World Cup Play-Offs (Europe) Draw

[noel 78]

Missing a drugs test is a serious offence as you are possibly hiding something. It is a different form of cheating altogether. If we are going to ban people for a long for cheating then I hope we have a 55 man squad when it happens.

i think rugby has gone down the right line with their game.i would like 2 see tv replays that result in a sin bin 15 mins for the cheating element. if you were beaten 2-0 with 20 mins 2 go i dont know a manager who would not be pissed at cheating player for been sin binned.however for drug cheats i agree the ban should be severe.getting booked for diving is a waste of time it could be half a season before a player picks up 5 yellows and gets suspended

But why is taking drugs deemed so bad and diving or blatant cheating in other forms acceptable? You don't need a 55 man squad, you just tell your players to stop. And let's be honest here, it's not as if there is a huge amount of it anyway. There's normally one incident every couple of matches. Start enforcing it and there would be none.

I think even keeping it simple, like a couple of matches ban for the players involved and it will start to run out of the game. Even for Henry if you gave him a 3 match ban, it rules him out of the group stages of the World Cup and it confirms him as a cheat. It's a start. I know you can't do it now but you could start something that will come in. It will effect us though and we will lose players but ultimately you'd have a lot more confidence in the game. The stricter it is, the more confident you would be.

[Nerik]

Missing a drugs test is a serious offence as you are possibly hiding something. It is a different form of cheating altogether. If we are going to ban people for a long for cheating then I hope we have a 55 man squad when it happens.

But why is taking drugs deemed so bad and diving or blatant cheating in other forms acceptable? You don't need a 55 man squad, you just tell your players to stop. And let's be honest here, it's not as if there is a huge amount of it anyway. There's normally one incident every couple of matches. Start enforcing it and there would be none.

I think even keeping it simple, like a couple of matches ban for the players involved and it will start to run out of the game. Even for Henry if you gave him a 3 match ban, it rules him out of the group stages of the World Cup and it confirms him as a cheat. It's a start. I know you can't do it now but you could start something that will come in. It will effect us though and we will lose players but ultimately you'd have a lot more confidence in the game. The stricter it is, the more confident you would be.

If you see no difference between diving and taking performance enhancing drugs then I rest my case here.

[noel 78]

the difference is alot of players dive and cheat in matches every week and the punishment is not acceptable.where as a player taken drugs knows that if and when there caught the penalty is severe.therefor not that many players test positive for drugs.if they fear the punishment there will be less cheating week in week out.

[Nosferatu]

Yeah that's pretty much it. We're saying you can cheat one way and you may face ruin. But cheat another way and you can get away with it.

[noel 78]

the cheating is a topic that the powers that be havent got the balls 2 deal with.its a case of when ever the big clubs or powerfull countries lose out big style because of it,then and only then will something be done.

[Nerik]

If Lance Armstrong takes drugs he will be banned from cycling for 1-2yrs. If Lance Armstrong blocks off an opponent illegally in a race he will be disqualified from the race at most. Can you guys see the difference?

[Nosferatu]

Not really. If I take drugs it will probably increase my ability as a cyclist because a lot of it is due to athleticism. If I am in athletics and I take drugs, I become a far better athlete. However if I take drugs as a footballer, where it does help, it doesn't quite give me the same advantage. I still need the skill and ability of a footballer.

But we're splitting hairs here. Correct me if I am wrong, but I would assume that if I am caught doing something illegal in cycling I will be punished regardless of when I was caught i.e after the race. Whereas in football we are saying if you're seen at the time, you're a cheat but otherwise you're not because we won't act on it.

The point behind severe penalties is to stop it. Realistically, it doesn't matter as long as something is done. Even a 1 match ban would go some way in stopping it. The thinking has to change among footballers that it is an option.

[Nerik]

I have no problem with punishment after a game. In fact I actually think there should be video evidence used there and then. What I do think is that people are going OTT in terms of the punishment they want to see meted out and with all due respect Nos you have never been as vocal when Liverpool suffered the same. That I am afraid shows the inconsistencies of fans, me included. We cannot call for a 3 month ban for Henry when he did what he did but then say it is ok if Rooney does it to us at Old Toilet because, myth of all myths, things even themselves out in the league. There has to be one standard.  With regards to punishment I would apply similar punishments to certain offences e.g. diving to get a player sent off equals a 3 match ban (the same you are trying to inflict on the other player).

Also with regards to drugs, do you think that Ben Johnson could not run at all before taking drugs? Taking drugs is the difference between placing 4th or first in a race. It could be the difference between missing a chance in the last minute or being fit enough at that stage to  get in the position to take it.

[Nosferatu]

Running is more about athleticism than anything else. If I take drugs that improve my speed and physical ability, I am going to improve far more in athletics than any other sport. None of that is going to improve my footballing ability. Pick any footballer who is seriously slagged off be it Heskey as an example. Improve his speed and his physical ability helps him but it's not going to make him a better goal scorer or give him the confidence in front of goal when all eyes are on him. Maradona on coke was still far better than most players and Paul McGrath couldn't train and yet could take some great players out of a game. Drugs can't give you footballing ability.

Yes, video evidence and dealing with it there and then is the best option but there is reluctance to bring in it in hence why I am talking about the aftermath.

As for the Rooney comment, I've tried to explain that already. It's the context of the game. Normally I wouldn't be so animated because there is nothing you can do for one and secondly there is not normally as much riding on one game. But also I made the point of the expected outcome and how hard the team fought to go against that.

The beauty of the FA Cup is not the big games like the Liverpool, Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea etc. The beauty is the big club against the small club. And 99 out of 100, the big club wins. But just that once, that once is what it is all about. And you'd be far more upset as a fan of the small club, as a neutral and in a lot of cases as a fan of the big club were the result to go against the small club because of cheating. In particular when the small club gives it everything and completely outplays the big club full of stars. As I said, if it were France who got knocked out because of it. I wouldn't be as pissed as they should really have wiped the floor with us. And also if we had the same calibre of players as France, I wouldn't be as pissed as we had the chances to kill it.

The worst thing about it is that a number of players there played fantastic and have done wonders for Ireland in the past and they will never get to another World Cup.

[Nerik]

Nos I understand your sentiments but emotions should not dictate punishment. If diving is worth a 3 match ban for example we cannot say it is needed in a World Cup play-off but not really needed in the EPL.

Yes drugs will not make Heskey a better player, but they may be enough to see him sneak in ahead of Maldini in the last minute to tap in a winner.

[Nosferatu]

You're right, I totally agree. If you did it right, you could stop it there and then. With regards Henry, you'd just say no goal. Maybe a yellow for doing it so blatantly and then that would be it. But if you are not going to do it properly and you are trying to discourage it, then the penalty probably has to be severe enough to prevent it. Otherwise it will continue as long as players get away with it.

[Nerik]

I say it should be fairly simple.

a. If a deliberate handball to prevent a goal is a red card, then a deliberate one to score one is a red card too.
b. If a foul to deny a goalscoring chance is a red card, then a dive to achieve such a foul is a red card.

[Nosferatu]

It's just its scant consolation to those who have lost out. A red card for Henry in retrospect but the result still standing means nothing.

[Nerik]

No I mean there and then with video evidence.

[Nerik]

It wasn't intentional anyway...........yeah Thierry

"The first handball honestly was like an awakening. With the first handball, I didn't even know that it touched me, it's after that I had a bad reflex, on the second. I swear I don't even know the first touched my hand.