And, we're off.....2016/17

[ColchesterFC]

What a big game it is for yawnited & spuds tomorrow, both need to win to keep in touch with the groups of teams there in and around but anything other than a win for manure and their season is all about hanging onto 6th 

If United lose today against Spurs I wonder if they'll be focusing more on the Europa League and trying to win that as a way into the Champions League rather than trying to finish top 4.

 

[Sweep]

The FA seem to condone diving by not having retrospective action available like it is in Scotland...
Doesn't make sense.
Almost every game there's a dive or two and, quite frankly, it's making a mockery of the game.
Cheats never prosper - unless you're a footballer that is.....

Excellent post. Diving has simply ruined the game for me, to the extent that I watch much less nowadays. This scourge of the game renders the result, the league and the game itself utterly irrelevant. Football these days is about as authentic as WWE or your local pantomime. It's not a sport. Sport requires sportsmanship. It's a game full of gamesmanship. There is a world of difference between the two.

 

[Hobbit]

Trouble is Homer I am inclined to agree with Paul 42, City with a woeful defence that is sooooooooo slooooooooow played right into Leicesters hands that was a woeful City performance. Would like to see Leicester get a kind draw, they deserve it. City have a ? World class centre forward coming in January, would like to see three world class defenders coming in as well. I said a month or so ago that City need to be on the leaders tails after Christmas. At this rate they won't be.

Hobbits's agrees with Tashboy. That defence is starting to look old and creaky. Sort the defence and an upside is you'll be able to attack more.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Excellent post. Diving has simply ruined the game for me, to the extent that I watch much less nowadays. This scourge of the game renders the result, the league and the game itself utterly irrelevant. Football these days is about as authentic as WWE or your local pantomime. It's not a sport. Sport requires sportsmanship. It's a game full of gamesmanship. There is a world of difference between the two.

You get the odd dive in the odd game and Stu_C is 100% correct that until teams lose points then nothing will change, but to compare it to WWE or a panto is ridiculous.

 

[richy]

Trouble is Homer I am inclined to agree with Paul 42, City with a woeful defence that is sooooooooo slooooooooow played right into Leicesters hands that was a woeful City performance. Would like to see Leicester get a kind draw, they deserve it. City have a ? World class centre forward coming in January, would like to see three world class defenders coming in as well. I said a month or so ago that City need to be on the leaders tails after Christmas. At this rate they won't be.

I don't get it. Man City have spent well over 80mil on defenders over the last 3 years so to say you need THREE more defenders is crazy. Man City are turning into Chelsea where if they have a problem they just throw a ridiculous amount of money at it and hope for the best.

 

[Sweep]

You get the odd dive in the odd game and Stu_C is 100% correct that until teams lose points then nothing will change, but to compare it to WWE or a panto is ridiculous.

Really? There is a dive in every game.
Who won yesterday? Hull or Palace? The result was skewed because of cheating. That's what it is, cheating. ( I am not a Palace fan btw). This in turn will skew the league.
You are right though, you can't compare it with pantomime or WWE. At least those two don't pretend to be serious. Football is becoming a laughing stock.
I remind you of Benteke when he won a penalty for cheating by diving v Palace (oddly enough) last year.
Interviwer: " Was it a penalty?"
Benteke: "I think he touched me"
Panalist: He had every right to go down.

Please! And my comparison is ridiculous???

Just imagine if golf was tainted this way.

 

[Sweep]

I don't get it. Man City have spent well over 80mil on defenders over the last 3 years so to say you need THREE more defenders is crazy. Man City are turning into Chelsea where if they have a problem they just throw a ridiculous amount of money at it and hope for the best.

For the past couple of years City were a different team when Kompany played and they really missed him when he was injured. I know he hasn't figured under Pep and is injured, but I do wonder if he is the answer to City's defensive woes.

 

[richy]

For the past couple of years City were a different team when Kompany played and they really missed him when he was injured. I know he hasn't figured under Pep and is injured, but I do wonder if he is the answer to City's defensive woes.

He probably is but for a team to have spent so much over the past few years they really shouldn't be relying on a single player.

 

[Sweep]

He probably is but for a team to have spent so much over the past few years they really shouldn't be relying on a single player.

I agree and it goes to prove you can't always buy the title.

 

[Sweep]

If United lose today against Spurs I wonder if they'll be focusing more on the Europa League and trying to win that as a way into the Champions League rather than trying to finish top 4.

Personally I don't think United should have entered the Europa League.
I am a United fan but I don't think they will make the Champions League either way (I hope I am wrong though).
IMO if you haven't been good enough to get into the Champions League you need to concentrate on your league form and take advantage of fewer games to do so. After all, it's not like the old days when only the Champions got into the European Cup. If you haven't made the top four or win the cup you shouldn't be playing in Europe. Winning a cup for teams that have come 5th or worse is not European glory. It's just about cash.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Really? There is a dive in every game.
Who won yesterday? Hull or Palace? The result was skewed because of cheating. That's what it is, cheating. ( I am not a Palace fan btw). This in turn will skew the league.
You are right though, you can't compare it with pantomime or WWE. At least those two don't pretend to be serious. Football is becoming a laughing stock.
I remind you of Benteke when he won a penalty for cheating by diving v Palace (oddly enough) last year.
Interviwer: " Was it a penalty?"
Benteke: "I think he touched me"
Panalist: He had every right to go down.

Please! And my comparison is ridiculous???

Just imagine if golf was tainted this way.

So one instance yesterday out of all the games played and one from last season, proves your point then!
I totally agree it's cheating and disgraceful and needs stamping out, but it's nothing new, diving has been going on for years, Francis Lee in the early 70's was one of the best.
Football is bigger and more popular than it's ever been so it must be doing something right.
If it's become a laughing stock it's for the obscene amount of money in the game.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Players have been diving for years , it's not a new phenomenon

I don't agree with punishing the clubs with points but do think they need to grab some balls and start to check videos afterwards and hand out retrospective action to any offender.

But you only have to look at the Eduardo case with UEFA when they attempted to ban him for 3 games - they couldn't prove him "intended" to dive so he got off on appeal - would be the same problem now , how do you proof it was an intentional dive looking to gain an advantage?

The easiest way is to just not allow them to appeal and any like found guilty of diving is banned for 4 games , it won't take long for that to hit Home

 

[One Planer]

Players have been diving for years , it's not a new phenomenon

I don't agree with punishing the clubs with points but do think they need to grab some balls and start to check videos afterwards and hand out retrospective action to any offender.

But you only have to look at the Eduardo case with UEFA when they attempted to ban him for 3 games - they couldn't prove him "intended" to dive so he got off on appeal - would be the same problem now , how do you proof it was an intentional dive looking to gain an advantage?

The easiest way is to just not allow them to appeal and any like found guilty of diving is banned for 4 games , it won't take long for that to hit Home

Did you see the Snodgrass dive.

He was looking for a penalty and won it. Pure dive, zero contact.

That is exactly the situation the FA should be retrospectively issuing bans for.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Did you see the Snodgrass dive.

He was looking for a penalty and won it. Pure dive, zero contact.

That is exactly the situation the FA should be retrospectively issuing bans for.

I haven't seen it but did hear that he said that he was diving out of the way of the tackle and that it shouldn't have been a penalty ? So how do they prove that he was looking for it ?

 

[richy]

I agree and it goes to prove you can't always buy the title.

Then throwing more money at it won't be the answer then.

They've supposedly got one of the best coaches in the world (they haven't, he's massively overrated IMO) so he should be able to fix it.

 

[One Planer]

I haven't seen it but did hear that he said that he was diving out of the way of the tackle and that it shouldn't have been a penalty ? So how do they prove that he was looking for it ?

Because they're was no tackle Phil.

Snodgrass jumped for a tackle/contact that never came, nor was even close.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Because they're was no tackle Phil.

Snodgrass jumped for a tackle/contact that never came, nor was even close.

So if he says he was expected a tackle coming in so dived out of the way from that expected tackle is he diving to get a penalty or to protect himself ?

This is what he said

"Apologies from my end, it was never a penalty," tweeted Snodgrass after the match. "But genuinely thought defender was going to slide, so tried to ride the tackle."


To charge the player they would have to prove that he did it to gain a penalty - and that's what they couldn't do with Eduardo , proving the intent. Would love for them to ban everyone who dives - but it's a minefield

Another example is look at the Charlie Adam incident from yesterday - he stood on Sanchez - so the question is to he mean too ? Was it a deliberate stamp ? Do you take his previous into account or was it an accident and that Adam couldn't have avoided standing on him - was there intent and can it be proved

 

[ger147]

Seems to wrok fine up here...

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/14677417.Hearts_midfielder_Jamie_Walker_loses_diving_ban_case/

 

[One Planer]

So if he says he was expected a tackle coming in so dived out of the way from that expected tackle is he diving to get a penalty or to protect himself ?

This is what he said

"Apologies from my end, it was never a penalty," tweeted Snodgrass after the match. "But genuinely thought defender was going to slide, so tried to ride the tackle."


To charge the player they would have to prove that he did it to gain a penalty - and that's what they couldn't do with Eduardo , proving the intent. Would love for them to ban everyone who dives - but it's a minefield

Another example is look at the Charlie Adam incident from yesterday - he stood on Sanchez - so the question is to he mean too ? Was it a deliberate stamp ? Do you take his previous into account or was it an accident and that Adam couldn't have avoided standing on him - was there intent and can it be proved

I watched the game live Phil, he knew exactly what he was doing. He shows zero remorse and slotted the Penally.

I remember a few years back where Robbie Fowler went over easily in the box and could clearly be seen telling the ref it wasn't a penalty. He missed the subsequent spot kick. On purpose? Who knows.

My point is if a player was sliding to tackle and he attempted to ride the challenge, I would agree.

The difference in this case is the player making the challenge didn't slide in. Snodgrass anticipated a tackle that never came.

How can he be defending himself from a tackle that was never made?

Obvious dive for all to see. Blatant cheating.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Players have been diving for years , it's not a new phenomenon

I don't agree with punishing the clubs with points but do think they need to grab some balls and start to check videos afterwards and hand out retrospective action to any offender.

But you only have to look at the Eduardo case with UEFA when they attempted to ban him for 3 games - they couldn't prove him "intended" to dive so he got off on appeal - would be the same problem now , how do you proof it was an intentional dive looking to gain an advantage?

The easiest way is to just not allow them to appeal and any like found guilty of diving is banned for 4 games , it won't take long for that to hit Home

If you take retrospective action, how does the team the offence was committed against benefit?
As said Snodgrass could've put the ball over the bar.
Instead he takes no responsibility and even his tweet is a piss take.
I don't believe they'll take points but that to me is the only way teams would take it seriously.