J
John McGovern
Guest
Gary Neville gets it spot on.
Diving
- Thread starter John McGovern
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Gary Neville gets it spot on.
Collymore is making a big deal out of it on Twitter as we speak (diving that is, not Ratface's burgeoning tv career)
J
John McGovern
Guest
Yeah I seen that, but just getting back to Neville. He really does make a fantastic pundit. He admit's he dived a few times, actually highlights Suarez's most recent dive which wasn't. He is fair as they come these days. I hate saying that.
I know. It proper irks me.
I hate the fact that the more I see ratface as a pundit the more i am starting to respect his opinion. God dam you intelligent football pundit! I wished he fucking failed.
I don't know what the hell you are all on about. What he is saying is mostly fucking obvious, and then his conclusions are utterly fucking retarded and unimaginative.
He starts off by pointing out in extreme detail the completely obvious - that everyone is diving to gain an advantage. My whole world view was exploded.
He then shows how some refs get it wrong when making decisions live, and then makes the leap that thus, retroactive punishment would also be unjust, even though it could be evaluated based on video evidence, the same video evidence he is quite comfortable making judgments on, at least in the most obvious circumstances. Why can he make critical accurate and objective decisions in this clip, which no reasonable person would disagree with? Oh, it's because he's using video.
He then states that it would be very difficult to get rid of this behavior, because making a judgement based on video evidence, as he was doing, and then punishing players for diving, would then result in anarchy. He doesn't explain why, he just builds a strawman. Retroactive punishment would alter the terms of the same cost calculation that causes players to dive, and it would make them think twice about it. While it wouldn't eliminate the behavior, it would drastically reduce it. Furthermore, video review could be done in an expeditious way in a live setting that would no more impact the fluidity of the game than the current tolerance of argument and pressuring of refs, celebration, and time wasting around FKs and PKs.
It happens at some point every season, and in every major tournament. World football refuses to use video evidence and other technological assistance, the lack of it causes rampant cheating, the rampant cheating has an overall effect at all times, in all games, but it's effect comes to the fore in very well publicized matters of injustice in big games at certain times. A discourse begins about what could be done to stop it, there is a call for significant systematic changes, world footballing bodies say they'll take a look at it. They run tests in meaningless games, as if it's somehow not yet certain whether modern science can determine whether an object has crossed a line or not, and they never even consider using video evidence. They make stupid statements as if they are undertaking some radical new project rather than reinventing the wheel, and then they do nothing whatsoever and it all blows over.
These are problems that have existing, well vetted and understood solutions involving technology that has been available for half a century, and implemented in sports for decades.
"It's not an easy problem" Yes it is, you rat faced cunt. It's just hard with your hands tied behind your back. Fuck off, and fuck off everyone in world football who won't attempt to do anything about it by perversely arguing that football is purer without it.
He starts off by pointing out in extreme detail the completely obvious - that everyone is diving to gain an advantage. My whole world view was exploded.
He then shows how some refs get it wrong when making decisions live, and then makes the leap that thus, retroactive punishment would also be unjust, even though it could be evaluated based on video evidence, the same video evidence he is quite comfortable making judgments on, at least in the most obvious circumstances. Why can he make critical accurate and objective decisions in this clip, which no reasonable person would disagree with? Oh, it's because he's using video.
He then states that it would be very difficult to get rid of this behavior, because making a judgement based on video evidence, as he was doing, and then punishing players for diving, would then result in anarchy. He doesn't explain why, he just builds a strawman. Retroactive punishment would alter the terms of the same cost calculation that causes players to dive, and it would make them think twice about it. While it wouldn't eliminate the behavior, it would drastically reduce it. Furthermore, video review could be done in an expeditious way in a live setting that would no more impact the fluidity of the game than the current tolerance of argument and pressuring of refs, celebration, and time wasting around FKs and PKs.
It happens at some point every season, and in every major tournament. World football refuses to use video evidence and other technological assistance, the lack of it causes rampant cheating, the rampant cheating has an overall effect at all times, in all games, but it's effect comes to the fore in very well publicized matters of injustice in big games at certain times. A discourse begins about what could be done to stop it, there is a call for significant systematic changes, world footballing bodies say they'll take a look at it. They run tests in meaningless games, as if it's somehow not yet certain whether modern science can determine whether an object has crossed a line or not, and they never even consider using video evidence. They make stupid statements as if they are undertaking some radical new project rather than reinventing the wheel, and then they do nothing whatsoever and it all blows over.
These are problems that have existing, well vetted and understood solutions involving technology that has been available for half a century, and implemented in sports for decades.
"It's not an easy problem" Yes it is, you rat faced cunt. It's just hard with your hands tied behind your back. Fuck off, and fuck off everyone in world football who won't attempt to do anything about it by perversely arguing that football is purer without it.
Sports with replay still don't use it for everything, and they still have controversial decisions, and refs still get it wrong, but they get it wrong less frequently.
The rules of the game were designed when the game wasn't so cynical because far less was on the line. Times have changed, it's long long past time to change with them.
Cheating ruins the game of football more so than most sports, because the consequences of a single goal are far greater.
Remember the sense of urgency after Henry cheated to deny Ireland a place in the World Cup? They promised they'd do something. What has happened since?
I used to think the governing bodies were just a pile of almost dead bureaucrats enjoying sinecures that stood in the way of such things because they couldn't be arsed. Now I tend to the conspiratorial about it. There's such absurd reluctance to make even obvious, uncontroversial, simple changes that it must be that making the game less flawed also makes it harder to corrupt.
The rules of the game were designed when the game wasn't so cynical because far less was on the line. Times have changed, it's long long past time to change with them.
Cheating ruins the game of football more so than most sports, because the consequences of a single goal are far greater.
Remember the sense of urgency after Henry cheated to deny Ireland a place in the World Cup? They promised they'd do something. What has happened since?
I used to think the governing bodies were just a pile of almost dead bureaucrats enjoying sinecures that stood in the way of such things because they couldn't be arsed. Now I tend to the conspiratorial about it. There's such absurd reluctance to make even obvious, uncontroversial, simple changes that it must be that making the game less flawed also makes it harder to corrupt.
completely agree with every work fark said. his (neville) analysis is excellent but his conclusions are STUPID. if you retroactively punished divers then diving would stop, it really is as simply as that.
I think you're missing one of the main threads of his argument, which is that due to the poor standard of refereeing, it has become necessary for players to make a meal of things in order to ensure they get the decision - is it a foul? Yes. Is it a dive? Yes. Would the foul have been given had the player not made the most of it? No. Is it cheating? No.
He even points out Suarez getting booked for diving when it was a foul.
As much as I hate the dick, I think he's got a point and makes it reasonably well, it's not as simplistic as people are making out, there are nuances
He even points out Suarez getting booked for diving when it was a foul.
As much as I hate the dick, I think he's got a point and makes it reasonably well, it's not as simplistic as people are making out, there are nuances
They should intro retrospective humiliation. Force the players to stand outside a stadium holding a placard saying "I'm a dirty big cheat" then at half time put them in stocks and let lucky members of the audience get up to throw rotten tomatoes at them.
J
John McGovern
Guest
Exactly Singlerider. Fark just hates Neville like therest of us and had a rant. No biggy.
I think the problem is that 'diving' is now used as a catch-all category for anyone falling down as well as consciously simulating. They're not the same thing, and until they're recognised as distinct no rule is going to be sensible or fair. In this high-speed age of football, any player has to make a lightning quick decision as to whether or not they need to take evasive action as a defender flies in to tackle them, and if they do, they'll dive. That's not simulation, that's diving out the way. Lots pf players are booked for that when they're not trying to gain an advantage, they're just trying to avoid a possible injury. As far as I'm concerned, only the obviously deliberate dives deserve any action at all - such as the Gerrard 'star-shape' leap or the Ronaldo somersault. They're clearly different from evasive action. It's perverse at a time when the FA seems obsessed with driving all physical contact out of the way that it is also so obsessed with players trying to avoid physical contact. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with diving - it's the intention behind it that's key.
Retrospective bans may stop players like Suarez going down easy, but who's to say he still wont be booked while on the pitch for something that may not be a dive, does that mean if a ref gets his decision wrong that the card is rescinded, like fuck it will be!
On Neville, I think he's an excellent pundit (still a dickhead), he calls things as he sees them and is generally spot on. This is having watched Jamie Redknapp sit on the fence on issues for the last few years. His conclusions may be disagreed with by some, but it will only be by implementing a system on diving that we'll see what will stop it. I personally dont think it will ever leave the game, as if theres contact in the box, however soft, some players will always go down. Some may say he's entitled to go down some may call him a cheat, and in that is where lies the dilemma!
On Neville, I think he's an excellent pundit (still a dickhead), he calls things as he sees them and is generally spot on. This is having watched Jamie Redknapp sit on the fence on issues for the last few years. His conclusions may be disagreed with by some, but it will only be by implementing a system on diving that we'll see what will stop it. I personally dont think it will ever leave the game, as if theres contact in the box, however soft, some players will always go down. Some may say he's entitled to go down some may call him a cheat, and in that is where lies the dilemma!
Woland speaketh the truth. Young goes hunting for yer man's leg and then does a salmon dive. Never a peno.
Im not nodding. Blaming the ref for cheats diving is just ridiculous. On Sunday Young actually instigated the contact. Yes Neville has surprised us with the level of his punditry, but this time he is reverting to type.
I find most of Neville's analyses to be quite exhausting, watching him manipulate that weird mixture of steam engine and touchpad that passes for his tactics screen. After an awful lot of huffing and puffing he usually concludes with a bit of cynicism wrapped up in a platitude. Of course, though, the rest of the pundits on Sky are so dire he certainly is a breath of fresh air, because when he's away from the board and responding to action during matches he's clear-sighted and quite sensible.
But as far as diving is concerned, some progress would be made if it was recognised that not every action on a football pitch can or should be valorised. All the analysis seems to fixate on a straight either/or question - is it cheating or is it fair? And quite often it's neither. It's just someone deciding to fall down. That doesn't 'deserve' anything, one way or another. All of the slo-mo studies won't change that, unless one projects some other intention onto it. The witless 'he goes down too easily' attitude doesn't help - you either go down or you don't, but frankly it's no concern of anyone else how 'easily' or 'reluctantly' someone goes down, even if, from a distant armchair, one could tell for sure. Providing the player isn't doing it to win a free kick or penalty, or get someone else booked, I couldn't care less. And unless a ref can tell the difference with a reasonable degree of certainty I'd want him to move on with the action. Not every action has to result in either a free kick/pen or a booking.
But as far as diving is concerned, some progress would be made if it was recognised that not every action on a football pitch can or should be valorised. All the analysis seems to fixate on a straight either/or question - is it cheating or is it fair? And quite often it's neither. It's just someone deciding to fall down. That doesn't 'deserve' anything, one way or another. All of the slo-mo studies won't change that, unless one projects some other intention onto it. The witless 'he goes down too easily' attitude doesn't help - you either go down or you don't, but frankly it's no concern of anyone else how 'easily' or 'reluctantly' someone goes down, even if, from a distant armchair, one could tell for sure. Providing the player isn't doing it to win a free kick or penalty, or get someone else booked, I couldn't care less. And unless a ref can tell the difference with a reasonable degree of certainty I'd want him to move on with the action. Not every action has to result in either a free kick/pen or a booking.
Im not going to stick up for Neville anymore because it feels weird but the last ill say is that he clearly states that its not an issue from the last 2 weeks (youngs dives , and yes some of you will point out the convenience of it) and backs that up by admitting he himself has dived in the past and using footage of beckham diving in a scum shirt too.
It's the blatant wrapping of the foot around a defender's shin that deserves immediate action, and that's been evident in the game for years. If a ref can't spot that he's not up to the job. The rest is far more contentious even if they do get video evidence (we couldn't even agree on here when Carroll collapsed at Newcastle).
You're dead right. And thats why I'm a bit reserved on whether or not to get a debate about it. If some of our own fans have difficulty agreeing on the Andy Carroll one then how are they going to be when Gary fuckin Neville may be right? 😕
This is the whole thing in a nutshell, the word exaggeration should be used in most cases instead of simulation, and that is not cheating. Refs will not give things in the box they would give without a seconds thought outside it.
Regards
2
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked