zimgunner
04-16-2014, 01:06 PM
My American friends' chief gripe with soccer is that there is too much diving. And I agree with them that it is a major problem. But the fault lies not only with the players but with the officials.
Players are guilty if contact is non-existent, manufactured, or dramatized. But yesterday Sagna was clearly late and clipped Jarvis after he had got to the ball. Refs will never call an incident like that unless the aggrieved player goes to ground -- although nothing in the rules says that a foul must include falling over.
Jarvis did not hit the turf -- and I guess he deserves some credit for that. (Although we don't know how much of his decision was based on fairness and how much on believing that he could easily run down the ball and ping a cross into the box, which was Fat Sam's game plan, if it deserves that term.)
But can we blame players for going down in such situations? I think not. The current regime amounts to a tax on players who attempt to stay up and continue the play, and why should players voluntarily shoulder that tax?
I think what football needs is a modification of the advantage rule. In other sports, like rugby, advantage can continue well after the incident in question and the ref will call back play sometimes a full minute later.
In football, advantage disappears within seconds. If the advantage period were a little longer, players would have more incentive NOT to hit the deck as soon as they felt contact, and the game would be better for it.
Players are guilty if contact is non-existent, manufactured, or dramatized. But yesterday Sagna was clearly late and clipped Jarvis after he had got to the ball. Refs will never call an incident like that unless the aggrieved player goes to ground -- although nothing in the rules says that a foul must include falling over.
Jarvis did not hit the turf -- and I guess he deserves some credit for that. (Although we don't know how much of his decision was based on fairness and how much on believing that he could easily run down the ball and ping a cross into the box, which was Fat Sam's game plan, if it deserves that term.)
But can we blame players for going down in such situations? I think not. The current regime amounts to a tax on players who attempt to stay up and continue the play, and why should players voluntarily shoulder that tax?
I think what football needs is a modification of the advantage rule. In other sports, like rugby, advantage can continue well after the incident in question and the ref will call back play sometimes a full minute later.
In football, advantage disappears within seconds. If the advantage period were a little longer, players would have more incentive NOT to hit the deck as soon as they felt contact, and the game would be better for it.