A&H

Fouled player can be booked for exaggeration/simulation?

J79

Active Member
Is it possible to book a player because he exaggerates the impact of a foul (ex. rolling over five times) or because he simulates to have been touched somewhere he hasn't been (ex. player being pushed in lower back who grabs the back of his neck)? So he would get the free-kick (rightly so), but he'd still be booked.

It seems like it would only be logical he can be booked (unsporting behaviour), but you basically never see it happen (while every week there are plenty of situations where it could), so would like to hear opinions.
 
Last edited:
The Referee Store
I personally wouldn't ... how can you give a free kick and also a booking for simulation?

not sure on the legal side though
 
  • Like
Reactions: J79
Doesn't MLS have something about embellishment? Could be entirely making this up but sure I've heard something
 
  • Like
Reactions: J79
You're right it does happen all the time. the problem is we arent trained medical professionals. Who are we to say if following a foul tackle they havent injured another part of the body i.e. landed awkwardly on an ankle or in your example a lower back offence might cause a twitch in the upper back or flare up an underlying condition a player might have we just dont know.

Slightly off topic but similar scenario didnt one of barca players, I want to say Messi, get booked for feigning injury (might not have been feigning) after a bottle, thrown from the crowd, hit him.
Just checked, he did, but it was then rescinded.
 
You're right it does happen all the time. the problem is we arent trained medical professionals. Who are we to say if following a foul tackle they havent injured another part of the body i.e. landed awkwardly on an ankle or in your example a lower back offence might cause a twitch in the upper back or flare up an underlying condition a player might have we just dont know.
True in some cases, but surely in other cases you don't need to be a medical professional to see a player is trying to milk it or trying to get an opponent booked or sent off.
 
Last edited:
Technical possible I guess, but not sure why you would.

"How is it a yellow if I've been fouled?"
"You're exaggerating the injury"
"I was fouled, it hurt. How do you know where it hurt, are you psychic? "

"Ref, if you've booked him for diving how can it be a foul?"
"It's for exaggerating the injury"
"So how is it a foul if you don't think he's been touched?"
"He has been touched, but not that much"

End result is your match control will be down the swanny for no reason.
 
Surely a booking for a Rivaldo-type incident? I guess the difference there is ball is not in play. Corner given IIRC, player boots it at Riv, Riv clutches face. YC for both players. Corner restart. Easy sell, no?
 
  • Like
Reactions: J79
I disagree.
Take the case of a player rolling around and around and around and around. You've already made the decision, nobody is disputing the foul (moreso than any other). A card here gives you and the game more credibility.

As for holding a different part of the body - problem is it's very, very difficult to be sure beyond all doubt. It's certainly plausible, but more often than not the player will go down, say, holding the head when it was a push to the chest. I'd argue to pick one in most cases - but again, sometimes they're rolling around on the ground holding something completely different.

Being fouled and feigning injury aren't mutually exclusive.

Of course, this is different again to there being some contact around the legs and the player going flying with arms up. Embellishing like that - exaggerating the contact - is making it look like the contact had a different impact to what it actually did. When a player is doing that he's made it impossible to judge the actual impact of the contact, so he's entered simulation territory - as he's simulating the effect of a massive, heavy foul.
 
I disagree.
Take the case of a player rolling around and around and around and around. You've already made the decision, nobody is disputing the foul (moreso than any other). A card here gives you and the game more credibility.

As for holding a different part of the body - problem is it's very, very difficult to be sure beyond all doubt. It's certainly plausible, but more often than not the player will go down, say, holding the head when it was a push to the chest. I'd argue to pick one in most cases - but again, sometimes they're rolling around on the ground holding something completely different.

Being fouled and feigning injury aren't mutually exclusive.

Of course, this is different again to there being some contact around the legs and the player going flying with arms up. Embellishing like that - exaggerating the contact - is making it look like the contact had a different impact to what it actually did. When a player is doing that he's made it impossible to judge the actual impact of the contact, so he's entered simulation territory - as he's simulating the effect of a massive, heavy foul.
Let's say you have a good view of this as R or AR... do you think the player can be cautioned?
 
  • Like
Reactions: J79
There would be nothing to stop you saying to fouled player, "look pal, everyone can see its a foul without your theatrics" or something similar....
Suppose if it was continuing and causing a potential issue and was clear and obvious, would you be happy to caution for "actions deemed to be inflammatory" ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: J79
I agree with CapnBloodbeard, I would more than happily book someone for ''theatrics'' after being fouled. I wouldn't be showing the caution for simulation though, it would for me be unsporting behaviour, in the very same way I caution people for the magic invisible yellow card wave, if your trying to get some one in my book then the only person your gonna get in there is you as far as I'm concerned!
 
  • Like
Reactions: J79
Back
Top