Eduardo faces a 2 match ban

OPENROAD

Frisbee wrote: »

As long as every single dive in the Champions League and Europa League is punished in the same way it's a brilliant initiative and I hope it catches on.

However if this is a one off and an example is being made of Eduardo then I hope Arsenal's lawyer's hit UEFA with a massive law suit at the first instance of diving not being punished

Arsenal look like they will appeal.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/arsenal/6122533/Arsenal



But to be consistent, when is a dive a dive? i.e. if a player is on his way down without being touched and is then clipped while he is falling, is this a dive?

Frisbee

OPENROAD wrote: »

But to be consistent, when is a dive a dive? i.e. if a player is on his way down without being touched and is then clipped while he is falling, is this a dive?

Yes

OPENROAD

Frisbee wrote: »

Yes

Sad thing is we will never get consistent decisions imo.

Frisbee

OPENROAD wrote: »

Sad thing is we will never get consistent decisions imo.

Of course not.

Then, BANG, drop a law suit on those mofo's

OPENROAD

Frisbee wrote: »

Of course not.

Then, BANG, drop a law suit on those mofo's

Interesting couple of days ahead imo

jank

So he gets a 2 game ban, fair enough you can ask but where is the ban for Ashley Young? Wasn't there a few incidents in the Super Cup?

Any investigations into these? Nope! This is the reason why this decision sucks in the long run.

Also does anyone think its a bit of a coincidence that the last 3 uefa bans for diving have involved Scottish teams?

Have a listen to Sunday Supplement, some very good points made here
http://www.skysports.com/tv_show/story/0,20144,12382_5492027_12382,00.html

Its funny how they (these guys are the chief sport writers for their respective papers) say that this incident would never have gotten the same coverage if it were an English player, and these guys are the journalists for christ sake!

The first few rounds of the CL will be very interesting......

Liam O

It's worth noting that he got this ban for deceiving the referee. 9 out of 10 dives deceive nobody and the guilty party is booked and rightly embarrassed. I think that if a player dives and gets a FK or peno when there is no contact, he should either tell the ref that it was a dive (like that's going to happen :rolleyes: ) or be banned like Eduardo. This talk of banning every dive is stupid and will never work.

EDIT: Personally though I think he shouldn't have been banned because there have been no previous incidents in which diving has been punished after a game, he is just been made an example of, like Rio Ferdinand missing his drugs test a few years ago.

Pro. F

Well the first step towards ridding the game of diving has been taken. Whoop I just hope to God UEFA follow this through. To think that we could be entering an era where diving gets properly punished - it makes me very happy.

As LiamO says the fact that Eduardo has been banned for deceiving the referee as opposed to attempting to deceive is important imo. So it seems clear - you get a yellow for attempting to deceive while you get a ban for succeeding in deceiving. The consequences of the offence are taken into account just like in the laws of the land.

I see that people on here (and at Arsenal and in the press for that matter) are still complaining about the perceived inconsistency (not all dives being punished) and arguing that it's a punishment for a referee's mistake. So i'd like to restate the argument that i made earlier in this thread in answer to that -

Pro. F wrote: »

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.

Mossy Monk

Pro. F wrote: »

Well the first step towards ridding the game of diving has been taken. Whoop I just hope to God UEFA follow this through. To think that we could be entering an era where diving gets properly punished - it makes me very happy.

But they wont follow it through. Look at the Villa game last week.

Redsoxfan

Liam O wrote: »

EDIT: Personally though I think he shouldn't have been banned because there have been no previous incidents in which diving has been punished after a game, he is just been made an example of, like Rio Ferdinand missing his drugs test a few years ago.

There is previous actually, strangely enough, a Scotish team were involved in that case as well.

A Colombian player was banned earlier this year after admitting to a diving and getting an opponent sent off.

And Adriano was also banned a few years ago for diving to win a penalty.

Pro. F

Mossy Monk wrote: »

But they wont follow it through. Look at the Villa game last week.

That's the Young dive that won a penalty against Vienna right? I haven't seen it but I'll assume that it is a blatant dive, it sounds like that from reading reports -

Unfortunately this does look like inconsistency, which doesn't surprise me at all. However, there is a slim chance that they are only going to do the retro-active banning in the CL this season. They are going to trial the extra refs system in the Europa League this year, so maybe they don't want to interfere with that. So as i said, I'm waiting for the next dive that wins a penalty in the CL.

I think that if UEFA do fook this up with inconsistency - i'm giving them the benefit of the doubt on that for now - it is really important that we criticise them for the right reasons. Not for failing to give bans to dives that get booked and don't win penalties. And not by saying that they should make a judgement on every single dive in their jurisdiction.

Erin Go Brath

Good to see UEFA taking a stand against cheating by enforcing this ban.

leninbenjamin

reports suggesting they're not looking to set a precedent with this:

football365 wrote:

UEFA's supposed clampdown on diving has been brought to a halt after just one case.

In an admission that is bound to further infuriate Arsenal after Eduardo was suspended for two matches for diving, the governing body has, reports The Times, 'confirmed that there are no plans to institute a regular programme of video referral for matches under its jurisdiction or issue an anti-diving directive'.

Rather than set a precedent that UEFA are determined to follow, the charge and subsequent banning of Eduardo is thus set to remain an arbitrary one-off, principally motivated by what The Times calls an 'unfortunate series of coincidences'. It would appear, as F365 reported at the time, that Eduardo has only been singled out because he committed his dive in a match against Scottish opponents broadcast on free-for-all television on a day of the week when no other high-profile games were being played.

'Article 10 (1c), which was introduced by Uefa as a consequence of the furore that followed Rivaldo's feigning antics when playing for Brazil in the 2002 World Cup, exists to punish the worst offenders, but there is no appetite at Uefa to mount a wholesale campaign against diving through the retrospective use of video technology,' reports the newspaper.

Arsenal have still yet to decide whether to appeal against Eduardo's suspension, with the governing body unable to provide the club with the rationale for banning the Croatian until later today. To date, all UEFA have faxed to the club is a single paragraph of text that reads, 'Having examined all the documents of the case which the player charged had likewise examined the control and disciplinary body decides that the player Eduardo is suspended for two Uefa club competition matches.'

The anomaly in that judgement is that Eduardo has been suspended for an offence that the rulebook stipulates should only receive a caution. Any hope that the governing body would issue an amendment to instigate a wider clampdown has, unfortunately, already been dashed. 'Although Eduardo's suspension is similar to that which might accompany a red card, Uefa will not now ask referees to send players off for such offences,' reports The Guardian.

While the news will meet with general disappointment, Uefa's handling of the Eduardo case perhaps suggests that their withdrawal is just as well. Of the two faxes sent to Arsenal on the matter, one failed to arrive and the other was sent to the offices of Arsenal Ladies at the club's Hertfordshire training ground.

It was actually originally in an editors article in the Times a day or two ago, but I can't see it now.

so much to taking a stand, it seems it was as much as most Arsenal fans suspected, a case of keeping the influential SFA happy.

Clanket

Ridiculous. They're too busy smoking cigars and sipping brandys to follow this up properly with an accross the board enforement.

Useless twats

Fuzzy_Dunlop

What a load of crap. Knew they weren't gonna follow up on it.

Frisbee

Time to slap UEFA with a law suit for unfair treatment or singling out or something.

Probably won't win but be worth it to annoy them.

SpAcEd OuT

leninbenjamin wrote: »

so much to taking a stand, it seems it was as much as most Arsenal fans suspected, a case of keeping the influential SFA happy.

Could someone explain this to me? surely the English FA would be far more influential than the SFA so why would they do this to an English team?

jank

So where is the outrage of the double standard?

Mr Alan

god Uefa are a joke

Galvasean

jank wrote: »

So where is the outrage of the double standard?

In the Arsenal camp. It will be interesting to see what managers of other teams have to say. Although they may want to keep theie mouths shut, considering Uefa's pettiness.

leninbenjamin

SpAcEd OuT wrote: »

Could someone explain this to me? surely the English FA would be far more influential than the SFA so why would they do this to an English team?

The SFA are one of the home nations, thus are one of the 'founding members' of the game and have a seat of the FIFA council that determine the rules of the game. They punch considerably over the weight in footballing circles because of this.

Secondly, the FA remained mute on the issue. By and large, the FA would have no interest in currying favour from Arsenal due to Wenger constant criticism of them and the national setup, and I'm sure the fact Eduardo was foreign played no small part in their silence.

Lastly, Platini's election was due to his overtures to the smaller FAs like the SFA. I can't remember exactly, nor can i find anything to back me up, but i think I remember reading Scotland were one of those important 'swing' votes that got him over the line.

Wreck

Watched 4 international games yesterday, and highlights from a few others. Every single game had diving incidents, including high profile ones like Rooney (lol) and Duff. There is next to no mention of it in the media today, no outcry from the SFA. It's absolutely sickening that Eduardo has been singled out like this for no reason.

gandalf

Yep pretty pathetic alright considering the diving incidents yesterday in the Ireland match. Double standards all round, while Duffs one yesterday was a clear dive Eduardo's looked more like he was anticipating the contact from the keeper and given he had his leg shattered its not surprising he went to ground.

WillieCocker

gandalf wrote: »

Yep pretty pathetic alright considering the diving incidents yesterday in the Ireland match. Double standards all round, while Duffs one yesterday was a clear dive Eduardo's looked more like he was anticipating the contact from the keeper and given he had his leg shattered its not surprising he went to ground.

Funny that.
Duff showed support for McGeady during the week after his little dive.

Rooney's dive/kick out was just a joke.
Dirty little shrek....

thorbarry

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/sep/06/wayne-rooney-england-slovenia-diving

The fact that he appealed for it also annoys me more. It really shows that Eduardo was singled out

Mitch Connor

thorbarry wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/sep/06/wayne-rooney-england-slovenia-diving

The fact that he appealed for it also annoys me more

Maybe, JUST MAYBE he just fell having tangled with the defender and felt he was impeded. He wasn't fouled, but maybe he thought he was? Ever played football and felt you were fouled when you had not been?

It shouldn't have been a penalty, but that doesn't mean it was a dive. You do know it can be no foul and no dive, at the same time, right?

thorbarry

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Maybe, JUST MAYBE he just fell having tangled with the defender and felt he was impeded. He wasn't fouled, but maybe he thought he was? Ever played football and felt you were fouled when you had not been?

It shouldn't have been a penalty, but that doesn't mean it was a dive. You do know it can be no foul and no dive, at the same time, right?

I never said he dived.

WillieCocker

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Maybe, JUST MAYBE he just fell having tangled with the defender and felt he was impeded. He wasn't fouled, but maybe he thought he was? Ever played football and felt you were fouled when you had not been?

It shouldn't have been a penalty, but that doesn't mean it was a dive. You do know it can be no foul and no dive, at the same time, right?

From what i saw, Rooney knew he wasn't going to get the ball and tackled the defender!!
Should have been a defensive free kick and a yellow for Rooney IMO.

leninbenjamin

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Maybe, JUST MAYBE he just fell having tangled with the defender and felt he was impeded. He wasn't fouled, but maybe he thought he was? Ever played football and felt you were fouled when you had not been?

so you're saying it's ok for a player to go down anticipating a foul then? Isn't that what Eduardo did? he went down anticipating a foul from Boruc that never came?

Anyway, from the replays I saw, Rooney held onto the defenders shorts. And even though defenders arm was behind Rooney's back at one point, the angle from sideline pretty much makes it clear there was no other contact between Rooney and the defender other than Rooney's own antics. About as blatant a dive as you can get tbh.

Mitch Connor

leninbenjamin wrote: »

so you're saying it's ok for a player to go down anticipating a foul then? Isn't that what Eduardo did? he went down anticipating a foul from Boruc that never came?

Honestly, it is like you read someone else's post. I have no idea how you have come to that conclusion based on what I said.

leninbenjamin

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Honestly, it is like you read someone else's post. I have no idea how you have come to that conclusion based on what I said.

You justified Rooney going down and looking for a foul regardless of whether there was one. Pretty similar scenario to me.

Triangle

Mitch,

From what i can see, Rooney was the offending player and fell.
But nothing will be said about it because the story is dead news, bringing dives up every week will just bore people, not sell newspapers.

UEFA are a joke and need a moral compass.
I hate diving as much as most, and firmly believe it should be stamped out. But, and it's a big but, decisions like UEFA's are worse than diving. UEFA need to be seen to be Fair and rule abiding.

Trig

Mitch Connor

leninbenjamin wrote: »

You justified Rooney going down and looking for a foul regardless of whether there was one. Pretty similar scenario to me.

No, i said it was possible he fell having tangled with the defender and that HE felt he was impeded. Just because it wasn't a foul doesn't mean he may not have thought it honestly was one.

I'm sure anyone who has ever played football will have been in situations where they thought they were fouled when in reality they were not.

Headshot

arsenal striker Eduardo wins appeal against 2 match CL ban

source ssn

jaykay74

Headshot wrote: »

arsenal striker Eduardo wins appeal against 2 match CL ban

source ssn

good decision imo. they need to take action against diving but went about it the wrong way.

Royale with Cheese

Well UEFA made a complete and utter mess out of all of this.

OPENROAD

http://www.arsenal.com/news/news-archive/eduardo-s-suspension-is-annulled-by-uefa

Wreck

Absolute farce from the outset.

thomond2006

UEFA are a bunch of cowards.

You made your bed, now lie in it. :mad:

A Uefa statement on Monday said: "Following examination of all the evidence, notably the declarations of both the referee and the referees' assessor, as well as the various video footage, it was not established to our satisfaction that the referee had been deceived in taking his decision on the penalty."

You can not be serious. :rolleyes:

mike65

Open season for diving then.

SlickRic

if UEFA want to get out of this with any dignity whatsoever, they had better set a precedent as of right now.

jaykay74

mike65 wrote: »

Open season for diving then.

No its not. Diving is a yellow card offence, same as before. UEFA in their wisdom decided with this judgement that it was a yellow if the ref sees it and a 2 match ban if he doesn't. If a 2 match ban is introduced thats fair enough but then it has to coincide with diving made a straight red card offence (which didn't happen), hence the farce, imo.

OPENROAD

mike65 wrote: »

Open season for diving then.

How? players will still get yellow cards, UEFA had no other choice but to rule in Arsenals favour, now they could change the rules going forward which they may well do.


But suppose we will still always have the age old debate when is a dive a dive and not a dive.

Gone Drinking

Is it suprising that the decision was over-turned? No. Everytime there's one of these decisions made, its appealed and either shortened/lessened or over-turned.

I'll bet Chelsea have their ban on buying shortened to 1 transfer window.

Pro. F

An absolute farce. So now UEFA are saying that the referee wasn't deceived? How? How is it possible, in any way, that the referee wasn't deceived? The fact that Eduardo dived is beyond doubt - anybody that argues that point has lost touch with reality.

jaykay74 wrote: »

Diving is a yellow card offence, same as before. UEFA in their wisdom decided with this judgement that it was a yellow if the ref sees it and a 2 match ban if he doesn't. If a 2 match ban is introduced thats fair enough but then it has to coincide with diving made a straight red card offence (which didn't happen), hence the farce, imo.

What's wrong with it being a yellow if the ref sees it and a two game ban if he doesn't? If the ref sees it the diver's team doesn't get any advantage (penalty, free etc.) and instead gets a disadvantage (player booked). If, on the other hand, a dive
wins a penalty then it's reasonable that the punishment should be more severe - just like in the law courts, where the consequences of a crime are assessed when the punishment is handed out.

If diving was made a red card offence during the game, like you suggest, then that would just put more pressure on referees. Whether a player dived or not is very hard to judge and making refs' jobs even harder by upping the stakes wouldn't help the situation in an way imo.

Ah fùck it all anyway, i'm so pissed off. Football is the best spectator sport on the planet imo. Why does it have to be run by idiots :mad:

Frisbee

Woop woop



the brown envelope does it again

L'prof

Pro. F wrote: »

An absolute farce. So now UEFA are saying that the referee wasn't deceived? How? How is it possible, in any way, that the referee wasn't deceived? The fact that Eduardo dived is beyond doubt - anybody that argues that point has lost touch with reality.

From what I've heard, Arsenal's case was that there was definitely contact (very minimal obviously) and Uefa had to prove otherwise. Wenger sounded very confident when talking about the appeal too.

Wenger wrote:

I'm the first to say that it doesn't look like a penalty but it's another thing to say that he went down with intent. I wish good luck in proving that having seen the pictures again.

Pal

Eduardo cheated.
Arsenal says he didn't.
UEFA says he didn't .

Absolute rubbish.
Shame on all three.

daveyboy_1ie

When I first seen it, I thought its no worse than the other players who dive and its about time UEFA came down on someone and its just unfortunate its him, it could and should be a lot more.

Then I seen the replay when he won the peno by diving, looking at the camera and winking then smiling and it just made my blood boil, how dare he be so casual about what is in any description, cheating and nothing else but cheating. The classless one (Wenger) will always lie to camera's when it suits him, he has made a career out of this, but the reason apparantly UEFA backed down is because Wenger compiled a dossier of players diving from last season (leaving out his own players of course) and was willing to release this to the press.

UEFA have effectively said its ok to cheat, because if they back down to Arsenal, what chances have they of tackling a big team?

thorbarry

I think UEFA were thinking about setting a precedent. They clearly had no desire to go through every Champions league/ Europa league game and find every incident of "deceiving the referee". I think that's why they didn't ban Eduardo. I think a win win situation would have been, Eduardo gets 2 game ban, and so does every player that does it under UEFA's duristriction, but UEFA were never going to do it to other players.. they handled the whole thing very badly from start to finish