when is cheating not cheating?

[matty_f]

Watching Sportscene last night and I was astonished to hear McCall and the 2 pundits praising the boy who got sent off for a "good foul".

Why is that acceptable but a dive (for example) isn't? Both are breaking the rules of the game to gain an unfair advantage, but it appears sometimes this is a good thing?

Now, with my hypocrite hat on here, I'll point out that Wayne Foster should have been halved back in the day, but I say that from a very biased point of view. Of course, the sporting thing to do was to not foul him.
To hear two neutrals praising a guy that got sent off just angered me.

[Hibbyradge]

Watching Sportscene last night and I was astonished to hear McCall and the 2 pundits praising the boy who got sent off for a "good foul".

Why is that acceptable but a dive (for example) isn't? Both are breaking the rules of the game to gain an unfair advantage, but it appears sometimes this is a good thing?

Now, with my hypocrite hat on here, I'll point out that Wayne Foster should have been halved back in the day, but I say that from a very biased point of view. Of course, the sporting thing to do was to not foul him.
To hear two neutrals praising a guy that got sent off just angered me.

A professional foul is cheating. Most fouls are.

It's breaking the rules to try to gain an advantage.

The only fouls which aren't cheating are the ones committed solely as an act of anger or revenge.

[matty_f]

A professional foul is cheating. Most fouls are.

It's breaking the rules to try to gain an advantage.

The only fouls which aren't cheating are the ones committed solely as an act of anger or revenge.

You'd think it would have been roundly condemned in that case, yet it was pats on the back all round on sportscene, and even Stewart McCall called it good.

[Hibbyradge]

You'd think it would have been roundly condemned in that case, yet it was pats on the back all round on sportscene, and even Stewart McCall called it good.

Agreed.

Having said that, pundits don't often condemn diving either.

Probably because they'd be shown up to be hypocrites one way or another.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Agreed.

Having said that, pundits don't often condemn diving either.

Probably because they'd be shown up to be hypocrites one way or another.

Depends who's playing who. England v Germany for example.

[lord bunberry]

Watching Sportscene last night and I was astonished to hear McCall and the 2 pundits praising the boy who got sent off for a "good foul".

Why is that acceptable but a dive (for example) isn't? Both are breaking the rules of the game to gain an unfair advantage, but it appears sometimes this is a good thing?

Now, with my hypocrite hat on here, I'll point out that Wayne Foster should have been halved back in the day, but I say that from a very biased point of view. Of course, the sporting thing to do was to not foul him.
To hear two neutrals praising a guy that got sent off just angered me.

I suppose that in the case of a player diving there's an attempt to deceive the referee and possibly get your opponent sent off, whereas a professional foul your seen to be taking one for the team.

[Hibbyradge]

Depends who's playing who. England v Germany for example.

True.

Also, the player being criticised probably doesn't play in their domestic league so they're easier targets.

[TRC]

A professional foul is cheating. Most fouls are.

It's breaking the rules to try to gain an advantage.

The only fouls which aren't cheating are the ones committed solely as an act of anger or revenge.


id say a missed time challenge isn't cheating if you start your tackle and in a blink of the eye the ball isn't there and you take the player it's an honest mistake. Played at right back and left back and whenever I was up against some nippy wee winger (please google younger users as this concept may be lost on being a hibs fan) I'd try and noise him up with a couple of studs down the back of the leg. this was cheating and a part of the game which is sometimes hard for refs to see.

[Hibbyradge]

id say a missed time challenge isn't cheating if you start your tackle and in a blink of the eye the ball isn't there and you take the player it's an honest mistake. Played at right back and left back and whenever I was up against some nippy wee winger (please google younger users as this concept may be lost on being a hibs fan) I'd try and noise him up with a couple of studs down the back of the leg. this was cheating and a part of the game which is sometimes hard for refs to see.

Yes, good point. I was really referring to deliberate fouls.

Accidental fouls are just that. Accidents.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

Basketball anyone...? ;)

[Deansy]

Watching Sportscene last night and I was astonished to hear McCall and the 2 pundits praising the boy who got sent off for a "good foul".

Why is that acceptable but a dive (for example) isn't? Both are breaking the rules of the game to gain an unfair advantage, but it appears sometimes this is a good thing?

Now, with my hypocrite hat on here, I'll point out that Wayne Foster should have been halved back in the day, but I say that from a very biased point of view. Of course, the sporting thing to do was to not foul him.
To hear two neutrals praising a guy that got sent off just angered me.

Wasn't too astonished as McCall did play for Rangers - a club more than well-versed in the 'Machiavellian-practices' of the game. Old habits and all that ......

[LeithBoozy]

Watching Sportscene last night and I was astonished to hear McCall and the 2 pundits praising the boy who got sent off for a "good foul".

Why is that acceptable but a dive (for example) isn't? Both are breaking the rules of the game to gain an unfair advantage, but it appears sometimes this is a good thing?

Now, with my hypocrite hat on here, I'll point out that Wayne Foster should have been halved back in the day, but I say that from a very biased point of view. Of course, the sporting thing to do was to not foul him.
To hear two neutrals praising a guy that got sent off just angered me.

A good point Matty, I watched it myself and the fact I never picked-up on it shows just how normal it is. :rolleyes:

[Lucius Apuleius]

Said it on another thread, their comments last night were despicable.

[Stevie Reid]

I often take great issue with stuff on the BBC and Sportscene regarding Hibs, but I really have no trouble with what the pundits or McCall said. It was a good foul, he denied a clear goalscoring opportunity and was punished correctly and accordingly - the free kick was too central and too close to the edge of the box to pose a serious danger, and the wasn't enough time in the game for us to gain an advantage from the extra man.

If it were the other way around I would be saying it was a good foul, so I have no issue with others saying so from a Motherwell point of view.

[Killiehibbie]

If it wins you the game it's looked on as acceptable but if ends up costing you the game the player is a liability.

[CyberSauzee]

Watching Sportscene last night and I was astonished to hear McCall and the 2 pundits praising the boy who got sent off for a "good foul".

Why is that acceptable but a dive (for example) isn't? Both are breaking the rules of the game to gain an unfair advantage, but it appears sometimes this is a good thing?

Now, with my hypocrite hat on here, I'll point out that Wayne Foster should have been halved back in the day, but I say that from a very biased point of view. Of course, the sporting thing to do was to not foul him.
To hear two neutrals praising a guy that got sent off just angered me.

We were brought up with the idea that going in hard on a player, getting the ball but at the same time causing the player injury was a fair and acceptable way of doing things. We were also taught that diving was unacceptable, even although there was no specific reference to it in the rules (I think you could be booked under 'ungentlemanly conduct' but I don't think anyone ever was for diving).

After reading The Hand of God by Jimmy Burns several years ago (biography of Maradona), I realised how parochial that view is. In it Burns describes the the accepted culture in Latin American and southern European countries of diving to try and deceive the referee to gain an advantage for your team.

Now of course, 'simulation' is specifically outlawed in the rules, but it's amazing that pundits will go on about diving as a worse form of cheating than a 'hard' challenge that gets the player along with the ball. One is an attempt to deceive, the other is an attempt to injure an opponent.

[Bronson]

Frustrating when it happens against you but let's be honest, if it was us on their end we'd have no complaints.

Not cheating in my eyes really, you're not trying to con the ref or anything. It's dirty, but tactical.

[Andy74]

Dave Beaumont. Case closed.

[Pretty Boy]

I've got no problem with it tbh.

Maybe the pundits shouldn't have been so complimentary about it but if Hibs were 1-0 up in the last seconds of a Scottish Cup Final(Ha!) or any game for that matter i'd be raging if a player didn't make that sort of challenge.