion would have to rely on one lone Meridian cameraman, who doesn't care about the game anyway, who's stuck up in the shed above the South Stand or behind a pillar at QPR and is more interested in drinking his tea than keeping up with play.

very good point, so to get round this would the FA need a seperate Panel in the stands at every game? Maybe just one person? But then you get the fact that they maybe obstructed by something at the time of the incident...hmmm interesting stuff!

What I would'nt give to be employed by FIFA to help sort out todays problems in football...dream job almost!

 

[Titanic]

Yellows for diving are fine by me. If it means the team has lost a goal opportunity then that is punishment enough.

 

[Hiney]

Every game should be subject to a video review on a Monday - they look at them anyway to sort out the stats - so that these cheating bastards can be punished. It's pretty much impossible for the ref to see things as they happen.

I was watching the Bayern Munich v Real Madrid game on Tuesday and one of the Bayern players went down after being 'kicked in the face' with a clear attempt to win a penalty and get the other player sent off. He rolled around on the floor clutching his face as if he had been hit with a hammer. The ref waved play on. The TV replays showed that, although the foot was high, no contac t whatsoever was made with the Bayern players face. After rolling around a bit he got on with the game as if nothing had happened.

If the players knew that a video panel would sit 2/3 days after game and would be giving out bans for this type of behaviour, they might have second thoughts about indulging in this sort of cheating.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

I think that any player who requires treatment should automatically have to leave the pitch for a fixed period- say two or three minutes.

That way, if you're genuinely injured, two minutes should be sufficient to get treatment, while the tarts who roll around like girls clutching a part of their body bearing no relation to the contact spot might be a bit more reluctant to demand the attention of the physio.

Most of the time the physio does sod all anyway, checks for breaks, rubs it a bit and sticks something cold on, so it's not as though players would be put at risk.

No treatment should be allowed on the pitch at all, apart from obviously serious injuries. I realise you're then asking the ref to make a judgement, but they should be stronger than they are at the moment. I hate to sound like an old git, but 15 years ago, you rarely had the game stopped for the benefit of an injured player. I think they only started doing it because of the York player who collapsed on the pitch and sadly died. But that was an extreme case, and the game is stopped too often now for "injuries" that a even 9 year old girl would be too embarrased to bother limping for.

 

[tedebear]

I think that any player who requires treatment should automatically have to leave the pitch for a fixed period- say two or three minutes.

That way, if you're genuinely injured, two minutes should be sufficient to get treatment, while the tarts who roll around like girls clutching a part of their body bearing no relation to the contact spot might be a bit more reluctant to demand the attention of the physio.

Most of the time the physio does sod all anyway, checks for breaks, rubs it a bit and sticks something cold on, so it's not as though players would be put at risk.

No treatment should be allowed on the pitch at all, apart from obviously serious injuries. I realise you're then asking the ref to make a judgement, but they should be stronger than they are at the moment. I hate to sound like an old git, but 15 years ago, you rarely had the game stopped for the benefit of an injured player. I think they only started doing it because of the York player who collapsed on the pitch and sadly died. But that was an extreme case, and the game is stopped too often now for "injuries" that a even 9 year old girl would be too embarrased to bother limping for.

spot on edna...

there is an element of dare I say it "cheating" in football - wether it be diving to get a free kick/penalty or even down to simple things when the ball runs out over the side line and both players involved signal that it is their own throw in - often when it is blatantly obvious who had the last touch....

I think this has actually come from the prima donnas in europe which has slowing crept across to us here in the UK - but it really isn't pleasant to watch at all - straight red card for diving is fine by me - however it is very subjective to ask a ref to judge this sometimes.

I'd personally like to see people being allowed to be judged by a video ref after the game and a ban or punishment imposed - or alternatively I've always wondered why the linesman wasn't allowed to walk around the corner to the "touch"line and view the action in the box area from another angle? surely this would assist as usually the ref is behind the play?

 

[Marc]

...I've always wondered why the linesman wasn't allowed to walk around the corner to the "touch"line and view the action in the box area from another angle? surely this would assist as usually the ref is behind the play?

then you'd get the problem of him not getting back to the touchline in time to see "offsides" as they are known!

 

[Easy 10]

I think a standard minimum of 3 minutes off the pitch if receiving treatment is an EXCELLENT idea Edna. It gives the player "proper time" to recover (if recovery is genuinely needed), and if it is someone feigning it, he knows he's going to be off the pitch for those 3 minutes while the game continues, so he might think twice before resorting to playacting.

As for the video panel for every match. I take the point that the lower down the league you go, the less camera angles a judge will have available to him. But players can still be caught diving or feigning injury - its sowing the seeds of awareness with players that they ARE being watched for this type of thing, so they know if they DO start diving or writhing in mock agony, an official after the game will be looking very closely to see if its genuine.

On the issue of fairness - yes, Sky have all the super slow-mo camera angles and close-ups. But the more high profile players have MORE of a responsibility to cut out the cheating, as they are being watched by millions worldwide. Its only right that they should be on "best behaviour" as they are supposedly the pinnacle of our game, and if THEY can't set an example to the rest of the League, then who can ?