Editorial on Diving in Soccer

[Grizzly]

Actually not a bad suggestion to make players who are taken off the field wait a bit longer to return although 2 minutes would probably be better than 5. In the case of a real injury that actually requires a stretcher an immediate substitution could be made. The ref could also have discretion to send a player off for several minutes if they spend too much time rolling around on the field.

Soccer's blemish needs fixing

By MORRIS DALLA COSTA -- London Free Press

It's the world's most popular game.

It captures millions emotionally on a regular basis and billions for an event like the World Cup.

Yet soccer could stand to make at least one change, one that would guarantee it would become instantly more popular in North America while eliminating a flaw that ridicules the game.

Let's back up for a moment.

Soccer has made major inroads in North America in the past 10 years. The success of the United States in the World Cup has heightened its visibility when major soccer events are being staged. The success of the Americans and Canadians on the women's soccer scene also has helped.

When it comes to numbers at the minor sports level, soccer participation continues to increase at a startling pace, making it the most popular game for kids and youth. Yet, all that success fails to translate into anywhere near the same success as other major sports in North America.

The so-called reasons are multifold and well documented. There isn't enough scoring. It isn't exciting enough. There are too many other major sports. The major media still consider soccer a minor league sport. It's an immigrant's game.

Perception is a difficult thing to change. You may want to believe there isn't enough scoring in soccer, but anyone who has watched the direction the NHL has gone is aware that during the regular season, its hockey is hardly a thrill-a-minute.

As for being exciting with continual action, we need only say one word -- baseball.

That said, there's one aspect of soccer that will never sell unless it's dealt with. It's the acting, the rolling around on the pitch after every tackle, every nudge, every incident when two players come together. There's nothing more infuriating than watching millionaire players writhing in supposed pain on the field, holding their heads, legs and various other parts of the body, crying out in pain -- all this in an effort to get their opponent penalized in some way or to waste time.

The near-death player is carried to the sidelines on a stretcher. Suddenly, with a miraculous recovery of Lourdes proportions, the player trots onto the field a minute later, a picture of health.

It has become a joke, an affront to professionalism and an embarrassment to the sport. It's one of the things most often mentioned as a turnoff by fans and has become a focal point for ridicule.

These phoneys cause their sport endless hours of shame.

A solution is to allow referees to penalize thespians with a yellow card. But the referee is then forced to judge whether a player is really hurt. He is already under enough pressure in a game where players would do anything if it means winning.

So let's put pressure on teams to clean up their own game. If a player appears hurt enough during a game to leave the pitch, that player must remain on the sideline a minimum of five minutes before he can return. Someone who is truly hurt will need the time to recover or will be replaced immediately. Someone who is faking will have his team penalized by missing a player on the field for those five minutes.

The off-field fourth official on the sidelines should be able to keep time on the player.

It shouldn't take more than a goal or two in key situations before the teams themselves act to restore some dignity to the game.

[TorontoInferno]

As much as i agree that diving and the shananigans afterward is deplorable, making a player stay off for 5 minutes is a slippery slope imo..whats next a penalty box ala indoor ?

Refs aren't stupid(as much as i may think they are at times []), Get enough of them not calling dives and giving yellows for unsportsmanlike, players aren't gonna do that, and will try to figure out some other way to flaunt the rules. If a ref sees that stuff, he should get it in his head that the player involved is trying to make him look stupid, and take offense to it.

There is a rule now that a player hurt can only re-enter the field of play when the ref allows, so the ref can easily not allow a player on the field if he/she wants. That being said sending little Jose or Johnny to the sin bin for 2 minutes for high foot isn't my idea of soccer and should only be allowed in the MLS i kid.. i kid

[Guest Jeffery S.]

The problem is quite simple. Someone might roll around and fake it, another might be seriously injured. The ref is not a doctor, and the club doctors don't go on the field with scanners and x-ray machines. You think he's faking, but hey, he's not. I see no real way to know the difference until after the foul/dive, when the player is back up and able to join play again. And even then things are not clear cut.

Meaning that however much you think someone is not seriously injured and is wasting time, by making them sit off for two or five minutes you could in the end be favouring a team that in fact did commit a foul, however hard to see, and by doing so gains a man advantage for a few minutes.

All I can say is that the ref should add injury time that corresponds to the time lost, and then noone should be arguing. And afterwards if video evidence shows there was a clear dive or intent to get another player thrown out or carded, you could fine or suspend from the league office.

[Free kick]

But you have to do something to curb this phenomena. Especially in North america because whether we like it or not, everyone likes to make comapaisons between sports ( ie.: Hockey, Baskeball, Football and Baseball) and when you see athletes who get off the playing surface on their own abilities with very serious injuries ( eg>; wrecked knees, concussions, shoulder separations), and then you see soccer players wince and clutch their faces yet they won't miss and single game or minute of that same game. For what its worth, I do not see this as a problem in domestic leagues here in North America. I cannot say that I have witness this with any regulity at a-league games. But, when international soccer hits the airways, the soccer critics are out in full force and looking for these things and al too often the games end up providing them will plenty of amunition. Case in point, the hockey media had field day with the Rivaldo incident at the World Cup. It even ended up on coaches corner.

Perhaps those who reside in Europe ( as does the FIFA headquarters) fail to grasp the magnitude of this compared to soccer fans in the US and Canada. The europeans don't have to worry about this since the game it tops when it comes to viewership and followers and they don't have to worry about comparaisons.

You point about adding injury time is pointless since they are supposed to be doing that now and it hasn't yielded and results. The point about favouring the team that commits the foul is also pointless IMO because, if it is a serious foul, the ref has and ability to show the cards. Plus we have seen players with career threathing get off the field of play on their own without a fuss. As far as the video idea, I am not sure that it will necessarily show anything different from what he referee has see. The only way to resolve this is find ways to discourage the players from play acting in the first place and the five minute rule sounds pretty good.

[Guest Jeffery S.]

I am not overly worried about this bad image in North America, as cultures that tend to do this (admittedly more "latin") are not going to change for the US media perception of them. It is not really clear that carding diving, which we are seeing a lot more of here in Spain, especially in the box, will really eliminate it. After all, does carding hard tackles with no chance at the ball eliminate them? In the end since it is strikers who tend to do this looking for or even faking contact with a keeper coming out on a one-on-one in the box are not worried about getting a card if upon occasion they can draw a penalty on a dive the next time.

A talented striker who always looks for this is Tamudo at Espanyol.It helps that they counter-attack a lot, he gets free a lot in front of the keeper, and they are desperate for results as a team often threatened with relegation. Simply put, faking a penalty to get a call is not part of what his ethical order would call deplorable in a sporting sense. Does that make him an inferior athlete?

I felt very badly about Rivaldo's performance vs. Turkey, as in all the years I saw him at Barcelona I cannot recall one even similar display, mostly he was hacked to death and did not always get a call for clear and even vicious fouls. But I was appalled by that show after the ball was sent his way just over the end line and agreed he should have been given a game suspension to uphold the FIFA principle.

Anyone notice that most erroneous penalty calls and more diving of this sort occurs on the refs weak side? I refer to the side where there is no linesman, the left side of all attacks, and usually deep and tending to the outside. Meaning a (probably left-footed) attacker going that way will take a chance at it as he knows that usually the keeper coming at him and going down for a touch on the ball will block the refs view of the ground, with no linesman to consult in case of doubt.

[Metro]

My beef about North American critics of diving is this:

North American soccer generally doesn't have a problem with diving. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you generally don't see it in the A-league or MLS, and I'm unaware of any Canadian or American National Team player who has a reputation for a being a diver. But it doesn't prevent critics from painting all soccer players with the same brush and accuse them all of diving. When a hockey player takes a dive (and yes, there are hockey players who do like to exaggerate their falls now and then), I don't hear these critics calling all hockey players divers, but for some reason it's different with soccer.

[Guest Jeffery S.]

quote:Originally posted by Metro

My beef about North American critics of diving is this:

North American soccer generally doesn't have a problem with diving. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you generally don't see it in the A-league or MLS, and I'm unaware of any Canadian or American National Team player who has a reputation for a being a diver. But it doesn't prevent critics from painting all soccer players with the same brush and accuse them all of diving. When a hockey player takes a dive (and yes, there are hockey players who do like to exaggerate their falls now and then), I don't hear these critics calling all hockey players divers, but for some reason it's different with soccer.

The simple fact that diving is now a penalty in hockey suggests that it was and is perceived as a possible problem. I read up on the hockey rule and all it says that a minor penalty will be given to anyone who acts with the intention of getting another player sent off without justification. In fact in basketball there is constant exagerration in those receiving contact, such when a defender tries to draw an offensive foul (the typical arms splaying in the air and falling half backwards) or an attacker has a shot blocked in close and exagerrates his upward arm movement on the shot as if having been hit.

[amacpher]

Obviously diving is a problem in North American sports just as much as in soccer. But people always try and justify their reason(s) for liking or hating a particular sport with lame excuses. Hence, the diving link with soccer among soccer haters. The 2 other most common complaints about soccer are just as far off-base:

1) "Not enough scoring". Easily shot-down by statistics: hockey and NFL has just as little scoring as soccer per minute.

2) "Not knowing exactly when the game will end". Have these people ever watched the closing minutes of a basketball game? Have these people ever watched any baseball game which can last anywhere b/w 2 and 5 hours??

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by Metro

My beef about North American critics of diving is this:

North American soccer generally doesn't have a problem with diving. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you generally don't see it in the A-league or MLS, and I'm unaware of any Canadian or American National Team player who has a reputation for a being a diver. But it doesn't prevent critics from painting all soccer players with the same brush and accuse them all of diving. When a hockey player takes a dive (and yes, there are hockey players who do like to exaggerate their falls now and then), I don't hear these critics calling all hockey players divers, but for some reason it's different with soccer.

But i think that its apples and oranges when talking about diving versus theatrics. Its the theatics that try to show that you more injured than you are, that hurts the games image. As far as diving, everyone is guilty regardless of the sport and where the game is played. People will forget someone falling easily to the ground in the box to draw a foul because it happens Basket and hockey to one degree or another. But faking injury makes soccer look bad in North america because its doesn't happen in other sports.