Retrospective bans for diving from 17/18

[Day]

Players who dive in English football could face bans from next season.

The Football Association will vote on retrospective action at its annual general meeting on Thursday and is expected to approve the proposal.

The governing body would need the backing of the Premier League, the English Football League and the Professional Footballers' Association to introduce the rule change.

But it is understood they are broadly supportive and already in agreement.

Under the proposed new rules, a panel would review footage from the weekend each Monday looking for cases of simulation. Any player unanimously found guilty of diving would be given a suspension.

Speaking in December, Burnley manager Sean Dyche said he thought diving would be eradicated from football "in six months" if retrospective bans were introduced.

Such bans have been in place in Scottish football since 2011.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39962886

[Alph]

Good. 

Get rid of feigning injury, time wasting and swearing at referees like a stroppy teenager and it'll be as manly and uninterrupted as the women's game.

[Day]

I hope the panel has former professionals on and not a bunch of suits. 

Will be interesting how the top 4 adapt with Champions League midweek diving competition then stay on your feet Saturdays.

Sorry FA, thought it was Tuesday! 

[Alph]

10 minutes ago, David said:

I hope the panel has former professionals on and not a bunch of suits. 

Will be interesting how the top 4 adapt with Champions League midweek diving competition then stay on your feet Saturdays.

Sorry FA, thought it was Tuesday! 

News of retrospective bans for diving has hit the Busquets family hard. Sergio, 28, has claimed he may never be able to work again

[Leicester Ram]

Going to have to sell Martin now ffs at least toddy'a happy

[EnigmaRam]

1 hour ago, Alpha said:

Good. 

Get rid of feigning injury, time wasting and swearing at referees like a stroppy teenager and it'll be as manly and uninterrupted as the women's game.

Did you see forrestieries feigning injury last night? Went down rolling around like he'd broke his leg. The ball then ricocheted back towards him and he was back on his feet like a rocket up his jacksy. Disgraceful, especially as he then got tackled and fell over again rolling around like a dying fish.

[Alph]

13 minutes ago, EnigmaRam said:

Did you see forrestieries feigning injury last night? Went down rolling around like he'd broke his leg. The ball then ricocheted back towards him and he was back on his feet like a rocket up his jacksy. Disgraceful, especially as he then got tackled and fell over again rolling around like a dying fish.

Thankfully I missed it. 

You'd be so embarrassed if your family and friends could see you doing that. 

You just can't even explain it. What are they doing. 

I'm slowly losing interest in football. I swear it's getting slower. Between the rolling around, the arguing with every decision, the diving at every contact and the time wasting... There's hardly any football. It's a series of set pieces and blokes acting like kids. One minute they're squaring up like heavyweight boxers and then they're going down easier than a prostitute.

Everybody stop!!! He's been pushed over!! Medic!!!

I don't like Rugby but it's miles better than football. 

[Bris Vegas]

Not a fan of this. Different rules within the same game isn't healthy in my opinion.

Also would like to know what is considered a dive. Are you only diving if you appeal?

 

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

30 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said:

Not a fan of this. Different rules within the same game isn't healthy in my opinion.

Also would like to know what is considered a dive. Are you only diving if you appeal?

 

A dive is where someone purposely goes to ground whether with contact or not in an effort to gain an advantage. It used to be called cheating now it's "winning" a foul.

[Carnero]

2 hours ago, David said:

I hope the panel has former professionals on and not a bunch of suits. 

Will be interesting how the top 4 adapt with Champions League midweek diving competition then stay on your feet Saturdays.

Sorry FA, thought it was Tuesday! 

They've said it'll be a 3 man panel - a former ref, a former manager and a former player.

A panel decision has to be unanimous.

Sounds good to me.

[KBB]

39 minutes ago, Saul Pimpson said:

They've said it'll be a 3 man panel - a former ref, a former manager and a former player.

A panel decision has to be unanimous.

Sounds good to me.

The ref is uria reny the manager is Ron Atkinson and the player is harry Kewell........

[Boycie]

2 hours ago, Bris Vegas said:

Not a fan of this. Different rules within the same game isn't healthy in my opinion.

Also would like to know what is considered a dive. Are you only diving if you appeal?

 

I agree, it's going to ruin the South American and Southern European games on tv.

[Sith Happens]

Great news, a 3 man panel to decide players from supposed lower clubs get more severe punishments from those at the top clubs, with west ham exempt from any action at all.

[EnigmaRam]

Problem with retrospective bans is it doesn't aid the team they do it against. It only AIDS the teams they are banned against. Would rather live video technology and either sin bin or send off for simulation.

at least that way it hurts them in that game

[Day]

Think the ban should deter players from diving so it won't effect any game, be nice to see clubs back this up with fines, if you can't play as you're banned for diving why should get paid?

Scotland it's a 2 game ban I believe, that's what the Ross County player had for his dive v Celtic.

I would make it a 3 game ban.

Once that's all sorted bang on UEFA's door and lobby them for the change, time this game was rid of this *****.

[Sparkle]

Good, if 100% correct, I hate cheating on any level and it sets youngsters the correct examples, banning players/red cards etc for swearing at officials would be nice to, and a pet hate when a player kicks the ball out of play then claims it should be his teams throw in,corner etc- hypocrites.

[Bris Vegas]

How can you judge whether a player has dived though? The player in return could just say he fell over, didn't appeal for a foul and was rewarded a penalty.

The Sane example the other week. I don't think he even appealed so how can you say he purposely tried to deceive the ref? 

Also can you go to ground with minimal contact and ask for a penalty? Is this any worse than asking for a penalty for handball when in some cases it's blatantly obvious it isn't.

Too many questions, and I think they're setting themselves up for even more controversy with that obvious grey area for diving.

[Day]

7 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said:

How can you judge whether a player has dived though? The player in return could just say he fell over, didn't appeal for a foul and was rewarded a penalty.

The Sane example the other week. I don't think he even appealed so how can you say he purposely tried to deceive the ref? 

Also can you go to ground with minimal contact and ask for a penalty? Is this any worse than asking for a penalty for handball when in some cases it's blatantly obvious it isn't.

Too many questions, and I think they're setting themselves up for even more controversy with that obvious grey area for diving.

The quick peep behind hands to see if the ref is looking should be easy to spot

[Bris Vegas]

5 minutes ago, David said:

The quick peep behind hands to see if the ref is looking should be easy to spot

Some cases will be really obvious. But a bunch of others won't be. I'm in favour of players going to ground to win a freekick/penalty if they have been fouled.

Trying to stay on your feet only gives an unfair advanatage to the defence and often allows them to get away with a foul.

[Alph]

3 hours ago, Bris Vegas said:

Not a fan of this. Different rules within the same game isn't healthy in my opinion.

Also would like to know what is considered a dive. Are you only diving if you appeal?

 

Nobody will be banned for "going down easy" when there's contact. There's too much doubt over whether there was enough contact. 

And I bet that penalty that Victor Moses won v Spurs won't be in any danger. His path was obstructed. The ball was gone. There was no contact though. He "went over" Son's legs.

I know in some cases a player can be fouled (especially in the box) and if he stays on his feet then he gets nothing. Referees need to back this up by giving penalties like this when they'd give a free kick. Otherwise we'll have defenders grabbing shirts and pulling attackers back hoping that this rule keeps them on their feet. 

But the blatant ones. The classic dig your toes in the ground, put your foot behind a defenders leg should be stamped out. 

There will be errors. Two similar incidents will get different treatment and people will be unhappy.

But it's about time the cheats stopped hiding behind the innocent where they can't be touched. If it takes some innocent players to get hit by accident to eradicate blatant diving then it's for the greater good. 

I'm not sure how much blatant diving there is in the UK though. A lot of it is people going down when slightly touched. That's hard to punish. 

I'd much rather the focus be on feigning injury. Get them off the pitch. Get a medic to check them over for 5 minutes after play has started. Again the innocent injured will suffer. But again it's worth it to get pathetic stuff like Forestieri's theatrics out the game. No need for it. It's boring, embarrassing, pointless and a waste of time that everyone would rather spend watching the ball moving. 

Refs need to give less yellows for mistimed but none dangerous tackles and start firing them out to time wasters and gobshites too. That's easy to stamp out. See how much more abuse refs get when games are finishing 9 v 9