Contact/no contact

[mjhibby]

The thing that irratates me more than anything from TVs pundits is this insistence that players are entitled to go down if there is contact. It's what is totally wrecking the game and making it so tough for referees to tell when he should give a penalty. I was so disappointed to hear jermaine jenas say Costa was entitled to go down in the game v Swansea. The fact the costa didn't have a real tantrum,as he usually does shows that he wasn't looking for a pen. You see it in kids football going down and screaming for a pen. There is a young lad who is in the team I coach who had perfected going down when touched. I told him in no uncertain terms to cut it out. Unfortunately not all youth coaches take that attitude and unless we stamp it out soon it will be part of football as it is on the continent. This annoyance has not be brought on by neilsons mobs laughable attempts to get pens every game. Unfortunately they have won a few pens by blatantly cheating and other teams will see this and do the same. I expect that sort of behaviour from the pink bus shelter team but not from decent footballing sides.winning is everything it seems and it is horrible to watch players going down as if hit by a truck. Rant over.

[hfcnic]

Cummings was pretty bad for doing this for a good while, seems to have calmed it down a bit now but it really annoys me. No need for it. Respect a player a whole lot more when they stay on their feet and carry on.

It does seem to be a growing culture though and I agree it needs to be stamped out.

[500miles]

If the defender isn't quick or good enough to make a proper challenge, it should be a free kick. We should be protecting skilful players, not the huddies.

[nellio]

I think part of the problem is that unless a player goes down a pen isn't given. If you get kicked in the box and try to stay on your feet or have you shirt pulled more often than not no pen is given. If ref's started giving pens properly for fouls in the box then players wouldn't need to go down if there's contact.

[Speedy]

I think part of the problem is that unless a player goes down a pen isn't given. If you get kicked in the box and try to stay on your feet or have you shirt pulled more often than not no pen is given. If ref's started giving pens properly for fouls in the box then players wouldn't need to go down if there's contact.

Exactly this.

[matty_f]

I think part of the problem is that unless a player goes down a pen isn't given. If you get kicked in the box and try to stay on your feet or have you shirt pulled more often than not no pen is given. If ref's started giving pens properly for fouls in the box then players wouldn't need to go down if there's contact.

Spot on, there is a need for both players and officials to act to deal with this.

Players who stay on their feet rarely get the penalty even when they're fouled. There is no incentive for them to stay on their feet - they're fouled either way but the one that goes down gets the penalty, the one who tries to stay on their feet sees the defender get away with it.

Contact in itself isn't a foul, I can't stand the theatrics when a player is touched and ends up rolling about the floor - I imagine how hard it must be for them to deal with the Next sale or Christmas shopping where folk bump into them all the time.

T.Watt's booking on Saturday was justified for me - there was contact but he flung himself down. Simulation, just because he was touched doesn't mean he didn't simulate/exaggerate the fall.

If referees were strong enough to give penalties where the player is fouled but stays up then it removes the need for players to chuck themselves down.

[Pretty Boy]

I think part of the problem is that unless a player goes down a pen isn't given. If you get kicked in the box and try to stay on your feet or have you shirt pulled more often than not no pen is given. If ref's started giving pens properly for fouls in the box then players wouldn't need to go down if there's contact.

Nailed it.

I've lost count of the number of times I've said 'if he went down that would have been a penalty' at games.

Refs don't have it easy but until they start doing their job properly players will continue to try to do it for them.

[The Green Goblin]

I think part of the problem is that unless a player goes down a pen isn't given. If you get kicked in the box and try to stay on your feet or have you shirt pulled more often than not no pen is given. If ref's started giving pens properly for fouls in the box then players wouldn't need to go down if there's contact.

:agree: Pretty sure that McGinn is often a victim of this. He's stays on his feet. The number of times he has been blatantly and persistently fouled but didn't get a free kick (or penalty) because he's an honest player.....

[Phil MaGlass]

Cummings was pretty bad for doing this for a good while, seems to have calmed it down a bit now but it really annoys me. No need for it. Respect a player a whole lot more when they stay on their feet and carry on.

It does seem to be a growing culture though and I agree it needs to be stamped out.

Who did he used to play for again?

[son of haggart]

Spot on, there is a need for both players and officials to act to deal with this.

Players who stay on their feet rarely get the penalty even when they're fouled. There is no incentive for them to stay on their feet - they're fouled either way but the one that goes down gets the penalty, the one who tries to stay on their feet sees the defender get away with it.

Contact in itself isn't a foul, I can't stand the theatrics when a player is touched and ends up rolling about the floor - I imagine how hard it must be for them to deal with the Next sale or Christmas shopping where folk bump into them all the time.

T.Watt's booking on Saturday was justified for me - there was contact but he flung himself down. Simulation, just because he was touched doesn't mean he didn't simulate/exaggerate the fall.

If referees were strong enough to give penalties where the player is fouled but stays up then it removes the need for players to chuck themselves down.

I had a perfect view of the Watt incident - it was a clear penalty but in my opinion the decisions should have been a penalty and a booking for Watt for the way he went down. I agree the refs should make a point re what is a pen (ie you don't need to fall its the nature of the contact, as well as coming down hard on simulation

[matty_f]

I had a perfect view of the Watt incident - it was a clear penalty but in my opinion the decisions should have been a penalty and a booking for Watt for the way he went down. I agree the refs should make a point re what is a pen (ie you don't need to fall its the nature of the contact, as well as coming down hard on simulation

Wouldn't have had an issue with a penalty and a yellow for T.Watt.

The other boy dived though, it's a pity Captain Caveman Jnr chose to defend him rather than calling it out for what it was.

[Puddocky]

What I can't stand is the players who get into the box and are clearly hoping for 'contact' to happen, to the extent of making weird contortions of their own leg to bring it about if a defender comes within range. Likewise any players who come out with lines like 'I thought there was contact'. How can they not know?

[Hibernia&Alba]

The assumption that any contact, however slight, is a foul, is incorrect. Football isn't a non-contact sport, so it can't be right. It isn't basketball.

[Speedy]

The assumption that any contact, however slight, is a foul, is incorrect. Football isn't a non-contact sport, so it can't be right. It isn't basketball.

Basketball isn't totally non-contact either.

[Wee Effen Bee]

I had a perfect view of the Watt incident - it was a clear penalty but in my opinion the decisions should have been a penalty and a booking for Watt for the way he went down. I agree the refs should make a point re what is a pen (ie you don't need to fall its the nature of the contact, as well as coming down hard on simulation

I agree. Watt did get caught but was overly-dramatic with the 'dive.'