Defensive diving

[Wowi]

You most likely know which sort of diving I'm referring to. If not, it's the ones where a defender is shielding the ball (often for it to go out of play) and then falls like a sack of shit as soon as an attacker is within five yards. The ones where a player is being closed down, is about to lose possession and then falls on the ball. The sort of dive Parker pulled off masterfully today, where he threw himself in front of Welbeck (who would've been clean through) and Foy somehow concluded that Welbeck must've tripped him. It's something every player does and I don't mean to single out Parker by the way - he was just a perfect example.

With all the focus on diving in attacking positions, why is "defensive diving" still completely ignored (or rather; encouraged) by officials, pundits etc.? I haven't seen a mention of that incident, although it could've been a very good chance if Foy hadn't fecked up.

So Caftards, does it annoy you as well, or is being able to fall like a sack of shit when defending an admirable skill?

 

[Sixpence]

Ahh yes, I believe they call it the "Pepe".

 

[alastair]

It's far more widespread than attacking diving but then the result isn't quite as severe so it's ignored. There are few things more frustrating in football though when a player breathes on a defender who proceeds to dive and the referee buys it. It's so rare for an official to be brave enough to say 'No, that's bollocks.'

 

[paceme]

Jones did it too

 

[Maagge]

I generally don't like diving be it in attacking or defensive positions. And Foy really fecked that Parker one up. It could have been a great chance.

 

[Shane88]

Evans did it a week or two ago and the ref didn't buy it, he gave the corner.

 

[Wowi]

It's far more widespread than attacking diving but then the result isn't quite as severe so it's ignored. There are few things more frustrating in football though when a player breathes on a defender who proceeds to dive and the referee buys it. It's so rare for an official to be brave enough to say 'No, that's bollocks.'

I definitely think that's a big part of it, yeah. Giving the free kick the easy option though for the ref. More often than not it doesn't really take anything away from the attacking side and if he does get it wrong (don't give a free kick to a defender that was actually fouled) he'll get hanged. I reckon that there's situations almost every match where it could become dangerous if a free kick wasn't wrongly awarded though, but as it's not a direct effect of the free kick the "what could've happened"-part is often completely ignored.

Jones did it too

You might have posted this before I added a little piece to the OP. In any case, yeah - it's something pretty much every player does, which makes it even more annoying.

 

[RK]

Evans does it most matches.

It's a skill in my opinion, drawing a foul from the attacker. At the end of the day the ref doesn't have to give it.

EDIT: I'm talking about ones with contact, if Parker's had no contact then it's obviously not a foul (and the ref can book him if he chooses).

 

[Traub]

They irritate me quite a lot. Though sometimes a defender will dive and not get the free kick leaving the attacker with the ball in open space - that pleases me.

 

[Buchan]

José Bosingwa, one of the worst offenders of "defensive divers" by the way, has the right answer for anyone deciding that they want to shield possession...

 

[Joemo]

 

[Ash_G]

I always find this funny because every defender does it from Pepe to Vidic, they might not elaborate as much but they get between the attacker and the ball, feel a touch, go down and get a free kick. It's always dismissed, at the most it might get a casual "not a whole lot of contact" and then it's forgotten about.

That's why recently I've started to think that it would be unfair to purely focus on dives from the attacking player, because defenders go down cheaply all the time, same with goalies. Seems harsh to focus on one rather than the others because you can't touch defenders any more, they don't need to roll around, put a little pressure on them, they go down and get a decision 99% of the time.

 

[jojojo]

Heinze used to do it all the time, real sniper in the stands stuff. He also did the one where you kick the opponent then fall down injured to confuse the ref. It used to drive me bats. Oddly enough he was a fan favourite - until, one day, he wasn't (but that wasn't because of he diving.)

 

[KingEric7]

José Bosingwa, one of the worst offenders of "defensive divers" by the way, has the right answer for anyone deciding that they want to shield possession...

How does a ref see that and not give at the very least a yellow? Amazing.

 

[peterstorey]

The other annoying thing about it is that the defender is usually obstructing the attacker and an indirect free-kick should be given the other way.

 

[Gio]

I suspect refs are happy to maintain the status quo (the potential for controversy is lower) and most having not played the game properly don't appreciate how much shepherding defenders can take the piss.

 

[Amar__]

Ahh yes, I believe they call it the "Pepe".

I agree, in last year or two he became such a pussy, it's incredible.

 

[Ruud10]

This is one of the least significant problems that bedevils that game.

 

[Amar__]

It's not tbf, we could have scored a goal today if ref didn't buy that dive from parker.

 

[TheRisingSun]

José Bosingwa, one of the worst offenders of "defensive divers" by the way, has the right answer for anyone deciding that they want to shield possession...

Jose Bosingwa is just an awful footballer. The worst player ever to have two Champions League winners' medals, currently taking QPR to the cleaners on 65k per week whilst refusing to play.

 

[Snow]

It annoys me a lot. Every defender is guilty of this as well.

 

[ghaliboy]

Vidic does it a lot.

 

[Doogie]

There's no point naming names, they all do it

 

[Fiskey]

There's no point naming names, they all do it

And one would, given how the rules are interpreted.

 

[Andrew~]

As Gary Neville says, diving is now a firmly established part of the game and fans should stop the hard man ethics and accept it. We would all do it in high pressure situations where you have to win at all costs.

Just enjoy the football!

 

[peterstorey]

As Gary Neville says, diving is now a firmly established part of the game and fans should stop the hard man ethics and accept it. We would all do it in high pressure situations where you have to win at all costs.

Just enjoy the football!

It's not football it's cheating and needs to be stamped out.

 

[kps88]

It's almost become an unwritten rule that defenders are allowed to fall over like they're made out of paper. The problem is that if a referee suddenly decides to grow a pair and not give the foul, the result would probably be a goal and an inevitable shit storm.

 

[Andrew~]

It's not football it's cheating and needs to be stamped out.

Last I checked there wasn't a law against going down if you feel significant contact (which, it seems, is how referees interpret a 'foul' now).

 

[Maagge]

It's almost become an unwritten rule that defenders are allowed to fall over like they're made out of paper. The problem is that if a referee suddenly decides to grow a pair and not give the foul, the result would probably be a goal and an inevitable shit storm.

Only if the replays show that it was indeed a foul and the ref got it wrong.

 

[kps88]

Only if the replays show that it was indeed a foul and the ref got it wrong.

It would depend on where you stand between it being a foul and there being contact. At the moment, the unwritten rule seems to be you can go down even if there is the slightest bit of contact. But technically speaking, that amount of contact should not be enough for a foul. I'd be very angry if a ref suddenly decided to start doing this when against United.

The only way it would work is if UEFA/FA come out with special directives before the start of next season. But it's something that could lead to a lot of farcical moments when trying to be implemented and isn't serious enough to worry too much about.

 

[Maagge]

It would depend on where you stand between it being a foul and there being contact. At the moment, the unwritten rule seems to be you can go down even if there is the slightest bit of contact. But technically speaking, that amount of contact should not be enough for a foul. I'd be very angry if a ref suddenly decided to start doing this when against United.

The only way it would work is if UEFA/FA come out with special directives before the start of next season. But it's something that could lead to a lot of farcical moments when trying to be implemented and isn't serious enough to worry too much about.

This thing about a slight bit of contact is enough to warrant a foul is bullshit in my opinion. But that seems to be the game these days.

I agree that one ref can't suddenly start not giving free kicks that would result in some quite embarrassing situations, as you say. We need it to be made official through a statement before the start of a new season.

 

[peterstorey]

They should just revert to the old rules/interpretation that obstructing a player attempting to play the ball while making no attempt to play it yourself is an indirect free kick - it worked for about 100 years.