http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24105809 Big debate on it at the moment. What do you reckon? For me, it is flawed. Refs get it wrong on both accounts. Dives for genuine fouls. Fouls for dives. The only way this can work is video replay or post match referral resulting in a ban.
In theory it should be harshly punished but it would probably be too difficult to police on the pitch due to different angles, dubious/debatable levels of contact and other grey areas.
easiest option for me would be retrospective action, whether the ref has seen it or not. but i would make it a 2 match ban. i reckon the retrospective action thing could be utilized allot more than it is.
This. Retrospective action is the best course and ban them. However, where does it end? We have loads of players trying to claim a corner or throw in - that's blatant cheating and lying? There are players who foul and lie to the ref that they got the ball? Cheating comes in many forms but it's only diving that gets the publicity because it was 'brought' into the English game by foreigners.
I find its only diving in the box that gets masses of attention, but a dive is a dive where ever it takes place on the pitch and should be punished the same. Its a fine line between using retrospective action to help with controversial incidents and refereeing the game after its finished. it should be used more, but knowing where to draw the line maybe difficult.
Only way to eradicate diving is by issuing a severe enough punishment. However, this could only be applied when 100% certain that it was a dive. Then there is the crazy two footed lunging tackles, surely these are worse than diving? Would these receive severe punishment too? To a lesser degree, there are the other red card fouls too, these are also worse IMO but it could just be a player mistiming a tackle by as little as one second or less! IMO, any 100% clear cut dive should be a five or ten game ban and the club should be deducted a point too. Harsh I know, but it would soon stop them diving! I just don't know how the above could be covered with this and where to draw the line.
I think its stupidity. Its PC kneejerk stuff. Frankly how many times have you seen the refs actually apply the rule consistently? I've regulary seen refs wave get up at guys and have thought... if there was no foul and you feel that strongly why are you not booking him... why do refs get that wound up over a guy on the ground if they saw contact... even if fair contact??? For me the simple home truth is there is a perfect system in rugby where a citing officer is appointed for EVERY game and both teams can cite a player for foul play and he also looks himself. the bans are fair and consistent and dare i say it stuff like the suarez 10 match ban v leg breakers doesn't come into it. make stuff up on the fly is always the problem. even if the ref gives a pen the card cfor diving should be applied AND AND mind you the ref should be punished as well. Just cite players and fine clubs retrospectively. its enough to curtail some of it.... floppers should get banned that way but ther eis NOTHING you can do about teams like palace losing the game on the day is there? people will always try to get away with stuff.
Fining clubs is a waste of time. They are not going to be bothered unless the fine is at least seven figures, that's not going to happen! Hit the clubs where it hurts, points or player suspensions. I know its the players that do the diving but until their retrospective managers / clubs have an issues they will continue to do it.
Should work both ways then. The atrocious decisions against Suarez at Sunderland and Norwich (especially THAT one!) should have resulted in bans for the ref and the respective defenders who called for Luis to be booked when they knew damn well they'd fouled him (and succeeded in the case of O'Shea and Twatkinson).
I don't think punishing the referee's would be beneficial. They are under enormous pressure as it is, applying punishment for incorrect decisions would just make the pressure worse. They would be scared of making a wrong decision. They'd claim not to have had a clear view and even take up bad positions to avoid having to make a decision (hide if you like). We should be supporting and encouraging officials, we'll only see the best officiating if they are relaxed and confident. They are not poor referees, they wouldn't have made it to the level they are at if they were!
I think this is the very best way forward that won't interfere with the flow of the game, otherwise we'll get interruptions every few seconds as players challenge decisions and you have to go to the replay ref looking at 10 angles over 2-3 minutes. I mean, a 3'o'clock kick off will be finishing after 6 if you start down this line...
I agree with this. When so many players are out to con the ref, with the tacit approval of their managers, then there's no point in them complaining when the ref gets conned. A return to a more honest approach generally would be ideal, but sadly I can't see that happening any time soon. I think the retrospective punishment idea is the only one that is workable at the moment. Perhaps a new system whereby accumulation of retrospective cards results in points being docked might work. For clubs to change their philosophy would require them to suffer for the transgression, and as pointed out, fining doesn't hit them hard enough.
Red cards for diving would open up a massive can of worms and would just create a new problem, you don't like the imaginary card waving? Imagine if this rule was put in place!!!
I haven't got a problem with card wavers. I've done it myself in games when I get chopped. I think there are bigger issues in football then those people.
Think the Rugby way is the best way but what about this: 3 man citation panel; a ref, an ex player that's not played for either club and an "independent" Rule: a retrospective red card for a majority decision against a player for diving. A reversal of any direct action or reward from the dive, i.e. any card against "tackler" and any goal resulting directly from the free kick or penalty and the result adjusted accordingly points wise. So, if a dive gets a one nil win? Due to a penalty or free kick, Turns into a draw. But if a team wins 3-0 it's only 2-0 etc. It wouldn't punish a team obviously better than the other just because a player dived if they romp home but interestingly if a team go a man down and 1-0 down from a penalty from what they believe is an obvious dive then they can gamble on not chasing the game, cling on to a one nil defeat hoping it turns into a draw after review. Might be boring but fairer. Would also have teams clamp down on their divers!
It wouldn't work. What if the score was 1-1 then does that mean that the draw turns into a win? The other team might say they would have gone all out to score an extra goal if they knew that the score was really 2-1... A real can of worms. Readjusting results after the match would never work.
