There has been a proliferation of posts on the FF website in recent years about simulation in football and how it is spoiling the game, and whilst I instinctively agree that cheating should be eliminated from the sport, I don`t share the horror that some have for this theatrical means of gaining an advantage: in fact I have stated more than once that “diving” is merely a forward`s revenge.
The culture of the game in this country, on the face of it, is less than approving of cheating but cannot see the hypocrisy of not being consistent in its disapproval. Whilst we decry those who dive, and therefore cheat to gain an advantage, the deliberate fouling of more highly-skilled opponents is considered quite normal and within the spirit of the game.
“Bring him down” is the plea when individual opposition flair threatens to run a defence ragged, and when this demand is satisfied, nodding heads quickly agree that the perpetrator “did the right thing”. No-one even hints that cheating has taken place.
We love defenders who are uncompromising, and if they resort to a bit of brutality along the way, so be it. At no time do we ever hear from stands or scribes that the deliberate kicking of an opponent is an act of cheating, but if a player chooses to become airborne because an uncompromising defender is in close proximity, and threatening, accusations of cheating are widespread and numerous.
Our game has defenders who kick and rake, pull and push, nip and hold and elbow and punch, but the term “cheat” is never applied. Strangely, and embarrassingly, this is an acceptable part of our game, and whilst a blind eye is turned to intentional foul play, we become apoplectic if a victim of this kind of abuse decides to get his own back.
A dive, preferably in or near the penalty box is considered the best way of getting even with defenders who can give it out, but cannot take it back, and of course all hell breaks loose when slow motion replays show that contact has either been minimal or didn`t happen at all.
Commentators, eager to see fair play, will lambast the diver for conning the referee, but those same pundits opt out of speaking the truth when brutal tackles are perpetrated, frequently describing them as “mistimed” when it is glaringly apparent that these tackles are timed to perfection, but not to win possession of the ball.
This one-eyed morality has existed in our game for many a long year, and yet simulation, effectively a forward`s revenge, receives all the negative headlines whilst thuggery and brutality are glossed over.
Much as I`d like to see simulation in the game disappear, I view it as a logical consequence to a tolerance of over-physical play by players who revert quite naturally to cheating when they are outclassed and out-thought, and with the compliance of the spectating football public.
It is important to make the case for simulation within the context of the way football is played in this country, even although it is cheating, and even although it is wrong. It is the natural reaction from attacking players whose cynicism is the equal of defenders who don`t give a second thought to upending them with deliberate foul play.
The subject does not end here, however, as there can be a legitimate case for going to ground for attackers even when the offence against them is not sufficiently forceful to leave them on the floor. A discrete foul in the penalty box will not always be punished severely unless the attacker demonstrates to the referee that he has been fouled. We`ve all witnessed instances where the consensus is that a player would have justly won his team a penalty if he`d gone down, but his failure to do so results in play continuing, and with no advantage gained.
This is the kind of cynical play which defenders thrive on, never really expecting to be punished, but when they are, and especially when an attacker has highlighted the incident, defenders feel aggrieved. Their anger and disappointment stems from the fact that they have been caught, not that they are not guilty.
If football is to be cleaned up, it will be an act of folly to concentrate solely on simulation. The game has a thuggish element to it which should be removed - together with simulation.
Unless both sides of the problem are addressed, a satisfactory solution will not be forthcoming. It is to our eternal discredit that we focus only one side, simulation - but not the accompanying over-physical and deliberate affront to the game, intentional foul play.
If the cheats are to be punished, there should be no exceptions.