By dasilva -
November 22nd 2009 @ 12:29am
Get a Roar profile
Loading ...Related coverage
How to stop diving in football
When people think of diving, they automatically cringe at the thought. Usually the word cheat starts getting branded and the people who are divers are automatically crucified.
However, looking at diving in a cold dispassionate way will reveal that diving is only considered a yellow card offense. This puts diving on par with time wasting, a miss-timed challenge, swearing and taking off your shirt while celebrating a goal. It’s also considered a more minor offense then denying a goal scoring opportunity, handball to prevent the ball going into your own goal and a reckless tackle.
On a theoretical level, Rhys Williams was a bigger cheater with his red card offense during the Oman game than the likes of Ngog who dived for a penalty for Liverpool. Now do I believe that is the case? Of course not, however, until diving becomes a red card offense, all the talk about the evils of diving is a moot point.
Nations from different cultural backgrounds can logically state that diving is just a misdemeanour as the rules of the game clearly states. That it is a no bigger sin than a miss-timed challenge, and all the outrage is misguided.
With the introduction of post-match reviews of diving in the A-League, what we get is this ridiculous situation where if the referee does his job and detects a person diving, they will get a yellow card. However, if the referee misses the incident, the video review will suspend the player for two weeks. It’s a pretty bizarre situation where a yellow card offense is worth a two week suspension.
So the first step FIFA has to make is to ensure that diving is a red card. To me this is logical as I believe diving inside a box is an appropriate counterpart of current laws where an unfair denial of an obvious goal scoring opportunity is considered a red card offense.
Therefore the unfair creation of an obvious goal scoring opportunity should also be considered a red card offense. Also, diving is the attacking player equivalent of a reckless tackle which is considered a red card. Therefore turning diving into a red card will correct the imbalance between unsporting conduct by the defender and the attacker.
Second step that FIFA should make is to introduce video referees in games. Now I know this is controversial and there will be people who will argue against that, saying that football is a free flowing game and introducing video referees will impede with that nature. However, those people are ignoring the natural break in flow during the game that video referees can take advantage of.
The first natural break in flow are goals, which can be checked for offside and fouls by video referees (which will prevent incidence like the hand of Henry). The second natural break in flow are fouls in particular free kicks and penalties. It takes time to set up a penalty and it takes time to set up a free kick.
During this period of time, there is ample time for the video referee to check whether the penalty/free kick is justified and if there is any diving, the player can get sent off. If the penalty decision is rescinded, it will be considered a goal kick or a foul if there is diving to the opposition.
If we still worry about video referees taking too long to make a decision and interrupting the flow of the game, simply put a time limit of 90 seconds for the video referee to make a decision. Therefore unclear incidence or 50:50 scenarios where the decision could go either way, will be given the benefit of the doubt to the attacking side whilst clear cut and obvious dives can be picked up.
The only problem I can foresee is that referees may be too quick to blow for a penalty knowing that there is a video referee who will pick up any mistakes. However, as long as the referee applies some common sense and is instructed to adjudicate as before and treat this as an extra help rather then something to rely on, this will become a non-issue.
If this is implemented, the incidence of diving will plummet in professional football. Although exaggeration of contact may still be present, I believe that diving with no contact will be virtually eliminated if these changes are put in place and that can only be a good thing for the game.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(10)
dasilva said | November 22nd 2009 @ 1:50am | Report comment
One of my inspiration for this article was Mike Salter’s brilliant blog at The Football Tragic. http://thefootballtragic.blogspot.com/2009/02/video-refusers-update-part-2.html
He was talking about using more video evidence in the game.
Now before you accuse of ripping off. I did take his idea of using video referees for penalty decision but I expanded on that aspect and brought up its implication in cracking down diving.
Freud of Football said | November 22nd 2009 @ 4:34am | Report comment
Dasilva, this article isn’t very well thought through.
For starters, I’d wager that 20% of players that are booked for diving didn’t actually dive (Darren Fletcher recently springs to mind) and video evidence frees them of guilt, as such you’d be wrongly red-carding 20% more players than now.
Secondly, interrupting the flow of the game, even for “90 seconds” is totally impractical. Not only are replays very often inconclusive but they can take time to be made available, further, only a coach getting hammered would want to break up the flow of the game, “resting while in possession” is an art-form specific to football, giving the players a breather everytime a decision is 50/50 would not only destroy the flow of the game but it would more than likely extend a match period over 2 hours which would affect TV.
Hence, any break in the game to view a video is simply not realistic in football. We just have to accept that referees get it wrong sometimes rather than hoping that video technology will increase the odds of correct decisions at the expense of the game.
If you want to eliminate diving, get rid of the rule that a foul inside the 18 yard box is automatically a penalty. N’Gog for example, he was on the byline, 3 players around him, where was he going to go? Nowhere, a penalty is a ridiculous result from there, there was no scoring opportunity, IF there was contact there should have been a free kick.
Same goes for fouls outside the box. Professional fouls that result in a free kick (and not always a red card) are way better to concede than a penalty, hence defenders will bring players down before they can enter the box.
If a referee can decide when a clear scoring opportunity has been affected by a foul then we will see less diving, there wont be penalties for fouls on the byline or when a player is hopelessly outnumbered but charges into the box ala C. Ronaldo hoping to get clipped, like everything else, it should be a judgement call.
dasilva said | November 22nd 2009 @ 9:10am | Report comment
I was pretty much saying only use the video referees when people are setting up for free kicks and penalties or when a goal is scored. These are natural break in the game. No one is going to tell a team to deliberately foul someone inside the box to waste time.
Really the time it takes for the video referees to watch the penalty shouldn’t be much longer then the time it takes for the referee to calm things down and set up the penalty kick.
Same things with goals, again no one is going to concede a goal as a time wasting tactic. It’s a natural break in flow. THere is more then ample enough time to check the goal for offside and any fouls. There was ample time when Henry scored that goal and then the kickoff where the goal could have been rescinded.
Now thinking even more about it, red cards are a natural break in flow of game as well. If someone dived in the box, the referee gives a red card. There is time for that to be rescinded and have the video ref examines and then call a penalty if there really was contact.
So I think you clearly exaggerate the effects of interrupting the game.
Your other idea is good idea however, I let you write the article for that law change cause I remember it was your idea didn’t want to steal it from you.
In any case that will become unnecessary if there is used in video evidence.
rocktrap said | November 22nd 2009 @ 12:39pm | Report comment
Use the american football system of giving the coaches a set number (say 2) of opportunities to check the video. if the decision is reversed the coaches get their check back. if the coaches make 2 wrong video calls then they can’t call for a video referee again.
Dan said | November 22nd 2009 @ 6:27pm | Report comment
That’s actually an extremely good idea. It would make the potential pay off for a successful dive far less and would also limit the number of possible stoppages.
dasilva said | November 22nd 2009 @ 7:15pm | Report comment
I think giving coaches to check the decision, this is where you start to get tactical use of video refereeing to waste time
If you are going to use replays to check if the penalty given is valid and to check if the goal given is valid.
There is no stoppages and there is no waste of time.
Midfielder said | November 22nd 2009 @ 12:55pm | Report comment
Hers a tho… if a player is brought down in the box and calls for a penalty …. it be sent to a TV ref … if correct award a penalty if not .. a yellow card to the diver a penalty for the defending team…
dasilva said | November 22nd 2009 @ 1:18pm | Report comment
The way I see it
THe referee does what he does normally the video referee will intervene if there is any mistake during the break in play.
Rabbitz said | November 22nd 2009 @ 6:16pm | Report comment
Easy to solve. Arm the refs. Shoot one or two of these soft c&*ks and then the dive will disappear overnight…
phil said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:08pm | Report comment
Where a player is down for 10 seconds or more he is removed from the field and cannot return for five minutes. This will stop the diving.