2 edits
Henry's was a clear penalty. Ronaldo should have been booked for diving.
Henry's reaction to being fouled - "Mon Dieu! I've been shot!" - was disappointing, but no more than that; he should certainly not have been booked, since the point of a yellow card for diving is that players should not try to convince the ref they have been fouled when there was either no contact, or completely insignificant contact. Henry was fouled.
I thought AP had more informed journalists.
2 edits
Originally posted by dottewellI think this is a very important distinction which often seems to get lost. Not all "diving" is created equal. Trying to manufacture a foul/card out thin air seems much worse to me than going down easy after you've really been fouled.
Henry's reaction to being fouled - "Mon Dieu! I've been shot!" - was disappointing, but no more than that; he should certainly not have been booked, since the point of a yellow card for diving is that players should not try to convince the ref they have been fouled when there was either no contact, or completely insignificant contact. Henry was fouled.
I mean, defenders are going to try to hide the fouls they commit, so why shouldn't attackers try to draw attention to them?
It would make great highlight films if players never went down easily after being fouled. It would probably also shorten a lot of careers, as defenders would be emboldened to hack more and more often and fiercely.
Unfortunately, there is also a slippery slope effect in the other direction-- it's all too easy to pass from "falling down to draw attention to a definite foul" to "falling down to draw attention to a borderline foul" to "falling down to draw attention to minor contact" to "falling down without any contact at all." But that doesn't mean that all of these "dives" are equally blameworthy. If you've really been fouled, I don't see why you shouldn't go down.
On the other hand, there's no justication for the fake shin/face clutching. That's just annoying. And I think doing a barrel roll or two on the ground after being fouled (ala Klinsmann 1990) should be an automatic lifetime ban from the sport. You're a human being, not a fighter plane that's lost a wing,
Originally posted by jgvaccaroI agree that the distinction between over-reacting to a genuine foul and simply cheating by pretending to have been fouled is difficult, sometimes impossible, to draw.
I think this is a very important distinction which often seems to get lost. Not all "diving" is created equal. Trying to manufacture a foul/card out thin air seems much worse to me than going down easy after you've really been fouled.
I mean, defenders are going to try to hide the fouls they commit, so why shouldn't attackers try to draw attention to ...[text shortened]... the sport. You're a human being, not a fighter plane that's lost a wing,
But that doesn't mean that there aren't clear examples of one or the other.
They are what Wittgenstein would have called "family-resemblance" concepts. If he had been a football fan. Which I'm pretty sure he wasn't. The poor sap.