Forums / The Stands: Intelligent Footy Debate
Order: Newest / Oldest
Kick It Out?
Matt (Footytube Staff) 7 years ago
Yesterdays Community Shield brought to the fore the interesting subject of when to kick the ball out.

Until recently unless it was a clear head injury or just looked plain nasty the referee would not stop play. The decision to kick the ball out and allow treatment for the prone player was left to the opposing team. It worked well, sportsmanship was abound and the fans saw to it that a team playing on when a player was down were in no doubt informed of their questionable parentage.

Then we started seeing players going down after a shoulder barge clutching their face/shin/back anywhere it seems accept their shoulder. This would generally happen after that player had lost the ball in an area of the pitch advantageous to the opposition.

Players became used to seeing this and started playing on regardless of how many times the downed player rolled over. This led to managers moaning in the post match interview about the lack of sportsmanship which led to the goal ignoring the several times his players did the same thing but just failed to score.

So in an effort to take this code of honour off the players shoulders now it is the referees responsibility to decide real injuries, attacking opportunities and when to stop the game. Problem is some teams/players are still deciding to kick it out thus making the ref's decisions for him and it's not helping.

So now we get managers in post match interview with another reason to moan at the ref.

Personally I am in favour of setting up a panel that looks at incidents after the game and can award cards. Obvious dives and feigning injury will get red cards and fines, they already have a dubious goals panel so why not dubious injury panel? Then we can have sportsmanship back in the game and give the fans a chance to applaud the opposition
Ant (Liverpool) 7 years ago
When I was learning football, any coach I had always told us to play to the whistle. Just keep playing unless the referee tells you to stop. Basicaly, if the referee and linesmen don't think the game warrents stopping, who are you to decide it should?

I completely agree about the incident panel. There should be escalating fines for repeat infringing teams and suspensions for the worst players. The only way to kick it out of the game is to properly punish the infringers in a way that negatively effects them.

Yamsy (Liverpool) 7 years ago
Great decision ref!
Anyway, I agree with Ant, the coach tells us always to play on unless the ref stops the game.... And he so rarely stops the game...
Pocketg99 (Arsenal) 7 years ago
Ha ha great call, look at ronaldo's expression!
Santillanavila (Tottenham Hotspur) 7 years ago
Interesting topic. Yea the referee should decide when to stop the game not the players. There should be a "dubious injury panel, " to see if a player dived or not and if they dived then punish them in a way that they will feel the affects strongly so they can just stop. Hopefully Fifa or whomever is responsible for stuff like this can implement this into the game. But one question, what would you do if the referee didn't stop the game but the player on the floor looked really bad? He might be faking it or it might be real. What would you do. You play on make a goal but the player in reality is actually hurt and you look like an asshole. You stop the play and the player is faking and you look stupid. But I guess that is where the injury panel comes in. Great topic
Pocketg99 (Arsenal) 7 years ago
Hmm, tricky question. Ideally the ref would spot the dive but that doesn't always happen. Now maybe if you just hod onto the ball and rolls around long enough the ref will stop play. I think you have to if the player remains on the ground
Matt (Footytube Staff) 7 years ago
So we have our first real world example, not a fake injury dive but a good old fashion penalty dive.

The incident I am referring to is in last nights (26/08) Champions League play off between Arsenal and Celtic. Arsenal leading 0-2 from the first leg.

The first goal in this game was always going to be vital if Celtic scored first one more goal would of seen them push to extra time if Arsenal scored first it would effectively kill the tie.

Eduardo, a brilliant player in my book, scored the first goal from a penalty that he had 'bought' as the commentator kept calling it. In my world he cheated. I don't think even the most blinkered of Arsenal fans could say he didn't dive, it was that obvious. Even Wenger himself can't deny it, Wenger said: "I do not go as far to say Eduardo dived.
"He went down, for what reason I do not know. Having seen it again on television, it doesn't look a penalty. " - BBC Sport

Arsenal eventually ran out 3-1 winners on the night 5-1 on aggregate, so the goal was not important? I happen to think it was the most crucial goal of the tie. So now I am electing my panel looks at this incident as well and they would order a replay and ban Eduardo for 3 games including the replay.

Wonder if he would do it again?
AbbeyC 7 years ago
I agree that, in all likelihood, Eduardo dived. Diving is cheating. Cheating should be punished, preferably at the time, but better late than never. I say this despite being an Arsenal fan.

That said, I would like to draw your attention to a moment earlier in the game. Eduardo was through on goal, onside. Play was then brought back to give an offside decision against a Celtic player! Perhaps for this reason he felt justified in sticking the penalty away.
Matt (Footytube Staff) 7 years ago
As my mum used to say 'Two wrongs don't make a right' and I don't see how a poor interpretation of the advantage rule gives a player carte blanche to cheat.

I guess the biggest difference between the two situations is, one is a mistake the other is intentional.

I understand how this would be frustrating but I hope I would have the moral fibre not to take the cheap way out
AbbeyC 7 years ago
You appear to have misread me. I did not write that he was justified in diving. In fact, I explicitly say something to the contrary "[d]iving is cheating". Rather I said he may have Felt justified in sticking the penalty away (because of the consequences of the injustice of the earlier moment in the game -where play was taken back).

Ideally, Eduardo, in the unlikely circumstance that he did not mean to dupe the referee, would have got up and indicated a goal kick

Kick4Life - changing lives through football