Football ready to take the plunge over diving

Diving, theatrical rolling around after a minor foul and brandishing of imaginary cards are increasingly commonplace antics marring many top class games. Even a practice that was originally intended to encourage sportsmanship like kicking the ball out of play when someone is injured has become corrupted as players feign injury in order to waste time or stop the game when opponents are on the attack.

Fans, football authorities, the media and many players are raising their voices against underhand tactics and complaining that the outcome of vital matches is being decided more by the ability to mislead the referee than by individual footballing skill.

In short, there is too little drama and too much theatre in the modern game.

"Faking it, feigning it, exaggerating - whatever you call it, it is cheating, full stop," former England striker Jimmy Greaves said.

"The ref always gets a hammering but it is the players who have made his job so much harder."

Attitudes to such behaviour do, of course, differ according to different football cultures.

In Spain for example, diving is often seen as evidence of a player being "listo" (streetwise or smart) by showing he can outwit both the opposition and the referee.

Appealing for cards is routine behaviour, gilding the lily after seemingly innocuous fouls and the corralling of referees by players are accepted parts of the spectacle.

But it is increasingly recognised that such behaviour can incite fans and contribute to the sort of crowd problems that have marred the game in recent seasons.

But realistically what can be done to combat the problem?

Some commentators have called for an immediate sending off if a player is spotted taking a plunge, while former England captain Gary Lineker has suggested the introduction of pink cards for so-called cheating offences with two cards resulting in dismissal.

An immediate red card seems to be a sledgehammer approach to the problem and would require a major change to the laws of the game. In any case, referees already have the power to book players who dive.

One answer might be a rugby-style sin-bin. Losing your leading striker for 10 minutes would certainly provide a strong deterrent against diving without having to resort to the extreme of a permanent dismissal.

However, the very nature of diving makes it extremely difficult for a referee to spot the offence in the heat of the moment.

Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger believes that retrospective bans would put an end to the problem.

"It is the only way you can get it out," he said. "Once the guy knows he might be punished he will not dive."

English FA chief Brian Barwick echoed the sentiment when he said: "We are in on-going discussion with FIFA on retrospective disciplinary action and have raised diving as a priority area where video evidence could be used."

The advantage of such an approach is that television replays could be used at leisure after the game to decide if there was a clear-cut example of diving and a suitable sanction could then be decided upon.

The system could also be used to clear defenders who had been wrongly booked or sent off as a result of such incidents.

The game's governing bodies are reluctant to use video evidence during matches, but when every top flight game is recorded from almost every conceivable angle it should be possible to use it afterwards.

Rugby regularly uses such an approach to punish illegal or dangerous play, so why can it not work in football?

An even more effective answer might be found in the groundswell of opinion that has built up against such practices.

The fact that sportswear giant Nike is basing its latest advertising campaign on the idea of fair play is ample proof that there is a demand for a "cleaner" game.

Naming and shaming persistent offenders is one tactic that could prove effective.

In an age when clubs, players and their agents are so concerned about image, fear of topping the diving list could prove an even more effective deterrent.