Diving and different football views

Red Threat

52ª brigata Garibaldi
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
630
Location
-7.13, -8.00 (Maybe exaggerated)
The incomprehensions about diving we have seen in this EC (about Italy, Netherlands and other teams) in my opinion come from the difference in the football views and way of playing it in the different countries.

In England, US, and anglo-saxon countries football has a very "phisical" tradition, closest to rugby or american football, and refs are less severe.

Instead, in Southern Europe and Southern America football is seen as a more technical and tactical sport, with less physical contact. Italy and Brazil are the two teams that made less fauls-per-game in the WC until now. Germany and Netherlands lie something in the middle.

This generates all the incomprehensions about international refs; so, what for someone is "cheating and immoral diving" when some player in the penalty area loses equilibrium when weakly touched or pushed, for someone else is the consequence of football's rules not respected.
 
I want something to add.
For some people it´s a little more complex. For example in Germany. Diving without a hit or a push is immoral and not fair. But being less steady in the penaltybox and falling easier when hit, is okay.

Ballack is sometimes a genius in this. When touched in the penalty-box he always fall down. The hand on his shoulder in the argentina-match for example: That was a foul from the defender - not worth a penalty, but it was a foul and Ballack tried to get a penalty for it.
 
In the US, some Basketball players have gotten notoriously good at falling over when contact is made, trying to draw a foul. While most Americans do understand this, what's starting to piss us off is when players get mad/complain/sulk when they don't get the foul call. The San Antonio Spurs are good at this (the sulking part).

I bring this up because Basketball is a technical/tactical sport which is supposed to have less physical contact, but Americans still don't like diving. I think it has less to do with the physicality of the popular rules of football played in differing countries than it does the notion of earning a foul. [ tongue-in-cheek ] Since the European/South Americans states are more socialist with a greater dependence on government (health care, welfare, etc.), they're more accepting of the idea of getting gifts from the ref. This doesn't fly in the US with our puritan work ethic and notions of hard-nosed capitalism. [ /tongue-in-cheek ] :mischief:
 
ChrTh said:
In the US, some Basketball players have gotten notoriously good at falling over when contact is made, trying to draw a foul. While most Americans do understand this, what's starting to piss us off is when players get mad/complain/sulk when they don't get the foul call. The San Antonio Spurs are good at this (the sulking part).

You can't compare diving to basketball. As a center I occassionally have to do it. I'm a tall guy and I'm not weak, but in some cases if I don't drop myself when an offensive foul is made, I will get a defensive foul against me. It's as simple as that. It's an error in the rules, or in the game I think..

Anyway, diving is unacceptable (everyone has a love-hate relationship with Robben here), whining for cards, overreacting, elbowing, etc. is as well. You can make hard tackles, as long as they are fair (English style). Worst is when you dive and then even whine about not getting a penalty or free kick. Diving is bad enough, but not accepting the consequences if the ref doesn't fall for it is even worse. Also not giving back the ball, Heitinga style, is not acceptable..but I guess it's like that anywhere. And making a hand goal is unfair and cheating, not cunning as Maradona described.
 
Totally faking a foul or an injury is unacceptable I guess all over Europe. I agree with willemvanoranje that very often there is no whistle after a foul if you don´t lie on the grass and instead continue running. In this case it´s just a hint to the referee that you were fouled. I don´t think this is unsportsman like as there is a foul play involved first hand.

2 years ago in Austria the Club Austria Wien scored the winning goal after a player violated fair play without intent. The player just took the pass that was supposed to give the ball the other team´s defense line and scored, he didn´t see that the ball was intentionally kicked out of the field by the other team due to an injury at the other side of the playground. Austria´s team manager applied for a complete replay of this game which was approved by the ÖFB and they lost -and they were close contendors for the Austrian champion until then. Now that´s real sportsmanship :goodjob:
 
Certainly traditionally in England, players that dive or fall over rather too easily are regarded as, how shall I put it, rather effeminate. Not terribly masculine. Football is regarded as a man's game and power, strength and physical contact are part of the game. Players with a lot of skill but little strength such as Robben are not highly regarded. Players such as Shearer or Rooney who are physically able to withstand challenges are regarded as the ideal player.

It is normal in England to regard any tackle that touches the ball as legitimate even if the defender also kicked the forward. Shoulder to shoulder contact is legitimate. Anyone pushed off the ball that way is seen as a weakling. Shirt pulling is not and off the ball blocking is a sneaky underhand tactic used by Johnny Foreigner.

The worst crime is to get a fellow professional sent off.
 
Mr. Blonde said:
2 years ago in Austria the Club Austria Wien scored the winning goal after a player violated fair play without intent. The player just took the pass that was supposed to give the ball the other team´s defense line and scored, he didn´t see that the ball was intentionally kicked out of the field by the other team due to an injury at the other side of the playground. Austria´s team manager applied for a complete replay of this game which was approved by the ÖFB and they lost -and they were close contendors for the Austrian champion until then. Now that´s real sportsmanship :goodjob:

Arsenal and Sheffield United did pretty much the same thing in an FA cup tie when Arsenal scored in the same situation. The game was replayed and Arsenal won again.
 
Syntherio said:
I want something to add.
For some people it´s a little more complex. For example in Germany. Diving without a hit or a push is immoral and not fair. But being less steady in the penaltybox and falling easier when hit, is okay.

Ballack is sometimes a genius in this. When touched in the penalty-box he always fall down. The hand on his shoulder in the argentina-match for example: That was a foul from the defender - not worth a penalty, but it was a foul and Ballack tried to get a penalty for it.
Yep, that's the view here.

So in fact the Italian penalty against Australia was neither a penalty nor diving. Which is the whole point about it. There is something in between and I think the referees are aware of that, too. Otherwise clearly every fall in the area would have to be either a penalty or a yellow card for the one who fell. But it is more complex than that.

Still diving is not regarded well by most fans. Might be different between different clubs but amoung Werder fans at least you'll find very few who would like it if one of our players would do it. We appreciated Klose once telling the referee that the penalty he just whistled wasn't one because he just tripped. I suppose in Bayernland they would have been angry at that fair play idiot... :mischief:

But there is this "taking the foul" thing, which resembles alot what willem said about Basketball. There are situations in which you get fouled but would still be able to run on, though with less of a chance to play the ball. Then falling down is a reasonable move. After all you were fouled. Frings is perfect in doing this, he has a great ability of getting his body between the opponent and the ball just to the recieve a push that makes him fall down. Nothing unfair about it.

Now Andi Möller, that is diving...
 
I have a long and complex historical-sociological theory about diving, or more generally fooling the referee, and its perceptions and acceptance on different countries, but won't elaborate on it until I gather more evidence and time. :smug:

There are very different types of what can be considered diving though. Lately FIFA has been atempting a witch hunt on it, which have caused imo that it is almost becoming immoral if a player falls on the box, fouled or not. If a light player falls due to a legitimate tackle or shoulder challennge from a stronger player, the public will scream "diver" when he has just fallen due to not having the physique to contest the challenge.
Then there is another phenomenon, which is common in any country and any football culture, which is when a player is slightly charged but makes sure the foul is whistled by making it more evident with a dramatic jump to the ground. For example, there isn't any defender anywhere in the world that will not fall to "extract" the foul, as we say here, if he's turned towards the end line, with a forward on his backs that drops his hands on his back. He will fall, and a foul wil be given because an attacker cannot do that. He falls to signal to the ref he has been fouled. Is that diving? Yes, it is diving, but there has been a foul indeed...
Then there are of course the proper dives, when a player simulates being fouled, when he was not, and jumps in agaony to the grass. Contrarily to what many probably think, that is not apreciated over here, though it will give some satisfaction if you're playing against your club rivals. Over here, club rivalry is so extreme, that under certain circumstances, just about anything can be acceptable to ruin the enemy team.
Finally there is still another situation: when a foul will not be made normally, but the player seeks it and obtains it through some "cunning" move. It is very similar to what happened in Italy vs. Australia where Grosso deliberatly ran towards the defender, in order to be obstructed in his move, which under a certain interpretation of the rules may be seen as a legitimate foul.

Red Threat's interpretation of physical or non-physical football also has some merit. Over here at least, it is ertainly more acceptable to dive than to practice some violent tackle. The former makes an irritating boy that fooled the authority, while the latter makes you an animalesque thug. Therefore, the worst thing over here is definitely an aggression, which means that when a teammate has been victim of such a thing, you'll always find portuguese players furiously surrounding the ref and the opponent player.
 
Top Bottom