The problem with cheating is that all players do it all the time. Its instinctive. For example throwing your hand up to appeal for a throw-in. It may not be perceived as much compared to a blatant dive but it is still cheating. The biggest problem though is that everyone complains like crazy when it is done TO them but how often do you hear managers properly condemning their players for diving? Or for players to haul someone to their feet (from their own team) and tell them not to behave like a spoiled brat. It just does't happen. And if a player dives, wins you the penalty that just happens to win you the league……what are you going to do? Maybe it is hypocrisy that is the problem. About 35 years ago I was playing in a big volleyball match against Cambridge University. They had match point, the ball came towards me but also towards the line, in or out, not long to make a decision. I let it go but stepped across so the line judge couldn't see it, just in case. I called it out and it was given out. We won the match, no-one cared and to this day I don't know whether it was in or out. But it still bothers me that I might have won the game by cheating. But then again I am the sensitive type
You can't call the cry "Our Ball" as cheating, it is asking a question, however if you shout it loud enough there is faint chance of influencing the decision, no harm in that, it is down to the Officials to get it right, that's their job.
There is also the element of 'if I get lucky this time, it will make up for the calls against me.' Most sportsman see a difference between accepting a wrong call in your favour and blatantly trying to fool the ref. A player might never dive, but wouldn't argue if a decision went in their favour. Morally a fine line, but football, although it might feel like it, isn't actually a religion.
I know what you mean but I don't necessarily agree. Most times the players know exactly who's throw it is. They aren't asking a question, its like you say, they are trying to influence the decision. And the fact is, if a linesman genuinely isn't sure and one player just walks away whilst the other appeals with conviction, which way is that throw likely to go regardless of the truth? Its like the "should one walk" in cricket debate. I think you should even though I can understand the argument that says you will have been wrongly given out in the past so you are just addressing the balance.
I agree with Lff. You could certainly argue it's cheating if the player knows the decision should go the other way. If you want to get picky about it, cheating is rampant in most sports. Cricket has been mentioned a couple of times. you get catches claimed that have bounced, batsmen waiting for the umpire to make a decision when they know they've edged behind, I'm sure bowlers and fielders appeal for lbws and catches behind when they know the batsman isn't out etc etc. As we're talking morals then is it morally acceptable to tell a batsman to expect a broken arm? More broadly, is sledging (or any method of trying to put the opposition off their game) really morally acceptable?
I think we can be a bit cynical about the motivations of players sometimes. There are just as many moments of sportsmanship in the average match as there are of gamesmanship. Something you often see is a player putting the ball out for an injured opponent. It's now officially the ref's decision to stop the game but still players feel compelled to act against their interests and put the ball out unprompted. Not because they fear condemnation, after all the rules are now clear that players are to play on until the referee intervenes (and some players will), but because they feel dishonest taking advantage of that situation. Something else you often see is a contest between two players, a flying winger cleaned out (ball and all) by a recovering full-back for example, both players get up (or one is sportingly pulled up by the other), brush themselves off and clap hands together in an acknowledgement of a contest firmly but fairly fought. Another common example is of a player cutting short celebrations of a big win to console a defeated opponent. These are not the actions of cold-blooded, win-at-all-costs mercenaries. There is more of a camaraderie between the players than people sometimes think and though examples of dirty or sneaky play are easily found, football is far from devoid of goodwill.
I for one have read it and thoroughly enjoyed your point of view adding that in the main I agree with you. In my view Hypocrisy does not come into it. You obviously would prefer to be judged on your own standards and actions as does your close friends. Is that though not though how they became close friends, because of the similarities to your own standards and actions? I applaud you for that. In professional sport sadly over the years the "win at all costs" or "any way you can" mentality has crept into the game. We will all have seen the changes from Diving, or pretence of being injured to drug taking or even match fixing all in the name of wanting to be famous and or winning. What makes it worse is that they do these things proudly and really believe they are top sports people if they can get away with it!!! Sadly when someone who genuinely deserves the praise because they have become a winner or top of their sport without the need to cheat. The stigmatism of "did they cheat or get to the top honestly" always hangs in the air. Often they do not get the accolades they truly deserve. The last batch of Olympic winners is maybe a prime example. Football is no different........and for good reason I might add. For a lot of us "oldies" it is a crying shame as we have been through most of the afore mentioned era's. Where winning meant doing it without putting someone in hospital or slyly bringing the ball down with your hand to score or diving in the penalty box to get a penalty, where the referee was given total respect even if you knew he had made a mistake, also, yes if you actually committed a foul you would tell the ref. Hard to believe maybe, but true......and yes I played a very high if amateur standard. However it was the same in the professional game at the time......Tommy Traynor taking out Stan Mathews in the very early 50's, at the Dell and telling the ref it was his fault. The one and only time I have seen a ref change his decision! You youngsters may think because of this it was not a good game of football.....in my view it was just as hard and as robust trust me. The difference was that players respected each other, even the hard players that left a lot to desired in the way they tackled and believe me there were one or two of them. To get your name taken by the ref or to be sent off was a total disgrace and you would be fined by the club for it. However it used to be good for the fans as they too used to respect each other. Just good old fashioned banter and a decent pint after the game discussing it's merits and fortunes....yes guys.........Those were the days of real supporters something perhaps we are slowly but slowly getting back to perhaps?
Here's a clip of a facist [video=youtube;EWdf5ZLbtYo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWdf5ZLbtYo[/video]
Here's a different slant. Do any of the posters who say they wouldn't like Suarez in the team, listen to The Smiths (OP, if you're still here, that includes you).
Well Morrissey believes the Chinese are a lower species and is perfectly happy to call people 'blackfaces' in his autobiography. Was wondering if their may be a little misguided hypocrisy going on with anyone saying they'd not welcome Suarez.
Isn't that a little aggressive for someone with the epiphet "the Peacemaker" in their name? Was Nigel badly treated? Yes, he was, but he's gotten a reputation as a good manager and is doing pretty well with Reading at the moment, so all's well that ends well. Is the comparison with Suarez apt? Not really.
