contact equals foul so why the big debate?
-----------------------------------------------------
No it doesn't, football's a contact sport
Clockworkred speaks the truth.
It is a phenomena called the uncertainty principle in physics.
kinsang
---------------
i agree every club has its divers and yes i am embarrassed when drogba goes to ground easily.
Strong action should be taken to deter these players for taking advantage of the refs and giving our sport a bad name
My opinion has always been that if a player is fouled but the contact isn't enough to take him down, the free kick or penalty should be awarded, and the player who went down should be booked. A foul is a foul. And there is no doubt that Young was fouled today. There is equally little doubt that if dived. A dive and a foul are not mutually exclusive! Both offenders should be punished!
comment by merrysupersteve (U1132)
posted 1 minute ago
My opinion has always been that if a player is fouled but the contact isn't enough to take him down, the free kick or penalty should be awarded, and the player who went down should be booked. A foul is a foul. And there is no doubt that Young was fouled today. There is equally little doubt that if dived. A dive and a foul are not mutually exclusive! Both offenders should be punished!
------------
I believe this is a have your cake and eat it moment! Complete crap!
i notice that no-one went this mad when adam johnson and edin dzeko did EXCATLY the same thing against fulham and sunderland respectively , im sure it has nothing to do with ashley young being a united player, no definatley not
--------
I said this to one of the idiot city fans on here and he said it was ok because they didn't dive in two games in one week.
At the end of the day, none of us know whether it was a dive or not. Space and time are simply a limited framework through which we understand the noumenal world, but we can't really know anything for certain.
are you trying to say that youngs movements were the result of a tackle?are you really trying to defend someone who saw a leg and moved his foot towards that leg then dived better than tom lewis over with a twist as well added . i'm surprised at your obvious lack of honesty
ban all cheats from football including all mentioned in this article to save football from becoming the W.W.E.
Xiuxiuejar,
I wish you had addressed my comment and found fault with it. You didn't. Therefore, I think you are a moron. Fair? I think so.
Please, do tell where what I said was crap. Young was fouled, yes?! He dived, yes?! Should both offenders not be punished?!
That is my point. It was a foul, it was a penalty and it was a dive.
the contact was because of young, and football is a contact sport.
He went down because he wanted a penalty. He is cheat plain and simple.
The contact wasn't because of young. He could not possibly have avoided that. He dived yes, but to say he initiated the contact is nonsense. English posters do lie! 8-2
Merrysupersteve - in theory your idea is a fair one, but I think it would be difficult to implement in practice. It can be difficult enough for refs to decide if a player has dived, never mind if it is a foul and they have dived also.The fact that they only get one split second view of it also makes it difficult, unlike the number of replays we get (at first glance it looks a clear penalty, only on review does it look marginal)
For me a foul is a foul, and even though Young made the most of it, it was a foul. In general, both diving were there is no contact and feigning injury should be looked at retrospectively and punished if necessary.
Agree wholeheartedly, kinsang!
It was a dive but also a pen. Whatever abus may claim, there was a foul. But all the focus was on the dive.
just watched MOTD analysis, and still think it is a penalty.
once there is contact the manner in which the player goes down is besides the point. He could easily have stayed on is feet imo but that is subjective.
YOU lot make me laugh....Young is a cheat..end off...Give him a red card next time and he might stop???
Yes that would be the right thing to do. Because a dive is worth a red card, as has been shown many times before. Was it a foul?
At the moment a dive is punishable by a yellow card, but I think that it should be able to be done retrospectively also when no foul is committed. However, if a foul is actually committed, which for me it was in the Young case, then even though he makes a meal of it, it is still a penalty, and as I mentioned before, it would be a tricky path to go down to award both a foul and book a player for diving.
For me what really needs to be looked at is players feigning injury. Players that use their hands and make contact with opposition players' faces etc should quite rightly be sent off, but the over-reaction of players falling down like they've been hit by Mike Tyson should be punished by a yellow card also - unless a player is knocked out, there is no reason for a player to go down the way they do when such contact is made. The same goes for rolling around the pitch - if you are genuinely injured, you don't roll around, A good example was Balotelli's tackle on Sagna - it was quite rightly worthy of a 2nd yellow, but Sagna's reaction was over the top and unneccessary.
The sooner players are punished for feigning injury the better, with bans for repeat offenders, and that would soon stop this practice.
Sign in if you want to comment
CHEATS!!!
Page 2 of 2
posted on 15/4/12
contact equals foul so why the big debate?
-----------------------------------------------------
No it doesn't, football's a contact sport
posted on 15/4/12
Clockworkred speaks the truth.
It is a phenomena called the uncertainty principle in physics.
posted on 15/4/12
kinsang
---------------
i agree every club has its divers and yes i am embarrassed when drogba goes to ground easily.
Strong action should be taken to deter these players for taking advantage of the refs and giving our sport a bad name
posted on 15/4/12
My opinion has always been that if a player is fouled but the contact isn't enough to take him down, the free kick or penalty should be awarded, and the player who went down should be booked. A foul is a foul. And there is no doubt that Young was fouled today. There is equally little doubt that if dived. A dive and a foul are not mutually exclusive! Both offenders should be punished!
posted on 15/4/12
comment by merrysupersteve (U1132)
posted 1 minute ago
My opinion has always been that if a player is fouled but the contact isn't enough to take him down, the free kick or penalty should be awarded, and the player who went down should be booked. A foul is a foul. And there is no doubt that Young was fouled today. There is equally little doubt that if dived. A dive and a foul are not mutually exclusive! Both offenders should be punished!
------------
I believe this is a have your cake and eat it moment! Complete crap!
posted on 15/4/12
i notice that no-one went this mad when adam johnson and edin dzeko did EXCATLY the same thing against fulham and sunderland respectively , im sure it has nothing to do with ashley young being a united player, no definatley not
--------
I said this to one of the idiot city fans on here and he said it was ok because they didn't dive in two games in one week.
posted on 15/4/12
At the end of the day, none of us know whether it was a dive or not. Space and time are simply a limited framework through which we understand the noumenal world, but we can't really know anything for certain.
are you trying to say that youngs movements were the result of a tackle?are you really trying to defend someone who saw a leg and moved his foot towards that leg then dived better than tom lewis over with a twist as well added . i'm surprised at your obvious lack of honesty
ban all cheats from football including all mentioned in this article to save football from becoming the W.W.E.
posted on 15/4/12
Xiuxiuejar,
I wish you had addressed my comment and found fault with it. You didn't. Therefore, I think you are a moron. Fair? I think so.
Please, do tell where what I said was crap. Young was fouled, yes?! He dived, yes?! Should both offenders not be punished?!
That is my point. It was a foul, it was a penalty and it was a dive.
posted on 15/4/12
the contact was because of young, and football is a contact sport.
He went down because he wanted a penalty. He is cheat plain and simple.
posted on 15/4/12
The contact wasn't because of young. He could not possibly have avoided that. He dived yes, but to say he initiated the contact is nonsense. English posters do lie! 8-2
posted on 15/4/12
Merrysupersteve - in theory your idea is a fair one, but I think it would be difficult to implement in practice. It can be difficult enough for refs to decide if a player has dived, never mind if it is a foul and they have dived also.The fact that they only get one split second view of it also makes it difficult, unlike the number of replays we get (at first glance it looks a clear penalty, only on review does it look marginal)
For me a foul is a foul, and even though Young made the most of it, it was a foul. In general, both diving were there is no contact and feigning injury should be looked at retrospectively and punished if necessary.
posted on 15/4/12
Agree wholeheartedly, kinsang!
It was a dive but also a pen. Whatever abus may claim, there was a foul. But all the focus was on the dive.
posted on 15/4/12
just watched MOTD analysis, and still think it is a penalty.
once there is contact the manner in which the player goes down is besides the point. He could easily have stayed on is feet imo but that is subjective.
posted on 15/4/12
YOU lot make me laugh....Young is a cheat..end off...Give him a red card next time and he might stop???
posted on 15/4/12
Yes that would be the right thing to do. Because a dive is worth a red card, as has been shown many times before. Was it a foul?
posted on 16/4/12
At the moment a dive is punishable by a yellow card, but I think that it should be able to be done retrospectively also when no foul is committed. However, if a foul is actually committed, which for me it was in the Young case, then even though he makes a meal of it, it is still a penalty, and as I mentioned before, it would be a tricky path to go down to award both a foul and book a player for diving.
For me what really needs to be looked at is players feigning injury. Players that use their hands and make contact with opposition players' faces etc should quite rightly be sent off, but the over-reaction of players falling down like they've been hit by Mike Tyson should be punished by a yellow card also - unless a player is knocked out, there is no reason for a player to go down the way they do when such contact is made. The same goes for rolling around the pitch - if you are genuinely injured, you don't roll around, A good example was Balotelli's tackle on Sagna - it was quite rightly worthy of a 2nd yellow, but Sagna's reaction was over the top and unneccessary.
The sooner players are punished for feigning injury the better, with bans for repeat offenders, and that would soon stop this practice.
Page 2 of 2