This rule is fella and people are having a pop at it. This rule could help in future prevent players going down holding their faces from these new superpushes to the chest that put players down like they been kod by Joshua.
I watched the game here and it will only be the jet lag that tired him. The tempo of the game was sooooooo slow it was painful to watch, he certainly won't have been over exerted. I hope we get the Aussies in the group stages, they are pi$$ poor, the game last night vs Honduras was L1 standard at best.
Problem is. there will be many repercussions to this rule and to prove if a player is hurt or not will be interesting to say the least...Consistency is the key factor.....can't see it my self, the game still struggles with the offside rule!!
I wonder the opposite also applies? For example - a player is booked for diving but the replay clearly shows he was pushed/tripped will his card be recinded?
?? also you are intimating a super push on Wrighty put him down and he held his face that's a different rule and you can appeal
You haven't answered the point about intent being the offence , as at the time a player attempts to decieve the ref he has no idea what the outcome is going to be. As regards your point about more serious implications if the opposition player is sent of, what if the 10 men play better , score & go on to win the game ? This ruling won't achieve what it is intending to achieve, will muddy the waters & I believe will potentially protect the perpetrators of violent behaviour.
I can barely understand your post Statistically a team with less players is more likely to lose. A fact. What if the 10 men play better, score & go on to win the game? I do not understand the point being made. This ruling won't achieve what it is intending to achieve ... Do nothing certainly will not. Retrospective action according to the SFA has brought not ceased players diving but has brought about improvement. Will muddy the waters ...No the ruling is clear and makes obvious distinction between attempt and success. I believe will potentially protect the perpetrators of violent behaviour .. I do not understand how.
tell that to Arsenal correct...at last something that makes sense.. but second bit is ***p depends on interpretation of 3 people based on sometimes will be dodgy video evidence /off ball etc
And all three will have to be unanimous in their decision to find a player guilty. People in the game, fans wanted something done about play acting and wanted people who know the game involved and here is something that will.
I'm in the camp where I think BW cheated but TBF Lee Johnson said BW has needed dental treatment since the Fulham game. Whether this is spin/fake news or what we'll never know. Certainly if this is true then surely Ashton or the like would have made the FA aware. Ah well, fingers crossed for Hillsborough.
Everton caretaker boss David Unsworth says a "dangerous precedent" has been set after Oumar Niasse was found guilty of diving and banned for two games. Really he aint the first so read the news he is the third, the precedent was set on the first one The Senegal forward is the first Premier League player to be punished under the new Football Association laws, which were introduced in May. Everton said they were "disappointed" with the ruling but have accepted the verdict and will review the FA's written reasons, which are set to be published on Thursday. There is no appeal get over it ...we did, but was of little consequence as would have knackered for his 2nd game ban!
Champions League last night with Seville player holding his head after he was fouled, clearly wasn't anywhere near his head and Henderson received a yellow card.....Nothing shown to Seville player!! As I predicted.......NO consistency!!
Is this only for fouls and Red cards? I watched the first half of Barnsley vs Leeds yesterday and Luke Ayling took a massive dive to try and deceive the ref for a penalty. When the ball went dead and the defender who Ayling tried to con took exception and a 10-15 player melee ensued and both were booked. Should the FA now come back and ban Ayling for 'simulation' under this ruling? Genuine question as I'm not familar with what the rule is on this, this season?
It is all retrospective.. simulation causing a player to be sent off .. could easily be a deliberate act to get rid of an opponent win the game 11 players v 10 and have 11 players on field for next 2 as he is banned after the game for the next 2. causing a player to be booked for the second time thus sent off causing a penalty simulation getting a yellow is not part of it... I think?
seems there is one rule for and one for.. obviously Man Utd players come under the rule for "those who play for a big club" and our player under the rule for " players that don't get paid a lot and in a lower club" Lukaku "He has kicked out at him. He has had two digs at him," Wright added. "Whoever is sitting in here making that decision - why haven't they pulled him up on it?" the whole thing is a FF........ BET the fa wont reveal the 3 names of the judges ...................
