M4 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 As a point of theory, yes. This, like a lot of the bullshit in football now, comes down to that top governing body FIFA not doing anything for years (decades). They barricade us with their moral Fair Play campaigns but never do any thing to actually make the game fair. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Would't mind Webb giving another one like that on Sunday tbh (as long as it is to us), like the dodgy one he gave us in the relegation season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 What was Walcott referring to btw? He didn't go down for the penalty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leffe186 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 What was Walcott referring to btw? He didn't go down for the penalty. I think it was the one where the ref ended up giving offside. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 We should get hotspot for football. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 What was Walcott referring to btw? He didn't go down for the penalty. I think it was the one where the ref ended up giving offside. Ah right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 What was Walcott referring to btw? He didn't go down for the penalty. I think it was the one where the ref ended up giving offside. Ah right. The first one was a pen. The second one wasn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 By the way, is there anything in the laws of the game that to be considered a foul, something has to actually impede the opponent? For example, Walcott having a hand placed on his arm clearly wouldn't fulfil that criteria. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exiled in Texas Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 By the way, is there anything in the laws of the game that to be considered a foul, something has to actually impede the opponent? For example, Walcott having a hand placed on his arm clearly wouldn't fulfil that criteria. A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following seven offenses in a manner considered by the referee to be careless,reckless or using excessive force: • kicks or attempts to kick an opponent • trips or attempts to trip an opponent • jumps at an opponent • charges an opponent • strikes or attempts to strike an opponent • pushes an opponent • tackles an opponent A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following three offenses: • holds an opponent • spits at an opponent • handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area) An indirect free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if, in the opinion of the referee, a player: • plays in a dangerous manner • impedes the progress of an opponent • prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands • commits any other offense, not previously mentioned in Law 12, for which play is stopped to caution or send off a player Interesting points from LOTG - Contact does not have to be made with an opponent for a foul to have been committed. The laws say "Kicking, or attempting to kick and opponent". So a swing and a miss is the same as making contact, if the referee judges that there was intent. Impeding a player (often called obstructing a player) means that a player prevented an opponent from moving buy there was no contact (hence the IFK). If contact was made then it would be a DFK depending on what contact was made. Re - Walcott - placing a hand on the arm would not really be considered holding, there is an expectation that a certain amount of physical contact is unavoidable as long as it's reasonable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gash Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Walcott really pissed me off there because there was nothing to be said, there was a foul and i think i'd be more annoyed if he didn't go down. I hate diving when there is no foul but when there is make it known, half the penalties teams got wouldn't be given if players played on if they could. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LooneyToonArmy Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Busquets with another oscar winning performance last night.... hope someone actually smacks him in the face sometime to show what it really feels like. The usual suspects like Alves and Di Maria of course was at it again but that's expected unfortunately..... Bunch of fairies all of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Not too long before diving ruins top-flight football IMO, can't understand why the authorities won't do something about it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Yesterday was fucking horrible, don't think I've ever seen a game where there was so much fannying about. Every little challenge was followed by someone acting he'd been shot. Refs need to be able to give bookings for players who tries to cheat like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 UEFA bottled it big style when they rescinded the ban that they gave Eduardo for diving. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertCommunicator Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Not too long before diving ruins top-flight football IMO, can't understand why the authorities won't do something about it. It's already been ruined. Fifa/Uefa/FA are a bunch of corrupt nobs who won't do anything about it lest they upset the big clubs who are unfortunately the worst for diving. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 what is the difference between a dive and a professional type foul ? surely they are both cheating with the sole intent to win and normally both done in a way intended to con the officials. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Footballing pet hate - The way commentators avoid saying "dive" or "cheating". It's pathetic, especially when they have the benefit of numerous replays. PC bastards. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 what is the difference between a dive and a professional type foul ? surely they are both cheating with the sole intent to win and normally both done in a way intended to con the officials. True, there's just something about pretending to be fouled/hurt when you aren't that goes against everything sport is supposed to be about. For me, I believe professional fouling should be harshly punished but it is diving that's the biggest threat to the the game. Seeing grown men, professional athletes, rolling around holding their faces when they've barely been touched is an absolute disgrace. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 How is professional fouling intended to con the ref? Generally they couldn't be more obvious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrenchWilliam Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 How is professional fouling intended to con the ref? Generally they couldn't be more obvious. Win the ball illegally hoping not to get booked? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Fouling isn't a con in the same way as diving though. It's still breaking the laws of the game, but I still wouldn't call it 'cheating'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 How is professional fouling intended to con the ref? Generally they couldn't be more obvious. Win the ball illegally hoping not to get booked? I was under the impression a professional foul was a cynical method of stopping the opponent playing or scoring etc rather than winning the ball in any way. Like deliberately bringing someone down if they look like being a goal threat, as Nolan did against Wolves. There's no way he attempted to con the referee with that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beren Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Would love to see a "Kick Diving Out Of The Game" style campaign launched (a la "Kick Racism Out Of The Game") and force Busquets, Drogba and Ashley Young to endorse/be the figureheads of it. Attend galas, get photographs with kiddy footballers and give speeches about not diving etc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 what is the difference between a dive and a professional type foul ? surely they are both cheating with the sole intent to win and normally both done in a way intended to con the officials. The player that commits the "professional foul" is more often than not booked for it. How often do we see divers get booked? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 How is professional fouling intended to con the ref? Generally they couldn't be more obvious. Win the ball illegally hoping not to get booked? I was under the impression a professional foul was a cynical method of stopping the opponent playing or scoring etc rather than winning the ball in any way. Like deliberately bringing someone down if they look like being a goal threat, as Nolan did against Wolves. There's no way he attempted to con the referee with that. i meant the professional type foul (i used the term before in the tiote thread with not a murmour) like the blatant bodycheck where everyone including supporters of the defending team scream that he couldn't get out of the way even though he leant into the challenge and could've got out the way, or the type when the defender is running behind the forward and he tries to make out it was an innocent tangle of legs but it was very deliberate. both occasions are attempts to con the officials and just as bad as diving but aren't seen as being as bad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now