2017/18 Oumar Niasse

[davek]

Don't let facts get in the way of a good rant: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41698275

PL footballer.

FFS

Scott Dann history maker.

 

[mahermi1]

There are 3 ex players on the " diving panel ", they are Terry Butcher, Scott Dixon and ...Danny Murphy. Danny Murphy tbh knows all about diving from his Liverpool fc days.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

Imagine the scope for this though: a player who dives and clearly dives might not be reported / WONT be reported if that talented cheating predator of a forward is needed in the next few games when they come up against a close competitor in the table to the team transgressed against.

The tactical use of this is an issue. It'll be weaponised by clubs who dont want to see rivals not having to face the player who cheated them.

Unreal.

Now the FA have banned Niasse, I can picture someone at the FA sitting there rewriting the rules on diving to cover their backs if they have to deal with a player from one of the top clubs.

 

[YorkshireBlue877]

"clear and overwhelming evidence" in the FA's own words has to be the criteria for a charge.

Did the Niasse incident with clear contact even come into that category? Did it bollocks.

The ONLY way a United, Chelsea, City, Arsenal or Liverpool player are being charged is if there is no challenge at all that they go down under.

Hmmm, there was certainly clear evidence of diving, Niasse being a human being and not a house of soggy cards. I’m not sure I’d have convicted him if the evidence had to be overwhelming however - on balance, yes, but not beyond doubt.

 

[Woolly Blue]

He did dive though lads.
I mean, it wasn't the most blatant dive I've ever seen, but a dive is what it was.

 

[davek]

Hmmm, there was certainly clear evidence of diving, Niasse being a human being and not a house of soggy cards. I’m not sure I’d have convicted him if the evidence had to be overwhelming however - on balance, yes, but not beyond doubt.

So not guilty then.

 

[Khalekan]

Remember when Gerrard got that pen v Sheffield Utd by doing a blatant dive and the pundits passed it off as he got a deserved penalty for ‘the intent to foul’ even though there was zero contact.

Whole game is corrupt. It’s ultimately the problem with video refs too. At some point there’ll be a human making a decision and where football in England is concerned that person will invariably be a Liverpool or United supporter.

Indeed.

 

[roydo]

He did dive though lads.
I mean, it wasn't the most blatant dive I've ever seen, but a dive is what it was.

But didnt dive with no contact. He dived really crappily.

 

[Khalekan]

When does the ban start?

 

[davek]

He did dive though lads.
I mean, it wasn't the most blatant dive I've ever seen, but a dive is what it was.

Simulation: the act or process of pretending; feigning.

How is a defender stepping into your line of direction and making contact with you "feigning" if you fall?

 

[davek]

When does the ban start?

Southampton game.

 

[Woolly Blue]

But didnt dive with no contact. He dived really crappily.

Needs more practice, it needs honing in training to make sure you get away with it.

Simulation: the act or process of pretending; feigning.

How is a defender stepping into your line of direction and making contact with you "feigning"?

Behave David, it was a dive.

 

[Mozza1987]

Absolute disgrace he has been banned for this. Can think of numerous players in the league at the top clubs who have been diving constantly and nothing has happened. Also if he had been booked for it then nothing would have happened after it I am gathering? So how is that the same a 2 match ban. Joke!

 

[YorkshireBlue877]

So not guilty then.

If the standard of proof is beyond reasonable doubt, not guilty for me. I’d be surprised if that was the case however; most sport disciplinary tribunals adhere to the civil, ‘on balance’ standard of proof.

 

[carolinablue232]

Absolute disgrace he has been banned for this. Can think of numerous players in the league at the top clubs who have been diving constantly and nothing has happened. Also if he had been booked for it then nothing would have happened after it I am gathering? So how is that the same a 2 match ban. Joke!

Yeah, if the ref did a better job, it's just a yellow and job done? But because the ref was incompetent, it's a 2 match ban?