Comments on: Eduardo’s Diving Suspension Rescinded

By: Al

Al — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 13:41:09 +0000

This is horrid. I think it is because it’s Arsenal (well, a top flight English club). I love the gunners but please. Had it been Celtic or, worse, some lesser level club, we all know it would have stood. It reminds me of here in NYC where a baseball player (A-Rod) did not get suspended despite taking PEDS only because he is a Yankee and the Yankee owner has long since bought off the sport.

By: Tim

Tim — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:19:53 +0000

It was reported that apparently Arsenal wanted to take legal action if the appeal was rejected. If that was the case (and regardless of whether it was true), UEFA has just smashed the can of worms now after opening it. No team would be afraid of taking a dive now if they can simulate it well enough. Not to mention Eduardo’s “fear of being chopped down” wasn’t even all that well dressed. I suppose FIFA will be the next one to lift the transfer ban on Chelsea after this.

By: MLM

MLM — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 05:15:19 +0000

The huge disgust I already felt for UEFA has just somehow increased. This is pathetic, and once again proves their incompetence. I agree it was overreaction towards the matter, but still, to back off now was the worst thing UEFA could do. Things simply got worse than they were. Because, if Eduardo’s dive was not a dive in UEFA’s eyes, nothing else is. No other player will be punished for diving, coz UEFA simply has no criteria – and no club/player should accept such punishment. IF there’s a change in rules, and after the change is made, UEFA wants to punish all (and I mean ALL) divers, story changes. But, it’s UEFA we’re talking about. A real shame, and a real joke. Laugh if you can.

By: Kelly

Kelly — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 04:10:49 +0000

Of course they were going to rescind it when they realized how much extra work they had just given themselves.

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 23:37:18 +0000

Bottlers. Total and utter bottlers. They should change their name to $UEFA$.

By: elle

elle — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 22:42:57 +0000

I was all for Eduardo being suspended because of the dive…but now I feel like there’s no point if they’re not going to suspend players in the future. I was hoping it would be a first step…but alas, it’s still UEFA.

By: john

john — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:45:15 +0000

I have to somewhat agree with sscouser on this. Although I find diving despicable and well worthy of strict punishment, what bothered me about the Eduardo decision was that it undermined the ref’s decision. I’d rather not watch a game that will ultimately be subject to next-day video tape reviews. The phrase ‘the ref’s decision is final’ is useful as the end of arguments that are weighted with subjectivity.

…And yet, I would by a beer for the guy who updated the wikipedia page!

By: sscouser

sscouser — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:25:58 +0000

“Not established” = Ref’s decision is final. That’s why Ade will not be punished further for instigating the crowd. He may be only punished for the stamping (i.e. if the ref didn’t see it).

By: Ian

Ian — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:23:43 +0000

I agree in principle with both of you, in that I think applying the rules evenly to everyone is hugely important. Still, if 100 people commit a crime, I’d rather have one caught for it than zero. Unless that one is let go afterward with an apology from the mayor.

By: Tom

Tom — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:18:56 +0000

Agree with SP, the real damage was done when UEFA announced that the ban was not going to set any kind of precedent for future punishments.

I’m as much for punishing divers as anyone, but it can’t be a “pick and choose” situation, deciding not on merit but on media attention.

If UEFA isn’t willing to carry on the path that they started with the Eduardo ban, then sadly, rescinding it was the “right” choice. Any rule and subsequent punishment, no matter how justitifed it may be, is useless when applied completely arbitrarily.