The diving and the play-acting

[Peter R]

drives me crazy... and when the (ice) hockey playing types criticise "soccer" as unmanly I cannot blame them...
If a player is fouled, drops and rolls twice before he gets up he should get a yellow card... three or more rolls a red card.

If a player is fouled and begs for a card, HE should get the card.

If a player is fouled and grabs the part of his body that is "injured", grimaces and contorts his face in dramatic and abnormal fashion then gets up running immediately after being "treated" , yellow card.

And yes, simulation a la Ashley Young, especially if in the opponents' box, straight red.

Enough of the deception...

[Paul Marin]

drives me crazy... and when the (ice) hockey playing types criticise "soccer" as unmanly I cannot blame them...
If a player is fouled, drops and rolls twice before he gets up he should get a yellow card... three or more rolls a red card.

If a player is fouled and begs for a card, HE should get the card.

If a player is fouled and grabs the part of his body that is "injured", grimaces and contorts his face in dramatic and abnormal fashion then gets up running immediately after being "treated" , yellow card.

And yes, simulation a la Ashley Young, especially if in the opponents' box, straight red.

Enough of the deception...

My two cents is that any player that goes down injured where play has to stop as a result of an opponents tackle should be off the field for a minimum of 5 minutes. The detractors of this approach say that this is unfair if the man is really injured to which I say, okay, if he is really injured, it is in his best interest to come off anyway and if a yellow is given to the tackler, he's off for the same amount too, so no advantage to either team. If no yellow is given, then the tackler stays on...this would cut the crap out once and for all.

[myYout]

True dat, di diving gaan from bad to worse yah now. Time fi stamp it out ah di game fi real.

[GazX]

My two cents is that any player that goes down injured where play has to stop as a result of an opponents tackle should be off the field for a minimum of 5 minutes. The detractors of this approach say that this is unfair if the man is really injured to which I say, okay, if he is really injured, it is in his best interest to come off anyway and if a yellow is given to the tackler, he's off for the same amount too, so no advantage to either team. If no yellow is given, then the tackler stays on...this would cut the crap out once and for all.

Hmmmm; So thinking like how some of these tiefing players think. One missed timed tackle/ brush against their boot and i can see players still rolling around to get taken off, and their team mates then surrounding ref to also get the oppositions player - Especially if its their oppositions top player/s - sent off the pitch for the same period. Could lead to the deliberate targeting of certain players imo

[Paul Marin]

Hmmmm; So thinking like how some of these tiefing players think. One missed timed tackle/ brush against their boot and i can see players still rolling around to get taken off, and their team mates then surrounding ref to also get the oppositions player - Especially if its their oppositions top player/s - sent off the pitch for the same period. Could lead to the deliberate targeting of certain players imo

Well...if the ref give the man a yellow, not much you can do, but I don't know of a player who wants to come off. In every case, the "injured" player comes off if play has to stop to tend to them. How many times have we seen the game stop because someone is down and there is no yellow even contemplated? Those are the ones that will be no problem. I agree though that players will come up with all kinds of ways to tief.