Jump to content
IGNORED

Diving Ban


Reigate Red

Recommended Posts

But what about those that are booked / sent off for supposedly diving but it gets proved that they actually didn't?

There's no allowing you to have the player back on the pitch for however much of the game he missed & cost you a defeat because you were wrongly a player short!!

It needs to be dealt with there and then, video evidence needs to be brought in to deal with such incidents, not leaving it for a couple of days before they realise an offence has been made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BRISTOL86 said:

We're not exactly innocent. Tomlin and Wilbs both love a tumble.

Don't think i have seen such a bad dive as our trip to Reading last season apart from the one from Jason Robert's a few years earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bakes said:

Don't think i have seen such a bad dive as our trip to Reading last season apart from the one from Jason Robert's a few years earlier.

Can't remember the incident in question. But reality is all teams have divers in simply because they're allowed to get away with it. 

I've been saying for years it could be eradicated in months if they took a zero tolerance/straight red approach. 

Players would simply be too scared to do it. They would try at all costs to stay on their feet unless they absolutely couldn't. Would change behaviour very very quickly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tipps69 said:

But what about those that are booked / sent off for supposedly diving but it gets proved that they actually didn't?

There's no allowing you to have the player back on the pitch for however much of the game he missed & cost you a defeat because you were wrongly a player short!!

It needs to be dealt with there and then, video evidence needs to be brought in to deal with such incidents, not leaving it for a couple of days before they realise an offence has been made.

That's just unfortunately. Same as if it was to happen now.

However if someone dives, and it's proven they can then be suspended. 

The two do not have to go hand in hand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Laner said:

So has it worked in Scotland? Surely must be some data if they've had the rule since 2011

to a degree yes, but the clause to exclude Celtic from the ban put a lot of club's noses out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BRISTOL86 said:

Can't remember the incident in question. But reality is all teams have divers in simply because they're allowed to get away with it.

I've been saying for years it could be eradicated in months if they took a zero tolerance/straight red approach.

Players would simply be too scared to do it. They would try at all costs to stay on their feet unless they absolutely couldn't. Would change behaviour very very quickly.

Totally agree but i don't think you can compare us to Reading.

If someone could bring up the link to their penalty this season you will see what  i mean.

I have seen more pens at Reading in our last few visits than we seem to get in a season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Tipps69 said:

But what about those that are booked / sent off for supposedly diving but it gets proved that they actually didn't?

There's no allowing you to have the player back on the pitch for however much of the game he missed & cost you a defeat because you were wrongly a player short!!

It needs to be dealt with there and then, video evidence needs to be brought in to deal with such incidents, not leaving it for a couple of days before they realise an offence has been made.

It's still a step in the right direction & an improvement on nothing at all. It's getting out of hand now like it did in Italy before they brought this in.

Im not sure you could have video evidence used for fouls/dives throughout the entire game. The games would never end.

I'd prefer it if there was one challenge allowed per half from each manager if that was the case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Tipps69 said:

But what about those that are booked / sent off for supposedly diving but it gets proved that they actually didn't?

There's no allowing you to have the player back on the pitch for however much of the game he missed & cost you a defeat because you were wrongly a player short!!

It needs to be dealt with there and then, video evidence needs to be brought in to deal with such incidents, not leaving it for a couple of days before they realise an offence has been made.

Good point. I suspect it will discourage referees from taking action on suspected diving, preferring to leave it to the video review.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diving is all very well and Im assuming if it is a retrospective ban then the laws will be adjusted to make it a red card. If so all for it. But for me no one really seems to know what's hand ball anymore. Call me old fashioned but referees seem reluctant to give penalties for what used to be a clear handball. 

Or is it just me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Busterrimes said:

Did anyone else think this was a new rule for swimming pools to add to bombing and running?

 

Just now, downendcity said:

What about bombing and petting?

Just read Buster's post - must read the whole thread before posting!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see no mention of a fine.

A player will quite happily take one for the team if promotion, competition progression etc. is at stake.

I'd like to say hefty fines for both team and player has to be included so that it becomes personal and has other real consequences. A fine should also probably be percentages of players wages because some of the better paid can quite easily shrug off a minor fine.

There also needs to be escalating consequences for repeat offenders e.g. do it once, 1 game ban, twice in any given period a 3 game ban etc. Make the consequences real and this really will cut this shit out.

Having said all of this, this is a step in the right direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

Doesn't do much for any advantage gained on the day.  Big Sam thinks it's a rubbish idea and I agree with him.  He wants a sin bin, player into sin bin whilst video technology checked by 4th official, if innocent, back into play, if guilty, red card.  Can't see why that's not doable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Maesknoll Red said:

Doesn't do much for any advantage gained on the day.  Big Sam thinks it's a rubbish idea and I agree with him.  He wants a sin bin, player into sin bin whilst video technology checked by 4th official, if innocent, back into play, if guilty, red card.  Can't see why that's not doable.

Well he does have Zaha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MichaelRobartes said:

Brilliant, the game has been crying out for this for years. Just hope they're not scared to use it.

Exactly!

All the penalties for shirt pulling and assault (ask Flinty) in the penalty area soon died down.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tipps69 said:

It needs to be dealt with there and then, video evidence needs to be brought in to deal with such incidents, not leaving it for a couple of days before they realise an offence has been made.

The retrospective panel will be made up of three and a decision has to be unanimous for a player to be disciplined.

I understand your point but how can such a decision be reviewed promptly during a live game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bcfcfinker said:

I see no mention of a fine.

A player will quite happily take one for the team if promotion, competition progression etc. is at stake.

I'd like to say hefty fines for both team and player has to be included so that it becomes personal and has other real consequences. A fine should also probably be percentages of players wages because some of the better paid can quite easily shrug off a minor fine.

There also needs to be escalating consequences for repeat offenders e.g. do it once, 1 game ban, twice in any given period a 3 game ban etc. Make the consequences real and this really will cut this shit out.

Having said all of this, this is a step in the right direction.

Back in the old days if a player was suspended he would not be allowed in the ground, this stopped him training with the team, no training grounds then, and he didn't get paid for the length of the suspension. That would cost them a few bob these days but would never be allowed now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Reigate Red said:

About time:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39962886

Didn't realise Scotland already had this in place.

While I absolutely agree something has to be done to stop the pathetic embarrassment of a footballer feigning being gunned down at the lightest touch and rolling around as if a limb has been chopped off, i fear the message will be received by players that, as a star who is guaranteed to get in to a starting 11 each week, they will see any ban as time off work whilst still receiving thousands per week. Surely including a hefty fine or points deducted is the only way to stop it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Robbored said:

The retrospective panel will be made up of three and a decision has to be unanimous for a player to be disciplined.

I understand your point but how can such a decision be reviewed promptly during a live game?

You have one person who makes a quick decision with a replay. 

Easy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Loco Rojo said:

While I absolutely agree something has to be done to stop the pathetic embarrassment of a footballer feigning being gunned down at the lightest touch and rolling around as if a limb has been chopped off, i fear the message will be received by players that a star who is guaranteed to get in to a starting 11 each week, they will see any ban as time off work whilst still receiving thousands per week. Surely including a hefty fine or points deducted is the only way to stop it.

 

Deduction from wages is likely to creep in to contracts I'd imagine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CotswoldRed said:

Deduction from wages is likely to creep in to contracts I'd imagine. 

Fingers crossed.

Also, how encouraging it is to see Big Sam showing his full support for action. It's refreshing to hear when truly honest individuals within the game stand up to support these changes. Prat!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Loco Rojo said:

Fingers crossed.

Also, how encouraging it is to see Big Sam showing his full support for action. It's refreshing to hear when truly honest individuals within the game stand up to support these changes. Prat!

Indeed. Has anyone asked Sam why his players dive? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, CotswoldRed said:

You have one person who makes a quick decision with a replay. 

Easy. 

It's easy when it's obvious but these types of cons are not always blatant. That's why the view of three people is so important. 

One persons view is open to being questioned. Three people's view is not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Robbored said:

It's easy when it's obvious but these types of cons are not always blatant. That's why the view of three people is so important. 

One persons view is open to being questioned. Three people's view is not.

So make a decision if it's obvious and shelve a decision if not immediately clear for the panel to review. 

A brain dead simpleton can tell a blatant dive. Would also be helped by adding a new rule "players must attempt to stay on their feet at all times" (sliding tackles obviously different). 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, CotswoldRed said:

So make a decision if it's obvious and shelve a decision if not immediately clear for the panel to review. 

A brain dead simpleton can tell a blatant dive. 

How many times have penalties been awarded and then later replays showed that the player dived?  

It happens. Darren Bent "blatant" diving against City? Everyone but the referee saw the dive...............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Robbored said:

How many times have penalties been awarded and then later replays showed that the player dived?  

It happens. Darren Bent "blatant" diving against City? Everyone but the referee saw the dive...............

I'm saying a video ref can spot it immediately. Supporting the notion of an in-law referral. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
Just now, JamesBCFC said:

So a players team could have a man disadvantage while he is off the pitch after not diving, because it is being reviewed, not a great solution IMO.

So what's the answer?  Retrospective bans can affect the future games and maybe disadvantage the team that was 'dived' against, a sin bin causes a disadvantage, no action is an unfair advantage, immediate action, maybe right, but it maybe wrong after review, so a possible case of justice, or a disadvantage or advantage depending on the circumstances.

It would just be better if some footballers grew a pair and behaved like men instead of bloody Pansy's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer is reviews in games where possible. Will take far less time than it takes for players to huddle around the ref, appealing and feigning injury etc. That already takes forever and we have enough time for that it seems. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I support the principle but as is clear from this thread the practical application is not straightforward. Players seem compelled to dive sometimes as some refs won't award free kicks or penalties if the stay on their feet. 

I dislike video evidence as in most sports it's an abomination that leads to weak referees and weak decision making, as evidenced by the wimps in Rugby League. Whether or not we believe football refs man up they at least most make decisions. On the plus side of the video argument is if it gets rid of prats of pundits like Shearer because they have nothing to say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

I support the principle but as is clear from this thread the practical application is not straightforward. Players seem compelled to dive sometimes as some refs won't award free kicks or penalties if the stay on their feet. 

I dislike video evidence as in most sports it's an abomination that leads to weak referees and weak decision making, as evidenced by the wimps in Rugby League. Whether or not we believe football refs man up they at least most make decisions. On the plus side of the video argument is if it gets rid of prats of pundits like Shearer because they have nothing to say. 

Chicken or egg? 

I'd prefer to think refs are reluctant to give penalties because they know the bastards are always cheating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...