Steve Evans Requests Football Association Simulation Action | Vital Football

Steve Evans Requests Football Association Simulation Action

I don't agree withtgis. When you are running it onky takes a little knock to make you lose your balance. I feel that if they bring in retrospective action players who are chalenged and lose their balance will be unfairly sanctioned against. I felt that the penalty awarded last night was the correct decision as there was contact when he ran past.
 
Would retrospective action really deter people from simulation, I'm not sure it would do. Alot of players would still take that risk and go down whether they thought they might get a game ban or not.

In 5 to 10 years time all grounds in the EFL will most likely be equipped with VAR technology anyway and this debate won't exist.
 
Spinimp said:
Would retrospective action really deter people from simulation, I'm not sure it would do. Alot of players would still take that risk and go down whether they thought they might get a game ban or not.

In 5 to 10 years time all grounds in the EFL will most likely be equipped with VAR technology anyway and this debate won't exist.
Click to expand...

I think the debate will always be there. Even with all the technology in the world instances like last night's penalty will split opinions.
 
SIMJON said:
I think the debate will always be there. Even with all the technology in the world instances like last night's penalty will split opinions.
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree that people will still have different opinions about such incidents but there won't be any need for retrospective punishment as it should all theoretically be sorted on the pitch at the time when you have VAR.
 
SIMJON said:
I think the debate will always be there. Even with all the technology in the world instances like last night's penalty will split opinions.
Click to expand...
Exactly. There will always be right and wrong decisions, even with technogy.
Refs make mistakes, they're only human. It's part of the game and gives you something to discuss at work on a Monday morning.
 
Can we also have retrospective red cards for Jason Cundy, Jack Tucker and Connor Ogilvie for their blatant assaults on Tom Hopper? And how about reviewing Akinde's elbow on Joe Walsh? And what about two nasty kicks at Joe Walsh and Adam Jackson by Oliver? We could go on and on.

If Evans really wants the rules to be tightened, he should be careful what he wishes for.
 
Brennan Johnson is a diver. Everyone knows it.

The ref last night was very close so presumably saw a slight trip or pull. In that case he should have given us the penalty, then booked Johnson as well, because the dive was laughable.

There is no excuse for it (Jorge Grant is similar by the way) and you either accept it, or I don't want to see a single post on this forum complaining the next time that our opponents are awarded a debatable penalty.

Because that would just mean you're all a bunch of insufferable hypocrites.
 
He was pulled back. It was both a penalty and a dive. The ref had the perfect view and there were no complaints from their no2.

The issue I guess is the penalty would never have been given if he didn’t dive. I guess that’s the excuse for it.
 
Skip155 said:
He was pulled back. It was both a penalty and a dive. The ref had the perfect view and there were no complaints from their no2.

The issue I guess is the penalty would never have been given if he didn’t dive. I guess that’s the excuse for it.
Click to expand...

Yep I agree. If more fouls were given when the foulee stayed.on their.feet.then the reason to dive would be reduced.
 
Absolutely agree with Evans on this one.

Nothing is blighting the game more than this. The wording of the simulation rule describes the offence as deceiving the referee. Was Brennan trying to deceive the referee that he had been pulled to the ground. YES. (If he got a little tug on his shirt, that does not mean it's okay to do a double pike, with three somersaults).

What happened elsewhere in the game is irrelevant.

The bigger picture is there should be some justice to the laws and they need changing to be fit for purpose.

If the price for stopping diving is an occasional minor foul being missed then I am prepared to accept that.

Who does it, who calls it out does not matter. It needs stopping.

Most will disagree, until Brennan does it for Forest against us next season.
 
Skip155 said:
He was pulled back. It was both a penalty and a dive. The ref had the perfect view and there were no complaints from their no2.

The issue I guess is the penalty would never have been given if he didn’t dive. I guess that’s the excuse for it.
Click to expand...

Yep. People always look down at legs for trips and if they don't see one on the replays they claim instantly "ooh not a penalty", but "arm fouls" also happen.
So Johnson is pulled back which ref spots so penalty correctly given.
Johnson will also have felt the pull and either it unbalances him leading to going down or instinct leads him to go down to increase chance of ref correctly giving the penalty.

Players can also go down just through a simple loss of balance whilst running with no contact from anyone, and it may look like a dive but isn't. For me a player should only be cited for diving if there is clearly no contact of any sort from a defender and if the player immediately appeals for an unjustified penalty. At that point cheating can be rightly considered.

I recall Simon Yeo running into the box once, maybe in a home leg play off semi, he fell over unchallenged (loss of balance), made no appeal for a penalty, immediately leapt up and continued to take the ball towards the goal only for the ref to blow up and issue a card for diving. Ref got that wrong as do so many tv pundits week in, week out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.