If stopping a goal scoring opportunity is a Red card, should creating one ( diving ) be a red too?

[MPH]

 

Ashley Young: Man Utd forward's dive prompts Palace red card call

Crystal Palace chairman Steve Parish has called for players who dive to be shown straight red cards.

Manchester United's Ashley Young was booked for tumbling over after a challenge by Palace's Kagisho Dikgacoi in United's 2-0 win on Saturday.

Dikgacoi was dismissed when the pair clashed again later in the first half.

"If preventing a goal-scoring opportunity is a straight red then trying to create one by cheating should be a straight red also," said Parish.

 

Young was booked by referee Jon Moss for the first incident, with replays suggesting the England player had initiated the contact with Dikgacoi.

Referee Moss later awarded a penalty to the home side for a challenge on Young by Dikgacoi, who was sent off for denying a goal-scoring opportunity.

"The only player in the incidents yesterday that was honest was Kagisho Dikgacoi and he's sent off and banned for the next match," Parish added in an email to BBC Radio 5 live's 606 programme on Sunday night.

"Ashley Young's dive and the appeal before put pressure on the ref to give a subsequent penalty that was certainly outside the area and probably wasn't even a foul.

 

 

"Ashley Young has a yellow card and three points and we have no points and one less player to pick from for the next game.

"Might have cost us a point that might keep us up. Need to get some momentum behind a straight red for a dive."

Palace manager Ian Holloway refused to discuss the incident following the match, saying his opinion "didn't count", but United boss David Moyes said he would not tolerate diving from his players.

"I don't want my players diving. It's not what I want. Dikgacoi definitely throws his leg out but Ashley put his leg into his leg.

"I don't like the rule where every time it is the last man it means it is [a red card]," added Moyes. "I thought it was harsh."

Last season, 34 yellow cards were shown for simulation in the Premier League, up 14 on the previous season's total and the highest recorded over the previous four years.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24105809

 

 

Interesting one, this.....

[marko]

I'd be against it because of the pressure it puts on the referee to make an instant decision on something that's not always obvious on the pitch at the time, especially seeing as a red card has a major influence on games.

 

However, I would advocate retrospective action where a panel look at incidents that could be deemed to be a dive and then apply a penalty - whether that be a ban for the offending player, or a substantial fine for the club - if they see fit.

[MPH]

I'd be against it because of the pressure it puts on the referee to make an instant decision on something that's not always obvious on the pitch at the time, especially seeing as a red card has a major influence on games.

.

I think with the incident in question, Ashley Youngs dive its already clear he dived because the ref gave a yellow for it... besides they already have to give Instant decisions when awarding a red for last man fouls...

[bmt]

I'm with him, cheating should be a red card. Big call for the ref though, but I also think if they are sure enough it is a dive they will give a yellow, then they should be sure enough to give a red card.

[marko]

I think with the incident in question, Ashley Youngs dive its already clear he dived because the ref gave a yellow for it... besides they already have to give Instant decisions when awarding a red for last man fouls...

 

I agree to an extent, but in the past there have been occasions where a yellow has been awarded for diving when in actual fact there has been contact. I think it's easier to look retrospectively and impose a ban as once the referee has sent someone off then there is no recourse. 

 

With regard to the last man situation, that occurs far less frequently than alleged diving which is commonplace in matches these days.

 

Also, define 'creating a goal scoring opportunity'. Is it a penalty? A free kick within 25 yards? A free kick in the opponents half? After all, if player dives just over the half way line you could easily argue they're creating a goal scoring opportunity, as it would allow them to put their centre-backs in the oppositions box and then put in a high-ball from the free kick.

[marko]

I'm with him, cheating should be a red card. Big call for the ref though, but I also think if they are sure enough it is a dive they will give a yellow, then they should be sure enough to give a red card.

 

But do you think a referee would be as 'sure' if it was a red card he was handing out? As it's only a yellow card I think they're far more inclined to penalise the player as it's not going to have a major impact on the match. I personally think they'd be less likely to pull someone up for a dive if it was red.

 

Also, is the irony not lost on anyone else, but this man employed Zaha last season who dived his way to a number of penalties.

[ADK]

I'd like to see the red card used less and to bring in alternatives for the ref than the present rules allow.

 

Allow a ref to award a penalty for fouls outside the area where the defender was the last man and for the ref to award a penalty goal if a player prevents a certain goal.

 

The problem with the red card is it is worth more or less depending on the match time. For example in Burnley vs Blackburn game, Burnley had a man through on goal but he was brought down. A straight red but it was in injury time so in that instance it was not a punishment at all. In our game last season, Wes Morgan gets sent off after a few minutes for a clumsy challenge that wasn't even deliberate resulting in playing almost a whole game with 10 men.

 

As for diving, I think referees ought to be able to refer players to disciplinary panels and suspensions given for diving.

[marko]

 

As for diving, I think referees ought to be able to refer players to disciplinary panels and suspensions given for diving.

 

I'm with you on this. It would also allow the panel to utilise all the different camera angles when making their decisions.

[ousefox]

I'd make it retrospective as it can completely ruin a game if the wrong decision is made, whereas a yellow usually doesn't cause 10 v 11.

[DennisNedry]

I'd make it retrospective as it can completely ruin a game if the wrong decision is made, whereas a yellow usually doesn't cause 10 v 11.

 

Then why not make it retrospective for stopping a goal scoring oppurtunity?

[Dan]

I'd go back and give players who dive in these situations 3 game bans.

 

The fact the rules say a dive is equal to 'over-celebrating' is wrong on so many levels.

[Harry - LCFC]

I definitely think putting the ball in with your hand should be a red card. Actually scoring is far worse than merely stopping an opportunity, I was pretty annoyed when Le Fondre slapped the ball in last season even though it wasn't my team playing. Shame he only got a booking for it.

[Kitchandro]

It should be a red card. Why should you get away with blatant cheating when you can get a 3 match ban for slightly mistiming a tackle?

 

If anything you should get a longer ban for purposefully trying to break the rules.

 

It is difficult to call at times but so are a lot of decisions. But officials still give offsides and red cards for tackles and denying a goal scoring opportunity etc, and sometimes they're wrong. So that argument really isn't good enough for me.

 

All this retrospective action isn't good enough really. It sounds half-hearted; in truth they'd just ingore most incidents.

[Donut]

It should be a red card. Why should you get away with blatant cheating when you can get a 3 match ban for slightly mistiming a tackle?

 

If anything you should get a longer ban for purposefully trying to break the rules.

 

It is difficult to call at times but so are a lot of decisions. But officials still give offsides and red cards for tackles and denying a goal scoring opportunity etc, and sometimes they're wrong. So that argument really isn't good enough for me.

 

All this retrospective action isn't good enough really. It sounds half-hearted; in truth they'd just ingore most incidents.

 

What about giving a red card that retrospectively was awarded wrongly and played a large part in costing a team 3 points.

 

Would it be overturned? would it just be tough luck in your scenario?

[MPH]

What about giving a red card that retrospectively was awarded wrongly and played a large part in costing a team 3 points.

 

Would it be overturned? would it just be tough luck in your scenario?

 

 

The only way to eliminate human error is to have the game  'policed' by robots...

 

 

But human error isn't what's the issue here, its the subject of purposeful cheating and what should be the punishment for it....

[Donut]

The only way to eliminate human error is to have the game  'policed' by robots...

 

 

But human error isn't what's the issue here, its the subject of purposeful cheating and what should be the punishment for it....

 

A retrospective ban would be appropriate punishment

 

I think on field punishments for diving are hard to give out because its very difficult (unless completely blatant) whether a player has dived or not

[Donut]

A retrospective ban would be appropriate punishment

 

I think on field punishments for diving are hard to give out because its very difficult (unless completely blatant) to determine whether a player has dived or not

[MPH]

 

A retrospective ban would be appropriate punishment

 

I think on field punishments for diving are hard to give out because its very difficult (unless completely blatant) to determine whether a player has dived or not

 

 

 

they already have to give red cards for last man fouls only when they are completely sure so it shouldn't be a problem for this issue either and then video evidence for any they may of missed should help the 'plague' that is diving, IMHO

[Donut]

they already have to give red cards for last man fouls only when they are completely sure so it shouldn't be a problem for this issue either and then video evidence for any they may of missed should help the 'plague' that is diving, IMHO

 

A last man professional foul is a lot easier to be sure on than a ''did he or didnt he'' dive case IMO and thats why i would keep it all retrospective

[Captain...]

You would have to be 100% certain though, I would have been retroactively punishing Ashley young and the rest years ago. The problem now though is not the blatant dive but the manipulation of contact. If you see someone go down Erland Johnson style (still angry) when there is no contact straight red, no problem with that. If you believe a player has made the most of minimal contact then a booking, but with further punishment if found guilty of actual diving, it must be so hard for a ref to judge at times.

[Manwell Pablo]

Nothing wrong with diving part of the game, at least that's what 99% of this forum would have had you believe on a certain evening in May last season.

[Kitchandro]

What about giving a red card that retrospectively was awarded wrongly and played a large part in costing a team 3 points.

 

Would it be overturned? would it just be tough luck in your scenario?

 

If a big decision is made wrongly there should always be the opportunity to reverse things like bans, or to give them out.

 

Diving should be treated as if it were any other defence, except more seriously because it's done on purpose.

 

Referees make errors all the while, are you suggesting players shouldn't be sent off for diving because the referee might get it wrong? In which case why make any decisions during the game?

[Kitchandro]

You would have to be 100% certain though, I would have been retroactively punishing Ashley young and the rest years ago. The problem now though is not the blatant dive but the manipulation of contact. If you see someone go down Erland Johnson style (still angry) when there is no contact straight red, no problem with that. If you believe a player has made the most of minimal contact then a booking, but with further punishment if found guilty of actual diving, it must be so hard for a ref to judge at times.

 

 

Define 'minimal contact' though.

 

That could be anything from brushing their arm with yours to clipping their heels when at full pace.

 

The way I see it is, if you choose to throw yourself to the ground it's diving. In fact that's the definition of it, if you're pushed over you're pushed over, if you're tripped up you're tripped up. Diving is purely voluntary falling over.

 

You're right in saying the ref would have to be pretty sure (though can he ever be truly 100%?). Basically, people's issue with this idea is that referees just aren't very good at their job. That they aren't fit to make these decisions.

 

But in principle I don't see how anyone could have a problem with it.

 

The issue I expected people to have was that if it was properly enforced every match would have a sending off. And maybe that's true, initially, but they'd soon stop doing it if they were risking a 3 match ban.

[Captain...]

Define 'minimal contact' though.

 

That could be anything from brushing their arm with yours to clipping their heels when at full pace.

 

The way I see it is, if you choose to throw yourself to the ground it's diving. In fact that's the definition of it, if you're pushed over you're pushed over, if you're tripped up you're tripped up. Diving is purely voluntary falling over.

 

You're right in saying the ref would have to be pretty sure (though can he ever be truly 100%?). Basically, people's issue with this idea is that referees just aren't very good at their job. That they aren't fit to make these decisions.

 

But in principle I don't see how anyone could have a problem with it.

 

The issue I expected people to have was that if it was properly enforced every match would have a sending off. And maybe that's true, initially, but they'd soon stop doing it if they were risking a 3 match ban.

 

The issue I have is that pundits review some of these decisions and defend some dives by saying there was the slightest contact, and despite having 20 cameras and slow motion replays, they still can't always come to an agreement. Only in clear cut cases could a ref give a red. Do you remember the Eduardo case, he was banned after the event and Arsenal appealed and despite it being a blatant dive the decision was over turned because there was contact.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/europe/8236689.stm

 

And after this debacle I don't think there was a single retroactive ban for diving after this incident.

[Narborough_fox]

For every time a player gets penalised for diving they should get a match ban. So, 1 yellow equals a 1 match ban, 2 yellows a 2 match ban and so on. Would stop players from diving, and would also mean that a game is kept at 11 vs 11, making it a better game for those who have paid to watch it. 

 

Governing bodies should also be allowed to overrule yellow cards for an attacker who has been booked for diving if it wasn't a dive, and give a yellow card (and the match ban) to those who have got away with the dive.