• Participation within this subforum is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

Bale suspended

Status
Not open for further replies.
Didn't spot the knee contact earlier so he may have a case. Would have been hard for the ref to spot that though.

But he doesn't make it easy for himself to get decisions by hitting the ground like he's just been shot.
 
electricblue said:
Didn't spot the knee contact earlier so he may have a case. Would have been hard for the ref to spot that though.

But he doesn't make it easy for himself to get decisions by hitting the ground like he's just been shot.
Click to expand...
yep he`s got previous for diving, obviously goes against him slightly.
 
Penalty for me because of how the rules are and the state of the game you have to give that, but if players manned up and the rules were somehow changed you wouldn't see this.
 

it's in the game now lads ffs....... look at Sewerez against Stoke.... noe don't get me wrong it was a clear foul by that donkey shawcross ( i think ) but it started way outside the box....carried on....carried on... LS looked at the ref and when in the box he theatrically threw himself to the ground.....can't blame him cos he got a pen.
 
Tubey said:
That's not a dive.

I hate the elf as much as the next rational person but that's a foul. Maybe not enough for a penalty but I can fully understand why he's gone down there.
Click to expand...

It's not a dive, but he made the most of the contact, which is what they all do.
 
Dive for me. All day long.

MOTD pulled up Aguero there. Is smaller, is quick, gets kicked more than Bale ever has... Never really seen him dive.
 
Technically, it's not a dive. There's contact with the player, and not the ball. By the lettering of the law, it's a penalty. I don't know how that can be argued with?

The issue is how easily players go down. There's no way to write a rule saying "if player goes down with only being slightly fouled then it's not a foul".
 

Elong said:
Technically, it's not a dive. There's contact with the player, and not the ball. By the lettering of the law, it's a penalty. I don't know how that can be argued with?

The issue is how easily players go down. There's no way to write a rule saying "if player goes down with only being slightly fouled then it's not a foul".
Click to expand...

Did he tackle or challenge for the ball and not get it? No. Theres no intent.

To me Gardner has steamed in, pulled out, and put his arm across him with as much force of a 2 year old with a calcium deficiency. Bale has seen him coming and is wanting any touch to go down and done so.

There's no way that contact is enough to put him down. Even the knee contact doesnt force his knees together to put him off his stride. Theres no challenge for me. That happens on the halfway line, Bale shrugs it off and carries on

If Gardner had gone in shoulder to shoulder, legitimate challenge, Bale would've still fell over.
 
kenada_blue said:
Did he tackle or challenge for the ball and not get it? No. Theres no intent.

To me Gardner has steamed in, pulled out, and put his arm across him with as much force of a 2 year old with a calcium deficiency. Bale has seen him coming and is wanting any touch to go down and done so.

There's no way that contact is enough to put him down. Even the knee contact doesnt force his knees together to put him off his stride. Theres no challenge for me. That happens on the halfway line, Bale shrugs it off and carries on

If Gardner had gone in shoulder to shoulder, legitimate challenge, Bale would've still fell over.
Click to expand...

Of course he's going for a tackle, he just tries to pull out but it's too late. I'm not denying Bale's taken advantage of it, but rules are the rules aren't they? It's gone the way of Basketball with contact fouls, best way I can describe it. It's not right, but it's how it is.
 
It wasn't a dive, Defoe clearly dived in the first half and didn't get booked. Think refs pick and choose who they want to book for diving, Bale being one of them.

Bale's got previous but that really shouldn't come into the refs thought process, had that been another Spurs player it would have been a pen.

Some players do get victimised, Big Dunc springs to mind. Collina had probably never seen an Everton game before he reffed us against Villareal, but someone had probably advised him on Dunc saying he's that sort of players all elbows and once did time. Collina's decision to disallow the goal was partially based on his opinion of the player, much like Martain Atkinson's decision today.

Sorry to bring up a painful memory.
 
the FA want to cut out diving yet they won't do anything about defoe's pathetic attempt. this was worse than bale's and should be highlighted more. if the ref doesn't give the free kick why has he not booked him? staying away from the subject here of people diving when there is contact - i agree with pulis that retrospective action should be taken and they should be banned for 3 games. Obviously when there's contact this will become a bit more difficult to judge, but it will all be about opinion - in the same way red cards are rescinded and the dubious goal panel deals with goals. if someone gets banned for 3 games for not actually diving then tough love - that's just the way it goes. people still get 3 game bans for fouls people feel isn't worthy of a red card. I guarantee more people would get rightly banned for diving than those falsely convicted.

it's such a simple solution that is so obvious to a lot of people - as with other ways to clean up the game but yet nobody in the high positions within football has the balls to do anything about such stuff - utter weapons in charge
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top