Jump to content

Sepp Blatter and diving


Viking Warrior
 Share

Recommended Posts

So the following in the news . I have always wondered how quickly mortally injured footballers seem to recover immediately they get to the touch line . I saw a Chelsea player hardly touched against us and I've went down as he had been hit by a HGV. Do they get some miracle jack Bauer jab that brings them back to live or just a bunch of con merchants . I agree with Blatters comments - what do other forum members think ?

 

 

Fifa president Sepp Blatter has proposed the use of a time penalty as a deterrent to diving in football.

Blatter feels players who get treatment but are not badly injured should have to wait longer before rejoining play.

"I find it deeply irritating, when the half-dead player comes back to life as soon as they have left the pitch," said

 

"The referee can make the player wait until the numerical disadvantage has had an effect on the game."

Blatter, the head of world football's governing body, added: "In practical terms, this is a time penalty and it could cause play-actors to rethink.

"The touchline appears to have acquired powers of revival which even leading medical specialists cannot explain."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't really about diving, it's more about the faking of an injury. I don't understand why play has to be stopped, there's no reason why a player can't be treated on the pitch with play continuing (as in rugby). Players play-act in order to cause a delay, if this option was taken away from them, only 'properly' injured players would stay down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like "the get up off the floor, almost collapse, next pace is a heavy limp, then a slight limp, followed by a laboured jog and ending with a 11s 100m" - It is like the end of Usual Suspects when Kevin Spacey character's limp miraculously disappears

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were attacking Chelsea, Aspilecueta stayed down in their penalty area, the attack lost it's momentum and the ball went out and the game stopped. Aspilecueta quickly recovered but the purpose was served the attack was over the bounce up and the ball given back with the opposition formed up. If he had to stay off in the dressing room for a doctors inspection/scan or substituted it wouldn't have happened.

 

We should have immediately had two forwards push up as he was playing them on side and not stopped. Play shouldn't be allowed to be stopped by the players and the referees shouldn't allow the ridiculous charade of giving the ball back or worst case a goal accidently scored then the opponents allowed to run through from the kick off to score.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a bad idea actually. If the physio comes on, the player goes off for minimum of 5 minutes.

 

I agree in principle, but what if a player is genuinely hurt, like the gash on lovrens leg the other day? This could actually back fire quite badly; currently if you're holding onto a lead you use this tactic to help waste time, but in future you'd be encouraged to inflict pain on the opposition by causing injury to them to reduce them to ten men etc which for 5 minutes at the end of a game you're chasing would be grossly unfair. people will always try and exploit the rules to their advantage so I could really see this happening. I think there would have to be an element of allowing a ref to allow a player back on if he felt there was genuine injury ... But then allowing refs (especially the current useless crop) to make subjective judgements is probably not a good idea either.

 

I think the status quo is unfortunately the only way to go. Treating players on the field while the game continues is ok in rugby, but I just can't see it working in the more fluid game of football - they'd be in the way far too much. Ultimately if everyone played fair we wouldn't have this problem, but footballs way past this point unfortunately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree in principle, but what if a player is genuinely hurt, like the gash on lovrens leg the other day? This could actually back fire quite badly; currently if you're holding onto a lead you use this tactic to help waste time, but in future you'd be encouraged to inflict pain on the opposition by causing injury to them to reduce them to ten men etc which for 5 minutes at the end of a game you're chasing would be grossly unfair. people will always try and exploit the rules to their advantage so I could really see this happening. I think there would have to be an element of allowing a ref to allow a player back on if he felt there was genuine injury ... But then allowing refs (especially the current useless crop) to make subjective judgements is probably not a good idea either.

 

I think the status quo is unfortunately the only way to go. Treating players on the field while the game continues is ok in rugby, but I just can't see it working in the more fluid game of football - they'd be in the way far too much. Ultimately if everyone played fair we wouldn't have this problem, but footballs way past this point unfortunately.

 

If it's a genuine injury then they will need that time to receive treatment anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea of a compulsory 5 minutes off the pitch when receiving treatment just sounds ridiculous to me. Genuine injuries do happen, and with this rule a player is effectively punished for being injured, whilst a player that manages to injure another player is rewarded by getting 5 minutes playing against 10 men. Treatment on the sidelines regularly takes 2-3 minutes anyway so you'd be left with the situation of a guy just sitting there waiting for a few minutes like a 'sin-bin' where the sin was to get injured.

 

The suggestion of play continuing whilst a player gets treatment on the pitch also clearly would not work in football. Although a winger cutting in and dribbling round a player lying in the area, or playing a one-two off the physio would be pretty funny.

 

I don't really see any way of solving these situations where judgement of whether a player is being honest or dishonest is clearly subjective, other than the minimal effect of ridiculing players who are blatantly being dishonest. It's just another area of football lost to bad sportsmanship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea of a compulsory 5 minutes off the pitch when receiving treatment just sounds ridiculous to me. Genuine injuries do happen, and with this rule a player is effectively punished for being injured, whilst a player that manages to injure another player is rewarded by getting 5 minutes playing against 10 men. Treatment on the sidelines regularly takes 2-3 minutes anyway so you'd be left with the situation of a guy just sitting there waiting for a few minutes like a 'sin-bin' where the sin was to get injured.

 

The suggestion of play continuing whilst a player gets treatment on the pitch also clearly would not work in football. Although a winger cutting in and dribbling round a player lying in the area, or playing a one-two off the physio would be pretty funny.

 

I don't really see any way of solving these situations where judgement of whether a player is being honest or dishonest is clearly subjective, other than the minimal effect of ridiculing players who are blatantly being dishonest. It's just another area of football lost to bad sportsmanship.

 

I agree (see my above post) but what about lets b avenues post saying you don't implement it if there's a foul given, only when there isn't. There might be some mileage in this suggestion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't allow any treatment on the field. If the injury is incapacitating then stretcher or walk them to the dressing room, otherwise they have to get to the touchline if they want any treatment. I bet 99% carry on playing, the seriously injured probably know they can't continue and can be substituted immediately. Physios treating on field, holding up the game while the player recovers and immediately comes back on at most at 100% fitness and the farcical throw in/non competitive bounce up is a nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think retrospective punishment is the way to go. Play the game as is and give reds/yellows after the event for obvious fraud.

 

It would be a brave ref who'd send Oscar off for the dive against us. However if he knew he'd get a red post match I don't think he'd do it.

 

Punishment by yellow isn't sufficient as strikers are unlikely to get two in a match.

Sent from my RM-821_eu_euro1_276 using Board Express

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So...obviously "diving " is not only a problem in the Prem.

 

Blatter trying to save face again.......but if he's going to allow punishment for diving, will this be the result of reference to video evidence?......and if so let's use that method for determining penalties as well. The Sky commentator gets it right everytime with a 5 second replay....so why not allow the fourth official the same right....and the many millions of viewers too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So...obviously "diving " is not only a problem in the Prem.

 

Blatter trying to save face again.......but if he's going to allow punishment for diving, will this be the result of reference to video evidence?......and if so let's use that method for determining penalties as well. The Sky commentator gets it right everytime with a 5 second replay....so why not allow the fourth official the same right....and the many millions of viewers too.

 

This is ironic, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})