Niasse Dive
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Goldfiinger  Just down the road 22 Nov 17 7.23pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by The Dolphin
We suffer on the day whist our immediate rivals benefit. Edited by The Dolphin (22 Nov 2017 6.38pm) Yep if West Ham and Southampton beat Everton and and/all three teams avoid the drop by two points whilst we go down. Well this is gonna look like a gut wrenching decision. Surprised more people aren't commenting on this.
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| thegreatlardino crawley/selsey 22 Nov 17 7.44pm |
|
|---|---|
|
i was speaking to my everton mate about this, regardless of whether it was a dive or not, what a load of rollocks, whats the point of it all, do we get the points? er no, going to be interesting when its a player from a top 4 club, then we will see what the ole duffers do...totally pointless waste of time this whole business
Sometimes I set out for Ludlow |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| rob1969 Banstead Surrey 22 Nov 17 7.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Banning the player for two games could benefit other clubs which could then be detrimental to the club that was originally wrongly penalised. Where's the justice then? if the infringement never occurred then the penalty should not have been given and the goal so scored therefore disallowed. The final result should then be adjusted accordinly. In this case Everton would forfeit a point and Palace gain two points. Yes it could at some time work against us but am sure that potentially loosing points will stop diving - managers will ensure that! Edited by rob1969 (22 Nov 2017 7.55pm) Edited by rob1969 (22 Nov 2017 7.56pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| monkey Sittingbourne 22 Nov 17 8.44pm |
|
|---|---|
|
David Unsworth has blown his chance of getting the Everton job permanent, because he's quite clearly on drugs!! The poor deluded fool
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
chateauferret  22 Nov 17 9.19pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by monkey
David Unsworth has blown his chance of getting the Everton job permanent, because he's quite clearly on drugs!! The poor deluded fool Have you seen all the Everton fans saying it was a fair penalty, that Palace were diving all over the pitch, and Wilf is a persistent cheat? Nutters the lot of them. Edited by chateauferret (22 Nov 2017 9.20pm)
============ |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Glazier#1 23 Nov 17 5.45am |
|
|---|---|
|
Most of them are saying that they support cheating if it gives you 'an edge'. Probably true of most football fans, don't you reckon? Not me though. I still remember Benteke's hideous cheating against us. Never liked him since, I'm afraid. I don't care if he's 'ours' or not. Ooh! Controversial. Oh, by the way. I got a red line under the word 'Benteke's' and when I right-clicked it, the suggestion was 'absentee's'.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| babylonjohn St Leonards-on-Sea 23 Nov 17 9.21am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by rob1969
Banning the player for two games could benefit other clubs which could then be detrimental to the club that was originally wrongly penalised. Where's the justice then? if the infringement never occurred then the penalty should not have been given and the goal so scored therefore disallowed. The final result should then be adjusted accordinly. In this case Everton would forfeit a point and Palace gain two points. Yes it could at some time work against us but am sure that potentially loosing points will stop diving - managers will ensure that! Edited by rob1969 (22 Nov 2017 7.55pm) Edited by rob1969 (22 Nov 2017 7.56pm) You can't "adjust results accordingly". There is a whole world of gambling /the pools / winning / losing / drawing etc that revolves around the final score. Rightly or wrongly the result at the end of the game will always stand.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| CrazyBadger Ware 23 Nov 17 9.30am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by babylonjohn
You can't "adjust results accordingly". There is a whole world of gambling /the pools / winning / losing / drawing etc that revolves around the final score. Rightly or wrongly the result at the end of the game will always stand. I don't think that would matter too much. Bookies would just stipulate that they would Pay based on the Score when The whistle blew, and irrespective of any retrospective action.
"It was a Team effort, I guess it took all players working together to lose this one" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| chateauferret 23 Nov 17 9.46am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by CrazyBadger
I don't think that would matter too much. Bookies would just stipulate that they would Pay based on the Score when The whistle blew, and irrespective of any retrospective action. You place your bet then leave your brown envelope containing £70,000 in the dead letter box you've agreed with the ref. Edited by chateauferret (23 Nov 2017 9.46am)
============ |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Midlands Eagle 23 Nov 17 10.07am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by babylonjohn
You can't "adjust results accordingly". There is a whole world of gambling /the pools / winning / losing / drawing etc that revolves around the final score. Rightly or wrongly the result at the end of the game will always stand. You could adopt the horse racing system where bets aren't paid out until the horses are weighed in and any stewards enquiries have been conducted. If they really wanted to stamp out diving then the only way will be for the cheating club to forfeit any points earned in the game
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| topcat Holmesdale / Surbiton 23 Nov 17 10.16am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
You could adopt the horse racing system where bets aren't paid out until the horses are weighed in and any stewards enquiries have been conducted. If they really wanted to stamp out diving then the only way will be for the cheating club to forfeit any points earned in the game As someone else suggested, make it this plus 1 more point, this will punish the clubs who will then make more of an effort to stop their players doing it.
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Willo South coast - west of Brighton. 23 Nov 17 10.27am |
|
|---|---|
|
If VAR had been in operation on Saturday then the referee could have reviewed the incident and one would imagine there would have been a different outcome with the penalty not awarded and the player booked.Whether of course this should be a 'Red' or 'Yellow' is debateable with other factors bring taken into consideration and would need a 'Law' change. That said, VAR is not a panacea, with subjectivity perhaps leading to more controversy.The technology is available but how it is used is open to debate with the devil being very much in the detail.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.