• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Diving/Cheating. Ok for Wolves to do?

Apologies oh wise oracle! Oh and if there is contact, it is a foul...
 
article-0-0CF777B600000578-203_468x286.jpg
 
I think it was a penalty. There's contact caused by the defender. Of course I wish football was played in the 1990's, as that's the era I enjoyed most, hard tackles were encouraged, minimal contact was ignored, and in which time that wouldn't have been a penalty as it was a less soft time - however, last nights game was played in 2015, in the rules as they are its a penalty.

Comparing it to forestieri is just stupid.
 
I can see why the ref gave it, and am happy enough that he did, and they're given all the time, so the defender was silly to have let his leg hairs brush Dicko's leg hairs and give him an excuse to go down. He didn't actually push him or trip, so that to me is a dive.

Not remotely comparable to the Watford incident but I think (nearly) everyone is agreed on that.
 
This thread demonstrates why you cannot introduce real time video technology into the game for this type of decision. After seeing it numerous times we are spilt more or less 50/50 as to whether it was a dive or not.

1,000,000 spades of agreement!
 
So, Sam, there was contact between the two players?

Yes, Deilna's left knee bumps Nouha's left thigh. The contact comes after he gets his toe on the ball though.
 
This thread demonstrates why you cannot introduce real time video technology into the game for this type of decision. After seeing it numerous times we are spilt more or less 50/50 as to whether it was a dive or not.

Wouldn't it be a bit like cricket whereby you give it to the ref's decision on the pitch? Or rugby whereby you ask the TV ref why you should(n't) give it?
 
Yes, Deilna's left knee bumps Nouha's left thigh. The contact comes after he gets his toe on the ball though.

So he didn't "blatantly cheat" or "dive" then...Contact at speed, hit the ground and let the referee decide
 
So he didn't "blatantly cheat" or "dive" then...Contact at speed, hit the ground and let the referee decide

Aye, pretty much. It's a pretty shit tackle but he does get the ball. The way he bottles out of the challenge works against him, if he'd been more committed and followed through with the tackle it wouldn't have been a pen. As it is, the referee thinks that Nouha pokes the ball past him and then trips over his leg.
 
Wouldn't it be a bit like cricket whereby you give it to the ref's decision on the pitch? Or rugby whereby you ask the TV ref why you should(n't) give it?

Both games with far more regular breaks in play than football.

My issue is that people seem to think video replays are some sort of Oracle of fairness, yet here we are debating an incident we have all had the opportunity to reach. Football is fun with all the "unfairness" (In brackets cos if it's your own team you see more bad decisions than there really are)

Back to the original point of the thread:
soft pen but no dive therefore nothing like Ff last week.
 
I'm impressed we have a whole thread dedicated to arguing a point that doesn't even exist. The 2 instances are completely different and everyone knows it.
 
Back
Top