Eduardo faces a 2 match ban

Pro. F

Third_Echelon wrote: »

Lets get a couple of things straight.... He dived he should be punished for it.

There is a precident.

The laws of UEFA allow retrospective bannings.

How difficult is this for people to understand?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/europe/8223917.stm

UEFA's Disciplinary Regulations:

http://www.uefa.com/multimediafiles/download/regulations/uefa/others/72/95/88/729588_download.pdf

Lots of other stuff in that document relating to unsportsmanlike behaviour etc...

UEFA are well within their rights to carry out the punishment... and I say fair play to them. The sooner this is stamped out the better.

Yes, totally agree.
there are rules in place and even a few precedents.

For some reason UEFA have been fannying around for years and hardly ever enforce their own rules in this regard. Hopefully this is the start of a new era. But, personally, i doubt it.

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

Since it looks like uefa are going to punish Eduardo and set a precedent, it will be interesting to see if they only carry this only for penalty decisions or will it be for all diving. I can't see Uefa putting to much effort into anything other than penalty decisions.

I don't think it would be a problem if UEFA, or whoever, only concerned themselves with incidents where penalties were won. Or more importantly where a significant advantage was gained (eg a dive for a free that is then scored from, a dive that gets a player sent off, etc). It would make enforcement easier - less incidents to review - but would still clamp down on diving imo.

I agree that lots of dives, even with all tv evidence, are hard to decide on but it's not as difficult as some people are making out. Imo it would be better to try and start retro-active punishments than to just sit back and say 'it's too hard, there's nothing to be done'. Rugby, as usual, is far ahead of soccer on this aspect of the organisation of the game.

gosplan

Mitch Connor wrote: »

imo - there are instances where a player is impeded (without the defending player geting the ball) but where they could stay on their feet. You see players go down in these situations, and it would be described as going down easy. Sometimes they get the foul called. Sometimes they try to stay on their feet but lose possesion of the ball because of the defender slowing them down or putting them off balance. A lot of the time, a ref won't give a foul for that, because the player didn't go down.

In those cases, what is the incentive for the player to stay on his feet - when going down (and thus drawing the refs attention to it) could result in the free he probably deserves.

IMO, there is a difference between going down easily and diving. Eduardo dived on Wednesday night (before anyone starts - Rooney and Ronaldo have done the same) and I think dives like his should be treated differently to people 'making the most' of the contact.

I'm not disagreeing with this and it's very well put but...

Eduardo was clearly anticipating more contact from Boruc. He saw the keeper rushing at him, and thought - 'I'll throw myself over him and win a penno'.

What made it look so bad was that Boruc pulled out of the challenge and Eduardo's dive became far more obvious to anyone watching.

If Boruc had kept going on his initial trajectory, I believe the dive could have been seen as 'going down easily'.

Again, I'd love a blanket rule for this and retrospective bans all over the place but the governing bodies have gone about it soooooo badly.

RedivideR

Indie18 wrote: »

If Eduardo is banned for any amount of games then it's a complete disgrace, why should he get a ban when any player who is caught out diving in a game is shown a yellow and not a red, so what we are looking at now is a player getting a two maybe three match ban for a yellow card offence, now thats rediculous.

By all means punish him but only with the yellow card he deserves and not a ban. It's staggering how much attention this has gotten as apposed to other things that have gone unpunished.

To me, this is exactly the problem with this whole fiasco.
I am also an Arsenal fan who was disappointed to see someone like Eduardo, who always seemed like an honest player, dive like that. HOWEVER, the fact that a player who gets caught diving during a game gets a yellow card but if it is NOT seen suddenly gets a two-match ban is completely ridiculous and leaves me baffled

I have to admit I don't remember hearing about the previous case of the Lithuanian player versus Scotland, but again it seems unbelievable that a player who committed an undetected yellow card offense could retrospectively receive a two-match ban. Just does not add up for me...

Mossy Monk

kida wrote: »

not comparabe IMO - that looks like making the most of minimal contact

A dive is a dive. You cannot punish only the really blatant dives.

villager

Third_Echelon wrote: »

The precident has already been set in the Scotland vs Lithuania diving case.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61835302&postcount=89



How is it populist or stupid. It is in the rule book and yes, it has been applied before. Should it not be applied because Arsenal are a big team?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61835302&postcount=89



http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61835302&postcount=89



They wouldn't have a leg to stand on (pardon the eduardo pun) :pac:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61835302&postcount=89



There is precident with post-game video analysis

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61835302&postcount=89

jesus! :rolleyes:

have to agree with third echelon here, plenty of precedent. I just hope that uefa are serious about this and carry it on regardless of who the team is. all clubs have there own divers and i nclude my own team, liverpool, in this. Oc course it is not just forwards looking for penalties it goes the other way too defenders simulating when under pressure defending, gives referee easy option of free out.

Quint

Frisbee wrote: »

That's a ridiculous knee jerk reaction.

Why? The only real argument against it seems to be: everyone else gets away with it, so why shouldn't Eduardo. Everyone knows it's not allowed. Everyone knows it's a boil on the arse of the beautiful game.

I think most people will agree that simulation is the worst part of football and UEFA are finally doing something about it, fair play to them! It's becoming a normal almost acceptable part of the game, it really needs to be stamped out. Eduardo happily stepped up and slotted the peno which makes it more sickening.
Imagine it was a decisive peno and cost Celtic a place in the Champions League group stages?

Pro. F

RedivideR wrote: »

To me, this is exactly the problem with this whole fiasco.
I am also an Arsenal fan who was disappointed to see someone like Eduardo, who always seemed like an honest player, dive like that. HOWEVER, the fact that a player who gets caught diving during a game gets a yellow card but if it is NOT seen suddenly gets a two-match ban is completely ridiculous and leaves me baffled

I have to admit I don't remember hearing about the previous case of the Lithuanian player versus Scotland, but again it seems unbelievable that a player who committed an undetected yellow card offense could retrospectively receive a two-match ban. Just does not add up for me...

Look at this way though:

(i) Player dives in the box and gets caught and booked. He and his team are at a slight disadvantage for the rest of the game. Fair enough.
(ii) Player dives in the box, doesn't get caught and wins a penalty which is then scored. His team get a huge advantage. After a review of the game the player gets banned for two games but the penalty goal he won still stands.

When a player gets a yellow for diving during a game, not only is he getting booked but his team is also not getting a penalty. So, a two match ban for players that avoid a yellow and win a penalty for diving, would be about right imo.

WillieCocker

kida wrote: »

not comparabe IMO - that looks like making the most of minimal contact

It's still cheating.
Choosing to go down and deceive the referee.

It's funny when all this comes down to cutting out cheating and not cutting out feeling a fly on your leg and dropping dead.

eirebhoy

Mitch Connor wrote: »

imo - there are instances where a player is impeded (without the defending player geting the ball) but where they could stay on their feet. You see players go down in these situations, and it would be described as going down easy. Sometimes they get the foul called. Sometimes they try to stay on their feet but lose possesion of the ball because of the defender slowing them down or putting them off balance. A lot of the time, a ref won't give a foul for that, because the player didn't go down.

In those cases, what is the incentive for the player to stay on his feet - when going down (and thus drawing the refs attention to it) could result in the free he probably deserves.

IMO, there is a difference between going down easily and diving. Eduardo dived on Wednesday night (before anyone starts - Rooney and Ronaldo have done the same) and I think dives like his should be treated differently to people 'making the most' of the contact.

I'd have to disagree. It's all diving imo. And there was slight contact with Eduardo and Boruc.

Big Ears

I'd give Young a 3 match ban for the first of those penalties aswell, to me it was conclusive that he dived.

The second one seems like a dive to me too but you can't 100% say it was and with reasonable doubt I wouldn't want him banned for that.

However I would love if UEFA clamped down on Young now, and I like the guy as a player he's great to watch but these are the actions that need to take place to save the game from what it is.

noodler

WillieCocker wrote: »

It's still cheating.
Choosing to go down and deceive the referee.

It's funny when all this comes down to cutting out cheating and not cutting out feeling a fly on your leg and dropping dead.

Missing the point.

Eduardo's was beyond ALL doubt - easier to punish.

WillieCocker

noodler wrote: »

Missing the point.

Eduardo's was beyond ALL doubt - easier to punish.

i was addressing someone else post about Young's Dive, stop changing the subject of my posts.

noodler

WillieCocker wrote: »

i was addressing someone else post about Young's Dive, stop changing the subject of my posts.

Thread Title.

Good man.

JPA

Big Ears wrote: »

I'd give Young a 3 match ban for the first of those penalties aswell, to me it was conclusive that he dived.

The second one seems like a dive to me too but you can't 100% say it was and with reasonable doubt I wouldn't want him banned for that.

However I would love if UEFA clamped down on Young now, and I like the guy as a player he's great to watch but these are the actions that need to take place to save the game from what it is.

Maybe I am biased but Young is an example of a player who makes the most of minimal contact, the first pen the defender had his hand on him, the 2nd he was somewhat pushed.
Maybe he is weak but I doubt it, but I don't think he goes down without contact.

Royale with Cheese

A dive is a dive. This talk of contact/no contact is rubbish. It just looks better in a replay (and also is unfortunately more difficult to punish retrospectively). Contact or no contact, the player is still choosing to go to ground when they could have stayed on their feet.

WillieCocker

Big Ears wrote: »

I'd give Young a 3 match ban for the first of those penalties aswell, to me it was conclusive that he dived.

The second one seems like a dive to me too but you can't 100% say it was and with reasonable doubt I wouldn't want him banned for that.

However I would love if UEFA clamped down on Young now, and I like the guy as a player he's great to watch but these are the actions that need to take place to save the game from what it is.

Agreed.
If this is about cutting cheating out of the game, it should be cheating of all forms and not just the cheaters whos timing is bad.

noodler

WillieCocker wrote: »

Agreed.
If this is about cutting cheating out of the game, it should be cheating of all forms and not just the cheaters whos timing is bad.

I am only saying it is easier to punish blatant ones.

Some people feel Gerrard dived in the CL final in 2005 but loads don't. Difficult to make a decision in this case with regards a punishment.

WillieCocker

noodler wrote: »

I am only saying it is easier to punish blatant ones.

Some people feel Gerrard dived in the CL final in 2005 but loads don't. Difficult to make a decision in this case with regards a punishment.

Missing the point.
It's not the easy decisions the people have a problem with most of the time.
It's the important difficult decisions that WIN games that are the real issue.
Everyone can call an easy dive, the bigger important ones are the ones players will notice and remember.
And that in turn will cut out blatant dives like Eduardos.

noodler

WillieCocker wrote: »

Missing the point.

Its not actually, I know you were dieing for a chance to say that to me but it really isn't.

WillieCocker

noodler wrote: »

Its not actually, I know you were dieing for a chance to say that to me but it really isn't.

Do you always just single out sentences to hit with a retort.?
the issue you first addressed forgotten now?

therecklessone

noodler wrote: »

Its not actually, I know you were dieing for a chance to say that to me but it really isn't.

WillieCocker wrote: »

Do you always just single out sentences to hit with a retort.?
the issue you first addressed forgotten now?

Both of you quit needling each other, or you can take a break from this discussion.

noodler

WillieCocker wrote: »

Missing the point.
It's not the easy decisions the people have a problem with most of the time.
It's the important difficult decisions that WIN games that are the real issue.
Everyone can call an easy dive, the bigger important ones are the ones players will notice and remember.
And that in turn will cut out blatant dives like Eduardos.

If its such a difficult decision that we aren't sure that he dived then we are left with inaction as our only real option.

Of course Eduardo's was unbelievably blatant and thats why UEFA had to act.

I don't see anyway we can punish the seriously debatable ones.

therecklessone wrote: »

Both of you quit needling each other, or you can take a break from this discussion.

Needling?

gosplan

deleted - nice modding therecklessone

noodler

Who said anything about Ashley Young being the reason?

You need to re-read the relevant sections, my point had no issue with the citing of other examples.

gosplan

noodler wrote: »

Who said anything about Ashley Young being the reason?

You need to re-read the relevant sections, my point had no issue with the citing of other examples.

whatever

noodler

gosplan wrote: »

whatever

Glad you realised. Cheers.

OPENROAD

Roar wrote: »

i'm just imagining what it would be like if it were steven gerrard or frank lampard or any of england's true sporting heroes (tm) that were involved in a similar incident.

there'd be no talk of two match bans and all the frothing at the mouth that there's been recently.

instead, there'd be a simple "he's used his experience there" line from one of sky's analysts, they'd move on an that would have been that.

To be fair the Scots are also up in arms about this,it is not an exclusivly English thing and keep an eye on match threads this season you can be guaranteed posters will defend there players who dive by offering excuses such as intent to tackle and so the player went down or his momentum made him fall, but I do take your point re sky etc.

I wonder what will happen if a player dives in the premiership this weekend, will he get a two match ban? You can't have one rule for one compeition and another rule for another.

Mitch Connor

yes you can.

For years there was a rule you could only name 5 subs in prem games. While in the CL you could name 7.

jank

kida wrote: »

I know what you are saying but IMO it has to be 100% deliberate, Youngs wasn't IMO - there is some doubt

There will always be doubt but a dive is a dive.. so where is the UEFA action regarding that young dive?

"Tumbleweed"

jank

Mitch Connor wrote: »

imo - there are instances where a player is impeded (without the defending player geting the ball) but where they could stay on their feet. You see players go down in these situations, and it would be described as going down easy. Sometimes they get the foul called. Sometimes they try to stay on their feet but lose possesion of the ball because of the defender slowing them down or putting them off balance. A lot of the time, a ref won't give a foul for that, because the player didn't go down.

In those cases, what is the incentive for the player to stay on his feet - when going down (and thus drawing the refs attention to it) could result in the free he probably deserves.

IMO, there is a difference between going down easily and diving. Eduardo dived on Wednesday night (before anyone starts - Rooney and Ronaldo have done the same) and I think dives like his should be treated differently to people 'making the most' of the contact.

As eirebhoy said there was slight contact between eduardo and bourc. Going down easily is still a dive and not "clever" as some english pundits would describe Michael Owen's dive in the '98 world cup.

See this is the thing that is pissing us off, if UEFA were going to take action against young than fair enough but it is clear that there are just making an example out of eduardo and life will continue on as normal and diving will just continue to go unpunished day in day out. Wenger has every right to feel angry at the treatment Eduardo is getting.

Mitch Connor

jank wrote: »

As eirebhoy said there was slight contact between eduardo and bourc. Going down easily is still a dive and not "clever" as some english pundits would describe Michael Owen's dive in the '98 world cup.

See this is the thing that is pissing us off, if UEFA were going to take action against young than fair enough but it is clear that there are just making an example out of eduardo and life will continue on as normal and diving will just continue to go unpunished day in day out. Wenger has every right to feel angry at the treatment Eduardo is getting.

the slight contact is made AFTER Eduardo starts his dive to the ground, which makes it a dive, and not an embellishment on the contact made.

givyjoe81

Does anyone else think the excuses Wenger made is a bit like chaps on this Island trying to get out of penalty points etc 'just cos some other chap got away with it, so should i...'.

John Giles pulled up some quote from Wenger about how he would condemn diving except when its his own players, i may have gotten that slightly wrong, but the intent was the same. He cheated, he should be punished, end of.

Headshot

so will Ibra get banned now ?

OPENROAD

givyjoe81 wrote: »

John Giles pulled up some quote from Wenger about how he would condemn diving except when its his own players, i may have gotten that slightly wrong, but the intent was the same. He cheated, he should be punished, end of.

As will supporters when it comes to their own players.

Locamon

cheating will just get worse if there are not post match bans of at least 2 games but ideally 4 games if they are serious...
the alternative is a TV official while the game is running... a matter of time and straight red cards for those caught... big contrast between Arshavin's reaction last year when he was awarded a penalty in the wrong and Eduardo's in the CL...
yeah we all make excuses for our team but the whole thing is still sickening for any fan IMO

Pro. F

Headshot wrote: »

so will Ibra get banned now ?

Why, did he win a penalty with a dive?

Royale with Cheese

What difference does it make if it worked or not? He tried to cheat, he's a diving ******** blah blah. Just because he didn't succeed, he should go unpunished?

Galvasean

Pro. F wrote: »

Why, did he win a penalty with a dive?

Intent is intent. The same way you get sent off for trying to punch another player even if you do miss.

Frisbee

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

What difference does it make if it worked or not? He tried to cheat, he's a diving ******** blah blah. Just because he didn't succeed, he should go unpunished?

No, didn't you hear.
It's perfectly acceptable to cheat in some parts of the pitch or as long as nothing advantageous comes of it.

Pro. F

Galvasean wrote: »

Intent is intent. The same way you get sent off for trying to punch another player even if you do miss.

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

What difference does it make if it worked or not? He tried to cheat, he's a diving ******** blah blah. Just because he didn't succeed, he should go unpunished?

Frisbee wrote: »

No, didn't you hear.
It's perfectly acceptable to cheat in some parts of the pitch or as long as nothing advantageous comes of it.

Imo the important thing is achieving the objective - reducing the amount of diving in football. If UEFA looked at every dive, every week they would be swamped. Also, the amount of disagreement and ill will about their decisions would be massive (since nearly every dive can be debated). If they reduce the number of incidents that they step in on - say by only retro-actively punishing dives that result in a penalty - then they can save themselves a lot of hassle and discord and still make diving a less effective tactic.

So the ones that go unnoticed or get a yellow won't get any advantage and the ones that do succeed in getting a peno will have a good chance of getting a ban. Would that not reduce diving? Maybe, in practice, we'd find it didn't but it would be worth a shot imo.

Ps i think that UEFA will probably fook this up by not punishing anymore dives that get penalties but i'm waiting for the next unjustly won CL penalty to see.

amacachi

The trouble is still referees. In the diving thread there's a really obvious dive in some low level match and straightaway everyone starts laughing. Except the ref who books the guy making a challenge. It happens constantly in bigger games too, 9 times out of 10 it's obvious from a distant camera when someone dives but the ref who is 10-15 yards away can't tell.

As Pro F. said above, most dives are debatable. Just look at a montage of Rooney or Gerard dives. In pretty much all of them there's a slight, slight bit of contact, so who judges whether or not it's enough to bring a player down? Even if it is a free kick but the dive convinces the referee to book the other player is that not deceiving the referee?

I just think it's BS that they're going after a single player from the week's matches, but it's typical UEFA, just have to be seen to be doing something.

Mossy Monk

Come on UEFA. Let's see you launch investigations into the dives by Young, Ibrahimavic and Pedro. Dickheads.

L'prof

All I'll say on this is what's the difference between a referee spotting a dive in a match and awarding a yellow card and the referee not spotting it in a match and awarding a 2 match ban???

A 2 match ban because the referee didn't spot the dive? Ridiculous! :rolleyes: Anyway, I doubt we'll need Eduardo in the group stages, so it doesn't matter, but it just doesn't make any sense!

General Zod

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Its not a case of supporting what he did. It is a case of being against Uefa acting in an unprecidented manner. banning a player for diving is not in the CL rules as far as I know, and I don't remember anyone getting done for it last year.

UEFA can only punish matches under it's juristiction, such as CL or European international matches. It punished Mikolunias the lithuanian player for 2 games retrospectively when he dived against Scotland.

L'prof

General Zod wrote: »

UEFA can only punish matches under it's juristiction, such as CL or European international matches. It punished Mikolunias the lithuanian player for 2 games retrospectively when he dived against Scotland.

When was this rule introduced and how many times has it been used??? I wouldn't exactly call once a precedent!

noodler

jasonorr wrote: »

When was this rule introduced and how many times has it been used??? I wouldn't exactly call once a precedent!

Isn't that exactly what a precedent is?

L'prof

noodler wrote: »

Isn't that exactly what a precedent is?

No, not if it hasn't been used for every instance where a player has dived since! Has it? No!

noodler

jasonorr wrote: »

No, not if it hasn't been used for every instance where a player has dived since! Has it? No!

I have no legal backgorund, maybe someone else here does, but I was under the impression a precedent was at least one previous instance in which the same rules/procedure/ruling was applied.

Surely a precedent does not mean that it was applied in every case previously? I mean then wouldn't just be common? I mean going to jail for murder, you would hardly need to cite a precedent in court as the punishment is so regular?

No?

L'prof

noodler wrote: »

I have no legal backgorund, maybe someone else here does, but I was under the impression a precedent was at least one previous instance in which the same rules/procedure/ruling was applied.

Surely a precedent does not mean that it was applied in every case previously? I mean then wouldn't just be common? I mean going to jail for murder, you would hardly need to cite a precedent in court as the punishment is so regular?

No?

What I mean is, once a precedent is set is should be used in every such case after said precedent. Does this not make sense? If not, then it's more like victimisation than setting a precedent!

So since September 8 2007 (said precedent) no players involved in Uefa regulated matches have been banned for diving? So no players have dived since then in Uefa regulated matches to gain free / penalty? That's ridiculous, it seems like victimisation to me, not "setting a precedent".

Eduardo has been charged now and faces a 2 match ban, does this mean that every player that dives from now on will receive the same fate? I doubt it to be honest. Selective banning is victimisation.

Quint wrote: »

I can't believe so many people think UEFA shouldn't punish eduardo because others get away with it! Eduardo is a cheating scumbag and should get the book thrown at him. And hopefully the book is really big and heavy.

Why should it be one rule for one person and another for the next??? If Eduardo is banned, fair enough. All I'm saying is if he is, then I'd expect to see these bans being handed out all the time from now on! Will they? Will they fúck!

noodler

jasonorr wrote: »

What I mean is, once a precedent is set is should be used in every such case after said precedent. Does this not make sense? If not, then it's more like victimisation than setting a precedent!

So since September 8 2007 (said precedent) no players involved in Uefa regulated matches have been banned for diving? So no players have dived since then in Uefa regulated matches to gain free / penalty? That's ridiculous, it seems like victimisation to me, not "setting a precedent".

Eduardo has been charged now and faces a 2 match ban, does this mean that every player that dives from now on will receive the same fate? I doubt it to be honest. Selective banning is victimisation.




Why should it be one rule for one person and another for the next??? If Eduardo is banned, fair enough. All I'm saying is if he is, then I'd expect to see these bans being handed out all the time from now on! Will they? Will they fúck!

I think you are confusing the word precedent with your argument that the rules are not being applied consistently enough.