Jump to content

Mourinho on diving - and what is the solution?


TopGun

Recommended Posts

Got to say, I'm not sure. I am sure it was a dive, and he should have been booked for that, but whether the ref was going to book him before he got gobby? You have to wonder whether the ref was swayed a little by the immediate pleading for a pen almost before he fell down.

 

He definitely booked him for simulation, his mouthiness was mostly after the booking, and referees generally don't book players for histrionics, as clear from him not booking Hazard for a lengthy arm-flailing appeal of a similar level of insolence at another point in the match. I knew that one was dissent without being able to hear him, from the 20th row of the Northam 100 yards away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why people get their knickers in a twist over diving . It's a form of cheating , but footballers cheat . Always have done , always will do . Ok , so in the good old days chopper Harris or Tommy Smith didn't dive , their particular form of cheating involved kicking people into row Z. I've never understood why diving in the middle of the pitch is a no no , yet appealing for a corner when you know full well you've touched it last , is ok. Players con the ref over hundreds of incidents every week.

 

Personally , if some dumb ass defenders going to dangle a leg in the box and a forward makes the most of it, it's his own fault . Every team does it, it is now part of te game whether you like it or not. The only dives that you can police are the ones where there is no contact at all. Wherever there is contact it will become subjective as to whether the player could have stayed on his feet or whether the forward moved caused the contact first. Good luck with proving that one way or the other . Defenders go down easily to win free kicks,even when there's minimal contact , and there hasn't been a keeper since about 1989 that doesn't make a meal of a high challenge he losses . Is that the same as diving, course it is .

 

Instead of apologising to Jose , the ref should have said " every game 22 players try to cheat me, if they stopped doing that I'd have got that one right. So **** off until you sort your own glass house out".

Edited by Lord Duckhunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why people get their knickers in a twist over diving . It's a form of cheating , but footballers cheat . Always have done , always will do . Ok , so in the good old days chopper Harris or Tommy Smith didn't dive , their particular form of cheating involved kicking people into row Z. I've never understood why diving in the middle of the pitch is a no no , yet appealing for a corner when you know full well you've touched it last , is ok. Players con the ref over hundreds of incidents every week.

 

Personally , if some dumb ass defenders going to dangle a leg in the box and a forward makes the most of it, it's his own fault . Every team does it, it is now part of te game whether you like it or not. The only dives that you can police are the ones where there is no contact at all. Wherever there is contact it will become subjective as to whether the player could have stayed on his feet or whether the forward moved caused the contact first. Good luck with proving that one way or the other . Defenders go down easily to win free kicks,even when there's minimal contact , and there hasn't been a keeper since about 1989 that doesn't make a meal of a high challenge he losses . Is that the same as diving, course it is .

 

Instead of apologising to Jose , the ref should have said " every game 22 players try to cheat me, if they stopped doing that I'd have got that one right. So **** off until you sort your own glass house out".

Exactly that, spot on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't think it was a penalty or a dive, but the only way to fix the problem is for referees to give penalties for fouls on attackers when they don't fall over - like the one on Costa in the second half when he was clipped but stayed on his feet. No-one, including Mourinho, has mentioned that since. If refs give fouls when there are actually fouls rather than just when a player falls over to make a foul look like a foul, it reduces the likelihood of simulation significantly. I think the yellow is about right - there was some guff the other week saying "it'll only stop diving when a player is sent off for a second yellow for diving". That happened within months of the law change, and it made no difference whatsoever to player behaviour. They'll still test the ref and a red card is far too much of a punishment for a situation with a lot of judgement and grey areas.

 

You could argue that if he stays on his feet then he hasn't been 'tripped'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jose now has a ref apologising to him/his side for the booking fagregas got

 

so, that is one ref that feels a but guilty for something

Or has allowed himself to be bullied into feeling guilty for something which, as I said on the post match thread, in real time looked exactly what he booked him for, Lino had a view didn't give it either as he saw the same in real time Fabregas over doing the theatricals as he hit the turf. 27 different angles shown over 4 minutes on Sky and hey the ref got it wrong, even from my seat behind the goal in real time Fabregas simulated contact.

So now Jose has got himself into a Fergie position and got another Premiership referee nicely tucked up in his pocket, unless the Ref actually has the balls to ignore what's gone on before next time he Refs a Chelsea game: which by apologising he has instantly become a submissive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone really think that the Special One really believes there is a campaign against them? He just seized an opportunity to

a) make sure none of the media are discussing how his world class team could only gain a single point from lowly Southampton; and

b) has already put subliminal pressure on the ref in their next game(s) to give them the benefit when in any doubt over a decision.

 

Speaking generally diving needs stamping out but is not easy to spot in real time. Sometimes only the slightest touch when running at speed is enough to genuinely make a player to stumble, if not go right over. The harder one's to decide on are the ones like Fabregas/Targett. He's not really moving at any speed, there was contact but was it enough to make him fall unintentionally? Then there's those really hard (sarcasm) pushes which look like they wouldn't move a balloon but "cause" a brick-****house-sized player to fall over. Pundits will say "he laid a hand on him" but the amount of force (or lack of) behind it is rarely mentioned if ever. Then there's that grey area of stumbling after jumping to avoid a scything tackle that would definitely have been a foul if you had stayed on your feet. Diving needs stamping out but I wouldn't want to be making decisions as to what is and isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised that Lord Duckhunter has no concern over cheating. Fortunately other sports take it more seriously than football with cheats being banned, sometimes for life. There are two things that could improve the situation, one being the retrospective panel to identify cheating in the same way that the Dubious Goals Committee operates. If the punishments are severe enough, cheating could be eradicated. The other action would be change in the laws to remove the penalty kick except for cases where the referee believes the foul or handball prevented a goal or a clear goal-scoring chance. The present penalty kick is too great a reward in many of the circumstances where it is awarded. Players throw themselves down to get the free 12-yard shot at goal because they know that if they continue in play, there is much less chance of their team scoring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised that Lord Duckhunter has no concern over cheating. Fortunately other sports take it more seriously than football with cheats being banned, sometimes for life. There are two things that could improve the situation, one being the retrospective panel to identify cheating in the same way that the Dubious Goals Committee operates. If the punishments are severe enough, cheating could be eradicated. The other action would be change in the laws to remove the penalty kick except for cases where the referee believes the foul or handball prevented a goal or a clear goal-scoring chance. The present penalty kick is too great a reward in many of the circumstances where it is awarded. Players throw themselves down to get the free 12-yard shot at goal because they know that if they continue in play, there is much less chance of their team scoring.

 

Where did I say I have no concern over cheating . what I asked is why do people concern themselves with only one form of cheating. Is your " cheating panel" going to adjudicate on all forms of cheating or just diving. If somebody appeals for a corner, when they know its a goal kick , is that cheating? How do you prove it. Is leaving your foot in cheating, Morgan cheated on Sunday by deliberately breaking up a Chelsea attack, he got a deserved yellow card. How is his cheating different than other forms of cheating. If Forster pushes a shot round the post , claims he didn't touch it, and ref gives a goal kick, will your panel adjudicate on that. What about Fonte holding somebody at a corner , is that not cheating?

 

It makes me laugh ,Chopper Harris can cheat by basically committing GBH on a forward, but diving is the lowest of the low.

 

Surely most forms of cheating is too subjective for your panel.

 

Which sports ban cheats for life?

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
×
×
  • Create New...