m4DD0gg Posted 22 November 2017 Share Posted 22 November 2017 56 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said: There's a difference between inviting a player to kick your leg and diving when not touched though. JV knows exactly what he is doing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScouseFox Posted 22 November 2017 Share Posted 22 November 2017 i thought it was a foul and im really confused that after it was a foul and it was given as a foul some other fellas have decided not only was it not a foul but it was a dive, worthy of a 2 game ban. games gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nalis Posted 22 November 2017 Share Posted 22 November 2017 Dann went across him. Penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yorkie1999 Posted 22 November 2017 Share Posted 22 November 2017 2 hours ago, m4DD0gg said: JV knows exactly what he is doing Cause he does, but he’s not conning the ref by diving untouched, the oppo player is not being forced to challenge him, and it’s not vardys fault if a player can’t get in front of him because of his speed. It’s a skill as simple as that. If another player doesn’t want to give away a penalty, then keep clear of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitchandro Posted 23 November 2017 Share Posted 23 November 2017 Unsworth: "I think it's a great rule but it doesn't change my stance on if there's contact anywhere on the pitch - slight or not, contact is contact," said Unsworth. "We don't want contact taken out the game. Slowly but surely it has started." This guy should be banned for these comments alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col city fan Posted 23 November 2017 Share Posted 23 November 2017 10 hours ago, ScouseFox said: i thought it was a foul and im really confused that after it was a foul and it was given as a foul some other fellas have decided not only was it not a foul but it was a dive, worthy of a 2 game ban. games gone. Yes it has. This will surely set a huge precedent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayfox26 Posted 23 November 2017 Share Posted 23 November 2017 3 hours ago, Kitchandro said: Unsworth: "I think it's a great rule but it doesn't change my stance on if there's contact anywhere on the pitch - slight or not, contact is contact," said Unsworth. "We don't want contact taken out the game. Slowly but surely it has started." This guy should be banned for these comments alone. Agreed, he talks absolute crap. I get managers will always defend their players but when your player has blatantly cheated then you just can't defend that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayfox26 Posted 23 November 2017 Share Posted 23 November 2017 13 hours ago, ScouseFox said: i thought it was a foul and im really confused that after it was a foul and it was given as a foul some other fellas have decided not only was it not a foul but it was a dive, worthy of a 2 game ban. games gone. It was never a foul. There was absolutely no contact at all. You are in a very small minority if you think that was a foul and also if you think players should not get banned retrospectively for cheating. The game is gone if you believe that not punishing cheating is the way forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayfox26 Posted 23 November 2017 Share Posted 23 November 2017 Just imagine the scenes. City and United are both going for the title on the final day of the season. City score a late penalty, won by an Aguero dive and city win the league. 2 days later the panel reviews Agueros dive and agrees it was a dive and ban him for the start of the following season but also take 2 points off city handing the title to united. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 23 November 2017 Share Posted 23 November 2017 4 hours ago, Kitchandro said: Unsworth: "I think it's a great rule but it doesn't change my stance on if there's contact anywhere on the pitch - slight or not, contact is contact," said Unsworth. "We don't want contact taken out the game. Slowly but surely it has started." This guy should be banned for these comments alone. Those comments make no sense, surely saying you are entitled to go down under any contact is more likely to turn it into a contactless sport not punishing people for throwing themselves to the floor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filbertway Posted 23 November 2017 Share Posted 23 November 2017 4 hours ago, Kitchandro said: Unsworth: "I think it's a great rule but it doesn't change my stance on if there's contact anywhere on the pitch - slight or not, contact is contact," said Unsworth. "We don't want contact taken out the game. Slowly but surely it has started." This guy should be banned for these comments alone. What's his point there? The ruling is encouraging contact, especially in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shen Posted 23 November 2017 Share Posted 23 November 2017 This contact/non-contact debate becomes so black and white. It's so subjective and situational what constitutes a foul. When is a shove or push a foul, when is it a 'tussle for position'? Vardy is a brilliant example of a pacy striker who, if nudged lightly while in full stride, will most likely lose balance and fall over. Yet the same player will have superb balance and agility when closing down defenders and attempting tackles. Messi by comparison suffers unreal amounts of fouls, but he rides them because his ball control is far superior and he can keep his balance. It's sometimes very difficult to know when a player falls if it was a stumble/slip, an infriction from an opposition player, poor balance or ball control or a dive. The only viable way to deal with it would be with live video refs who can then report suspicious situations for subsequent investigations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Countryfox Posted 23 November 2017 Share Posted 23 November 2017 Absolutely black and white for me ... If there is contact which causes a player to fall then it's a foul .. No contact it's a dive. When JV 'draws' a foul he is, maybe only marginally, knocked off balance ... He is master at it because he is too quick for the defender. If a player goes tumbling without contact he is a fookin cheat .. And throw the book at him. I would love it to be stamped out otherwise it will ruin the game ... Ultimately we will have players leaping about all over the place like some demented Monty Python sketch ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wymsey Posted 23 November 2017 Share Posted 23 November 2017 Ashley Young already making plans for a new career after football.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitchandro Posted 23 November 2017 Share Posted 23 November 2017 51 minutes ago, Countryfox said: Absolutely black and white for me ... If there is contact which causes a player to fall then it's a foul .. No contact it's a dive. When JV 'draws' a foul he is, maybe only marginally, knocked off balance ... He is master at it because he is too quick for the defender. If a player goes tumbling without contact he is a fookin cheat .. And throw the book at him. I would love it to be stamped out otherwise it will ruin the game ... Ultimately we will have players leaping about all over the place like some demented Monty Python sketch ... I agree it's black and white but not in the way you are saying. Diving is intentionally falling over. It doesn't matter if someone attacks you with a flamethrower, if you fall over on purpose (i.e. the contact doesn't trip you/knock you over) then it is a dive. That is the definition. Feeling a touch and then throwing yourself over is just as much of a dive than if there is no contact. Tired of this 'right to go down' culture. You never have a right to go down. You act like a man and stay on your feet unless you are physically unable to do so. The game should be built around this principle with no exceptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitchandro Posted 23 November 2017 Share Posted 23 November 2017 8 hours ago, shen said: This contact/non-contact debate becomes so black and white. It's so subjective and situational what constitutes a foul. When is a shove or push a foul, when is it a 'tussle for position'? Vardy is a brilliant example of a pacy striker who, if nudged lightly while in full stride, will most likely lose balance and fall over. Yet the same player will have superb balance and agility when closing down defenders and attempting tackles. Messi by comparison suffers unreal amounts of fouls, but he rides them because his ball control is far superior and he can keep his balance. It's sometimes very difficult to know when a player falls if it was a stumble/slip, an infriction from an opposition player, poor balance or ball control or a dive. The only viable way to deal with it would be with live video refs who can then report suspicious situations for subsequent investigations. I actually think it's fairly easy to tell 95% of the time. There's too many apologists for cheats these days. We see it game in, game out and it needs a firm stance taking on it, not this inconsistent, halfway house thing we've got going on now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Countryfox Posted 23 November 2017 Share Posted 23 November 2017 2 hours ago, Kitchandro said: I agree it's black and white but not in the way you are saying. Diving is intentionally falling over. It doesn't matter if someone attacks you with a flamethrower, if you fall over on purpose (i.e. the contact doesn't trip you/knock you over) then it is a dive. That is the definition. Feeling a touch and then throwing yourself over is just as much of a dive than if there is no contact. Tired of this 'right to go down' culture. You never have a right to go down. You act like a man and stay on your feet unless you are physically unable to do so. The game should be built around this principle with no exceptions. I think we sort of agree. By coming down VERY hard on players who blatantly cheat (ie no contact) this will, imo, have a BIG impact on players who try to go down after minimal contact (which is much harder to police). Expecting players to stay on their feet no matter what aint never going to happen .... lets just start with blatant cheating and take it from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 23 November 2017 Share Posted 23 November 2017 The problem is the wording of the rules are so woolly that the definition of a foul is subjective so you'll never get a consensus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WigstonWanderer Posted 24 November 2017 Share Posted 24 November 2017 The rules of football will never be, and cannot be black and white. There will always be grey areas that are a matter of opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieG Posted 24 November 2017 Share Posted 24 November 2017 I thought he was obstructed and then made a meal of it but then obstruction happens all over the pitch and is rarely punished and probably encouraged players to over react. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkyrobot Posted 24 November 2017 Share Posted 24 November 2017 Speaking of diving, the fkin hammers are proper cheats. Starts at centre back Reid and carries on through the rest of the team and the ref is giving every one as a foul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_horns Posted 24 November 2017 Share Posted 24 November 2017 Clear dive from Ayew but will he get into trouble as no "foul" was given? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.