|
|
Post by tommyred on Apr 20, 2012 18:54:31 GMT
Andy Carroll's ridiculously obvious and embarrassing dive vs Newcastle got zero coverage.
Neither did Dzeko's, or Johnson's against Fulham. Those were worse than Young's if anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by tommyred on Apr 20, 2012 19:01:29 GMT
Just funny that only when a United player does it does it become a "diving row"
|
|
|
|
Post by jimbonda on Apr 20, 2012 19:03:31 GMT
exactly my point.
yes young is out of order. but why is he now the face of diving, off the back of what is still in reality a correctly awarded pen?
there's a better case that carroll should be the poster boy. the geordie boy shamelessly trying to screw over the toon who put him on the map.
or bale, who's dived more than once this season and followed it up with an admission that effectively he'll continue to dive in the future?
as for drogba, he's got off lightly IMO. 8 years of it from that prick
|
|
|
|
Post by tommyred on Apr 20, 2012 19:06:05 GMT
Drogba's a disgrace.
Also hilarious is the way Ferguson does more than most managers to condemn his own player, when the majority would just brush it under the carpet (can you IMAGINE Dalglish admitted Suarez "played for it"?) and yet somehow even that isn't enough for the media....
Load of shit the lot of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnboy14 on Apr 20, 2012 19:08:09 GMT
They should just ban players for 6 games if they dive, im telling you it would eradicate diving overnight. Its one of the great plagues in the game along with debt and corruption at fifa. Just because barca are cheating bastards does not justify drogba doing it. I think he even surprised busquets. Theres no justification for cheating. its not true that only the winners are remembered because maradonas wonder goal in 86 didn't cover up the fact he was a dirty cheat for that handball. You think the people of Ghana have forgotten about suarez, no chance.
|
|
|
|
Post by tommyred on Apr 20, 2012 19:10:30 GMT
I've always found it hilarious the way here in England people think exaggerating an actual foul to ensure that it's given as a pen is somehow worse than a potentially career ending tackle like the one Balotelli got away with against Arsenal, or stamping on an opponent's head which again Balotelli got away with against Tottenham.
But obviously Young being a bit theatrical once or twice is worse than that.
Btw Johnboy that post is a load of bollocks. As if it's that easy to determine if a player has obviously dived and ban them for 6 games, and as if it's worth that sort of punishment. Maybe if refs actually gave pens without a player hitting the deck...
|
|
|
|
Post by johnboy14 on Apr 20, 2012 19:17:30 GMT
I've always found it hilarious the way here in England people think exaggerating an actual foul to ensure that it's given as a pen is somehow worse than a potentially career ending tackle like the one Balotelli got away with against Arsenal, or stamping on an opponent's head which again Balotelli got away with against Tottenham. But obviously Young being a bit theatrical once or twice is worse than that. Btw Johnboy that post is a load of bollocks. As if it's that easy to determine if a player has obviously dived and ban them for 6 games, and as if it's worth that sort of punishment. Maybe if refs actually gave pens without a player hitting the deck... Most people can spot a dive when they see one, its not rocket science. It might sound harsh but its what I think needs to be done. If people want to stamp it out then they need to stop moaning about it and actually fix the problem. I don't remember anyone comparing diving to dirty tackles, another useful justification for cheating then. |
|
|
|
Post by tommyred on Apr 20, 2012 20:00:47 GMT
Not saying that. I'm saying there are quite clearly worse and more dangerous things in the game and the fact that exaggerating contact in order to win a legitimate penalty because refs are incompetent (so not even cheating really) causes a bigger shitstorm than a dangerous,potentially leg-breaking challenge says a lot about the mentality over here.
There's plenty of examples of players jumping out the way of a dangerous challenge to avoid injury. Gonna ban em for 6 games lad?
|
|
|
|
Post by tommyred on Apr 20, 2012 20:02:05 GMT
And if diving is worthy of a 6 game ban what's a tackle like Balotelli's worth then? A season?
Gary Neville discussed this issue very logically without any of this sensationalist bullshit. I suggest you listen to him.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnboy14 on Apr 20, 2012 21:19:46 GMT
Just watched it and this is how professionals see it. Just put up with it then.
|
|
|
|
Post by tommyred on Apr 20, 2012 21:27:33 GMT
I'm actually asking you, if you think a dive (or even just exaggerating obvious contact) is worthy of a 6 game ban, what is a dangerous studs up tackle worth?
|
|
|
|
Post by SAF_Legend on Apr 20, 2012 21:50:24 GMT
Just watched Neville's discussion re diving. I think the answer is retrospective refereeing and video replays on the spot. Get someone(s) in a room with the camera on the ball and make calls if there is actually a foul or not. Feed the decision to the referee on the pitch to let him make the call.
A 6 game ban is a bit much, but probably 1- 3 is enough. IMO breaking someone's leg is much worse than someone trying to win a free kick or penalty.
On the subject of a dangerous tackle; it should be under review on the seriousness of the injury and the intent. A malicious intent to deliberately cause grievous harm should get a more serious ban i.e. 3 months or even the season. A lack of intent but serious injury should be at least half the ban of one that has intent IMO, since a lesson needs to be taught not to go in throwing dangerous tackles that could potentially end a fellow player's career.
|
|
|
|
Post by redcase on Apr 21, 2012 7:34:01 GMT
I for one am all for retrospective refereeing. If the refs miss something during the game (and they always do) dole out the punishment after the game. It sends the prefect message that even if you don't get caught during the game, you will still be punished after it. Especially for violent tackles like that tool Balotelli. Even for dives, give bans or whatever other punishment after the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by ScholesEvilTwin on Apr 21, 2012 10:06:56 GMT
A malicious intent to deliberately cause grievous harm should get a more serious ban i.e. 3 months or even the season. A lack of intent but serious injury should be at least half the ban of one that has intent IMO, since a lesson needs to be taught not to go in throwing dangerous tackles that could potentially end a fellow player's career. How do you prove intent? |
|
|
|
Post by fletchabey on Apr 21, 2012 10:11:51 GMT
Just watched it and this is how professionals see it. Just put up with it then. This is very worth watching. I used to think retro-active punishment for dives would be the solution but he made a good argument against it. Opens up a whole can of worms. Cracking pundit Neville has tuned out to be too and that not red tinted specs. |
|
