I'd like to believe this will do a lot to tackle the proliferation of 'simulation'. Unfortunately I suspect it will only be applied for blatant cases (e.g where there is no contact whatsoever).
Unfortunately, a lot of the worse cases of deception involve players deliberately contorting feet/body into a a position that creates artificial contact with a defender, or grossly exaggerates minor contact. My guess is that will continue to go unpunished.
Is it me or is the third paragraph under the heading "How the new bans will work " somewhat confusing? I am having difficulty getting my head round it.
I see that the piece has now been edited (no doubt as a result of others having commented) and is now the second paragraph under the "how it will work" sub heading.
If you blatantly dive and change the course of the match as a result (get a penalty and probably a goal, get the opposition sent off) seems fair that you should be punished.
Well it's a start but I can't remember a game of professional football where players from either team didn't simulate being fouled or over play the seriousness of a mistimed tackle in order to gain some advantage usually a free kick but a card for the opponent is seen as a bonus and a penalty is a scratch card win. Some players have actually built a career around it so there's a mountain to climb
Not so much in jobs where the demand for the role exceeds the people qualified to do it. For example doctors have to do a lot wrong before anyone is interested in anything more than a quiet word.
If there were an unending supply of good referees, sure. But the ones we get are among the best in the country - if we get rid of them we end up with the next ones down. Suspending them doesn't seem to be a recipe for us getting better referees.
I have to say if there we one rule change I'd welcome over anything it would be to abandon 90 min games in favour of a 60 minute game on a stop clock. Time wasting has become absolutely farcical at all levels of the game, including amateur football!
How would that work @mooneyman? For example, goalkeepers tend to be the biggest single perpetrators of the blatant variety (though they receive disproportionately few yellow cards). Would you give a free kick on the forward edge of the 6 yard box and shove the defenders into the goal?
The other problem with goalkeepers taking ages, is that the ref seems to only pick up on it if it's exceptionally blatant, and if their team is winning, or a smaller team hanging on for a draw.
Very often the keeper is taking just as long in the first half to no punishment.
Going back to some sort of time limit to kick it surely works?
@micra - Taking too long at Corners, throw ins and free kicks can easily be penalised by free kicks to the opposition. Even indirect free kicks could be given against the goalkeeper as is currently the case if he holds the ball for more than six seconds. Keepers would soon speed up after being penalised a couple of times.
Comments
I'd like to believe this will do a lot to tackle the proliferation of 'simulation'. Unfortunately I suspect it will only be applied for blatant cases (e.g where there is no contact whatsoever).
Unfortunately, a lot of the worse cases of deception involve players deliberately contorting feet/body into a a position that creates artificial contact with a defender, or grossly exaggerates minor contact. My guess is that will continue to go unpunished.
Is it me or is the third paragraph under the heading "How the new bans will work " somewhat confusing? I am having difficulty getting my head round it.
Its just you, Micra.
You dive to get a penalty or get their guy sent off, you get punished.
If only it was that simple.
@micra If only it were...?
I see that the piece has now been edited (no doubt as a result of others having commented) and is now the second paragraph under the "how it will work" sub heading.
Subjunctive-you're right @Cyclops.
Ainsworth will have to change our tactics some opposition fans will say.
Seems silly that you if you dive and get rumbled by the ref you only get a yellow, but if you dive and get away with it you get a ban?
If you blatantly dive and change the course of the match as a result (get a penalty and probably a goal, get the opposition sent off) seems fair that you should be punished.
Well it's a start but I can't remember a game of professional football where players from either team didn't simulate being fouled or over play the seriousness of a mistimed tackle in order to gain some advantage usually a free kick but a card for the opponent is seen as a bonus and a penalty is a scratch card win. Some players have actually built a career around it so there's a mountain to climb
Cancel that new contract for Matt Bloomfield. He'll barely play a game if this comes in at our level.
They will have to be proper obvious game changing dives presumably.
Otherwise, the bods would spend the whole of the next week flagging the overdone reactions and "gone down too easily" ones.
They need to do something on ref performances too. Suspend a few more of them for shocking decisions too
Are there enough people who want to be refs around that they can start suspending them?
You need a system where the underperformers are weeded out. Like in any job.
Not so much in jobs where the demand for the role exceeds the people qualified to do it. For example doctors have to do a lot wrong before anyone is interested in anything more than a quiet word.
If there were an unending supply of good referees, sure. But the ones we get are among the best in the country - if we get rid of them we end up with the next ones down. Suspending them doesn't seem to be a recipe for us getting better referees.
Don't refs still have to spend years climbing to even be able to ref non league games? Hence all the previous talk of "fast tracking" ex pros?
I'd probably take a "good ref" from the league below, over one making repeated mistakes in league 2
I have to say if there we one rule change I'd welcome over anything it would be to abandon 90 min games in favour of a 60 minute game on a stop clock. Time wasting has become absolutely farcical at all levels of the game, including amateur football!
Simple way to stop blatant time wasting is to give a free kick to the opposition.
How would that work @mooneyman? For example, goalkeepers tend to be the biggest single perpetrators of the blatant variety (though they receive disproportionately few yellow cards). Would you give a free kick on the forward edge of the 6 yard box and shove the defenders into the goal?
The other problem with goalkeepers taking ages, is that the ref seems to only pick up on it if it's exceptionally blatant, and if their team is winning, or a smaller team hanging on for a draw.
Very often the keeper is taking just as long in the first half to no punishment.
Going back to some sort of time limit to kick it surely works?
I think that only applies when the keeper is holding the ball (or, in OldenDaysbouncing it repeatedly.)
Can't get the cursor between the words. Sorry.
@micra - Taking too long at Corners, throw ins and free kicks can easily be penalised by free kicks to the opposition. Even indirect free kicks could be given against the goalkeeper as is currently the case if he holds the ball for more than six seconds. Keepers would soon speed up after being penalised a couple of times.
Far too subjective to implement effectively though. Fans get on the backs of players who don't sprint after the ball sometimes.
Fans don't make the decisions though, refs are paid to do it!
No worse than O'Nein or Parish Community Hall.
Agreed. But his saintly reputation makes it worse.
Not so keen on the Gairman version of Luke's name. Too negative.