One of my biggest gripes with this topic is actually the word 'dive'. I would rather see the word simulation used by everyone, especially the media (and indeed isn't this what the laws themsleves use?).
Just because a player didn't 'dive', does not mean that he hasn't exaggerated his movement. A player can be touched, but then exaggerate his fall. He's not dived, he's clearly been caught, but he's exaggerated his fall.
Only recently when Bale got booked for his fall in the penalty box, I read a lot of people saying that he shouldn't have been booked because there was contact. Well yes, I clearly thought there was contact too, but so what? For me, contact shouldn't instantly rule out the possibility that the player has cheated - and I take that view to the extent that I don't actually see why you can't have both a foul being given, and the player fouled being booked for simulation.
The only thing that the contact on Bale told me, is that he hadn't thrown himself to the ground unaided (like Defoe did in the exact same game). It didn't tell me that it was or wasn't a penalty, it didn't tell me that Bale had or hadn't simulated.
