‘Diving’ in football matches should be more severly punished, even after the match.
'Diving' is bringing down the whole reputation of football. Trying to trick and deceive the referee is cheating and too often it goes un-punished. At present, players can be suspended and fined for violent conduct even if the referee does not see the incident at the time. This should also be the case for diving.
You can also add to the debate by leaving your comment at the end of the page.
Bringing down the reputation of the sport
Diving is bringing down the sports reputation. People are being turned off from the constant cheating that they witness when they turn on a 'top-level' match. Football players are seen as not only cheats, but wimps. Diving is the greatest advert Rugby has ever had!
Diving is not necessarily done with the intention of cheating. Sometimes if a player is in a position where a tackle has thrown them off balance it is safer for them to go to the floor than to try and stay on their feet and risk injury. Rugby players should know that a controlled 'going to ground' is less likely to cause an injury than struggling to stay on their feet. An injury can ruin a player's career.
It is possible to charge players for violent behaviour after a match if the referee missed it. Diving is also cheating and should be punishable in the same way.
The degree of these offences is wildly different. Violent behaviour is more than just cheating, it is tantamount to assault. Even if you accept that diving is a form of cheating, it is not as serious as to merit that level of attention.
Diving is an aspect of the 'dirty' side of football; by punishing it we increase respect and sportsmanship.
Football has an endemic problem of cheating and lack of respect. Diving is the most elaborate form of cheating in professional football, but it stems from a basic disrespect and lack of authority in the game. Referees frequently lose control of games and scuffles break out, whilst flagrant verbal abuse is inflicted on the referee as a matter of course. Ashley Cole turning his back on referee Mike Riley in the match at White Hart Lane in March 2008 is a case in point; having committed an egregious foul on the Tottenham defender Hutton, Cole proceeded to give a torrent of abuse, blatant disrespect, and ultimately only received a yellow card. Change must come from the top. Referees must be paid more, must be given the power to give cards for every instance of dissent, and should be helped to achieve this by the adoption of the 'sin bin'.
Diving is already adequately punished; through the surprisingly effective method of public ridicule. With the action replay being screened on television, players know that an obvious dive is going to be immediately spotted by the people who really matter; the fans. Referees are undoubtedly in a difficult position due to the highly competetive atmosphere of football. Yet the solution is not to make their lives more difficult by telling them to strictly punish an offence which is extremely difficult for them to correctly identify.
Let the ridicule of fans and pundits get the message through to football stars that diving is not on. Their reputation is key to their career; it is what gets them sponsorship, transfers and big salaries. It is in their interests to be anti-diving.
It shows the player in poor light!
The player who dives shows that he and he is team are desperate to win!!
By hook or by crook!
It indicates that the team is incompetent for winning the match on its own capabilities and thus has to resort to unfair means.
Reducing such incidences would surely make us
"rejoice in the beautiful game,
everybody at the end of the day"
Diving is part of the game
Like it or not, diving has become an important part of the sport. Being able to pull off a convincing dive in the penalty area is just as an important a skill as any other other. If the referee doesn't spot it, they have mastered the skill.
Cheating is not 'part of the sport'- if diving is where your skill lies, perhaps that is what you should compete in!
Taking power away from the referees
By punishing players after the match is over, you are discouraging refs from taking important decisions during games. If they are not 100% sure that there was a dive, referees will not take action at the time because they know it can just be verified afterwards.
Referees will still have to make a good judgement in the game. For instance, if they award a penalty for what later turns out to be a dive, the resulting goal and course of the game will still stand. It is still essential that the result of the game is as fair as possible. This new rule would just allow for punishment for diving players if it is found that a dive had occurred that had not been spotted in the game.
Diving is merely a response to overly aggressive physical play, a necessary evil.
You watch Barcelona, and you marvel at the aesthetics of a superior, forward-thinking philosophy of football. Small but quick, technically masterful, attacking in spirit, these players are playing 'the right way.'
Fortunately for them, in general they are protected from bad or reckless tackles by the referees in Spain and Europe. Surely it cannot be a legitimate tactic to 'get in their faces', to deliberately go in hard, to try and 'put them off their game'. And yet some football philosophies actively encourage such negative play, such forms of 'anti-football'. The game is physical, they say, stand up, be a man! Winning is more important than beauty or art or entertainment. Football is about winning, at any cost.
And so Barca (now playing in red) come to play Holland in the World Cup. Holland, although talented and technical in their own right, decide that the only way to beat them is to hurt them, to stop them. And the referee lets them. This is surely an injustice. What are the players to do? They just want to play their football, they don't want to hurt anyone in retaliation. Their only option is to draw the referee's attention to this foul play. It is their only response to this great injustice. Until all referees offer consistent protection from dangerous foul play, the sensible thing is to try and encourage the referee to punish the real culprits. If that means feigning injury, then that is a necessary evil.
What do you think?