Cheating/The Ugly Game

[gmonn]

What ruins the beautiful game? It's not bunkering, it's cheating for advantage, and frequent injuries.
So much cheating is accepted, taken for granted, and defended. We all know that diving is a disgrace. Some people say that it's an attacker's revenge for all the ways they've been cheated. Held, pushed, pulled, hacked, hurt, taken down.
I'd like to see video reviewed after games and players punished far more often. I'd also like to see unfair and dangerous defensive play severely punished. BPL lovers will object the most, but I hate to see a player on a yellow get away with things because the ref doesn't want to give him a red. Violence makes the game less beautiful and more boring, with offense stifled by fouling. See how previously beautiful Brazil fouled Argentina over and over in the Copa final. I'd even suggest taking away the yellow and going straight to reds for current yellow card fouls. After an adjustment period we'd see 11 on 11 again as the players changed their games. The defenders who couldn't adjust, good riddance to them.
It's also cheating to automatically make a claim when the ball bounces out of bounds off your foot.
All of this stuff comprises the ugly game. If only we could purge it.

[Kevin8833]

What ruins the beautiful game? It's not bunkering, it's cheating for advantage, and frequent injuries.
So much cheating is accepted, taken for granted, and defended. We all know that diving is a disgrace. Some people say that it's an attacker's revenge for all the ways they've been cheated. Held, pushed, pulled, hacked, hurt, taken down.
I'd like to see video reviewed after games and players punished far more often. I'd also like to see unfair and dangerous defensive play severely punished. BPL lovers will object the most, but I hate to see a player on a yellow get away with things because the ref doesn't want to give him a red. Violence makes the game less beautiful and more boring, with offense stifled by fouling. See how previously beautiful Brazil fouled Argentina over and over in the Copa final. I'd even suggest taking away the yellow and going straight to reds for current yellow card fouls. After an adjustment period we'd see 11 on 11 again as the players changed their games. The defenders who couldn't adjust, good riddance to them.
It's also cheating to automatically make a claim when the ball bounces out of bounds off your foot.
All of this stuff comprises the ugly game. If only we could purge it.
Physical play is part of the game, to many cards was a big problem in the 2006 WC and really deteriated the level of play in my opinion, the game can still be beautiful but you have to realize the game involves physical play as well.

[frasermc]

a couple of years ago FIFA told referee's to stamp down hard on the tackle from behind. a yellow card offense, minimum, at all times.

this was adhered to for a while but now it seems that players are being let off the hook for an offense which, 95% of the time at least, is a way of taking a cheap shot at a defenseless attacking player.

i hate diving and any other way of trying to con a referee, including mass arguments by teams against decisions but the tackle from behind is as ugly as anything in the game most times.

[actusreus13]

Physical play might be part of the game, but a lot of fouls I see in games are reckless and perhaps even border on intentional fouling, and ruin the beauty of the game. I tangentially touched upon this topic when I criticized Eric Wynalda for praising players who are not afraid to foul "tactically" to throw the other team off their rhythm. It is reprehensible to me, cowardly, and extremely unsportsmanship-like. It can also destroy a player's career, whether professional or recreational since you cannot possibly predict the outcome of a foul (think of Larsson's lower leg break when he was tackled from behind; it looked like a light tackle, almost a trip; obviously, the other player did not intend to hurt Larsson that badly).

Perhaps gratuitous yellow cards would make the game less exciting at first, but once players realized there's very little they can get away with, they would adjust. It's no different than not tolerating blows below the belt in boxing, or MMA. You just don't do it, period. Even accidental blows earn warnings from the referees so the fighters know it in their brains to keep the punches up. We need the same kind of mindframe and clarity in soccer.

Diving is the other side of the coin. Not as dangerous, but equally cowardly. It's cheating to gain advantage, akin to cheating by using illegal substances in other sports. If you cheat and you're caught, you deserve to be punished and stripped from any winnings. As simple as that.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

I tangentially touched upon this topic when I criticized Eric Wynalda for praising players who are not afraid to foul "tactically" to throw the other team off their rhythm. It is reprehensible to me, cowardly, and extremely unsportsmanship-like. It can also destroy a player's career, whether professional or recreational since you cannot possibly predict the outcome of a foul (think of Larsson's lower leg break when he was tackled from behind; it looked like a light tackle, almost a trip; obviously, the other player did not intend to hurt Larsson that badly).

Tactical fouls are not fouls from behind. If you wanted to ban the former then players like Makelele would be out of a job.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

I tangentially touched upon this topic when I criticized Eric Wynalda for praising players who are not afraid to foul "tactically" to throw the other team off their rhythm. It is reprehensible to me, cowardly, and extremely unsportsmanship-like. It can also destroy a player's career, whether professional or recreational since you cannot possibly predict the outcome of a foul (think of Larsson's lower leg break when he was tackled from behind; it looked like a light tackle, almost a trip; obviously, the other player did not intend to hurt Larsson that badly).

Tactical fouls are not fouls from behind. If you wanted to ban the former then players like Makelele would be out of a job. The current rules are good enough. The problem, as always, is the standard of officiating.

[MichaelBall]

The current rules are not good enough to deter the tactical fouling that destroys attractive soccer. The prime example of this was the Copa America Final when Brazil shamelessly resorted to tactical fouls to beat a technically superior Argentina. The fundamental problem arises from the fact that any time a team has possession outside dangerous free-kick range, the most effective defensive tactic under the current rules is to break up the possession with a tactical foul that isn't hard enough to merit a yellow card. Even once a team is within dangerous free kick range, as a defender, if you can calculate that the play unfolding is more dangerous than a free-kick from where the ball is, you're better off fouling the player than letting it go. What's even more common though is playing just physical enough -particularly from behind as a player checks to the ball- to knock a skilled player off his balance- but not enough to knock him over usually. It gets called sometimes and sometimes the player allows it to knock him over, but a free-kick in the midfield is useless and the play has been killed. In effect, it's the attacking team that is penalized for the tactical fouls of the defensive. This ensures that it will continue to happen more and more. This makes soccer unnatractive to watch as skilled players are more easily neutralized and teams are forced to rely on long balls and set pieces to win 1-0 games.

I don't understand the usual frustrating response "Soccer is a physical game. Get used to it." The problem is that physical play combined with tactical fouling is being used against the rules to stifle open, skilled and attractive soccer.

There needs to be a crackdown on this sort of thing. Possibly a foul-limit; with penalty time or a red card for players who exceed it. Every fifth foul is a mandatory yellow maybe. This needs to be combined with a much tighter calling of fouls. Initially there will be lots of reds until players learn to adjust. Then the game will open up and be much more fun to watch. You can't just institute a policy like this for one tournament every four years; it has to be a sustained policy in a league to give players a chance to adapt. It has be a long-term solution.

It's just like in the NFL when cornerbacks were ruining the passing game with frequent contact outside of five yards. The NFL cracked down on it harshly and initially a lot of pass interference was called until players adapted and then the game opened up and was much more fun to watch. People didn't deride the opponents of this type of cheap defensive play by saying: "Football is physical. Get used to it." Sorry this is so long but I feel very strongly about this issue. I think it's the number one issue in soccer today.

[gmonn]

Amen. Another possibility is a penalty (maybe even a penalty kick) for a certain number of team fouls. Anything to alter the current culture of kicking people on a regular basis. The NBA has tactical fouling also, but the rule structure keeps it from being used to stifle, intimidate and even injure the most skilled players.

[frasermc]

The current rules are not good enough to deter the tactical fouling that destroys attractive soccer. The prime example of this was the Copa America Final when Brazil shamelessly resorted to tactical fouls to beat a technically superior Argentina. The fundamental problem arises from the fact that any time a team has possession outside dangerous free-kick range, the most effective defensive tactic under the current rules is to break up the possession with a tactical foul that isn't hard enough to merit a yellow card. Even once a team is within dangerous free kick range, as a defender, if you can calculate that the play unfolding is more dangerous than a free-kick from where the ball is, you're better off fouling the player than letting it go. What's even more common though is playing just physical enough -particularly from behind as a player checks to the ball- to knock a skilled player off his balance- but not enough to knock him over usually. It gets called sometimes and sometimes the player allows it to knock him over, but a free-kick in the midfield is useless and the play has been killed. In effect, it's the attacking team that is penalized for the tactical fouls of the defensive. This ensures that it will continue to happen more and more. This makes soccer unnatractive to watch as skilled players are more easily neutralized and teams are forced to rely on long balls and set pieces to win 1-0 games.

I don't understand the usual frustrating response "Soccer is a physical game. Get used to it." The problem is that physical play combined with tactical fouling is being used against the rules to stifle open, skilled and attractive soccer.

There needs to be a crackdown on this sort of thing. Possibly a foul-limit; with penalty time or a red card for players who exceed it. Every fifth foul is a mandatory yellow maybe. This needs to be combined with a much tighter calling of fouls. Initially there will be lots of reds until players learn to adjust. Then the game will open up and be much more fun to watch. You can't just institute a policy like this for one tournament every four years; it has to be a sustained policy in a league to give players a chance to adapt. It has be a long-term solution.

It's just like in the NFL when cornerbacks were ruining the passing game with frequent contact outside of five yards. The NFL cracked down on it harshly and initially a lot of pass interference was called until players adapted and then the game opened up and was much more fun to watch. People didn't deride the opponents of this type of cheap defensive play by saying: "Football is physical. Get used to it." Sorry this is so long but I feel very strongly about this issue. I think it's the number one issue in soccer today.

i agree with you to a certain extent. tactical fouling must be dealed with on a more strict and consistent basis worldwide. however, we must ensure we do not remove the physical element of the game that has been prevalent since football began.

using NFL as a measuring stick is a dangerous game. football (soccer) has no salary cap or draft in europe and south america to ensure a parity between the teams to an extent. therefore, to be able to compete, teams need to rely on the physical element of the game.

would introducing a foul count for penalty kicks or yellow cards lead to a better game or would it just encourage the cheats to dive more...?

[NHRef]

the tactical foul "count" you are suggesting is already in place, a ref can give a yellow for persistent infringement, this can come in two flavors, a single player persistently fouling, or a team consistently fouling.

the problem is this, everyone here is saying refs need to call more fouls and card for tactical etc. Well they tried doing this in the WC and got bad publicity for it. While I think changing for the world cup was a bad move, the teams where warned before hand, months before hand and the teams didn't adjust.

The rules needed are in place. They just need to be enforced. It will cause a mess at first, just as the NHL and NFL did when they clamped down on things, there will be cries of "ruining the game" just as there was in the NHL and NFL. But if the refs and FIFA and leagues stick to it, players will adjust.

[gmonn]

Yeah, people can't adjust for one tournament, even if it's the WC. It needs to be enforced worldwide. People definitely get away with too much though, and the yellows don't prevent that behavior. How about two team yellows, and the player who gets the second one comes out?

[mintone]

IMO the rules are fine as is(on the pitch). Calling more fouls will lead to more diving. I honestly think you need another ref on the field and punishments after the fact for diving. Its tough to dish out extra after the fact punishments for a lot of the fouls you see because the ref has a better idea of how the game is going than someone just watching video.

You constantly here terms like Two-footed challenge" "studs up" "tackle from behind" and so on. If a player gets the ball and not the man these types of challenges are considered good tecnique. Besides "tactical fouling" seems only to be a bad thing when it happens against the team you support.

[lanman]

the problem is this, everyone here is saying refs need to call more fouls and card for tactical etc. Well they tried doing this in the WC and got bad publicity for it. While I think changing for the world cup was a bad move, the teams where warned before hand, months before hand and the teams didn't adjust.

Teams were warned of the changes but, as far as I'm aware, they were not actually enforced until the finals. Would they not be better served bringing in any prospective changes after a World Cup, giving teams and officials a long period to adapt and giving FIFA the chance to tweak anything for the better in the build up to the finals?

[MichaelBall]

The idea of a free kick from a designated spot about 25 yards out after a team exceeds a foul limit isn't a bad idea. Similar to in basketball maybe. But I prefer calling fouls much more strictly combined with some sort of time-out or expulsion when a foul-limit is exceeded. The solution is difficult; I'm more concerned with recognizing the problem because for some reason many people don't.

I disagree with the idea that "the physical element has been prevalent since football began." The way defenders phsically and tactically play the man and not the ball is a relatively modern development; at least the degree to which it is happening. Yes, soccer is a physical game, but it also a skillful, beautiful game of talent. The problem is when the cheap, tactical-fouling physical part of the game destroys the attractive skillful part. That's what's happening.

Arguing that the lack of a salary cap justifies allowing less-skilled teams to compete through physical play doesn't make sense or address the issue. By that logic we should allow some shirt-pulling or encourage bad pitch conditions because surely that would help even the playing field for the bad teams. It also doesn't address the issue because the same tactics that help bad teams compete against good ones, work in big matches between two very good teams. It's an unfair advantage for defense against offense and it's part of the reason why big games between two very skilled teams are often low scoring and boring; because both defenses can shut down the skilled players of the other side through tactical fouling and cheap physical play.

A crackdown would increase the incentive of diving of course. This would have to be combined with either multiple refs or video replay after the match or both with strict suspensions for diving to crack down on diving at the same time. I don't think that would be a big problem. At any rate, not as big as the current tactical fouling problem.

Also, I agree that people complain more when tactical fouling is used against their team, but that still doesn't mean it's not bad for the game and needs to be stopped. I hate it even more when my team does it. I've always loved Brazil but I hated the way they played in the Copa Final and I actually found myself wishing they'd lose.

A crackdown will work but only if it is implemented in such a way that players have a chance to adjust. FIFA's preferred method of cracking down for the World Cup every four years gives the policy a bad rep because players don't adjust in time. It needs to be put into the Champions League or all Internationals or the big European leagues for a sustained period for it to work.

[frasermc]

I disagree with the idea that "the physical element has been prevalent since football began." The way defenders phsically and tactically play the man and not the ball is a relatively modern development; at least the degree to which it is happening. Yes, soccer is a physical game, but it also a skillful, beautiful game of talent. The problem is when the cheap, tactical-fouling physical part of the game destroys the attractive skillful part. That's what's happening.

the previous post said that physical play combined with tactical fouling is ruining the game.

i was merely stating that the physical element of the game should not be removed. the game has been physical since it began and at the rate we're going it will soon be a non contact sport.

what you have written is the definition of a foul. i never suggested that playing a man and not the ball was acceptable. of course it should be cracked down on. that's a freekick and should be awarded appropriately. yes it's a skillful, beautiful game. at times it can be mesmerising and wonderful to watch. however, as mentioned by other posters the art of tackling is just as important to football as other attributes.

Arguing that the lack of a salary cap justifies allowing less-skilled teams to compete through physical play doesn't make sense or address the issue. By that logic we should allow some shirt-pulling or encourage bad pitch conditions because surely that would help even the playing field for the bad teams. It also doesn't address the issue because the same tactics that help bad teams compete against good ones, work in big matches between two very good teams. It's an unfair advantage for defense against offense and it's part of the reason why big games between two very skilled teams are often low scoring and boring; because both defenses can shut down the skilled players of the other side through tactical fouling and cheap physical play.

the lack of a salary cap doesn't justify a less skilled team to compete physically. it's their right to play as they see fit to win the match. i'm not suggesting by foul means but they must be allowed to play to their strengths. if a team must rely purely on skill to win a match then how is a less-skilled team going to have a chance of winning?

my logic never stated that we should allow fouling to be encouraged for the smaller teams. all i'm saying is they must be allowed to compete within the laws of the game. as long as their physical play is legal then why shouldn't they play the game that way if it is to their advantage? a case in point being scotland defeating france. if we try to play the same way as france they'd have taken us to the cleaners. are we supposed to turn up and allow ourselves to be ripped to shreds so people can enjoy watching the skill of attacking play? there is just as much skill and ability in good, organised defensive displays. we were congratulated after defeating france twice for our workrate, our strength in the tackle, our determination and organisation. in short for our physical attributes to an extent.

in an ideal world each team would have two or three leo messi's and we'd all be at the stadium watching our teams score beautiful goals in 5-4 wonder matches. the reality is quite different. i go to see celtic for every home game and away in europe. i see both sides of the game. at home in the SPL we dominate the majority of matches and we want to see our team play beautiful football as much as they possibly can. when we go to europe our philosophy changes as we then become the smaller team. i then look for my team to defend and fight for every ball and try and play good football if and when the opportunity presents itself to do so.

there's a time and a place for the beautiful game and unfortunately it's impossible for it to be seen for 90 minutes in each and every match.

[passtheblizz]

The referees need to be better... These guys aren't even real professionals. If a referee takes control from the very beginning of the game he can eliminate most of the problems we are seeing. There needs to be consistency though, and there is none. WC 2006 was a prime example. The refereeing was terrible. The reason they had to give so many cards was that they lost control of practically every game. The refs were all calling different stuff and it was ridiculous.

They should also eliminate carrying yellow cards from match to match. It is stupid and hurts the game. Three yellow cards in three games is NOT the same as a red card, no matter what anyone says.

I also believe any intentional "professional" foul should be a red card. That would put a stop to it quick. Clumsy challenge-yellow. Blatant shirt pull to stop a counter-red. If you have played soccer, than you know it is possible to play without fouling on purpose. Every other sport has rules now to prevent this. The way it is now in soccer, it is clearly a smart play to take a yellow card to disrupt a good scoring chance. Referees rarely give breakaway-foul reds anyway, so why not take the chance if it will help put your team through?

[NHRef]

The referees need to be better... These guys aren't even real professionals. If a referee takes control from the very beginning of the game he can eliminate most of the problems we are seeing. There needs to be consistency though, and there is none. WC 2006 was a prime example. The refereeing was terrible. The reason they had to give so many cards was that they lost control of practically every game. The refs were all calling different stuff and it was ridiculous.

Actually the WC reffing was incredibly consistent and I actually think it was good refereeing, the problem was, they were told to enforce different standards than the players where use to.

Soccer is a "strange" game in that it is so popular world wide, you then get cultural apsects tossed in. Leagues from differnet parts of the world give ref instructions to concentrate or adjust to different things. At the WC, the refs where instructed to call physical play tightly and to pull yellow cards to enforce this. Problem was the players didn't adjust and it turned into a joke from many peoples view point. Now who's fault was this:

- refs for doing what they were told to do
- players for not adjusting to new standards
- FIFA for putting new standards in place

Basically its tough to get a worldwide standard. You increase foul calls and the net effect is increased diving which is very hard to clamp down on.