A&H

Blatant dive

R

ReallyRef?

Member
Just remembered of an incident at a preseason friendly I've watched in July. Defender blatantly dives in his penalty area when challenged for the ball. Ball ends up to another player from defending team who clears it out for a corner kick. Attacking team challenge the referee for the dive in a rather nice manner. He doesn't want to listen and sends them away.

As both teams' players set themselves for the corner kick, the referee has discret word with the diver*, who literally tells him: "**** off man!" Also gesturing some sort of: "go away, leave me alone!". I heard the referee saying: "Don't attempt that again!" Which made me assume that he was aware of the dive, but took no action.

Referee moves away from him and takes position on the semi-circle.

Corner kick taken...
Diver* tries clearing the ball, but just skimms it and ends up top bin own goal...
I assumed karma happened.

My question is if that scenario would happen in one of my games: As there was no contact with the defender when the attacker challenged for the ball and the defender simulates, would an IDFK be the correct action and obviously a caution for the defender? I cannot think of giving a penalty kick if there was no contact...

And as final mention, the referee is a chap in his mid 50's and a rather good one, but on this occasion he acted a bit too old school...
 
The Referee Store
ReallyRef? said:
Just remembered of an incident at a preseason friendly I've watched in July. Defender blatantly dives in his penalty area when challenged for the ball. Ball ends up to another player from defending team who clears it out for a corner kick. Attacking team challenge the referee for the dive in a rather nice manner. He doesn't want to listen and sends them away.

As both teams' players set themselves for the corner kick, the referee has discret word with the diver*, who literally tells him: "**** off man!" Also gesturing some sort of: "go away, leave me alone!". I heard the referee saying: "Don't attempt that again!" Which made me assume that he was aware of the dive, but took no action.

Referee moves away from him and takes position on the semi-circle.

Corner kick taken...
Diver* tries clearing the ball, but just skimms it and ends up top bin own goal...
I assumed karma happened.

My question is if that scenario would happen in one of my games: As there was no contact with the defender when the attacker challenged for the ball and the defender simulates, would an IDFK be the correct action and obviously a caution for the defender? I cannot think of giving a penalty kick if there was no contact...

And as final mention, the referee is a chap in his mid 50's and a rather good one, but on this occasion he acted a bit too old school...
Click to expand...
Certainly an IDFK and a booking and I’d add at least a yellow for dissent for that comment, if not a red for OFFINABUS.
 
From how it’s described, and applying that to the level I operate at, either I’m going FK to the defending team if I believed they were fouled or - as it seems written here - play on. If a defender wants to (feign) go to ground in such a vulnerable situation, those are the risks of a no-call… and, if you like, advantage played with the ball pinging around in their box.

Not enough in that for me for OFFINABUS, especially as the ref has instigated the conversation which didn’t need to happen.
 
FirsFox40 said:
From how it’s described, and applying that to the level I operate at, either I’m going FK to the defending team if I believed they were fouled or - as it seems written here - play on. If a defender wants to (feign) go to ground in such a vulnerable situation, those are the risks of a no-call… and, if you like, advantage played with the ball pinging around in their box.

Not enough in that for me for OFFINABUS, especially as the ref has instigated the conversation which didn’t need to happen.
Click to expand...
As described, not a chance of being an attacking foul; good challenge by attacking player who won the ball, but after being challenged/tackled, defender simulates, ball ends up to another defending team player. As I said, was only a spectator, close enough to hear everything that was said. Referee knew what happened (simulation) since he had a word with the simulator*. My real confusion was: did he not know what he should have given (IDFK) or thought: if I sanction the defender for simulation, therefore should be a PK. My reading of the situation was that the referee was unsure and by allowing the play to carry on he "excused" himself of more agro...
 
You will be very hard pushed to "sell" an IDFK and caution for simulation in a player's own penalty area. You're going to be getting a load of grief if you don't give a foul and a goal occurs, if you give an IDFK and a goal is scored that will be multiplied by 10.

This might fall into the don't go looking for issues that don't exist category. Not wrong to penalise, but do you need to?
 
#RustyRef, my post's title was blatant; almost everybody realised it was an obvious dive. How can you give a foul when the attacker gets the ball with no contact or his tackle/challenge is nowhere near the opponent's leg/foot?

I was probably the most neutral person there and my thinking was of how would I manage that sort of scenario?

In the end it was pretty much self explanatory; referee was challenged by attacking team over something very obvious; referee warned the player; player reacted as mentioned. Karma also happened to be present...
 
In these situations what should or shouldn't be done is much easier in hindsight and after loads of thinking time. When it's live only experience, awareness/sharpness helps you get a quick decision right.

I think the referee in OP did reasonable good. If it's an attacker diving then it's an easy caution and defensive free kick. It takes care of both the deterrent (caution) and rebalancing the game (defensive IFK) side of things. If it's a defender, we need the deterrent (caution) but it can't come without an IFK in the attacking PA which is far too big of a punishment for rebalancing IMO.

So for me I won't give the IFK (and hence no caution), but to cover the deterrent side of it, a loud firm "no" when it happens and a public bollocking after ball out of play. A firm public bollocking (instead a discreet nice "please...") makes it less likely for the player to try to take the upper hand by telling me to f off but if he does then a caution for dissent (or send off if you wish) is easier to issue when ball is not in play.

This is not too dissimilar to a recent thread we had about dissent by offenders right in front of their goal while their team has the ball.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top