Sith Happens Posted February 15, 2019 Share Posted February 15, 2019 Seriously when will authorities clamp down properly on cheating? 2 games is pathetic, make it 10 then the cheaters might think twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van der MoodHoover Posted February 15, 2019 Share Posted February 15, 2019 26 minutes ago, Paul71 said: Seriously when will authorities clamp down properly on cheating? 2 games is pathetic, make it 10 then the cheaters might think twice. Sadly, big Dave has come out and said how "disappointed" he is. On the basis that Gayle apparently thought he was going to be "clattered". Didn't look that way on the footage I must say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ambitious Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 If I was West Brom I'd feel hard done by, not by the ban in particular but the lack of consistency. You struggle to get through a weekend without someone diving: Grabban did it the week before for a penalty, Salah has done it on more than one occasion this season & countless more over the past two years without any retrospective punishment. I think there was one other? I'm not sure though. No denying it was a dive, but it was no worse than the penalty given for Bristol City against QPR on the same night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 Can't help thinking that a better way to wipe it out would be to call it as it is - rather than the FA using terms such as "simulation" or "trying to mislead an official", charge them with being a "cheating twit" - and let's also have commentators and ex-pros calling them cheats - players aren't bothered about being caught for "simulation", but won't be so keen to be publicly labelled as cheats.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 7 hours ago, Ambitious said: If I was West Brom I'd feel hard done by, not by the ban in particular but the lack of consistency. You struggle to get through a weekend without someone diving: Grabban did it the week before for a penalty, Salah has done it on more than one occasion this season & countless more over the past two years without any retrospective punishment. I think there was one other? I'm not sure though. No denying it was a dive, but it was no worse than the penalty given for Bristol City against QPR on the same night. Yes I agree, consistency is a major issue as they seem to pick and choose. My point is I guess if they actually go to the trouble of charging then 2 game is not a lot for cheating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 If we wasn’t so resistant to change and would be more forgiving to the VAR teething problems you wouldn’t need retrospective action. It shouldn’t take minutes to review an incident, more officials with gizmo gadgets. Review all penalties, 30 seconds max. These can be game changing decisions, come May if West Brom make the top 2 by a single point you can look at that as being earned by a dive at Forest. If all penalties were reviewed players would know they wouldn’t get away with it. Get caught diving and it’s a standard red card and ban. That alone should make players think twice. Throw free kicks in there as well around the box, a free kick outside the box may as well be a penalty for Harry Wilson. It’s 2019, we shouldn’t be technophobes, nor should the game skimp on the technology and match officials to operate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 Just now, David said: If we wasn’t so resistant to change and would be more forgiving to the VAR teething problems you wouldn’t need retrospective action. It shouldn’t take minutes to review an incident, more officials with gizmo gadgets. Review all penalties, 30 seconds max. These can be game changing decisions, come May if West Brom make the top 2 by a single point you can look at that as being earned by a dive at Forest. If all penalties were reviewed players would know they wouldn’t get away with it. Get caught diving and it’s a standard red card and ban. That alone should make players think twice. Throw free kicks in there as well around the box, a free kick outside the box may as well be a penalty for Harry Wilson. It’s 2019, we shouldn’t be technophobes, nor should the game skimp on the technology and match officials to operate it. I do agree, but the things you mention are the reason I hate VAR currently. The other night, I didnt see it but they said it was over 3 minutes to review the Ajax Goal against Real Madrid, 3 minutes is just crazy. If a decision can't be reached quickly then let the original decision stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 4 minutes ago, Paul71 said: I do agree, but the things you mention are the reason I hate VAR currently. The other night, I didnt see it but they said it was over 3 minutes to review the Ajax Goal against Real Madrid, 3 minutes is just crazy. If a decision can't be reached quickly then let the original decision stand. They do need to give the officials a max time to come to a decision. Watch a game on Sky and they are showing you replays instantly, in the studio they have that twisty knob thing that can rewind the game. Doesn't need to be reviewed from every angle going, 2 people, each with a different camera angle, 30 seconds yes or no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjam Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 I'm not keen on VAR, it needs to get significantly better (and faster) imo and hopefully it will. That said, Dwight Gayle dived to rescue a point for West Brom - it cost Forest 2 points. Furthermore he will now be banned for 2 games that may additionally help Forests rivals (dunno who West Brom are playing tbh but the potential is there). If it was almost anyone else I'd be outraged ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 15 minutes ago, David said: They do need to give the officials a max time to come to a decision. Watch a game on Sky and they are showing you replays instantly, in the studio they have that twisty knob thing that can rewind the game. Doesn't need to be reviewed from every angle going, 2 people, each with a different camera angle, 30 seconds yes or no. VAR is also about getting the right decisions. I know its been discussed but the Sheff Wed vs Chelsea Penalty awarded to Sheff Wed then overturned is a good example. The decision was correct to overturn the penalty, and I know the rules are re-start the game with a drop ball, but its quite clear that had the referee not made an incorrect decision to award the penalty it should have been a corner to Wednesday. Surely there should be some flexibility on what happens next. But if we are going to stick to the rules of giving a drop ball, why did the ref wave away the Wednesday players and calmly drop the ball at the feet of the Chelsea keeper uncontested and then the next passage of play leads to Chelsea;s opening goal. At least allow the drop balls to be contested if this is going to be the rule. There is little value in VAR if one incorrect decision is going to be replaced with another incorrect decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 Why not wipe out the goal? deduct one point from west brom and award Forest the full 3 i know.....but that was the result of the cheating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 4 minutes ago, RamNut said: Why not wipe out the goal? deduct one point from west brom and award Forest the full 3 i know.....but that was the result of the cheating. I know what you mean but that would be a slippery slope for me. We don't want a situation in football where we leave a game then the next day find out the result has been changed. This happens sometimes in MotoGP/F1 and it just makes a mockery, the driver celebrates on the podium etc then later on the result is changed. I think just clamp down on it, make the punishments significant, 2 Games is naff all. Maybe if he was going to get a 10 game ban he might think twice next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 How many games is the ref banned for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Ram Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 Its funny because its forest. All of them going mad over it & biting on social media when you say its a stone wall penalty ? its too easy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRamFan Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 Gayle - 2 game ban Mings, nothing happen, honest ref... The FA, EFL, The refs are getting worse every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 31 minutes ago, McRamFan said: Gayle - 2 game ban Mings, nothing happen, honest ref... The FA, EFL, The refs are getting worse every year. Because the ref saw the Mings incident and thought it was an accident. Because he saw it the FA cannot take retrospective action. The FA can take retrospective action for diving, deceiving the match officials, seen or not at the time. Those are the rules for this season, you can’t just say forget the rules this time we’re going to do what we want. Do the rules need changing? Of course, but there’s no point in comparing these two incidents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 To be fair Forest can't have too many complaints. Its easy to complain when you are on the wrong end, but maybe they should remind themselves of their 2-1 home win against Newcastle which saw Newcastle reduced to 9 men as a result of Lansburys theatrics. Two red cards that were subsequently rescinded. And if they need further reminding those two points they likely got from playing against 9 men kept them up in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boycie Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 3 hours ago, David said: Because the ref saw the Mings incident and thought it was an accident. Because he saw it the FA cannot take retrospective action. The FA can take retrospective action for diving, deceiving the match officials, seen or not at the time. Those are the rules for this season, you can’t just say forget the rules this time we’re going to do what we want. Do the rules need changing? Of course, but there’s no point in comparing these two incidents. But the ref did see the incident and dealt with it, he awarded a peno. The ref saw the Mings incident too and nothing was done, maybe a free kick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 2 minutes ago, Boycie said: But the ref did see the incident and dealt with it, he awarded a peno. The ref saw the Mings incident too and nothing was done, maybe a free kick. Doesn’t matter if the ref saw the dive or not, the rules state retrospective action can be taken for dives. The Mings incident wasn’t a dive, the ref saw it, made the report as an accident, FA can’t take action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boycie Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 Just now, David said: Doesn’t matter if the ref saw the dive or not, the rules state retrospective action can be taken for dives. The Mings incident wasn’t a dive, the ref saw it, made the report as an accident, FA can’t take action. I don’t care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.