Diving Ban

[MichaelRobartes]

1 minute ago, 42nite said:

Exactly!

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

 

 

Ah now, was it the Swindon match where we should have had three or four penalties in the first half?

[redysteadygo1]

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!

[Rossi the Robin]

I read the title and thought it was Tammy again, on his way back, up the M4

 

[Loco Rojo]

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.

 

[CotswoldRed]

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. 

[CotswoldRed]

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. 

[AppyDAZE]

5 hours ago, BRISTOL86 said:

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

Do any of these play anymore?

[Loco Rojo]

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!

[CotswoldRed]

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? 

[Robbored]

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.

[CotswoldRed]

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). 

 

 

[Robbored]

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...............

[CotswoldRed]

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. 

[Up The City!]

7 hours ago, Busterrimes said:

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

At first I read it as if players will be banned from driving a car and that this rule already applies in Scotland 

[JamesBCFC]

5 hours 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.

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.

[Maesknoll Red]

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.

[CotswoldRed]

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. 

 

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

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. 

[CotswoldRed]

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. 

[joe jordans teeth]

So it only matters if a player dives to get a player sent off or Wins a penalty,can carry on diving willy nilly in the centre of the park tho by the looks of it

[petehinton]

Will probably put an end to Stuart Sinclair at Rovers, too. The guy is an embarrassment to the sport.

[JamesBCFC]

15 hours ago, Maesknoll Red said:

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.

There is no easy answer.

Personally, think the new rules plus a retrospective yellow added to dives in other areas of the pitch, where any advantage gained is lessened. Plus fines to both the club and player where there are repeat offenders AND a points deduction at clubs after a certain number of retrospective cards are handed out.

Fines for the players would scale for the wages they are on.

E.g Tomlin gets on. His first one would just be the yellow/red.

His second would be a fine of a weeks wages for him, double that for the club.*

His third would be 2 weeks wages for him, double that for the club.*

After the third, whether Tomlin or someone else, the club would gets a points deduction.* If Tomlin then his fine and the clubs, doubles again.

 

*Placeholder amounts.

 

No solution is perfect, but there are clubs where diving is/was actively coached (I seem to remember someone in football coming out with this during Mourinhos first time at Chelsea).

Discourage the players, and discourage the clubs.

 

Edit. The restrospective yellows in other areas of the pitch may not seem like much, but they can lead to a ban for the player from yellows tallying up, or a fine for the club on disciplinery grounds if they then have 6+ bookings in one match. The fines for the players that I mention would also stand, for player and club.