as for the cheating i told my gooner mate that you wil get them soft peniltys aganst lesser teams but you wont aganst the big teams i blame the players for trying to con the ref
I lost faith in refereeing and officiating after the Chelsea v United game this season. Standard of refereeing has deteriorated since the 2006 World Cup in my view but that was the tipping point. Many other games have made me think I.e QPR v Chelsea, Stoke v Spurs, Chelsea v Barca, Liverpool v United and the 10-12 stonewall penalties we've been denied for fouls on Hazard, Torres and Oscar. We receive our fair share of decisions, but not nearly as many as the competition (United) of which there is institutional bias. The playing field is far more level lower down in the PL and in the Football League.
Like with kcspurs I blame the players first and foremost. But I blame Arsenal and the likes of Pires, Reyes, Henry and co who really got the ball rolling in that respect
Quite angry about the Walcott dive. Not called by any pundit that I have seen, but absolute disgrace. The Goons are getting a lo of these now, but Bale (who has never won a penalty by diving that I can recall) is the one with the bad reputation.
That's because it wasnt a dive. Get rid oi your biased hatred of a rival team. Cazorla dived, Bale dives all the time, Walcotts wasnt a dive.
I can only assume that the majority of PL centre backs are closet gays. This must be so, because every time there is a corner given, you can see them trying to have intimate sexual relations with opposing strikers.
No bias, watched it very carefully and at no point does the defender put his leg across Walcott and there is absolutely no reason for him to go tumbling.
Actually I don't think Walcott dived - he may well have got his legs tangled with Beausejour but it definitely wasn't a foul. I've never seen Bale dive either - he sometimes trips himself up by taking evasive action from desperate tackles though. The two most blatant dives recently are Cazorla and Jenkinson. I think the only solution to this form of cheating is for the referee to ask the player to confirm what happened. If the 'fouled' player is found by clear video evidence to have both simulated and lied to the referee about it then the penalty should be a 10 point deduction and a ten match ban. That would make them think twice before cheating.
You're having a laugh...if you've never seen Bale dive, you can have watched many Spurs games. Cazorla and Jenkinson have both done one blatant dive each, yes, no excuse. Bale's done loads, don't excuse him.
I think Bale has dived, but I am also fairly sure that we have never benefited from it, and I don't think he's ever dived in the area in order to win a penalty. He also has a track record of others coming after him to injure him, which does give some kind of background to his behaviour - not condoning it but he knows for example that people like Charlie Adam could easily end his career. I don't think people like Carzola and Walcott have been targeted in the same way yet they are the ones that have "won" penalties recently and even worse Bale is the one that is regularly condemned for it.
Until refs are given vid replay help, something we all get on tv in under a minute, don't moan about ref incompetence, the speed things happen today is too much for the human eye imo. There are still inexplicable decisions I agree, but in the main, most contentious decisions just happen too quickly in a blur.
I agree with that. The decisions I object to are the ones that are given when nothing happened, not those that missed something that did happen. You cannot give a penalty just cause the forward goes down, you have to see the contact (and then decide on intent). I guarantee the ref at Wigan didn't see a foul on Walcott because there wasn't one. It's not a balance of probabilities thing, it should be beyond reasonable doubt.
Spot on (the last sentence might not matter if the refs actually only act on what they have seen). But this also means that a ref can rarely caution someone for simulation because he won't normally be sure that there was definitely no foul. Simulation has to be punished retrospectively
The video evidence is obvious within seconds - in other words in a shorter time than the Stoke goalkeeper takes to ready himself to kick the ball (or other things that take longer than they should). People say it will slow down the game but that's rubbish, and if you're concerned put a time limit on it. Say for example if the evidence isn't conclusive in 30 seconds then the original decision stands or it can no longer be used. For this reason I think an experienced ref should be in the stands with the video replay - gives the experienced refs a useful thing to do after they're forced to stop running around - and they can actually overule the ref on the field ... if they do so in time. As for the ridiculous "they can't do it in the premiership as they can't do it on Hackney Marshes" argument, well most games on Hackney Marshes often don't even have linesmen, which is rather different from the 99 officials that Europa League games have isn't it... so why is it ok to be different in this respect but not in terms of video evidence? And as PowerSpurs said, simulation (I prefer the word cheating) has to be punished retrospectively - which is difficult for the FA because they'd then have to punish Carzola for a penalty that was given during the game and affected the result, thus admitting the ref was wrong. Basically I doubt they have the bottle to really stand up to cheating.
I've watched almost every Spurs game and I'm telling you that I've seen no incidents when I've been certain that Bale deliberately simulated a foul when there wasn't one. I wouldn't accuse any player of cheating without really firm evidence. Actually I've only been sure about anyone diving a very few times - it is really hard to tell when players are moving fast if there was sufficient contact for someone to lose balance.
I've seen Bale dive, embarrassingly badly at times, too. Most of what he does that's called diving is either an attempt to avoid being hit or preparing for contact that never comes. He's largely created his own reputation. What annoys me though is that he's also been clogged to bits on numerous occasions with commentators claiming it's ok and outright attempts to hurt him have gone unpunished. He's also been repeatedly punished for being fouled, especially in recent weeks. As a result he's now almost entirely unwilling to put himself in a position where he'll face challenges when he's moving at pace, as he'll almost certainly come out of it badly, whatever happens. He steadfastly refused to get involved in a number of 50/50s against Stoke, for example. Arsenal have a ton of players that dive, yet the Goons are unwilling to accept it until they leave. I'm sure that they've all noticed Nasri and van Persie 'going to ground' since they've headed North, for a start.
