VillanousOne Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 I think in situations like this a ref should just award a free kick unless the player is diving to win a penalty. What?! Not sure what other form of English to put this in. If a player is gaining no advantage from the dive, i.e. they are not trying to win a penalty, they are not getting a free kick in a key area, they are not defending a breakaway leading to a goal, or trying to get a player sent off, then the ref should use common sense and award the free kick against them, unless he is 100% sure it was a deliberate dive which I just don't think is possible. Grealish was breaking forward when he allegedly dived, if he won a free kick it would have barely been in the opposition half, plus the breakaway would have been lost, so why would he dive at that point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B94villa Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 (edited) Lol. "Not getting a free kick in a key area". What if there's someone on the team who can kick the ball really far? Plenty of players dive when there isn't a clear goalscoring opportunity fo a any number of reasons, whether it's to break up a spell of limited possession, or because they'er under pressure, or maybe to get a key opponent carded to minimise his threat. Conning the ref is cheating, which by it's very definition is against the rules. You seem to be advocating adding a whole new layer of totally subjective regulations to a set of rules that is already wide open to abuse, simply because one of our players got sent off for diving. Edited March 10, 2015 by B94villa 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 I don't see it either way, it was just a barely coming together of two players, they both ended up on the floor with the ball rolling towards the keeper. Sensible refereeing would have just played on. Cool, thanks...I was at a wedding and I've had quite a few none villa fans txt/msg me that it was "never a red". Still didnt manage to see in all its glory yet (the match) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillanousOne Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 (edited) Lol. "Not getting a free kick in a key area". What if there's someone on the team who can kick the ball really far? Except that or if Rory Delap is playing or Jonny Wilkinson Edited March 10, 2015 by VillanousOne 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted March 10, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 10, 2015 I think in situations like this a ref should just award a free kick unless the player is diving to win a penalty. What?! Not sure what other form of English to put this in. If a player is gaining no advantage from the dive, i.e. they are not trying to win a penalty, they are not getting a free kick in a key area, they are not defending a breakaway leading to a goal, or trying to get a player sent off, then the ref should use common sense and award the free kick against them, unless he is 100% sure it was a deliberate dive which I just don't think is possible. Grealish was breaking forward when he allegedly dived, if he won a free kick it would have barely been in the opposition half, plus the breakaway would have been lost, so why would he dive at that point? I understood, I just couldn't believe you were saying it. You do realise that would just mean everyone would fall on the ground as soon as it looked like they were going to get tackled and they'd get a free kick. The game would be an endless sequence of one player running 10 yards, falling over, winning a free kick. Run 10 yards, fall over, win a free kick. Repeat until penalty area is reached. You haven't thought this one through at all. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicho Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Anyway is this guy any good at football? Or let's talk about his ridiculous shin pads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted March 10, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 10, 2015 The consensus seems to be that it wasn't a dive (even though I think it was). But no, you can't appeal two yellows. But at least a harsh sending off? Guess he has no other option, 2nd bookable offence if the ref believes it to be simulation. Just a little frustrating as so much worse is let off, you'd have thought with how much time left to go just waiving it on might be an option? I think he was unlucky to be sent off. And I think if the ref hadn't just sent of Yacob he'd have stayed on the pitch. But I think there's enough in it that even if we could appeal, it wouldn't get overturned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 (edited) I think in situations like this a ref should just award a free kick unless the player is diving to win a penalty.What?!Not sure what other form of English to put this in. If a player is gaining no advantage from the dive, i.e. they are not trying to win a penalty, they are not getting a free kick in a key area, they are not defending a breakaway leading to a goal, or trying to get a player sent off, then the ref should use common sense and award the free kick against them, unless he is 100% sure it was a deliberate dive which I just don't think is possible. Grealish was breaking forward when he allegedly dived, if he won a free kick it would have barely been in the opposition half, plus the breakaway would have been lost, so why would he dive at that point?I understood, I just couldn't believe you were saying it. You do realise that would just mean everyone would fall on the ground as soon as it looked like they were going to get tackled and they'd get a free kick. The game would be an endless sequence of one player running 10 yards, falling over, winning a free kick. Run 10 yards, fall over, win a free kick. Repeat until penalty area is reached. You haven't thought this one through at all. They already have that. It's called rugby league. Edited March 11, 2015 by dont_do_it_doug. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_Villain Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) Diving insinuates no contact... There was contact between Grealish and Lescott on the way to Jack hitting the deck... Whether that is because Lescott tackled poorly, missed the ball and hit him accidently OR Lescott tackled poorly, missed the ball and Jack clipped him on purpose to play for the foul... The fact remains, Jack was impeded from running onwards because of a poorly timed tackle from an opposition player... We should have had a free kick and Jack should never have been sent off... On what planet is that not cheating? On Earth IF Joleon Lescott cleanly tackles the ball and knocks it away instead of missing the ball altogether. However, on Saturday, on Earth, Lescott didn't get the ball... He committed to a tackle, hit the floor, missed the ball and got the player... He didn't mean to get the player, but he got him nonetheless... He will have to work on his tackling... That's just nonsense. May aswell outlaw any attempt at tackling if that's case. Explain your logic. We already have rules for this. Just because someone misses a tackle doesnt mean the opposing player has a right to ensure contact and the free kick. Its a bit hard to avoid contact when the person missing the tackle is built like a fridge freezer and has thrown himself in front of you... In my opinion, it wasnt meant as a tackle for the ball anyway; he was trying to get in Jacks way... When Jack was drawing fouls against Hull earlier this season, A lot of people thought it best thing since sliced bread... Now an opponent makes a mistake and he does the same and people are criticising the lad... I have no problem with a good clean tackle... Even if its a strong one... but the bottom line with a tackle is that you get the ball... If you tackle someone, don't get the ball and impede their play, its a foul... Edited March 11, 2015 by DJ_Villain 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted March 11, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 11, 2015 I think in situations like this a ref should just award a free kick unless the player is diving to win a penalty. What?! Not sure what other form of English to put this in. If a player is gaining no advantage from the dive, i.e. they are not trying to win a penalty, they are not getting a free kick in a key area, they are not defending a breakaway leading to a goal, or trying to get a player sent off, then the ref should use common sense and award the free kick against them, unless he is 100% sure it was a deliberate dive which I just don't think is possible. Grealish was breaking forward when he allegedly dived, if he won a free kick it would have barely been in the opposition half, plus the breakaway would have been lost, so why would he dive at that point? I understood, I just couldn't believe you were saying it. You do realise that would just mean everyone would fall on the ground as soon as it looked like they were going to get tackled and they'd get a free kick. The game would be an endless sequence of one player running 10 yards, falling over, winning a free kick. Run 10 yards, fall over, win a free kick. Repeat until penalty area is reached. You haven't thought this one through at all. They already have that. It's called rugby union. *league Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Yeah. Drunk! Not right now obvs. Then... Edit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 He needs a haircut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 He needs a haircut. But... he's already got a haircut and a half !? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightoffyour Posted March 11, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 11, 2015 Looks like a dive to me. This whole new evasive action argument is bollocks IMO. If he was going to get hit then do it and get the free kick. Its only running in to another man ffs its hardly going to kill him. If you jumped over a 2 footed lunge the other player would probably get sent off for intent anyway. If hes not going to get hit, go past him and be in 1 on 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Its a bit hard to avoid contact when the person missing the tackle is built like a fridge freezer and has thrown himself in front of you... In my opinion, it wasnt meant as a tackle for the ball anyway; he was trying to get in Jacks way... When Jack was drawing fouls against Hull earlier this season, A lot of people thought it best thing since sliced bread... Now an opponent makes a mistake and he does the same and people are criticising the lad... I have no problem with a good clean tackle... Even if its a strong one... but the bottom line with a tackle is that you get the ball... If you tackle someone, don't get the ball and impede their play, its a foul... This. The only debate with that incident was whether or not he deliberately got himself fouled, and afaik there isn't a rule against doing that anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skarroki Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Feel like I need to announce that I didn't see his first booking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted March 11, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 11, 2015 Its a bit hard to avoid contact when the person missing the tackle is built like a fridge freezer and has thrown himself in front of you... In my opinion, it wasnt meant as a tackle for the ball anyway; he was trying to get in Jacks way... When Jack was drawing fouls against Hull earlier this season, A lot of people thought it best thing since sliced bread... Now an opponent makes a mistake and he does the same and people are criticising the lad... I have no problem with a good clean tackle... Even if its a strong one... but the bottom line with a tackle is that you get the ball... If you tackle someone, don't get the ball and impede their play, its a foul... This. The only debate with that incident was whether or not he deliberately got himself fouled, and afaik there isn't a rule against doing that anyway. There's a big difference between drawing a foul and diving. Vs WBA it was the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Its a bit hard to avoid contact when the person missing the tackle is built like a fridge freezer and has thrown himself in front of you... In my opinion, it wasnt meant as a tackle for the ball anyway; he was trying to get in Jacks way... When Jack was drawing fouls against Hull earlier this season, A lot of people thought it best thing since sliced bread... Now an opponent makes a mistake and he does the same and people are criticising the lad... I have no problem with a good clean tackle... Even if its a strong one... but the bottom line with a tackle is that you get the ball... If you tackle someone, don't get the ball and impede their play, its a foul... This. The only debate with that incident was whether or not he deliberately got himself fouled, and afaik there isn't a rule against doing that anyway. There's a big difference between drawing a foul and diving. Vs WBA it was the latter. Or you could say that there's a big difference between diving and going down after a foul, and by the argument above, it was a foul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Feel like I need to announce that I didn't see his first booking Has anyone? I've re watched the second half a couple of times now and not seen it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillanousOne Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) I think in situations like this a ref should just award a free kick unless the player is diving to win a penalty. What?! Not sure what other form of English to put this in. If a player is gaining no advantage from the dive, i.e. they are not trying to win a penalty, they are not getting a free kick in a key area, they are not defending a breakaway leading to a goal, or trying to get a player sent off, then the ref should use common sense and award the free kick against them, unless he is 100% sure it was a deliberate dive which I just don't think is possible. Grealish was breaking forward when he allegedly dived, if he won a free kick it would have barely been in the opposition half, plus the breakaway would have been lost, so why would he dive at that point? I understood, I just couldn't believe you were saying it. You do realise that would just mean everyone would fall on the ground as soon as it looked like they were going to get tackled and they'd get a free kick. The game would be an endless sequence of one player running 10 yards, falling over, winning a free kick. Run 10 yards, fall over, win a free kick. Repeat until penalty area is reached. You haven't thought this one through at all. No i did and then I made fun of myself as i was talking dobbins. But if you need to feel right through exaggeration and repetition, go ahead, the fun never ends. Edited March 11, 2015 by VillanousOne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts