I'm probably the only one that doesn't consider diving one of the seven deadly sins apparently. Sure it should be punished, but its not the worst thing in the world.
I think Murder, Rape, racially motivated killings, and bombing poor countries - are marginally worse.
I like MITO's idea of a siting officer for retrospective bans for the player AND officials that cock it up! Players should still get carded for diving, yellow at worst but they then have the right to appeal that decision after the match, if they didn't dive and the siting officer/committee agree, Yellow card is wiped off, if its a stupid appeal and the player did dive, it gets upgraded to a red, that way, any sane player and team would only sanction an appeal they believe they can win. Players that dive and get away with it, then the opposition can appeal after the match to get that player banned, they can't appeal against the result, each team would, for example have 3 appeals a year, if they fail, with an appeal, they lose it, if they are successful, they get to keep their number of appeals intact, again, this should prevent teams from making appeals that clearly have no chance of being successful. The same goes for the Refs, far too often ref that cocks it up one weekend is the 4th official the next before taking over a game again the week after that! Need a points system for these guys, cock it up often, its 1 game ban, cock it up again after that, looking at 3 games, keep on cocking it up and find another profession, harsh it maybe but how many times would our employers tolerate sub standard performance before they address it?
Honestly I'd just get rid of the current crop of referees and train the next ones to be better at spotting dives. Encouraging consistency and fairness, and then some more training to go with the additional training. Eventually we wouldn't complain too often and its still a part of the game - just better regulated. That would be better without destroying referee influence (post match appeals).
Outside the box thinking: Instead of punishing divers... give them less incentive to dive... make fouls legal.
and yet in rugby refs are treated like gods and are never abused. If something works in one sport why not... he hooter at end of game in rugby league or the red timer in rugby union works fine... the hawkeye in cricket worked for years. the citing rule sin rugby are very sensible and work well. I see no reason at all why video technology Or citing would diminish the ref. they AID the ref. the ref knows there are less cheats cos the citing officer and opposing clubs will say what happened and the video technology allows for a reasonably quick examination of what that ref deems important to look at. in short no sport should be insular and fail to see what works in other sports. I remember when one ref got miked up and tony adams was heard for 90mins abusing him with foul mouthed rubbish all game. refs were never miked again. that's cowardly by the fa IMO.
Moyes just said in a press conference that we can expect more dives from Young, and Ferdinand said that's it's all part of the game and defenders should learn to cope with it.
I get the feeling they don't want the officiating to be perfect or the game would become too sterile and clinical, and that's why they drag their feet on technology becoming involved. After all it's the refs decisions that make for the most debate after the game.
Something I agree with. Basketball is awfully boring with no controversy. Hockey rarely has controversy. And so conversations about it revolve around the goals, the assists, the points, and that's it. Sterile sports are awful. What makes football beautiful is the debate, the injustice, the mistakes. Now that can't come at the cost of integrity so a balance has to be struck. What would be the point of forums if all decisions were made by a super computer in the FA HQ? No offsides, biased refs, contentious reds, etc. Those are worth more than the occasional free kick and yellow being correct.
well thats certainly an interesting point of view. I mean ok sometimes rugby as my example can be awful "artifical" look at the new scrum rules for instance... you knows its artifical. or look at how badly some team (australia) handled appeals in the ashes using the technology. however..... I will never agree that only being able to salivate over a goal or two ehre and there makes things sterile.... we've had 3 months of endles transfer sagas, that will not change nor does it apply to some sports mention ed and honeslty the "act itself" will still generate debate. example. young dives for a pen and palace are down to ten men... it still happened. maybe a video would over turn maybe not.... look at how savage the aussie are towards broad for not walking! there is still lots of controversy. but being able to have justice after the fact is at least something when its fair, understood and consistent. Again in rugby a citing is not any good to the guy who got eye gouged or kicked in the head. nor will it prevent the sly high tackle or blocking off or a player to score a try etc etc. Football with a citing system and a klaxon instead of fergie time will still be dramatic. I can't see offsides going to video. I can see the palace foul going upstairs for in or out of the penalty area etc.
No those sports are boring because scoring is so common that it's not worth celebrating each one individually, you just wait to see if your statistics beat the other team's. High scoring games also mean the underdog wins less often. Football will always be a game about a handful of key events so there will always be important events to discuss. I don't know why people want terrible decisions to be kept in the game for the sake of something to talk about.
There is definitely a difference between high scoring games and low scoring games as far as emotional response. Someone scores a goal... big emotional event. Someone nets a basket... smaller emotional event. F1 car overtakes on track... let off the fireworks. NASCAR car overtakes... meh... is it last lap? No? Means nothing then. This isn't saying low scoring games are better... just the emotion is more concentrated rather than spread out. All-in-all any sport can be good or bad depending on your individual attachment. Something as mundane as a ball spinning around red and black squares fascinates many because the one playing has a vested interest.
