No it's not.

It's a bit like trying to enforce the law against murder with DNA testing instead of without it.

And as Klaus and I have already stated why should diving be treated as special?

Biggus wrote:

Cheating and fouling are cheating and fouling- all the laws of the game are clear they just need consistent enforcement, if Kos was sent off and a penalty awarded there should be a sending off and a penalty awarded at every game where there is a corner kick because that exact same thing will go on.

We don't need special punishments for diving special punishments for time wasting special punishments for pretending to be seriously hurt etc.......

We already have the concept of retrospective punishment for violent play such as elbowing so here we have the wedge widening to a non dangerous foul?
Are we going to have dna testing for speeding as well as murder?

Biggus wrote:

And as Klaus and I have already stated why should diving be treated as special?

It shouldn't and I haven't argued that.

The difference would be emergent rather than top-down, as diving is one of the "sneaky" offences (like subtle elbows) where a player specifically avoids being seen by the ref. As a consequence diving would be dealt with more often by post-match video evidence than, say, two-footed tackles.

Well thats what we're saying- "Sneaky offences" theres a 100 of them- from defenders getting up close and personal at corners, goalies scooping back balls that have crossed the line and players feigning injury to break up play.
None of them worthy of a panel of review.

Well, that's a matter of opinion and I disagree. Dives, for example, are usually to win penalties which frequently decide matches. That's why diving bothers people - because it's cheating and it changes the result.

If Michael Owen tossing himself on the floor at WC98 was just a nice bit of drama without a penalty attached, would any Argentinians still be upset about it 15 years later?

It's not a huge deal for a couple of officials to review footage of significant incidents, cite anything for further investigation by a qualified panel, and for that panel to apply a suspension to any player found clearly guilty of something. Happens every week in the AFL.

Grappling in the penalty area at corners etc is also rife but if the ref acts at all he just blows the whistle tells the players to cool it and then lets the corner be taken.

I think people are pissed off at the Kompany decision because they see what Kos was punished for let go 9 out of 10 times at corners.

Well, once again, it's not quite the same thing is it? You're talking about situations that are seen by the ref and therefore acted upon.

Happy to leave it there anyway.

The ball isn't in play when what Biggus is talking about happens anyway. If it continues after the corner is taken, invariably a penalty or freekick is given. The ref then gets a grilling from the pundits...

The clock is still running and rarely is a penalty given (not saying it's right).

Not really that fussed about it.

I think video evidence should only be brought in to clear those who have been carded for the action and not to prosecute (except in off the ball instances where someone has deliberately tried to get someone sent off).

Defenders are just as guilt of going over softly at times to win freekicks in their own box and shielding the ball out of play etc, however when the ref says play on, the defender will never get pinged for diving.

Also, I know from playing that sometimes the smallest contact can send you over compared to much heavier contact because of the circumstances e.g. running at pace or in a way to avoid heavy contact etc.

I would like to get rid of the most blatant cheating, but where do you draw the line? I think its part and parcel of whatever game you play that people will "cheat" to some degree.

The fourth official should sit in front of a tv screen and see the same footage as we do on the telly instead of getting abuse from Wenger and Fungus. He could then easily assist the head ref in any way he sees fit. When we have the possibility to see every small thing that happens on the pitch, from several different angles, just moments after they happen - it seems stupid and incredibly rigid to not use the technology that is available.

Using this system the ref could have decided on Kompany right then and there, but with a better platform to make a correct decision. If he still deems it as a red card offense then that should be it. If he comes to the same conclusion as the FA, inexplicably, has come to - then he just awards a freekick. Same thing with dives like above, or headbutts like Fellaini on Shawcross.

As for what goes on in the penalty box on corners and free kicks - I feel it is more down to HOW refs interpret the rules. They see a lot of it but CHOOSE not to do anything. In my opinion refs are generally too lenient on grabbing, holding, pushing, screening etc in the box, but that is another discussion entirely.

kamikaze wrote:

i would've suspended all of them except for suarez, ironically.

And that's exactly why it's impossible to enforce because Suarez has just gone on record to say that he did, in fact, dive against Stoke.

The only dives that should be banned are the ones where players roll on the floor, trying to get players sent off a la Busquets. Being light on your feet isn't quite the same thing, otherwise there's no difference between what Rooney tries to do when he lets himself trip over Almunia and what Cazorla did against West Brom.

They both tried to engineer contact, only one of them managed to deceive his opponent so why should Cazorla be banned and not Rooney? And it's impossible to ban someone who does get tripped over, even if he did so willingly.

With my suggestion above, Cazorla would have possibly been booked for simulation and Rooney would have still been awarded the penalty against Almunia. Wouldn't have taken a second longer to get to those decisions either since there is ALWAYS a pause in the game when players complain about decisions anyway.

The images were there for everyone on tv to see seconds after they happened. Why should the refereeing team be the only ones not to see it? Mental. We alsoget bizarre situations like when Henry used his hand against Ireland. The ref KNEW something was not right, but since none of the refs had seen the handball he had to allow a goal that he KNEW was wrong.

I say 'possibly' with Cazorla because there actually was contact, albeit minimal. There wouldn't have been a penalty though which would have been the correct call.

My fave sat night telly show

If you dive you deserve to have your feet cut off.

There, I said it.

And while we're at it blatant, goal saving handballs should result in hands off.

Love to see Suarez the stump.

Diving which leads to a penalty - retrospective video analysis and a 2 game ban.

Diving elsewhere on the pitch - same as above and a single game ban.

Those fuckwits tried it with Eduardo and wanted to ban him for 2 games. Make the rules clear from the offset and enforce it. So many angles available these days so there should be no problem determining if it was a genuine dive or not.

A dive should be categorised as 'there being sufficient enough contact for the player to go down', so no bullshit where the player feels the slightest of touches and decides to do a swanny.

Depressed Rex wrote:

I say 'possibly' with Cazorla because there actually was contact, albeit minimal. There wouldn't have been a penalty though which would have been the correct call.

Whats the difference between "the Gareth Bale school, where the player is only trying to protect himself" and "the Cazorla school, where the player anticipates contact and tries to lessen the impact but then, unfortunately? contact doesn't arrive"?

I think you and Flobs have your Gooner coloured glasses on Rex, but I agree too- Carzorla might be another cheating little diving Spanish cunt- But he's our cheating little diving Spanish cunt.

If a dive is as blatant, obvious and ludicrous as Pederson's infamous dive against us then it warrants at least at two match ban.

I think you're getting carried away Y, thats a bit harsh considering no one got injured.

Diving is no worse than other forms of cheating that can cause a goal, like blocking off the goalie or use of the hand, Henrys handball against Ireland wouldn't even have been a booking if it took place in the center circle.

The only reason diving receives extra attention is because unlike other forms of sneaky cheating it usually occurs in a possible goal scoring area, and it's easier to carry off than say a blatant hand ball.