I’m not a cheat: Adelaide’s Jeronimo
Adelaide United striker Jeronimo Neumann says he’s not a cheat and didn’t dive in an incident which has caused an A-League furore.
Neumann was visibly upset on Tuesday when defending himself of diving allegations and being branded a cheat by Wellington captain Andrew Durante.
Phoenix defender Ben Sigmund was sent off in the incident, a straight red card later upheld by Football Federation Australia (FFA) on appeal by Wellington.
Argentine Neumann was distressed when fronting the media in Adelaide, with his teammate Cassio interpreting for him.
“No, no,” Neumann said when asked if he dived.
“I felt the player take my t-shirt and I went down.”
Neumann said he also a clip on an ankle and believed Sigmund’s red card was justified.
“He was the last man, so that’s a fair call,” he said.
Neumann, who scored twice in Adelaide’s 3-1 win against Wellington, said he was feeling pressure from the subsequent controversy despite being cleared by the FFA of any wrongdoing.
The FFA also upheld Sigmund’s one-match ban for the straight red card, verdicts which left Phoenix coach Ricki Herbert fuming.
“It is very disappointing for both Ben and the club … and also wrong that the game is being ruined by players who dive and do not get punished for it,” Herbert said on Monday.
Durante, in a post-game interview, labelled Neumann a “cheat” for diving and both he and Herbert could face sanctions for their comments under the A-League’s code of conduct.
But Cassio called for an end to the controversy.
“I can’t see anything wrong,” Cassio told reporters.
“He (Sigmund) touched him – he tripped him on his ankle.
“So what is the point? Let’s move on.
“The referee can make mistakes as players can make mistakes.
“But in my opinion, the referee (on Saturday) was okay.
“Maybe he (Neumann) delay a bit when he went down, but who cares? He (Sigmund) touched him.”
The Phoenix on Tuesday issued a brief statement in which General manager David Dome said the the club “respectfully accepted” the the match review panel’s decision over Sigmund’s dismissal.
Dome says the correct process was followed.
“So far as the club is concerned, the matter has been laid to rest,” he said.
© AAP 2013
Passionate about your football? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily football email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
The Crowd Says (33) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
- Explore:
- A-League, football, Jeronimo Neumann
October 31st 2012 @ 6:07am
Stevo said | October 31st 2012 @ 6:07am | Report comment
Sorry JN, watch the slow mo:
http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/jeronimo-cleared-of-diving-/video-e6frf423-1226505621952?subcat=1111112039253
1) there was no clip on the ankle
2) the shirt tug was minor and you still continued on your run as if unimpeded
3) Paston easily got the ball before you could have (you didn’t really have control of the ball at any stage)
4) you threw yourself to the ground because of 3) and you thought you could get a favourable decision from the ref
Gillet made the call in the moment as he saw it and that’s all he could do – that’s fine.
October 31st 2012 @ 6:23am
PB said | October 31st 2012 @ 6:23am | Report comment
Maybe not a cheat, definitely a cheap opportunist. But if you look at the clip, it’s clearly no red card – only cover for officials is “he was the last man” dogma. Sigmund was hot on his heels, yes – but if he clipped his ankle its because Neumann saw Paston had the ball covered and stopped running.
The right for each team to have a 2 video referrals would have had the Phoenix up 2-1 by this incident, and both teams finishing with 11 men.
October 31st 2012 @ 8:26am
Kasey said | October 31st 2012 @ 8:26am | Report comment
Of course he would say that. In his mind he has done nothing wrong. Time for the AU squad to teach/tell him that going down too easy after a foul is considered unsatisfactory in this country.
Mind you with the shyte refs in this league, I wouldn’t be surprised to see more antics like this from other players on all teams going forwards… gotta make sure the ref calls the foul by accentuating that contact
October 31st 2012 @ 10:15am
Ian said | October 31st 2012 @ 10:15am | Report comment
is this the same Kasey that supports AU? no offence but it doesn’t sound like you.
October 31st 2012 @ 10:24pm
Auric Goldfinger said | October 31st 2012 @ 10:24pm | Report comment
The SBSers and the usual soccer brigade suspects will stick up for the ‘diving’ culture and point out it goes on in other sports, like the high board and what not but all it will take to stamp this rubbish out is for FIFA to start suspending players in World Cup finals.
FIFA is corrupted also, so as the old saying goes, the fish starts rotting at the head.
October 31st 2012 @ 9:24am
c said | October 31st 2012 @ 9:24am | Report comment
So AFL Steve what’s your point? Don’t you have AFL news stories breaking everyday that will continue to break until your round 1you can comment to
October 31st 2012 @ 10:00am
fadida said | October 31st 2012 @ 10:00am | Report comment
I thought it was an impartial article. Not sure why you’re having a go at the author?
October 31st 2012 @ 11:40am
c said | October 31st 2012 @ 11:40am | Report comment
okay fadida your point is acknowledged. I thought Steve did not add anything to the discussion rather than restating these ugly facts and deriving pleasure from doing so as an AFL Guru?. My apologies Steve if I have misread your intentions.
pS I am rather paranoid the local SA media (particularly 5aa radio station) is giving our game particularly the always negative slant it seems to take glee in reporting. Fortunately they do have lots of “breaking AFL news” to report to their listeners in their off-season on and hourly basis
October 31st 2012 @ 2:33pm
fadida said | October 31st 2012 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
I’m paranoid too C!
I’m sure we’re all waiting for the mainstream media to jump on the first sign of crowd trouble or negativity
October 31st 2012 @ 9:59am
fadida said | October 31st 2012 @ 9:59am | Report comment
Jeronimo’s statement shows how South American players view it; if the opponent grabs/trips you then you are entitled to go down. Diving would be if you went down with NO contact. Our interpretation is that the contact should be enough to make you fall. Two different interpretations of the same scenario.
On the other side, is it cheating if Sugmund tries to illegally pull back a player running past? He’s breaking the rules to stop a player. This is different to honestly mis-timing a tackle, or being beaten by a great bit of skill and accidentally fouling.
For the record I thought it was a yellow as the keeper had it covered, therefore no goalscoring opportunity. If I was the referee I would have told Alf Kosmina to have a word with Jeronimo and to let him know that in our interpretation you shouldn’t go down if you have to think about falling.
Not cheating, just emphasising contact.
October 31st 2012 @ 10:40am
Fussball ist unser leben said | October 31st 2012 @ 10:40am | Report comment
If a player trips an opponent or holds an opponent, in football, the Laws of the Game deem it to be a foul and a direct free-kick is given.
If the ref thinks the foul also resulted in denial of an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, the offending player is given a red card.
Whether Jeronimo fell over is absolutely irrelevant in relation to any discussion regarding:
1. the foul that was committed
2. the red card to Sigmund
October 31st 2012 @ 10:46am
clayts said | October 31st 2012 @ 10:46am | Report comment
Finally someone who is actually paying attention to the rules.
The red card was mandatory and correct on what the referee saw. Player held back running towards goal with no one between him and the keeper = red card – dive or no dive.
Yes, Jeronimo went a few paces then fell over which is clearly not a good look. However, we should probably be focussing more on the fact that Sigmund was the main offender here and would/should have been sent off even if Jeronimo just pulled up straight after he was held back. Sigmund is a cheat
October 31st 2012 @ 10:54am
Nathan of Perth said | October 31st 2012 @ 10:54am | Report comment
Well, no, that’s not necessarily a red card, there’s a number of factors that are supposed to come into play – but you are right, as has been mentioned in relation to this issue a few times now, the dive was immaterial to the sanction given. The hold was there, if Gillett felt it was an obvious goal scoring opportunity then off he goes. But even if Gillett did not think it was, Sigmund still had a yellow card coming his way and it would have been his second – same result. Although the Nux supporters were pretty cheesed about Sigmund’s first yellow card.
So, as I’ve said, yellow to Sigmund, yellow to Jeronimo (would have been R7s to both of them because they had both already been cautioned) and restart play with Adelaide DFK.
October 31st 2012 @ 11:00am
philipcoates said | October 31st 2012 @ 11:00am | Report comment
Agree 100% Nathan. Yellow to Sigmond, yellow to Jeronimo, free kick to Adelaide for the initial foul.
October 31st 2012 @ 11:07am
Fussball ist unser leben said | October 31st 2012 @ 11:07am | Report comment
Nathan, I know you’re a referee so really keen to know if you’ve ever seen a player fouled AND given a yellow card for allegedly diving?
From what I understand, the YC for diving is for “unsporting behaviour” in relation to a player WHO IS NOT fouled and falls over in an attempt to con the ref into giving him a free kick.
October 31st 2012 @ 11:21am
Nathan of Perth said | October 31st 2012 @ 11:21am | Report comment
Not anymore on the refereeing, got sick of coaches
Have I heard of it happening in practice? No, but the provision is there. Y1 / USB is the catch-all it comes under.
Now the interpretation is feigns injury or pretends to be fouled. The delay between the hold and the fall could easily be interpreted to pretending to be fouled as, at the time he went down, he was no longer being held and he didn’t go down in a way that would seem to reflect Sigmund’s actual infringement. It would be a pretty rare scenario though. By contrast, whilst Emerton went to ground as well when held by Pants, he started going down whilst held, rather than a couple steps thereafter.
So, very fine lines and very tricky stuff, but that would have been my “ideal world” resolution to the incident.
For all I know though, Gillett may have thought it was an ankle clip instead of the hold.
October 31st 2012 @ 2:13pm
Diablo said | October 31st 2012 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
It’s a tough one but anyone who’s played the game knows that if you try to stay on your feet after contact there is a good chance the ref will just waive play on. Some players feel they have to exaggerate it to get the refs attention.
October 31st 2012 @ 5:59pm
Nathan of Perth said | October 31st 2012 @ 5:59pm | Report comment
From Ben Wilson the ref boss’ article about this:
“I think most people would acknowledge there was a foul there, the fact that he may have exaggerated that contact more than what it was doesn’t necessarily lead to a yellow card for simulation because there was actually a foul there in the first place.”
Would highlight the ‘doesn’t necessarily’. Depends on the nature of the exaggeration. Wilson is apparently of the opinion that he was potentially tripped, which is probably Jeronimo’s great saving grace.
October 31st 2012 @ 10:56am
philipcoates said | October 31st 2012 @ 10:56am | Report comment
The crucial words here are, “If the ref thinks the foul also resulted in denial of an obvious goal-scoring opportunity.” Blind freddy could see there was no goal scoring opportunity. The ball was running through to Patson and there was no way Jeronimo would have reached it. As there was no goal scoring opportunity, there should have been no red card at all.
October 31st 2012 @ 11:01am
Fussball ist unser leben said | October 31st 2012 @ 11:01am | Report comment
The ref’s opinion is the only opinion that matters.
When it comes to “interpretation” issues, we have to accept the ref’s interpretation.
For sure, we can castigate a ref for errors of fact, but why should your interpretation, or my interpretation of “goal-scoring opportunity” be any more valid than the bloke who was officiating and standing 10 metres from the action?
October 31st 2012 @ 11:07am
Nathan of Perth said | October 31st 2012 @ 11:07am | Report comment
Well, the fact the bloke officiating seemed to be about 30m on an internal angle from the action didn’t help matters much…
October 31st 2012 @ 10:58pm
Griffo said | October 31st 2012 @ 10:58pm | Report comment
I think your statement above Nathan is what is missing from the whole debate…
…how soon for FoxSports to push the HeroCam concept a few steps further and helmet-mount a GoPro HeroCam2 camera to the ref so we can see the action for his decisions from his eyes in real time?
Just a thought FoxSports.
October 31st 2012 @ 12:09pm
philipcoates said | October 31st 2012 @ 12:09pm | Report comment
I accept your comments, Fuss, sure the ref could have got it wrong. But I’m staggered the match review couldnt see that a mistake had been made.
October 31st 2012 @ 1:23pm
Peter Wilson said | October 31st 2012 @ 1:23pm | Report comment
The referee acted within the rules. The “mistake” is in the interpertation of the rules.
Brett Emerton didn’t reach the ball and fell over easily when he was held back by Pantelidis.
Should he have tried to stay on his feet and try and get to the ball?
Was it not a penalty and red card?
October 31st 2012 @ 1:51pm
Nathan of Perth said | October 31st 2012 @ 1:51pm | Report comment
Speaking subjectively as a Glory fan, yes!
But objectively, penalty and a red everyday of the week. The jerk!
The keys to the interpretation in these two cases are whether or not the fouled player was likely to gain or keep possession. Emerton absolutely had the best chance of getting to that ball first and would surely have an obvious opportunity to score (though as we all have seen, a one on one with a keeper is not a sure thing, but it is the opportunity that counts).
Would have liked to see a quick check with the AR before going to the red with the Jeronimo case.
October 31st 2012 @ 11:17am
fadida said | October 31st 2012 @ 11:17am | Report comment
Agree completely with PhillipCoates
October 31st 2012 @ 1:05pm
Peter Wilson said | October 31st 2012 @ 1:05pm | Report comment
Yes, but did Geronimo not reach the ball because he was held back or because the pass was overhit.
The referee had to decide that in a split second and made the call.
Red card was a bit harsh, but its entirely within the rules – no error or illegal decision by the referee.
Should they replay the game?
Should we replay last season’s grand final?
Lets move on – its nearly round 5!
October 31st 2012 @ 2:06pm
baanskis said | October 31st 2012 @ 2:06pm | Report comment
Both Durante and Herbert must be punsihed.
October 31st 2012 @ 2:15pm
Nathan of Perth said | October 31st 2012 @ 2:15pm | Report comment
Fascinating to think that the FFA has come after no party in all of this. Very softly softly approach!
October 31st 2012 @ 2:37pm
fadida said | October 31st 2012 @ 2:37pm | Report comment
Agreed. Durante not for his cheat comment, but for criticising the refs.
I like Herbert and what he’s doing over in NZ but calling a ref incompetent based on a split second decision that has split opinion about 50/50? He should be fined.
November 1st 2012 @ 4:20pm
clayts said | November 1st 2012 @ 4:20pm | Report comment
Of course he should be fined. No doubt about that. Particularly when the referee did absolutely nothing wrong. I think A-League coaches and players just need to concentrate on playing better football than the opposition each week and stop blaming referees for mistakes their own players have made. Much more often than not, if you score more goals than you let in, not worrying about referees sending off players for tugging shirts, you will do quite well I think
November 1st 2012 @ 5:26pm
Nathan of Perth said | November 1st 2012 @ 5:26pm | Report comment
Although the sending off part will probably interfere with the scoring part. Wellington seemed to think so, anyway.
October 31st 2012 @ 8:15pm
Stevo said | October 31st 2012 @ 8:15pm | Report comment
Well, what we have to believe is that Gillet gave the foul for the ‘touch up’ that Benny gave Jeronimo and that the dive didn’t influence the refs decision. We will never know unless we can examine what Gillet was thinking at the moment of the incident. What we do see is that JN made a meal of it – an ugly look.