Diving Bans

[exileinleeds]

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/39962886

The FA is today voting on retrospective bans for diving from next season....

Long over due imho, however, in the early part of next season, are some clubs going to find themselves without key players due to bans- and potentially missing vital points?

Would a ref ignore a borderline decision and leave it to the FA and multi angle cameras for Monday?

[BR0B0T]

Banning them from driving??

lolz...it'll never stick!

[Stranded]

They'll vote it in , 3 players will get banned in August, all from bottom half PL clubs. Then a name player from one of the top 6 will get banned, people will be outraged as "how can the panel really be sure he dived, they don't understand the modern game" and it will slowly disappear until we get to Feb and realise no-one else has been banned despite there being clear dives most weekend.

[No Fixed Abode]

Yeah - I think they would only be able to ban players for clear, ridiculous dives. I can't see how they can ban if there is some doubt or a player dives out the way to avoid a clattering.

[Sutekh]

It's in!

"Players who dive in English football will face bans from next season under new Football Association regulations.

Under the new rules, passed by the governing body at its annual general meeting on Thursday, a panel will review footage from the weekend each Monday looking for cases of simulation.

Any player unanimously found guilty of diving would be given a suspension.

The panel will consist of one ex-match official, one ex-manager and one ex-player. "

So, they're going to FF through footage every league game looking for people falling over in the penalty box and then debate it are they

#jobsfortheboys

[Silver Fox]

So if the ref sees simulation during a game you get a yellow card, but if this panel decides that it was missed it's effectively a red?

[paultheroyal]

Check out Luton game. That's what you call cheating. oxf*rd.

[Sutekh]

So let's say a player goes over with an obvious dive, that fools the ref from his angle, and gets a penalty which sees his side win a game. You don't think the FA would be stupid enough to look at the incident and say the player dived and ban him would you?

[Hoop Blah]

So let's say a player goes over with an obvious dive, that fools the ref from his angle, and gets a penalty which sees his side win a game. You don't think the FA would be stupid enough to look at the incident and say the player dived and ban him would you?

It certainly opens up a whole can of worms but it's not a lot, if any, different to reviewing a red card, a bad tackle or a violent incident.

What happens during a game is influenced by so many factors and is over at the end of 90 minutes.

They'll vote it in , 3 players will get banned in August, all from bottom half PL clubs. Then a name player from one of the top 6 will get banned, people will be outraged as "how can the panel really be sure he dived, they don't understand the modern game" and it will slowly disappear until we get to Feb and realise no-one else has been banned despite there being clear dives most weekend.

That does sound quite likely. I am in favour of diving being addressed by retrospective penalties for those that cheat, but it will just become another thing for pundits and managers to harp on about and distract from the actual proper football on the pitch.

So if the ref sees simulation during a game you get a yellow card, but if this panel decides that it was missed it's effectively a red?

It will mean there is less benefit to getting away with it, IF, it's enforced effectively. It's one thing conning a ref with a hundred things to watch and weigh up in a split second, but another thing to avoid being done by the panel.

As ever it'll come down to the way they implement it and how effective they can be in reviewing whether contact was made and if it was enough to warrant the dive. Anyone who's seen the so called experts on Sky or Match of the Day will know that it won't be an easy thing to agree on or get right and you wonder how often all 3 panel members will find a player guilty.

[stealthpapes]

Yeah - I think they would only be able to ban players for clear, ridiculous dives. I can't see how they can ban if there is some doubt or a player dives out the way to avoid a clattering.

I kind of think the opposite - it needs to be harsh enough that you don't risk it.

[Winston Biscuit]

[genome]

[BR0B0T]

A cancer in the game i love

[genome]

A cancer in the game i love

Clear foul

[Ian Royal]

This is great, providing someone has actually clearly defined what a dive is and where the boundary between diving and not diving is. Requiring contact isn't good enough. A mild glancing touch shouldn't usually take someone down, so falling over could still be a dive. Managing to avoid a challenge but losing your balance and going down as a result is often not going to be a dive.

Can we chuck in feigning injury / being hit to this?

[Top Flight]

Yeah - I think they would only be able to ban players for clear, ridiculous dives. I can't see how they can ban if there is some doubt or a player dives out the way to avoid a clattering.

I kind of think the opposite - it needs to be harsh enough that you don't risk it.

There will be a panel to make these decisions. The panel will include an ex player, an ex manager and an ex referee.
I'm sure their judgement will be good most of the time.

The point the Swansea manager Clement makes though is that the team that was the victim of the dive isn't going to benefit from the retrospective action. The team that benefits could be the next opponent of the diving players team and that team might be a rival of the team that was sinned against. The sinned team could be disadvantaged over and over again.

[Ian Royal]

Yeah - I think they would only be able to ban players for clear, ridiculous dives. I can't see how they can ban if there is some doubt or a player dives out the way to avoid a clattering.

I kind of think the opposite - it needs to be harsh enough that you don't risk it.

Yeah, if you penalise the obvious ones and leave the dubious ones, it's essentially just creating a system of encouraging players to get better at disguising diving. Whereas if you shrug and accept sometimes you'll get it wrong and someone'll be unfairly penalised there is no incentive to get better at diving, the incentive is to stay on your feet at all costs.

[multisync1830]

Yeah - I think they would only be able to ban players for clear, ridiculous dives. I can't see how they can ban if there is some doubt or a player dives out the way to avoid a clattering.

I kind of think the opposite - it needs to be harsh enough that you don't risk it.

Yeah, if you penalise the obvious ones and leave the dubious ones, it's essentially just creating a system of encouraging players to get better at disguising diving. Whereas if you shrug and accept sometimes you'll get it wrong and someone'll be unfairly penalised there is no incentive to get better at diving, the incentive is to stay on your feet at all costs.

as a theory that might work but that implies a certain amount of premeditation . Diving (or not) generally is a millisecond split decision. .

[Ian Royal]

I kind of think the opposite - it needs to be harsh enough that you don't risk it.

Yeah, if you penalise the obvious ones and leave the dubious ones, it's essentially just creating a system of encouraging players to get better at disguising diving. Whereas if you shrug and accept sometimes you'll get it wrong and someone'll be unfairly penalised there is no incentive to get better at diving, the incentive is to stay on your feet at all costs.

as a theory that might work but that implies a certain amount of premeditation . Diving (or not) generally is a millisecond split decision. .

You could say the same about tackles from behind. Doesn't mean that punishing them harshly failed to stop them because they were milisecond split decisions.

[AthleticoSpizz]

I think it is a great thing....too late for the likes of Drogba tho'

However, more important, is the goals that actually are or aren't.....that needs to be addressed.........and a way of awarding/deducting them from the scorelines.