It's always pleasant when people stop to talk about this column- At least I
know it's being read. Better still when it is complimentary, such as by
someone I hadn't met before, saying I looked younger than my photograph.
Sometimes people say 'I read the column but I don't agree with half of it,'
without saying which half!
However, one loyal Royal supporter recently told
me that he enjoyed the column but he couldn't accept my comments, that
players constantly cheat. My answer was that I ought to sit next to him at
the Madejski Stadium and point out some of the cheating that goes on,
The cheating that we all automatically think of is diving. Diving is not
something new, but now it has become much more prevalent and in some
cases even sinister. This has happened to some extent since the change to
the law on tackling but it is also due to the morality that exists to day. Spurs
Argentinian player Maurice Taricco, recently admitted that he dived.
'In Argentina we just do it. I may be a cheat,' he is reported as saying, 'but I'm
no hypocrite.'
So that's alright then. In an attempt to curb diving, a new
clause was added to the law in 1999 which read, 'Any simulating action
anywhere on the field, which is intended to deceive the referee, must be
sanctioned as 'unsporting conduct.' In other words a yellow card.
The simulation clause also covers players who exaggerate the extent of their
injuries when tackled, in an attempt to influence referees into taking
disciplinary action against their opponents. I see that as being sinister.
But of course, players aren't constantly diving throughout a match, so
what other forms of cheating do they get up to? One of the most prevalent is
standing over the ball to prevent a free kick from being taken. The law has
always said that opponents must be at least ten yards at free kicks, but so
prevalent had encroachment become, the law had to be enlarged in 1997 to
make non-compliance a cautionable offence.
I watched the African Nations
Cup Final on television recently and practically every free kick was delayed
by opponents 'failing to respect the required distance' as it's worded in the
laws. Perhaps referees should use the law more but it is such a niggling little
offence. What frustrates us as referees, is that we know it could be cured
almost overnight but the authorities won't grasp the
nettle.
What about players who take a free kick quickly and deliberately aim it at an opponent
who hasn't yet made the ten yards, trying to get them cautioned.? Nasty.
Another form of constant cheating is taking the throw-in ten or fifteen
yards further than it went out. Players did this even more frequently before
it forced another law change in 1997. Now the throw taken from the wrong
place, can be, should be; awarded to the opposing team.
You can see cheating whenever players deliberately advance the position of free kicks, I
remember one player saying 'What difference can four yards
make?' but of
course it was more like ten yards and the difference was that he could then
reach the opponents' penalty area with the kick.
There's also time wasting,
delaying the restart' as the law calls it; another form of cheating that has
had to be legislated against.
And what about when players who know full
well that they touched the ball last, appeal to the referee thinking he hasn't
seen, to award the kick or throw to them. Is that not cheating?
So not only do players not mind being called cheats, spectators like my loyal Royal
supporter have become so accustomed to all these deceitful tactics that theyno longer see them as cheating but sadly as a normal part of the game.
Dick Sawdon Smith