Diving Divas

[jambutty]

I have watched football since 1946 when I saw my first match at Peel Park and like most kids of my era played football in the street, on some spare ground or at school in inter form matches and even inter school matches. Followed by whilst in the navy and for the works team after being demobbed.

My first allegiance was to Accrington Stanley until one day I saw the Busby Babes in action and I switched immediately, although I have always had a soft spot for the Stanley.

That preview is to establish my football credentials so that I can lay some claim to knowing something about football gleaned from over 60 years association with the game. Although my viewing is limited to the TV these days with the odd foray to watch Accrington Stanley.

In recent years diving has taken a hold and a penalty awarded to a diver has altered the overall the outcome of a match. Conversely an obvious penalty not awarded has also altered the overall outcome of a match. Today a match won or lost that could have had a different outcome but for a penalty incident, could cost a club dear. From being relegated to not winning the league or attaining a lower place in the league. In other words it could cost a club several millions of pounds. The other side of the coin being - winning the league or not being relegated and attaining a higher place in the league thus gaining money under false pretences.

I accept that referees and their assistants can only judge what they see and an incident can look different from another angle. I also accept that, contrary to some opinions, referees and their assistants are human and under pressure humans make mistakes. Heck they even make mistakes when not under pressure.

But nonetheless the FA and FIFA should address the problem because football is rapidly deteriorating into a farce.

The solution is blindingly obvious. Use the TV replays and slow-mo to make a better judgement on alleged diving incidents in the penalty area. However football is a game that flows and is only disrupted by infringements so to interrupt a match whilst someone pours over a TV replay wouldn’t be practical or desirable. Yet the TV cameras capture the incident from several angles and should be used to decide – dive or no dive, penalty or no penalty.

I would suggest that three retired referees at a match view the replays for alleged diving and also for disputes about a penalty not being awarded when in fact a foul had been committed and make a decision.
If they decide that a player dived, a penalty was awarded and a goal was scored direct from the penalty or from an immediate ‘follow up’ – the goal would be scrubbed and the diver would be awarded a RED CARD and be charged with ‘bringing the game into disrepute’.
If no goal were scored direct from the penalty or from an immediate ‘follow up’ the diver would still be charged with ‘bringing the game into disrepute’.
If they decide that the challenge was fair yet a penalty was awarded, a goal was scored direct from the penalty or from an immediate ‘follow up’ – the goal would be scrubbed.
If they decide that a player was fouled in the ‘box’ but was not awarded a penalty, that penalty could be taken at the end of the half during which the incident took place.

The question is would the FA be able to find 3 retired referees for each match that is being televised and would the FA be prepared to go the expense? Unlikely!

In that case there could be a panel of 5 recently retired referees who could view penalty decisions from all televised matches during the following day/s. Much like there is a panel to decide the outcome of matches that have been postponed due to bad weather to aid the football pools.

If a manager of a team is of the opinion that the referee made the wrong decision about a penalty incident he could lodge an appeal with the fourth official.

The referee panel could view the incident and decide what the outcome should have been.
If a team were wrongly awarded a penalty from which a goal was scored direct from the penalty or from an immediate ‘follow up’ that goal would be scrubbed from the final score and if it were a diving incident the diver would be awarded a RED CARD and be charged with ‘bringing the game into disrepute’.
If a team was NOT AWARDED a penalty but the panel decides a penalty was due, then one goal should be awarded to that team.

Any panel decision that goes against what the referee awarded should not be seen as a criticism of that referee. After all he can only make a judgement on what he sees. He could have actually blinked at the crucial split second and everyone blinks all the time. His view could have been obscured by a player at the crucial moment.

No doubt someone will immediately think ‘what a crackpot idea’ but if they really thought things through my suggestion is A solution to the ‘it was a penalty – no it wasn’t’ problem. Not necessarily THE solution but one to be discussed.

[cashman]

If a team was NOT AWARDED a penalty but the panel decides a penalty was due, then one goal should be awarded to that team. -----its a problem that needs much study! clubs whole futures can depend on correct descisions, but that idea is not for me. many penalties are missed as well as scored, so to award a goal for not being awarded a penalty, defeats the object.

[AccyJay]

I would suggest that the whole thing should be looked at, not by ex referees', but by ex footballers.

[mthead]

Originally Posted by cashman

If a team was NOT AWARDED a penalty but the panel decides a penalty was due, then one goal should be awarded to that team. -----its a problem that needs much study! clubs whole futures can depend on correct descisions, but that idea is not for me. many penalties are missed as well as scored, so to award a goal for not being awarded a penalty, defeats the object.

Yeah I agree it does defeat the object Cashie.When all said and done over a season it usually balances itself out anyway,your team not getting a penalty or the other team getting one in dodgy circumstances.Not only that what would we have to talk about over a pint It would take all the debate side of the game away.I think its all the fun of being into footie having a good old post match chin wag

[Mancie]

Sounds a bit iffy to me... some of the things suggested could leave supports leaving at the end of games on Saturday, not knowing if they had won, drawn or lost because the score could be altered by a panel on Tuesday!

[lancsdave]

I'm all for players being brough to task for cheating using video evidence after a game. They already do that if a player hits somebody and it's missed by the referee.

Perisitent offenders should first of all be banned and then the clubs concerned docked points.

Don't run with the idea of penalties being given after a game.

Oh and one question .. What is a penalty ?

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by cashman

If a team was NOT AWARDED a penalty but the panel decides a penalty was due, then one goal should be awarded to that team. -----its a problem that needs much study! clubs whole futures can depend on correct descisions, but that idea is not for me. many penalties are missed as well as scored, so to award a goal for not being awarded a penalty, defeats the object.

Then it puts the onus of a judgement before the game ends and a penalty is taken at the end of the half.

Have you a better solution to what is an obvious penalty to the majority of the crowd but unseen by any of the officials?

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by AccyJay

I would suggest that the whole thing should be looked at, not by ex referees', but by ex footballers.

By their nature ex-referees are the best people to judge whether an incident in the penalty area is fair or foul. Footballers may consider themselves to be experts on the laws of football but they have not had to prove it in a match. An ex-referee has.

[shakermaker]

There's no logical and practical way to stop diving. It's now sadly a big part of football. Give it time and refs will get more experience with diving and will be able to make better judgements. Afterall diving has only become a widespread problem in English football in the 21st Century.

[lancsdave]

Originally Posted by jambutty

By their nature ex-referees are the best people to judge whether an incident in the penalty area is fair or foul. Footballers may consider themselves to be experts on the laws of football but they have not had to prove it in a match. An ex-referee has.

I would totally disagree about footballers being experts at laws of the game, I would say 99% of them haven't a clue, which is about the same percentage of the number of football fans who haven't a clue as well.

[mthead]

Originally Posted by jambutty

By their nature ex-referees are the best people to judge whether an incident in the penalty area is fair or foul. Footballers may consider themselves to be experts on the laws of football but they have not had to prove it in a match. An ex-referee has.

But the ex players know the little tricks that go on that ref's dont see.

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by mthead

Yeah I agree it does defeat the object Cashie.When all said and done over a season it usually balances itself out anyway,your team not getting a penalty or the other team getting one in dodgy circumstances.Not only that what would we have to talk about over a pint It would take all the debate side of the game away.I think its all the fun of being into footie having a good old post match chin wag

So because it is thought that over a season things USUALLY balance out it is OK to carry on as we are doing? USUALLY isn’t good enough today! Imagine if that attitude applied to other walks of life. You get short changed in a shop but the shopkeeper comes back with “It’ll balance out over the year because another shop might give you more change than you should have got.” There are no concrete statistics to verify the “it’ll balance out over a season” claim. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that some big clubs like Man U, Chelsea, Arsenal etc are more likely to get a penalty when playing at home than the opposition.

On Saturday Watford got their first penalty of the season and you can bet your sweet life they had many un-rewarded legitimate claims in previous games.

Because you and your mates will not have anything to talk about after a match is a pretty lame excuse for not doing something positive about ‘penalties’.

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by Mancie

Sounds a bit iffy to me... some of the things suggested could leave supports leaving at the end of games on Saturday, not knowing if they had won, drawn or lost because the score could be altered by a panel on Tuesday!

That sounds like you might favour a decision during a match.

[mthead]

Originally Posted by jambutty

So because it is thought that over a season things USUALLY balance out it is OK to carry on as we are doing? USUALLY isn’t good enough today! Imagine if that attitude applied to other walks of life. You get short changed in a shop but the shopkeeper comes back with “It’ll balance out over the year because another shop might give you more change than you should have got.” There are no concrete statistics to verify the “it’ll balance out over a season” claim. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that some big clubs like Man U, Chelsea, Arsenal etc are more likely to get a penalty when playing at home than the opposition.

On Saturday Watford got their first penalty of the season and you can bet your sweet life they had many un-rewarded legitimate claims in previous games.

Because you and your mates will not have anything to talk about after a match is a pretty lame excuse for not doing something positive about ‘penalties’.

So to me it sounds like you want to start americanising our beautiful game,shall we have the halves made into quarters to to raise a bit more revenue on advertisements.Just like what Sky have done 'Glazer' at my club and probably what 'Gillett' will do at Anfield.It will Kill off for good our game.

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by shakermaker

There's no logical and practical way to stop diving. It's now sadly a big part of football. Give it time and refs will get more experience with diving and will be able to make better judgements. Afterall diving has only become a widespread problem in English football in the 21st Century.

Whether diving is a recent or long standing problem isn’t the issue. The issue is should it be allowed to continue and if not how to prevent it or at least punish the offenders to the advantage of the team offended against.

I have put forward A COUPLE OF SOLUTIONS but not THE SOLUTION. Can anyone come up with something better?