Someone on the Guardian podcast remarked “Koscielny can’t jump”. I think it was Barry Glendenning. I hadn’t noticed during my live viewing so I watched the second half versus Chelsea again and sure enough he looks hampered in his (lords a) leaping.
Often the jumps are ill timed or barely able to reach the ball. But he does get to the ball. It looks like Sarri’s insistence on playing Hazard in the forward role helped Arsenal because Chelsea lacked an aerial threat for most of the match. And when Giroud came on the two center backs took a different approach to aerial defending: often sandwiching the former Arsenal man between Sokratis and Koscielny.
On a positive note, since I just watched the center backs for 45 minutes, it was impressive to see how well Kos and Sok (Kos Sok is a palindrome, do we have any other partnerships that are palindromes?) played together. Their movement back and forth in creating the line for Arsenal was impressive. Also, Koscielny’s willingness to just put himself in harms way (he takes a shot to the crotch, literally) was refreshing.
We are already up to 12 minutes in this post. Sigh. Two more things..
I read a quote from Emery on Monchi. Not Monchi-chis which were soft and cuddly, but Roma director and former Sevilla transfer genius, Monchi. It was something like “Monchi is good. I like Monchi. He works at Roma. It’s up to the club to get him.”
I know this is pure speculation on my part and obviously the paper I read the quote in wanted me to speculate, that was the point, but I still can’t help but think “if Sven Mislintat fell in the forest and no one was around, would Monchi be a great replacement?” Yes, yes he would.
If Arsenal fired Sven because they want Monchi, I’m all in.
I was thinking about diving and wondered something. You know how when Lacazette was fouled in the box, stumbled, but then stayed on his feet and scored against Chelsea? I wonder if we can incentivise this behaviour rather than punish the divers? Punishing divers will never really work because the benefits far outweigh punishment and they are immediate – you win the penalty now, you win the game now, you get a yellow card later, or you get a one match ban later. Even match bans wouldn’t really stop diving, because players would just see it as gamesmanship (yes, I got punished, but I won the game), and plus some would even do it to get a week off!
So, instead of punishment, why not incentivise players to stay on their feet? My problem is that I can’t figure out how to do it. Thanks for solving that problem for me in the comments.
A fair play award at the end of the season!
Speaking of the Guardian, today’s Squires cartoon on Ozil and Emery is one of his better ones.
Reward the team which stays on its feet.. Hmmm..
Maybe on the next corner the defending team has to have fewer players in the box? Kind of like a powerplay.
Power play would work.
By definition, a goal to prevent a scoring opportunity. Ameliorated by an actual score: Yellow card!
Maybe referees noting this down and treating players a little differently. If a player is prone to diving then don’t give a penalty unless you are absolutely sure that he was fouled.
I like Shard’s powerplay idea, but how about a 10-minute sin-bin penalty where the player committing the foul gets sent off for “some amount of time”. Since VAR is working so well, it could be used to determine a) if the scoring player actually was fouled and stayed up, b) who the offending player was, and c) how long they deserve to be off the field. Simples.
And while we’re dreaming, let’s implement the much-needed rule that a player who breaks another player’s leg (Shawcross you C*NT) has to sit out for as long as it takes that player to reclaim his starting position.
Keeping the offending player out until the injured player returns would not work. A situation where a club decides to manipulate the rule by falsely prolonging the injury and return of perhaps a not particularly important player just to prevent a rival team’s ‘star’ from playing could very easily occur.
…better to lengthen the ban to a minimum three months.
I can’t take Glendenning – I’m not even sure how much football he actually knows and he admits on the podcast to not even watching some matches he’s commenting on. His predictions are usually way off. He thought we were going to finish 2nd to City just a few weeks ago, now he’s panning us for being dreadful.
Won’t VAR (once it’s sorted out) take care of the diving? The ref blows for a penalty based on what he saw on the field, there’s a quick (that’s the key I suppose) conversation with upstairs, no wait – he dived? No penalty, yellow card for you, free kick the other way. Other than that I cannot imagine a way to incentivize staying on your feet during the match.
No. VAR won’t solve diving. It will make it worse. Fouls are subjective, and there are a lot of people out there for whom “any contact” is legit grounds for simulation. There are also a ton of people who (rightly) argue that you don’t even need contact to make a foul. These people are officials, fans, etc. So, my suspicion is that VAR will make diving worse.
If the goal is get rid of any subjectivity in referee decisions then I think that’s a fool’s errand. We can ask to improve it by refining the definitions of what constitutes fouls and providing examples as precedents, but in the end the idea that there will be absolute “justice” in a football game is unattainable. Arguably the NFL has gone the furthest down the road of seeking justice in-game, and this past weekend there was egregious examples of justice failing.
Sports are a metaphor for life. Sometimes people are unfairly screwed. It adds to the drama and history.
Maybe they should add something like a sensor on a player to measure the impact… Dreams, dreams.
We had an incident in Fulham’s FA Cup 3rd round game where one of their players went down easily under minimal contact. Watching live, I expected VAR to overturn the penalty decision…and nope, the penalty stood. So now that we’ve officially moved into the “contact = foul” era, I think many VAR calls will still be as contested as without VAR.
I think Alan Shearer and Danny Murphy are plain domes?
I think that in the grand scheme of things, VAR will eventually be accepted wholesale as a ‘beneficial corrector’ of poor decisions regarding fouls or the lack of them. It works well with rugby (like NFL — only — totally different). 😜
However, as with all refereeing decisions there will always be a subjective element to it, with one man’s heinous foul being another’s ‘he hardly touched him ref’. This will inevitably require someone to be blamed for bias/cheating/incompetence with calls for public flogging or the forced watching of Trump for 10 minutes. (that should stop anyone from being tempted toward bias/cheating or being incompetent.
But — hold hard — instead of flogging anyone, or imposing even more torture on them, we will be able to blame the humble VAR machine/software and hurl abuse at it – which the innocuous construct will not find offensive. (well it can’t – can it? until robots take over the world circa 2030).
Umm, I think I lost track of that somehow — never mind Shard will guide mt back to righteous ways. ☺️
I’m not sure how it would work to reward players/teams who stay on their feet. They have enough difficulty deciding what is or isn’t a foul. Wouldn’t this just add another layer of decisions that are refereed inconsistently and controversially? That’s why I can’t see any way forward with real actual in game consequences or rewards.
I like Sean Thum’s idea.
At the end of the season reward players with the title of ‘Fair Play Ambassador’ or something like that.
Or, in the future, just award one of those rotating Super League spots to the team that most tries to stay on it’s feet when fouled.
It’s a good point about how the officials can’t decide who fouls.
My only problem with an end of the season award is that it doesn’t reward people in the moment.
I was thinking something more like: allow play to go on, if they score, let it stand and give a yellow card to the defender; if they don’t score award the pen. But hey, you know what? That’s actually the rules. So…
I watched the clip and Lacazette wasn’t fouled there. He could have intentionally tripped over the leg that was stuck out though, and instead he dodged the leg and therefore didn’t fall down. So if you could somehow change the definition of a foul such that Lacazette was still considered to be fouled there (and then still let him take the shot), there would be incentive to stay upright since he’d get a free shot and then have the penalty be called should he miss.
Basically a delayed penalty in hockey or even American football terms. The penalty isn’t called until the play is over (defending team touches the ball), if a goal is scored before that, then the goal stands. Otherwise the penalty is assessed.
tim, your idea of pulling a play back to the penalty spot if the fouled player misses the chance is already a real thing. its called the advantage rule; its a rule that’s seemingly never enforced if a player gets a shot away. a referee with the balls to point to the spot under that circumstance would be a legitimate trendsetter. while some pundits won’t like it, i’m sure the audacity of an official to point to the spot would be a major talking point and embolden referees. the fact is any official making that call would be well within his rights.
in basketball, they have an “and 1” rule that most of us knows. for those that don’t american basketball, it says that if a player is fouled in the act of shooting and still scores, they’re awarded the basket “and 1” free throw. it rewards toughness.
in soccer, they could, perhaps, do a “plus” rule where if a player scores in the act of being fouled, the goal stands and they’re awarded a “plus” penalty. however, this penalty doesn’t count as a an actual goal but as a plus. meaning that if the game finishes 1-1, a team with a plus is awarded a win and maximum points. it’s kind of like the away goals rule in two-legged cup competitions. the key is, the person that’s fouled, unless they’re injured and substituted, must be the one to take the penalty kick; you don’t get to pick who takes the kick from the mark.
i have another idea but i have to go. i’ll share it later.
I don’t think you can actually reward players who stay up in a sensible way. It’s already hard enough agreeing on whether there’s contact or not when the player goes down, how can you recognize when the player should have gone down but didn’t?
What you can easily do (right after a dive is confirmed with VAR) is sending off the diving player for 10 minutes, like how minor sanctions work in Rugby. It effectively realigns the temporality of the sanction with the potential reward. You can still keep the longer term sanction (match ban) for repeated diving, similarly to how accumulating yellow cards across games already works.
Review with VAR and immediately give a red card.
I think it’s hard to reward staying on your feet – but Josh’s +1 is intriguing. Although it really amounts to giving a second goal, if it can be used to break a tie. My preference is to use VAR and immediately give a red card, or award a penalty to the opponent. There might be a way of asessing the punishment based on where the infraction occurs. So, if you dive in your opponents’ box, the opponent gets a penalty kick. (same if you dive in your own box – which is pretty rare) If you dive somewhere between the boxes, the opponent gets a free kick from a desginated area just outside the 18. That creates a very harsh consequence for diving, provides an incentive for staying up, and sends a very clear message that it won’t be tolerated.
Or maybe the free kick plus a 10 minute penalty box for the offender?
The system can never be corrected when the interest is not about protecting players.
The prize $$ is insignificant anyway.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2017/dec/02/fa-respect-campaign-fair-play
Palindromes:
Len Nel (Leno – Nelson)
Mar Ram (Martinez – Ramsey)
And, if you allow the first-last name combinations (like Sok-Kos), then also Cal Lac (Calum Chambers – Lacazette)
It’s all way too fuzzy. I think milking a mild foul is at least as bad as diving. It’s all gamesmanship. Has there ever been a case of giving a foul and penalty and also a yellow for the attacker for simulation? Is that in the referee guidelines as an option? I mean the description of simulation is broad enough to allow for it.
As usual the rules and the intent behind them are ok but referees are very conservative in applying them. If there was full application of the letter of the law it would be a different game in many respects.
I’m thinking it should be the other way round. Diving has been part and parcel of the “beautiful game” since forever.
So make it official. Have a Neymar Award at an end-of-season awards show. What a great highlight reel of flops to entertain everyone. And we should award a “Rooney Trophy” for the Best Dive Against Arsenal for the season.
Ah, poor Thierry. Never struck me as a manager type; sad to see him fail nonetheless.
Great players don’t often make great managers. You could make an argument for Zidane, Guardiola was very good for Barcelona as a player and Ancelotti won everything at at Milan with Maldini and crew. But only Zizou was at the level of Henry. After that it’s very slim pickings.
i think a more accurate assessment is that BRILLIANT players don’t often make great managers. they expect players to be brilliant just like they were and when players are not brilliant, these managers struggle to help them.
henry was destined to fail. first, he’s french-caribbean, which is a double whammy on the personality front; the french are cynical and the caribbean are temperamental. add to that, he has ZERO experience as a manager at any level (ala arteta). since winning the league less than two years ago, monaco’s roster has been ratfucked by the big teams in europe and the club hasn’t replenished the ranks. last, they’re bringing him in mid-season while in the relegation zone.
monaco needed to bring in the right guy under an awful set or circumstances. henry, a young, inexperienced, moody, unproven, manager with a crap roster is never going to find success.
zidane’s situation is completely different. he had some experience, although with a youth team, he was established at real madrid, knew all of the players, heard all the gripes from both the players and two managers, and he had a fantastic roster.
henry was bold, but foolish to take the monaco job. now, he’s been embarrassed.
i think a more accurate assessment is that BRILLIANT players don’t often make great managers. they tend to, subconsciously, expect the players in their charge to be brilliant as well. as a result, when the less than brilliant players struggle, the managers can’t help them.
henry was doomed to fail. first, he’s french-caribbean, which is a double-whammy on the personality front; the french are cynical and the caribbean are hot heads. second, he’s got ZERO managerial experience. third, he’s got an awful roster. fourth, he’s coming in mid-season while the team are in the relegation zone.
monaco needed to bring in a skilled campaigner who knows how to get the team out of the dilemma they’re in. henry is a young, inexperienced, and polarizing figure, ill-equipped to manage a relegation-threatened team with marginal talent. he was bold but foolish to take the monaco job.
as for great the players you mentioned becoming great managers, i don’t know anything about ancelotti as a player. i know he was manager at juventus when zidane was there. i also know he brought henry to juventus and stuck him on the wing, which is why people always say henry is a winger.
zidane was groomed in a way i’ve never seen a manager groomed. he was the #1 behind both ancelotti and benitez and took his time before declaring himself ready to be the manager at real madrid. he was there, he knew the team, he heard all of their gripes, and he heard the gripes of two top managers. if he has success at another club, i’ll be convinced.
pep was good for barcelona but he wasn’t a brilliant player. he got into the barcelona team because he was the smartest player at the club and cruyff wanted his intelligence on the field. he was always suited to be a manager. an aside, while at barcelona, he mentored a youth player named mikel arteta.
The only way to prevent cheating is punishment. What is the rule when a team play with a player which is not qualified for a game? Points deduction is an accurate way to stop cheating. If they lose games afterwards because of diving, cheaters will think twice before falling down in penalty areas.