What actually constitutes a 'Dive'?
........................
Breaking the water cleanly without the use of the belly?
UnitedRedMacca
Your old man is not going senile but i dont agree with his take on it.
In short, a dive is simply where a player goes to ground without any contact, or through over-simulation that is unnecessary (example: a push in the face, and the player goes down clutching his face as if he's taken a right hander).
If you're put off balance & you're at disadvantage then i would say it is okay to go to ground, if you haven't lost anything from any contact made, you should stay on your feet (to avoid being called a diver).
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 2 minutes ago
What actually constitutes a 'Dive'?
........................
Breaking the water cleanly without the use of the belly?
===
Nothing better than a good old fashioned Bomb dive
The question is wrong in my opinion. Your question relates to seeking an advantage through deception.
In my opinion what you are asking is "is it deception fair" and not what it is that constitutes a dive.
Fellani is rubbish. Big oaf who stands in the middle bullying and elbowing midgets.
"what actually consitutes a dive"
Defying basic physics (collision, momentum, gravity etc) .
I used to think Lineker was a superb diver, in that he seemed to understand the above when under slight contact in the penalty area.
And correspondingly why Drogba was such a reeto.
As a non pro player, I would always try and stay on my feet. They only time I went down is if I was taken down by the challenge and couldn't stay upright.
Saying that, I also played more Rugby then Football, and being a winger, would be travelling at pace when taking hits and still staying upright, so this whole 'it doesn't take much to knock you over at pace' argument doesn't hold much water with me, especially when you're 6'2" and 14 1/2 stone, as many top pros seem to be these days.
Vidicshin
You just beat me too it.
Referees (and the guidelines they are given) are almost as much to blame for diving as players. For me roughly speaking there are two types of dive, the first being a blatant dive, no or minimal contact. This is simulation and cheating. The second is when a player has been fouled but had it been the same tackle having a kick about with your mates you wouldn’t go down but in order to force the hand of the ref to make the call these days you almost have to go down to get the decision which is rightly yours. Be this you’re getting hacked in the middle of the park or you’ve been fouled in the box.
Of course the two types of dive I mentioned is pretty black and white, there is a whole range in-between and you could always be on the cusp depending on your view point of what is reasonable aggression.
As a Chelsea fan watching Drogba over the years I always had a different view to opposing fans, as much as it annoyed me the way he went down, swallow diving and holding the small of his back like he’d been booted in the back most of the time they were legitimate free-kicks, Drogba wasn’t bad diver in the extreme sense of the word but took the foul and went down in order to get the decision.
Another example would be Hazard, he’s already won a couple of pens and he clearly plays for them, nothing wrong with that at all. Shows the defender one way, a turn of pace and he knows his legged is going to get hooked, goes down and it’s a stone wall pen. That said he could of course have stayed on his feet if he wanted to but then refs are reluctant to give the decision. Every player does this, Owen was a master of sprawling out.
Both are diving but one is seen as acceptable these days, if they want to stop it they need to book more divers and actually give decisions or clearly play advantage when a player is getting kicked in the ankles.
"so this whole 'it doesn't take much to knock you over at pace' argument doesn't hold much water with me, especially when you're 6'2" and 14 1/2 stone, as many top pros seem to be these days"
Contradicted by the ankle tap (you should know better ) .
Where you get contact is the sole arbiter.
comment by Dubbed The New Wenger -Sancti Cazorla (U9163)
posted 2 minutes ago
Fellani is rubbish. Big oaf who stands in the middle bullying and elbowing midgets.
==
What the hell does that have to do with diving
"What the hell does that have to do with diving "
When he elbows the innocent little dwarves, they crumble like they've been shot, causing some of them to be labeled 'divers'.
"Drogba wasn’t bad diver in the extreme sense of the word"
Sorry, but a guy built like the proverbial s--t house who violated basic physics.
Diving is part and parcel of football. If I had the chance to dive to win a penalty for my team in a cup final I would do it without a question.
decieving the ref into thinking you were fouled when you weren't. And not all contact is a foul.
which is very different to making sure the ref knows you were fouled. That's just acting.
"Diving is part and parcel of football."
P-i-s-s poor practice of the art certainly is.
Bring back Lineker !!!
For me a dive is when the player goes down when there wasn't enough force to make them go down. Consciously choosing to fall over.
The best dive ever was probably El Hadji Diouf when playing for Blackburn.
He deliberately clipped his own heel and went down as if being shot.
comment by Dubbed The New Wenger -Sancti Cazorla (U9163)
posted 2 minutes ago
"What the hell does that have to do with diving "
When he elbows the innocent little dwarves, they crumble like they've been shot, causing some of them to be labeled 'divers'.
===
Who has he been doing this too then?
"When he elbows the innocent little dwarves, they crumble like they've been shot, causing some of them to be labeled 'divers'."
ITV the other month had a great Barca goals compilation.
One of them was one where John Terry tried his usual snidey body checks, on Ronaldinho. Who was accelerating forward and JT bounced backwards like a little girl (before Ronnie pulled the trigger) .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpeYKAlvFs4
This makes me chuckle
@ RDBD: I'm not talking about an ankle tap (illegal in Football so would be a foul anyway), which would be the most effective way of taking down anyone running at a decent pace.
I'm taking about the shoulder to shoulder challenges, or the 'brush' a player receives when they go past a defender, which in general practice seems to always result in the attacking player kissing the turf.
In my opinion what you are asking is "is it deception fair" and not what it is that constitutes a dive.
------------------
Sort of yes but I have given a few reasons as to why
Is it fair for a defender to, for example, go across you path knowing full well the attacker has plenty of time to get out of the way? The run is impeded and no foul is awarded? Or, a defender has a hald on the back of an attacker in an attempt to put him off whilst he is about to shoot?
Take a close look at the 2 penalties won by Hazard for Chelsea recently. one of them shown in slo-mo shows clearly that Hazard was on his way down about a foot nefore the player impededes him. He knew the challenge was coming but he made the decision when to go dwon rather than totally leaving it to the defender to make that decsion for him.
HMMurdoch :
As a rugby player you know what I mean.
If you catch someone right with minimal force, you can collapse mountains. Football is no different.
Send the divers back to school to learn basic physics.
'He knew the challenge was coming but he made the decision when to go dwon rather than totally leaving it to the defender to make that decsion for him.'
If he had enough time to fall over before the tackle came, he had enough time to ride the challenge.
Sign in if you want to comment
What actually constitutes a 'Dive'?
Page 1 of 4
posted on 10/9/12
What actually constitutes a 'Dive'?
........................
Breaking the water cleanly without the use of the belly?
posted on 10/9/12
UnitedRedMacca
Your old man is not going senile but i dont agree with his take on it.
In short, a dive is simply where a player goes to ground without any contact, or through over-simulation that is unnecessary (example: a push in the face, and the player goes down clutching his face as if he's taken a right hander).
If you're put off balance & you're at disadvantage then i would say it is okay to go to ground, if you haven't lost anything from any contact made, you should stay on your feet (to avoid being called a diver).
posted on 10/9/12
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 2 minutes ago
What actually constitutes a 'Dive'?
........................
Breaking the water cleanly without the use of the belly?
===
Nothing better than a good old fashioned Bomb dive
posted on 10/9/12
The question is wrong in my opinion. Your question relates to seeking an advantage through deception.
In my opinion what you are asking is "is it deception fair" and not what it is that constitutes a dive.
posted on 10/9/12
Fellani is rubbish. Big oaf who stands in the middle bullying and elbowing midgets.
posted on 10/9/12
"what actually consitutes a dive"
Defying basic physics (collision, momentum, gravity etc) .
I used to think Lineker was a superb diver, in that he seemed to understand the above when under slight contact in the penalty area.
And correspondingly why Drogba was such a reeto.
posted on 10/9/12
As a non pro player, I would always try and stay on my feet. They only time I went down is if I was taken down by the challenge and couldn't stay upright.
Saying that, I also played more Rugby then Football, and being a winger, would be travelling at pace when taking hits and still staying upright, so this whole 'it doesn't take much to knock you over at pace' argument doesn't hold much water with me, especially when you're 6'2" and 14 1/2 stone, as many top pros seem to be these days.
posted on 10/9/12
Vidicshin
You just beat me too it.
posted on 10/9/12
Referees (and the guidelines they are given) are almost as much to blame for diving as players. For me roughly speaking there are two types of dive, the first being a blatant dive, no or minimal contact. This is simulation and cheating. The second is when a player has been fouled but had it been the same tackle having a kick about with your mates you wouldn’t go down but in order to force the hand of the ref to make the call these days you almost have to go down to get the decision which is rightly yours. Be this you’re getting hacked in the middle of the park or you’ve been fouled in the box.
Of course the two types of dive I mentioned is pretty black and white, there is a whole range in-between and you could always be on the cusp depending on your view point of what is reasonable aggression.
As a Chelsea fan watching Drogba over the years I always had a different view to opposing fans, as much as it annoyed me the way he went down, swallow diving and holding the small of his back like he’d been booted in the back most of the time they were legitimate free-kicks, Drogba wasn’t bad diver in the extreme sense of the word but took the foul and went down in order to get the decision.
Another example would be Hazard, he’s already won a couple of pens and he clearly plays for them, nothing wrong with that at all. Shows the defender one way, a turn of pace and he knows his legged is going to get hooked, goes down and it’s a stone wall pen. That said he could of course have stayed on his feet if he wanted to but then refs are reluctant to give the decision. Every player does this, Owen was a master of sprawling out.
Both are diving but one is seen as acceptable these days, if they want to stop it they need to book more divers and actually give decisions or clearly play advantage when a player is getting kicked in the ankles.
posted on 10/9/12
"so this whole 'it doesn't take much to knock you over at pace' argument doesn't hold much water with me, especially when you're 6'2" and 14 1/2 stone, as many top pros seem to be these days"
Contradicted by the ankle tap (you should know better ) .
Where you get contact is the sole arbiter.
posted on 10/9/12
comment by Dubbed The New Wenger -Sancti Cazorla (U9163)
posted 2 minutes ago
Fellani is rubbish. Big oaf who stands in the middle bullying and elbowing midgets.
==
What the hell does that have to do with diving
posted on 10/9/12
"What the hell does that have to do with diving "
When he elbows the innocent little dwarves, they crumble like they've been shot, causing some of them to be labeled 'divers'.
posted on 10/9/12
"Drogba wasn’t bad diver in the extreme sense of the word"
Sorry, but a guy built like the proverbial s--t house who violated basic physics.
posted on 10/9/12
Diving is part and parcel of football. If I had the chance to dive to win a penalty for my team in a cup final I would do it without a question.
posted on 10/9/12
decieving the ref into thinking you were fouled when you weren't. And not all contact is a foul.
which is very different to making sure the ref knows you were fouled. That's just acting.
posted on 10/9/12
"Diving is part and parcel of football."
P-i-s-s poor practice of the art certainly is.
Bring back Lineker !!!
posted on 10/9/12
For me a dive is when the player goes down when there wasn't enough force to make them go down. Consciously choosing to fall over.
posted on 10/9/12
The best dive ever was probably El Hadji Diouf when playing for Blackburn.
He deliberately clipped his own heel and went down as if being shot.
posted on 10/9/12
comment by Dubbed The New Wenger -Sancti Cazorla (U9163)
posted 2 minutes ago
"What the hell does that have to do with diving "
When he elbows the innocent little dwarves, they crumble like they've been shot, causing some of them to be labeled 'divers'.
===
Who has he been doing this too then?
posted on 10/9/12
"When he elbows the innocent little dwarves, they crumble like they've been shot, causing some of them to be labeled 'divers'."
ITV the other month had a great Barca goals compilation.
One of them was one where John Terry tried his usual snidey body checks, on Ronaldinho. Who was accelerating forward and JT bounced backwards like a little girl (before Ronnie pulled the trigger) .
posted on 10/9/12
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpeYKAlvFs4
This makes me chuckle
posted on 10/9/12
@ RDBD: I'm not talking about an ankle tap (illegal in Football so would be a foul anyway), which would be the most effective way of taking down anyone running at a decent pace.
I'm taking about the shoulder to shoulder challenges, or the 'brush' a player receives when they go past a defender, which in general practice seems to always result in the attacking player kissing the turf.
posted on 10/9/12
In my opinion what you are asking is "is it deception fair" and not what it is that constitutes a dive.
------------------
Sort of yes but I have given a few reasons as to why
Is it fair for a defender to, for example, go across you path knowing full well the attacker has plenty of time to get out of the way? The run is impeded and no foul is awarded? Or, a defender has a hald on the back of an attacker in an attempt to put him off whilst he is about to shoot?
Take a close look at the 2 penalties won by Hazard for Chelsea recently. one of them shown in slo-mo shows clearly that Hazard was on his way down about a foot nefore the player impededes him. He knew the challenge was coming but he made the decision when to go dwon rather than totally leaving it to the defender to make that decsion for him.
posted on 10/9/12
HMMurdoch :
As a rugby player you know what I mean.
If you catch someone right with minimal force, you can collapse mountains. Football is no different.
Send the divers back to school to learn basic physics.
posted on 10/9/12
'He knew the challenge was coming but he made the decision when to go dwon rather than totally leaving it to the defender to make that decsion for him.'
If he had enough time to fall over before the tackle came, he had enough time to ride the challenge.
Page 1 of 4