By David Butler
The issue of diving came to the fore again in last weekends Premier League when media pundits alleged that Chelsea midfielder Ramires dived to win Chelsea a penalty from referee, Andre Marriner, in the dying seconds as they trailed at home to West Brom.
Diving is perhaps a relatively new phenomenon in football and a question often arises as to who should burden the responsibility; is it a players duty not to dive or is it up to a referee to detect deception and duly punish? If we assume that it is the latter (rather than debating the morals of footballers), it is interesting to ask how referee's are trained to detect deceptive tactics and whether or not they make more accurate judgements than the rest of us.
The issue of diving came to the fore again in last weekends Premier League when media pundits alleged that Chelsea midfielder Ramires dived to win Chelsea a penalty from referee, Andre Marriner, in the dying seconds as they trailed at home to West Brom.
Diving is perhaps a relatively new phenomenon in football and a question often arises as to who should burden the responsibility; is it a players duty not to dive or is it up to a referee to detect deception and duly punish? If we assume that it is the latter (rather than debating the morals of footballers), it is interesting to ask how referee's are trained to detect deceptive tactics and whether or not they make more accurate judgements than the rest of us.
I haven't come across any empirical articles on the suggested rise in cases of diving but previous work concerning the motor experience of observers has been explored as a causal reason why we can/cannot detect cheating. Here's the interesting study that surveys football referees, football players, wheelchair bounded football fans (who have limited motor experience) and novices and asks all the groups to judge whether a footballer dives or is actually fouled.
As expected, depending on the condition, different success rates are recorded. Referees have a 72.2% accuracy in diagnosing the difference between a dive and a foul while players score 72%. Fans come it at 61.1% in their ability to discriminate and novices could distinguish between a foul and a dive' 57.4% of the time.
So perhaps we should lay off Andre as referees appear to be better able to spot dives...(in an experimental setting)...
As expected, depending on the condition, different success rates are recorded. Referees have a 72.2% accuracy in diagnosing the difference between a dive and a foul while players score 72%. Fans come it at 61.1% in their ability to discriminate and novices could distinguish between a foul and a dive' 57.4% of the time.
So perhaps we should lay off Andre as referees appear to be better able to spot dives...(in an experimental setting)...
RSS Feed
