Unless I've got this wrong here, the ref is only supposed to issue a caution when they are 100% sure that is was a dive, and that there was no contact. My point is, whatever you may think of the way Bale goes down, there is no way in my mind that the referee in either of the recent cases could be absolutely sure that it was a dive. Therefore, worst way round, he should just not award the free kick for the foul. But it's certainly not a yellow card.
Well he was sure from what we saw, and thats all you can ask of a ref. We have all had the benefit of slow-mo replays since to arrive at our conclusions here, the ref has one, at speed. If the most notable thing the ref see's in that second is a theatrical fall, its enough to cast doubt over anything else he saw, or more to the point, thought he saw. Refs base decisions on what they think they saw.
He doesn't need to be 100% sure about anything - there is no mention of this in the laws so he just uses his best judgement about all incidents. Personally I think simulation is too hard to call in the game. I think it is really important to stamp it out so I favour the RU approach of 'citing' the offence followed by a massive ban if the cheating is proved.
By the way the yellow card offence is described in the laws as "a player attempts to deceive the referee by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled (simulation)". Bale didn't feign injury, nor did he pretend to have been fouled (as he was fouled). Therefore the yellow cards were unjustified.
Can't blame Bale for the acrobatics as that is his mind reacting to the many times he has been fouled and crocked eg the Adams tackles where he felt studs coming onto his Achilles. That shot hurts if you have ever had it done. Hurts enough to not be forgotten and hurts enough for the mind to take evasive action. The moment where a foul like the one against Fulham becomes a tendon cruncher like Adams tackles, is a split second action. The way Bale as some say 'dramatises' is to avoid that split second and he just 'jumps' over it now, thus only a little clip of the foot. Therefore making it look exaggerated. If anyone is to blame then blame the refs for not protecting him in those situations where he did get crocked. As now he has a mental block which obviously is at the forefront of his mind whenever he gets the ball. We all have mental blocks created by others actions. In this case it's a lack of protection at them times when he's got battered.
There seems to be this "rule" in football that "if a player makes a contact, you have a right to go down", so what is this "right"? is it a sign that cheating is acceptable, as long as you get touched? Being fouled, does not mean the player has to go to ground, what has happened, is players, attacking players mainly, believe they have a right to go to ground, if they receive contact. Now, only Bale knows if he is going to ground with intent to win a free kick, rather then stay on his feet, or if he is actually tripped or touched in a way, that he has no contact. However, what is Bales choice, is to act dramatic and prance about to the floor! Bale is one of my favourite players, as is Ginola, as is Klinsmann. All three players I love/loved watching but aside from having great natural talent, they dived throughout their career, and gained reputations for it. If you want to believe they had no choice and were doing it to prolong their career, then thats your call, BUT regardless of the fact I rate them so highly, they are/were divers and I want to see Bale cut it out of his game.
Time may have distorted my memory of Ginola, but I don't remember him being a diver. I can remember him having a reputation for doing it, but I don't remember it actually happening. I can't find any clips of him doing it, either. I can remember us not getting a penalty for some ridiculous length of time with him in the side, though.
Maybe my mind is playing tricks but I remember him having a rep for it and Klinsmann was the biggest diver in the game until he played for us for that season, as he wanted to change his reputation for it. Bale is gaining a reputation as the biggest diver in the league, along with suarez, and its because of how dramatic he is.
To my mind if the Ref is going to accuse somebody of cheating ( which is basically what he is doing by issuing a caution) then he should have a bit more evidence than what he thought he saw!..
This is why it is so difficult for referees to get it right, especially in a tackle where the definition of a foul is not contact but 'carelessness' and in a trip where the laws say it is a foul to 'trip or attempt to trip an opponent'. So if a player attempts to trip someone but he jumps over the attempt and then loses his balance and falls - it is clearly a foul under the laws but most people will say 'there was no contact - it was a dive'
Then why not just jump and stay on your feet, sorry mate, your whole defence of Bale falls flat because of that. Jumping to avoid injury is one thing, as a player it happened to me, and if you think ones coming you kind of hurdle an anticipated challenge with the intention of keeping going...no? jumping and still going to ground is seen as looking for a foul. There just isn't time to process in your mind half of what you've put, "ooh, that hurt when Adam clonked me, I'd better jump out the way this time" nonsense mate, nonsense, and if you're going to go through your career worrying about where the next hack is coming from you may aswell give up!
Yeah it is hard for refs, so i'm sure you can understand why Bale got booked, as imagine being a ref in a premier league game and having to make a decision within a second, you're either seen as rewarding play acting by giving the free kick, or accusing some falsely of being a diver, I don't envy their job! This is why i find it frustrating to see pundits say "he had a right to go down", as players have it in their mind "if he touches me, I have a right to go to the floor" which i believe is cheating.
Sorry, but again, if you're not completely sure, you don't accuse somebody of cheating. Refuse to give a foul, o.k. Fine. But, the cards should be reserved for the absolutely blatant stuff. If a Referee is making that kind of decision in a split second, on what he" thinks" he saw. That's not enough to make those kind of accusations. As AVB has pointed out, Bale is now not far from a ban thanks to two false accusations of being a cheat.
Lol Notso I don't think he registers all that info everytime but a history and memory of it has obviously made itself sit firm in Bales mind. I understand what you say about 'hurdling' but throw in the added pressure of trying to gain an advantage plus no one being honest enough to admit it when they have committed a foul has made it into a dog eat dog world where you try to gain an advantage or the advantage falls to the oppo I.e they get the ball and start an attack. Yes he dramatises it but I can't blame him as it's a case of desperate needs, desperate measures...gets no protection therefore protects himself.
How many times have you seen a ref waving play on and telling a player to get up? It happens all the time. Bale's being booked now for nothing and it's clearly a problem, as he's been carded for 'simulation' more than any other team in the division, let alone player. The most that any other player has received has been two (Suarez, Balotelli and Torres) and Bale's picked that up in 4 days, with both decisions being clear mistakes.
Well thats turned out to be a pretty poor plan, all he's done now is rack up cards and he's looking at a ban for 'totting up' now...desperate is spot on!
And we were all getting on so well! I think some of you in the 'diving' camp are saying that he falls in an exaggerated manner is that correct? Does anyone think he is a cheat? I think the 'not diving' camp, which is where I am, are saying that it is irrelevant how a player falls. We have tried to suggest reasons for the apparent theatrical manner he sometimes adopts but as Boss says only Bale can answer this. Bale has: So do you take Bale's word for it or not? My feeling is that he would not be frustrated with the label if he did not think he was innocent. I believe Kliinsmann was often accused of diving unfairly that is not to say that either player has never dived. Ginola speaks out because he understands the frustrations that Bale is going through. Maybe it's because I played left wing and the most potent part of my game was to tear at speed up the wing being clattered many times when doing it, that I support Klinsmann, Ginola and Bale. Maybe the defenders view the game differently, which of course they do. Whatever, I do not believe that Klinsmann, Ginola or Bale were/are cheats they fell just like they played their football spectaculary.
A little bit naive Spurf, of course Bales official stance is as he says, and you say the manner of fall should be irrelevant, quite right too in essence, but the fact is, that it is relevant now. Refs are told to be on the lookout for simulation, so how a player falls goes a long way to making that decision whether its right or wrong. We've all been tackled, but not once have I seen fit to throw my arms out and head back like some dying swan, if you want to jump out the way its not difficult to stay on your feet in most circumstances.
Do you think they practice how to dive? I've tried it a few times but I react too slow, get clobbered then laughed at by my own team mates for a **** attempt at rolling around in agony.
Refs are told to look out for simulation and of course they will get it wrong sometimes as Foy did, but that was not all he got wrong in this game or others. Maybe Foy is just not a very good referee. Having said that it is very difficult for refs to make many of the calls they are asked to make, that's why PowerSpurs suggestion of citing is a good one IMO. How a player falls should not be part of the judgement unless you are pre-judging the issue. The ref needs to see whether contact has been made or not and whether that contact constitutes a foul, nothing else. Anything else is prejudice. The logic of your argument is that we support Foy for his decision to book Bale. I do not! Re. the dying swan, that is about perception and is an argument that neither of us can prove one way or the other. I am far to old to be naive btw and it's a poor argument anyway.
