THIS YEAR MARKS the 24th anniversary of one of football’s most successful and long-lasting phenomena. Despite persistent criticism and threats to its existence, this increasingly popular practice is now arguably more prominent than ever.
Okay, that’s a slight exaggeration. Diving did not begin at the 1990 World Cup. It has no obvious year zero. There were incidents of simulation before then and there have obviously been countless examples since. Yet that was surely the first occasion in which it became the source of major debate in football, and it has undoubtedly become far more prevalent in recent years.
With West Germany’s Jurgen Klinsmann as its leading light, diving announced itself on the world stage at Italia 90, when the player produced a now-infamous dive that led to his opponent being sent off and tilted the World Cup final in his side’s favour.
Back then, there was a clear consensus that such incidents of diving were harming the game, and that greater efforts needed to be made to stamp out its existence. However, displaying a level of procrastination that would make Hamlet baulk, 24 years later, footballing authorities are still contemplating the matter with little sign of progress being imminent.
Chelsea are the most recent team to come under the spotlight, with Jose Mourinho diplomatically insisting his squad accommodates no divers, despite admitting that his players (Oscar and Ramires) have dived and were rightfully booked in two consecutive recent games.
Manchester United’s Ashley Young is also a figure of recurring controversy, with the player gaining a reputation for deceiving referees, owing to a number of high-profile examples of this behaviour in recent times.
The debate about how to effectively curb the problem is less straightforward than the casual observer may initially assume though. Some people, such as Crystal Palace boss Tony Pulis, take an extreme view. Pulis is one of diving’s most ardent critics — when Luis Suarez dived during a Liverpool and Stoke game in October 2012, the coach went as far as to suggest that the Uruguayan should be banned for three games.
“What happens is that he puts enormous pressure on the referee,” he said. “Every time he goes down, you have got 40,000-odd Liverpool supporters getting after the referee and I don’t think that’s right. It is a tough enough job as it is.”
What Pulis neglected to acknowledge, though, is that there have actually been incidents of players being banned for diving. In 2009, then-Arsenal striker Eduardo was banned for diving against Celtic in a crucial Champions League qualifier, while Rangers’ Sone Aluko was also banned for the same offence in 2011. However, tellingly, in both instances, the manager of the player in question reacted with outrage, and in Arsenal’s case, their appeal against the ban was successful. Therefore, it has no surprise that such punishments have not become common, given the lack of support they received within the footballing community on those occasions.
YouTube credit: Horatio Spear
The Eduardo incident, in particular, gave a concise snapshot of football’s failure to effectively manage diving. Arsene Wenger’s staunch defence of his player illustrated how football managers invariably only tend to condemn diving when it suits their side of the argument to do so. Moreover, UEFA’s meek acceptance of Arsenal’s subsequent appeal showed how they are unwilling, and perhaps unable, to act on this problem with any real conviction.
On the one hand, the behaviour of Wenger and Rangers’ Ally McCoist in protesting the respective decisions seems somewhat egregious. Shouldn’t managers do all they can to alleviate this issue that has already driven some former fans away from the game? Yet, conversely, their points are understandable to a degree — why should their players be singled out and made examples of? Nevertheless, if top coaches are to maintain this attitude and become part of the problem rather than facilitating its solution, diving will surely continue to be a major issue for the next 24 years.
That said, recent evidence has suggested that diving is decreasing. Last November, there had been six recorded incidents of diving in the Premier League, compared with 19 the year before. Referees’ chief Mike Riley attributed this improvement to players starting to understand their “moral obligation”. However, such a suggestion seems fanciful. It wasn’t as if, before last year, players weren’t already being notified that they were considered role models and that diving is largely frowned upon.
Moreover, the past month has seen several high-profile examples that suggest diving is as widespread as ever — Adnan Januzaj, who only made his senior debut this season, is already the second most booked player for diving in Premier League history.
Hence, to believe that football has made any significant steps in curbing diving seems a little naive. It is a practice that will ostensibly prevail if the perceived benefits of diving outweigh the drawbacks and so long as it is encouraged within certain circles. Ex-Manchester United player and current Sky Sports pundit, Gary Neville, has spoken articulately in the past about how, in the sanctity of the dressing room, players put pressure on one another to go down to win penalties and free kicks in dangerous positions. And it is no surprise that this practice is largely encouraged, when the authorities’ attitude to it is so lax and players will receive, at worst, a booking, for their troubles.
And Neville, for instance, when asked how to stop diving, sounded perplexed. Yet there have been some studies conducted that have revealed predictable but important insights. They have suggested that players dive more often in leagues where the practice is less likely to be punished. Therefore, the obvious answer on how to combat diving is by punishing the offenders in question more readily and severely. Whether this can be done simply by handing out yellow cards liberally is questionable, while Sepp Blatter’s recent proposal for time penalties seems similarly tenuous. Retrospective action and actually banning players on a consistent basis in situations where the dive is clear cut, however, could prove to be a substantial deterrent.
