Gareth Bale

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

Kirby wrote: »

But why are you trying to deflect? Do you think that by shouting "Look! he's a racist!" that we will all suddenly forget that Bale is a diver?

It's not relevant. If you want to argue Saurez is just as bad a diver, it would be an on topic point. Argue that "Bale's not that bad because everyone does it" I would be with you. But deflecting from the issue isn't fooling anybody. Bale's a cheat. Just because he plays for your team.....it doesn't make him less of one.

Fully agree with the Bale comments, don't think I, a lone man on the internet, could cause people to forget about Bale's diving. I'm just exclaiming my disbelief at how anyone can believe Suarez to be innocent in his racism 'row' with Patrice Evra. I can get over Bale diving, LFC fans should be able to get over Suarez being a racist.

Iago

The incident at the weekend wasn't a dive.

It's entirely possible for it to be neither a foul or a dive.

Kirby

Iago wrote: »

The incident at the weekend wasn't a dive.

It's entirely possible for it to be neither a foul or a dive.

True. It is possible. But the incident at the weekend was a clear dive. He can stay up....he chose not to. Therefore dive. The ridiculous back-arch and scorpion kick just made it look dramatic. It's still a dive without them. for example, Phil Neville's dive a few weeks previously didnt have any dramatics.....but it was a dive too.

super_furry

http://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/english-league/2012/1203/356452-spurs-boss-defends-bales-against-diving-claims/

Looks like it's getting to AVB. He's out defending him, insisting he's not a diver when pretty much everyone can see he is. I hope what he's saying in private is different to his public statements because Bale needs to be told to cut out the cheating.

Iago

Kirby wrote: »

True. It is possible. But the incident at the weekend was a clear dive. He can stay up....he chose not to. Therefore dive. The ridiculous back-arch and scorpion kick just made it look dramatic. It's still a dive without them. for example, Phil Neville's dive a few weeks previously didnt have any dramatics.....but it was a dive too.

It was never a dive, the onus shouldn't be on the player to stay up. Tackling players know what they are doing leaving a leg out, if they can't get the ball they can imbalance the attacker to enough of an extent that he loses control of the ball.

Given the option of continuing on the existing path and colliding at full force, or simply going over the outstretched leg the choice would be fairly simple. Certainly the over arching that has become commonplace with almost all such incidents doesn't help the case and looks a bit ridiculous but that doesn't take away from the fact that

a) there was some contact
b) players shouldn't be expected to just continue into challenges whereby they may get injured for no good cause

For me a dive is only a dive when there is no contact or when a player is looking to get advantage by throwing themselves into the defender. Neither was the case imo in the Bale incident.

Kold

THFC wrote: »

Fully agree with the Bale comments, don't think I, a lone man on the internet, could cause people to forget about Bale's diving. I'm just exclaiming my disbelief at how anyone can believe Suarez to be innocent in his racism 'row' with Patrice Evra. I can get over Bale diving, LFC fans should be able to get over Suarez being a racist.

Tbh 'negrito' isn't racist. I've been travelling a while and many nationalities use it as a term of affection.

citytillidie

Gareth Bale on diving by him
If people want to say I’m diving they can, but at the end of the day I’m trying to get out of the way and save myself and my career. You’ve just got to try to be a bit clever about it. I’ve got a few people sent off this year by doing that

Thats all there is to say about it he admits to diving and getting people sent off

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2112226/Gareth-Bale-Im-diver.html

Pro. F

Kold wrote: »

Tbh 'negrito' isn't racist. I've been travelling a while and many nationalities use it as a term of affection.

"Negrito" wasn't the word used. "Negro" was the word used, which is pretty much the same anyway. The South American Spanish language experts said that it could be interpreted as racist depending on context. Which is obviously logical.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

No, just a "court" not operating with adequate burdens of proof and acceptable procedures.

The procedures and burdens of proof were perfectly adequate and acceptable.

Pro. F

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I wouldn't mind, but players who play the game in an unmanly fashion like Gareth Bale shouldn't be celebrated. There was a time when a player like him would have had to toughen up or get booted out of the game, and football was better for it.

Football was less effective back then. Personally I detest all the diving and feigning of injury that goes on nowadays, but the problem is with the rules which encourage that sort of play. The rules need to be fixed or the problem will never go away. Giving out about what the players are doing because it doesn't fit in with our aesthetic ideals for the game is pointless.

Seaneh wrote: »

Where is it encouraged?


What absolute nonsense.

In Spain and Italy. It is also encouraged in England as well, but not quite so much.

TheDoc

I applaud referees who are taking action on diving and dishing out the cards.

And if I'm honest, I don't mind if they get a few wrong either, just to get the word out that diving is a bookable offence and will be actioned.

When I played ball, and got a hit or a tackle going through on goal, I did everything in my power to stay on the run to get a chance on goal. But that was really when diving wasn't even heard of and definitely wasnt as widespread as today.

Genuinelly hope this card brandishing continues, and mistaken booking by refs arent ridiculed, so that players will make more effort to stay on their feet. I've heard all the excuses now defending it, the game is a faster pace, referees arnt making the right decisions, players bodies are more finely tuned. I've heard it all, I've taken a un-biased look at it.

And I've come to the conclusion that there is still cheating and I won't take any excuse for it.

Bale is being talked about by the British press as the second coming of god in relation to the football pitch, when he in fairness, is only having glimmers of class during various point sin the season. The press need to stop making excuses for him, because they jumped the gun and heralded him as their best export.

ThunbergsAreGo

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

He's a cheat, plain and simple.

As are many footballers. Another dislikeable player, news at eleven.

I wouldn't mind, but players who play the game in an unmanly fashion like Gareth Bale shouldn't be celebrated. There was a time when a player like him would have had to toughen up or get booted out of the game, and football was better for it.

Are you Tony Pulis is disguise?

Ush1

Pro. F wrote: »

Football was less effective back then. Personally I detest all the diving and feigning of injury that goes on nowadays, but the problem is with the rules which encourage that sort of play. The rules need to be fixed or the problem will never go away. Giving out about what the players are doing because it doesn't fit in with our aesthetic ideals for the game is pointless.



In Spain and Italy. It is also encouraged in England as well, but not quite so much.

What problems with the rules?

Pro. F

Ush1 wrote: »

What problems with the rules?

On balance (risk vs reward; chance of being caught) diving and feigning injuries are effective methods of gaining an advantage. The rules need to make it not effective.

Ush1

Pro. F wrote: »

On balance diving and feigning injuries are effective methods of gaining an advantage. The rules need to make it not effective.

They are only effective if you trick the officials. Sure any foul can be effective, nevermind diving or feigning injury, that's why they happen.

MrKingsley

I just find it amazing how the 'diver' tag seems just to be passed around to a different player every few weeks. The media/fans pick one out every month and that it they get booked when they are fouled.

Every single team has a few. Its part of the game and wont be stopped until retrospective bookings come into play IMO.

As for bale on the weekend and in general. Yes he goes down easy at times but the last 2 bookings he has picked up are an absolute joke. Just because he now has this 'tag' he will continue to be booked needlessly. Sidwell put in a late tackle and caught him. It was a foul and if anything a booking for the tackler. The theatrics have nothing to do with it for me. He was caught and went down. Spurs free kick

Pro. F

Ush1 wrote: »

They are only effective if you trick the officials. Sure any foul can be effective, nevermind diving or feigning injury, that's why they happen.

And it is too easy to trick officials with diving and feigning injury. You are more likely to get away with diving and feigning injury than any other foul. Feigning injury isn't even recognised as a foul afaik.

People generally don't mind the other fouls that go on in the game - illegal blocks, trips, handballs, offsides, etc. It feels like their presence in the game is fair because a) they aren't completely scandalous and unmanly looking and b) the risk vs reward seems fairly balanced.

Diving and feigning injury on the other hand is the opposite in both these regards. I don't know of anybody who has ever been punished for feigning injury for example and players get away with dives in pretty much every single game at the pro level.

Ush1

Pro. F wrote: »

And it is too easy to trick officials with diving and feigning injury. You are more likely to get away with diving and feigning injury than any other foul.

You're a describing a problem with the enforcement of the rules then, not the rules themselves.

Pro. F wrote: »

Feigning injury isn't even recognised as a foul afaik.

Stopping play for injuries is at the refs discretion unless it's a head injury.

Pro. F wrote: »

People generally don't mind the other fouls that go on in the game - illegal blocks, trips, handballs, offsides, etc. It feels like their presence in the game is fair because a) they aren't completely scandalous and unmanly looking and b) the risk vs reward seems fairly balanced.

Erm, I thought we were talking problems in the rules, not if certain fouls are manly looking? The offenses you listed can be just as rewarding if not more if they aren't spotted, than diving.

Pro. F wrote: »

Diving and feigning injury on the other hand is the opposite in both these regards. I don't know of anybody who has ever been punished for feigning injury for example and players get away with dives in pretty much every single game at the pro level.

Again, not problems with the rules, problems with enforcing the rules.

Pro. F

Ush1 wrote: »

You're a describing a problem with the enforcement of the rules then, not the rules themselves.
...
Again, not problems with the rules, problems with enforcing the rules.

I'm not interested in getting into semantics about this. If you want to be an awkward ass about it then you can go back and read "the rules and the enforcement of the rules" everywhere I just wrote "rules."

Ush1 wrote: »

Stopping play for injuries is at the refs discretion unless it's a head injury.

That's got nothing to do with punishment for feigning an injury.

Ush1 wrote: »

, I thought we talking problems in the rules, not if certain fouls are manly looking? The offenses you listed can be just as rewarding if not more if they aren't spotted than diving.

Read my post more carefully then and you will understand the conversation better. I was replying to Lloyd's post where he was giving out about thte unmanliness of it all and I said that I detest diving and feigning injury too.

The offences I mentioned all get punished more often than diving and feigning injury.

Ush1

Pro. F wrote: »

I'm not interested in getting into semantics about this. If you want to be an awkward ass about it then you can go back and read "the rules and the enforcement of the rules" everywhere I just wrote "rules."

It's not semantics, you meant something different altogether. Rules and officiating are two distinct areas.

That's got nothing to do with punishment for feigning an injury.

So what's the advantage they are gaining?

Read my post more carefully then and you will understand the conversation better. I was replying to Lloyd's post where he was giving out about thte unmanliness of it all and I said that I detest diving and feigning injury too.

The offences I mentioned all get punished more often than diving and feigning injury.

Again, so you didn't mean what you said? I suggest you type it more carefully.

Pro. F

Ush1 wrote: »

It's not semantics, you meant something different altogether. Rules and officiating are two distinct areas.

Rules and officiating are two overlapping areas that interact with each other continuously.

Ush1 wrote: »

So what's the advantage they are gaining?

Convincing the ref that they were fouled when they weren't or that the foul was worse than it was. Obviously. Could you not work that out for yourself?

Ush1 wrote: »

Again, so you didn't mean what you said? I suggest you type it more carefully.

Exactly what part of what I said was different from what I meant with regards to the unmanliness?

Ush1

Pro. F wrote: »

Rules and officiating are two overlapping areas that interact with each other continuously.

No, everything you've mentioned so far has been complaining of enforcement of the rules. No overlaps I can see of any kind. It's like saying we should change heroin laws because there is so much heroin but guards never make arrests.

Convincing the ref that they were fouled when they weren't or that the foul was worse than it was. Obviously. Could you not work that out for yourself?

Again, no overlap. Still problems with enforcement(refs, officials..).... Still haven't illustrated any issues with the rules, that's probably why I couldn't figure it out to be honest.

Exactly what part of what I said was different from what I meant with regards to the unmanliness?

Seriously? I replied to your mention of the rules, you brought up something you were talking about to someone else, not to do with what I mentioned which was what is your issue with the current rules?

Pro. F

Ush1 wrote: »

No, everything you've mentioned so far has been complaining of enforcement of the rules. No overlaps I can see of any kind. It's like saying we should change heroin laws because there is so much heroin but guards never make arrests.

Changes in laws/rules can help officials to better deal with a problem. It happens all the time in the laws of the land and the laws/rules of games and sports. Your heroin example is the type of thing that happens all the time.

Ush1 wrote: »

Again, no overlap. Still problems with enforcement(refs, officials..).... Still haven't illustrated any issues with the rules, that's probably why I couldn't figure it out to be honest.

As far as I am aware there is nothing in the rules/laws to discourage players from feigning injury. There is definitely nothing effective since it is never punished.

Ush1 wrote: »

Seriously? I replied to your mention of the rules, you brought up something you were talking about to someone else, not to do with what I mentioned which was what is your issue with the current rules?

The fact that I might bring up what I see as an important motivation for fixing the problem is just natural in the course of a conversation about the problem. You are coming across as a complete oddball with your objection to my mention of it.

Ush1

Pro. F wrote: »

Changes in laws/rules can help officials to better deal with a problem. It happens all the time in the laws of the land and the laws/rules of games and sports. Your heroin example is the type of thing that happens all the time.

It makes sense to alter the rules if they need to be or methods of better enforcing them has been exhausted, which it hasn't.

I don't see a major issue with the rules, I see an issue with refs being human, and there is probably ways to help him.

Pro. F wrote: »

As far as I am aware there is nothing in the rules/laws to discourage players from feigning injury. There is definitely nothing effective since it is never punished.

If the ref deems a player fouled and he pretends to be more injured than he is, that's not something the ref should take into consideration. He obviously can be pressurised into making calls/issuing cards but that comes down to his own mental toughness.

The fact that I might bring up what I see as an important motivation for fixing the problem is just natural in the course of a conversation about the problem. You are coming across as a complete oddball with your objection to my mention of it.

I didn't have any objection to you mentioning it, I have no idea why you mentioned it to me, oddball indeed.

I personally am not interested in the manliness of fouls. Hatchet-men are just as bad if not worse than divers.

Pro. F

Ush1 wrote: »

It makes sense to alter the rules if they need to be or methods of better enforcing them has been exhausted, which it hasn't.

I don't see a major issue with the rules, I see an issue with refs being human, and there is probably ways to help him.

As I said earlier, rules and officiating are two overlapping areas that interact with each other continuously. Some of the ways to help referees may include changes to rules and regulations.

Just because you don't see a major problems with the rules doesn't mean there isn't one.

Ush1 wrote: »

If the ref deems a player fouled and he pretends to be more injured than he is, that's not something the ref should take into consideration. He obviously can be pressurised into making calls/issuing cards but that comes down to his own mental toughness.

Every single referee on the planet is influenced by players when making calls every week. When players can so easily get away with diving, feigning injury and arguing with the ref and there is not a single referee who is able to stop them doing it, then it is obviously not a problem with their mental toughness. It is a problem with the impossible situation that they are put in.

Ush1 wrote: »

I didn't have any objection to you mentioning it, I have no idea why you mentioned it to me, oddball indeed.

I personally am not interested in the manliness of fouls. Hatchet-men are just as bad if not worse than divers.

I don't care if you are not interested in the manliness of fouls.

Ush1

Pro. F wrote: »

As I said earlier, rules and officiating are two overlapping areas that interact with each other continuously. Some of the ways to help referees may include changes to rules and regulations.

Just because you don't see a major problems with the rules doesn't mean there isn't one.

As I said, you still haven't given any examples where it is a problem with rules and not the enforcement of them. You haven't either suggested any solutions which would require altering the rules.

Every single referee on the planet is influenced by players when making calls every week. When players can so easily get away with diving, feigning injury and arguing with the ref and there is not a single referee who is able to stop them doing it, then it is obviously not a problem with their mental toughness. It is a problem with the impossible situation that they are put in.

Well that's a broad sweeping statement that you can't verify. Some refs are better than others, they don't all just throw up there hands and say there's nothing I can do, it's an impossible situation out there.

I don't care if you are not interested in the manliness of fouls.

lol, then why did you mention it to me??

Pro. F

Ush1 wrote: »

As I said, you still haven't given any examples where it is a problem with rules and not the enforcement of them. You haven't either suggested any solutions which would require altering the rules.

Yes I have given an example and it is a whopper.

I have given the broad direction of rules change that I think would suggest, ie that the balance between risk and reward needs to change so as to make diving and feigning injury not effective, or less effective. I haven't suggested specific rules changes because I have been dealing with your utter shíte arguments about nothing.

Ush1 wrote: »

Well that's a broad sweeping statement that you can't verify. Some refs are better than others, they don't all just throw up there hands and say there's nothing I can do, it's an impossible situation out there.

I think you are insane if you don't think that all referees are influenced by the diving, feigning injury and arguments from players. Fúcking certifiable.

Ush1 wrote: »

lol, then why did you mention it to me??

Because I think it is important. I don't tailor my posts just to what you might think is important.

Ush1

Pro. F wrote: »

Yes I have given an example and it is a whopper.

I have given the broad direction of rules change that I think would suggest, ie that the balance between risk and reward needs to change so as to make diving and feigning injury not effective, or less effective. I haven't suggested specific rules changes because I have been dealing with your utter shíte arguments about nothing.

Yet again, you haven't given any examples. You've essentially said there's something wrong with the rules and then nothing...

I think you are insane if you don't think that all referees are influenced by the diving, feigning injury and arguments from players. Fúcking certifiable.

Thanks for the psych. evaluation "professor".

Because I think it is important. I don't tailor my posts just to what you might think is important.

So you would quote me and mention something directly to me that you just want to say but don't want me to respond to. I think I'm getting your thinking now, certifiable FTW!

Pro. F

Ush1 wrote: »

Yet again, you haven't given any examples. You've essentially said there's something wrong with the rules and then nothing...

I have given an example of what is wrong with the rules.

Ush1 wrote: »

So you would quote me and mention something directly to me that you just want to say but don't want me to respond to. I think I'm getting your thinking now, certifiable FTW!

I didn't say I don't want you to respond to it. I said that I think it important and worth mentioning and I don't care if you disagree with that.

Ush1

Pro. F wrote: »

I have given an example of what is wrong with the rules.

No sireee.

I didn't say I don't want you to respond to it. I said that I think it important and worth mentioning and I don't care if you disagree with that.

Great, thanks for the irrelevance.

Pro. F

Ush1 wrote: »

No sireee.

Here:

Pro. F wrote: »

As far as I am aware there is nothing in the rules/laws to discourage players from feigning injury. There is definitely nothing effective since it is never punished.

---

Ush1 wrote: »

Great, thanks for the irrelevance.

We disagree about its relevance.

Ush1

Pro. F wrote: »

Here:

---

We disagree about its relevance.

I already asked you what is the advantage if the ref believes he is feigning injury?

Pro. F

Ush1 wrote: »

I already asked you what is the advantage if the ref believes he is feigning injury?

And I have told you.

Ush1

Pro. F wrote: »

And I have told you.

No you haven't.

Pro. F

Ush1 wrote: »

No you haven't.

Wait, lets be clear. What do you think you have asked me that I haven't answered?

Oregano_State

Ush1 wrote: »

They are only effective if you trick the officials. Sure any foul can be effective, nevermind diving or feigning injury, that's why they happen.

You're missing the point. The gain form diving is worth much more than the likely punishment, if any. You don't see strikers hacked down every time the try to make a run behind the defence because last man challenges have to be punished with a straight red card, i.e. the risk is not worth the rewards.

In my opinion diving won't be gotten rid of just by brandishing yellows, because in many cases you can't tell with the naked eye whether it's a dive or not.


In-match video refereeing and post-match citations would help, but in fairness that's not about to happen any time soon with Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee running Football.

Ush1

Pro. F wrote: »

Wait, lets be clear. What do you think you have asked me that I haven't answered?

The advantage gained by feigning injury if the ref doesn't stop play or doesn't buy into the feigning.

Ush1

Oregano_State wrote: »

You're missing the point. The gain form diving is worth much more than the likely punishment, if any. You don't see strikers hacked down every time the try to make a run behind the defence because last man challenges have to be punished with a straight red card, i.e. the risk is not worth the rewards.

In my opinion diving won't be gotten rid of just by brandishing yellows, because in many cases you can't tell with the naked eye whether it's a dive or not.


In-match video refereeing and post-match citations would help, but in fairness that's not about to happen any time soon with Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee running Football.

No I'm not but since you mention that, you can dive any where on the pitch. Not every dive is in the box and will result in a red card.

My point is, like you said, the problem is the refs detecting what is a dive and what isn't. Video reffing would help in this instance without actually changing rules.

Bounty Hunter

Pro F, Ush

please let it be, a full page of back and forth from you guys isnt needed, agree to disagree, agree that its not important or whatever but lets not monopolize a thread about Gareth Bale with this.

rob316

Hes a big talent no doubt but christ hes a disgrace with this faking injury., man up! shoulder him in the back hes goes down holding his head, touch his shoulder he goes down clutching his face. If this guy wasnt british he would be mauled by the press.

I wouldnt mind but hes a big strong lad who has enough talent to cut out this ****e.

davycc

rob316 wrote: »

Hes a big talent no doubt but christ hes a disgrace with this faking injury., man up! shoulder him in the back hes goes down holding his head, touch his shoulder he goes down clutching his face. If this guy wasnt british he would be mauled by the press.

I wouldnt mind but hes a big strong lad who has enough talent to cut out this ****e.

The "shoulder" in the back was sore as Gerrard actually headed the back of Bales head after gerrard won the ball.Bale had only a standing jump whilst Gerrard had a run & jump so it it would hurt a fecking lot while Gerrard also caught him slightly with the elbow.

He didnt go down there to win a free kick, he did it as he had no choice after getting flattened unexpectadly like that.

You could see Bale talking to the ref at half time showing him the fat new bruise on his head.
did you even see the game?

Despite this he still managed 2 assists & almost 3 if siggy had beat jones instead of the post saving pool.

He is a very big talent but your correct in the lucas "foul" was not a foul at all bale had lost the ball & chanced his arm id say.he should cut it out

Optimalprimerib

At this stage I love when bale goes down injured. I see it as a sign that when he gets up, he will do something special. It looked like he got a bad injury against Newcastle: BANG!! 2 goals. Against Liverpool yesterday: 2 assists.

I really hope he stays next year as if he goes, no matter who we get in place for him, we will have to pay through our nose for half the player due to the payoff we get from bale.

An intelligent striker would be nice.

ThunbergsAreGo

Where are people getting two assists from yesterday?

Milkers

naughtb4 wrote: »

Where are people getting two assists from yesterday?

He lumped a free kick into the box, the defenders made a hames of it and Vertonghen hit home a super composed finish = credit Bale with an assist cos he's brill.

fullstop

Milkers wrote: »

He lumped a free kick into the box, the defenders made a hames of it and Vertonghen hit home a super composed finish = credit Bale with an assist cos he's brill.

Well he was the last Spurs player to touch the ball before Vertonghen, so he'll get the assist. You're obviously a big fan from the wording in your post.

klose

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/world-of-sport/gareth-bale-attempts-trademark-heart-shaped-goal-celebration-200756095.html

Havent players done it before him?

Nuri Sahin

2nd Row Donkey

klose wrote: »

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/world-of-sport/gareth-bale-attempts-trademark-heart-shaped-goal-celebration-200756095.html

Havent players done it before him?

Brian O'Driscoil did something similar about 10 years.

missingtime

klose wrote: »

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/world-of-sport/gareth-bale-attempts-trademark-heart-shaped-goal-celebration-200756095.html

Havent players done it before him?

"whips, harness and saddlery"

You kinky bastard bale.

Chucky the tree

klose wrote: »

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/world-of-sport/gareth-bale-attempts-trademark-heart-shaped-goal-celebration-200756095.html

Havent players done it before him?

He's trading marking that symbol, not his celebration. He obviously can't trademark the celebration.

Seaneh

Nuri Sahin wrote: »

I see your Turkey (international) and raise a duck!