The Flopper Thread

[TheStinger]

How about the first week of the A-League when Jason Culina was going past Craig Moore and then hit the deck like a sack of spuds. Everyone saw it and the ref saw it and told him to get up and nothing was done. Why should he not receive a sanction?

I think it should be one rule for everybody and everywhere, none of this "only if a penalty or red card results" nonsense. If you dive and it can be plainly seen on video evidence (whether or not the ref caught it) then you are the recipient of a one match ban. No ifs ands or buts.

If you get caught again, you get a two match ban and so and so forth. I am sure that after the second ban that players will stop doing it. I think that FIFA and the other confederations are gutless when they will not just step in and stamp it out fully.

Don't make a pussy attempt at it, get rid of it completely. We all hate it and it needs to go away now.

 

[Gouldy]

Some good discussion coming out of this thread.

For those criticising the referee's inititial decision, you have to remember that they are under a lot of pressure and they are often blindsided. Maybe it is an issue of there not being enough referee's on the pitch. With the eduardo dive and a lot of similar instances, the referee cannot see properly, and neither can th line-ref. Maybe they do need the bi-line ref they have been talking about?? It'd be a crap job, but it is starting to make more sense.

Back on the subject of chronic floppers and whingers, Didier Drogba has been well behaved so far imo. He is up there with the worst at times. Probably has something to do with the fact that when him and his team play well and he's being supplied good delivery, he doesn't need too do it. However it only takes a rampant Barcelona and a referee on a bad day to undo all that

 

[ShearMagic9]

Usually I'd agree with you re the ref's gouldy, but that dive from Eduardo was actually a terrible dive. A referee should never be conned by a dive that bad.

 

[Gouldy]

Did you think Rooney dived on the w.e?

 

[ShearMagic9]

Did you think Rooney dived on the w.e?

He made the most of minimal contact, and he was only ever looking for the penalty.

Make of that what you will.

 

[Gouldy]

Well these are the instances I'm talking about. With another ref, maybe they could make a better decision?

 

[twentydollarnote]

rooney didnt make the most of the contact he made the contact, most umpires/refs in all sports suck because they didnt play the sport themselves long enough to understand. The ref should look where the ball is its always a good guide as to whether the player is diving or not. They should also card players who go through the back of other players legs ro get to the ball instead of just giving a foul.

 

[Gouldy]

The penalty rule should be re-written based on whether the ball would be 'netable' if the keeper didn't make contact.

The striker knocks the ball forward in anticipation of contact, but if there is no contact, or indeed contact, would the striker be able to or have been able to score the goal still?

 

[ShearMagic9]

The penalty rule should be re-written based on whether the ball would be 'netable' if the keeper didn't make contact.

The striker knocks the ball forward in anticipation of contact, but if there is no contact, or indeed contact, would the striker be able to or have been able to score the goal still?

In certain situations (like the Rooney one), that's how it's meant to be interpreted.

 

[smiddaz123]

Is it?

I thought tripping was tripping. If you take out the legs, it's a penalty, regardless of whether there was a goal scoring chance or not. Surely it's always interpreted as a foul if you take out a strikers legs....

I thought the goal scoring opportunity was only relevant to whether it deserved a red/yellow card or no card at all?

 

[ShearMagic9]

Is it?

I thought tripping was tripping. If you take out the legs, it's a penalty, regardless of whether there was a goal scoring chance or not. Surely it's always interpreted as a foul if you take out a strikers legs....

I thought the goal scoring opportunity was only relevant to whether it deserved a red/yellow card or no card at all?

Tripping is tripping, but Rooney booting the ball into oblivion and then kicking Almunia probably doesn't constitute a trip.

He booted the ball away. There's no way in hell he should be given a penalty for that, and any referee with common sense/not at Old Trafford wouldn't give it.

 

[belfast_bomber]

Tripping is tripping, but Rooney booting the ball into oblivion and then kicking Almunia probably doesn't constitute a trip.

Good thing that's NOT WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED then.

Johnson booted the ball away when Gomes legged him in the first week, and nobody argued that. But because it was at Old Trafford OMG CONSPIRACY CORRUPTION CHEATING et cetera ad infinitum.

 

[TorresIsGod]

You've conviently over-looked the part where Gomes actually took Johnson out.

Rooney instigated the contact with Almunia. Completely different.

A trip in the box is a trip in the box, kicking the keeper and falling over is a different situation.

 

[Chops18]

But because it was at Old Trafford OMG CONSPIRACY CORRUPTION CHEATING et cetera ad infinitum.

now you know how it feels being a supporter of the Italian national team

 

[ShearMagic9]

Good thing that's NOT WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED then.

Johnson booted the ball away when Gomes legged him in the first week, and nobody argued that. But because it was at Old Trafford OMG CONSPIRACY CORRUPTION CHEATING et cetera ad infinitum.

Fairly sure that is what actually happened, but you keep telling yourself otherwise if it makes you feel any better....

I can't really remember the Johnson penalty to comment on it.

 

[peternorth]

He booted the ball away. There's no way in hell he should be given a penalty for that, and any referee with common sense/not at Old Trafford wouldn't give it.

interesting

graham poll (take with grain of salt if you want) on foxsports fc that refs are intimidated at old trafford.

 

[Boro]

Fairly sure that is what actually happened, but you keep telling yourself otherwise if it makes you feel any better....

I can't really remember the Johnson penalty to comment on it.

No it isn't. It was a stone cold penalty imo (just as Arshavin's was). Almunia rushed out and Rooney was too quick. It doesn't matter one little bit whether or not that was what Rooney played for. He was too good for the keeper end of story.

Seeing as you know all the rules FC, what happens in a scenario that sees a bad corner taken, and one of the defenders punches the attacker in the face in the box. Is it a penalty even though the ball isn't heading in the direction of the player?

Or, if a forward who is in the penalty area is heading away from goal and is taken out just as he passes the ball to a player outside the box. Is that not a penalty because the ball was heading in the wrong direction.

Or, what about if there is a throw in and a goalkeeper or defender kicks an attacker up in the air inside the box just as the throw is taken...is that a penalty?

I'm not trying to be smart, I just want to know if they are all penalties or not and if so why Rooney's wouldn't be just because he 'may' not have had total control of the ball. It's impossible to tell if he would or wouldn't have gotten to the ball imo as Almunia was too busy taking his legs away.

 

[ShearMagic9]

No it isn't. It was a stone cold penalty imo (just as Arshavin's was). Almunia rushed out and Rooney was too quick. It doesn't matter one little bit whether or not that was what Rooney played for. He was too good for the keeper end of story.

Rooney initiated the contact. He also BOOTED the ball out for a goal kick. It's definitely not a 'stonewall' penalty, and I don't care if you disagree because you're wrong.

Seeing as you know all the rules FC, what happens in a scenario that sees a bad corner taken, and one of the defenders punches the attacker in the face in the box. Is it a penalty even though the ball isn't heading in the direction of the player?

Or, if a forward who is in the penalty area is heading away from goal and is taken out just as he passes the ball to a player outside the box. Is that not a penalty because the ball was heading in the wrong direction.

Or, what about if there is a throw in and a goalkeeper or defender kicks an attacker up in the air inside the box just as the throw is taken...is that a penalty?

All of the above depend on circumstances. The first one, if the referee sees it, is probably a red card and a penalty, but the referee should never let the game get to the point where someone punches another person.

But I can't answer either of those questions, it depends on the manner in which they occur, each situation is treated on its merits.

I'm not trying to be smart, I just want to know if they are all penalties or not and if so why Rooney's wouldn't be just because he 'may' not have had total control of the ball. It's impossible to tell if he would or wouldn't have gotten to the ball imo as Almunia was too busy taking his legs away.

Lmao. Impossible to tell? Are you for real?

The ball was already out of play before the contact was made. That's how obvious it was. Actually, I'd argue that the ball was out of play therefore it can't be given as a penalty because the ball is dead, that's how blatantly out of play it was.

There's no point even explaining the guidelines that referees get to you because you'll come up with ridiculous situations like you have above, so I don't really care.

If you think that was a clear penalty you're dreaming (and wrong) though.

If, by the letter of the law, a penalty was awarded for every time an infringement occured in the box, there'd be 20 penalties given a game. Is that what people want to see?

 

[Boro]

Lmao. Impossible to tell? Are you for real?

The ball was already out of play before the contact was made. That's how obvious it was. Actually, I'd argue that the ball was out of play therefore it can't be given as a penalty because the ball is dead, that's how blatantly out of play it was.

There's no point even explaining the guidelines that referees get to you because you'll come up with ridiculous situations like you have above, so I don't really care.

QUOTE]

errr the ball actually wasn't out of play when Almunia hit him. Heading out yes, but that shouldn't matter as Rooney's intention imo was to get to the ball first and take the foul. He sucked the defender into the challenge.

The situations I gave aren't ridiculous especially the 2nd scenario, although I probably don't do a good job of explaining the situation I find it a little funny that you infer it is the referees fault if a player gets a punch during a match, I guess that means the ref in the WC Final was at fault for Zidane going balistic

I also find it strange you think your opinion is worth more than all of the rest of us because you've refereed at a lower level in Adelaide? I'm sure there are plenty amongst us who have a referee badge, a coaches badge or have even played the game at a professional or semi professional level, but that doesn't mean everything they say or believe is always right.

I've asked one of the referees coaches in Brissie what they thought of the decision and they had no doubt it was a penalty...it's all open to interpretaion I guess and no two people will see the same thing, but in this case I think most would agree it was a pen.

[YOUTUBE]wLN3B-03Mcw&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]

 

[TorresIsGod]

His opinion is worth more than the rest of us when speaking about referees and the decisions they make, because he is one?...

It's also not a penalty.

 

[ShearMagic9]

errr the ball actually wasn't out of play when Almunia hit him. Heading out yes, but that shouldn't matter as Rooney's intention imo was to get to the ball first and take the foul. He sucked the defender into the challenge.

It shouldn't matter, are you for real? HAVE A LOOK AT WHERE THE BALL IS. HE PRETTY MUCH LAUNCHED IT INTO THE CROWD.

Rooneys intention was to leave his leg in, and go down under any contact. ANY contact.

I find it a little funny that you infer it is the referees fault if a player gets a punch during a match, I guess that means the ref in the WC Final was at fault for Zidane going balistic

Players usually go ballistic because of instances that have occured during the match, that weren't really controlled very well by the referee.

Ask any referee that, and they'll all tell you the same answer. How often do you see games that have a couple of red cards that have been well refereed? Very, very few.

I've asked one of the referees coaches in Brissie what they thought of the decision and they had no doubt it was a penalty...it's all open to interpretaion I guess and no two people will see the same thing, but in this case I think most would agree it was a pen.

Which coach did you ask?

As for the youtube vid, I've never disputed the fact that there was contact.

 

[smiddaz123]

His opinion is worth more than the rest of us when speaking about referees and the decisions they make, because he is one?...

What happens if another referee says it was a penalty?

The universe implodes?

 

[ShearMagic9]

Oh, and I also find it funny that people get so wound up when I say my opinion is a lot better than yours .

FWIW, no-ones opinion is any better than anyone elses.

I've also said in other threads that I can understand why the referee gave it and that I'd personally classify it as a 50/50 decision.

Man, you guys are too easy to wind up sometimes.

 

[Boro]

Man, you guys are too easy to wind up sometimes.

I guess if you say it over and over and over again it starts to seem as though you are serious...but if you were just taking the piss then fair enough

I've talked to a few refs about the decision fc, have you started reffing in Brissie now? I'll let you know who I asked off line if you know a few... If you have been reffing, what level? I wonder if you've done any of the matches the side I'm with plays in

 

[TorresIsGod]

He sent you off the other week Boro.