Feigning Injury a City Tactic

[Im_Spartacus]

I have to admit that whilst I would consider myself to be a fairly even handed city fan, able to both praise and criticse my club, this bile strewn article about city having a tactic of feigning injury to delay play, really has me stumped!

I dont really have much of a problem either with Dzeko's reaction or the fact thaf Liverpool went on to score. it was a bad decision, we all move on.........but what I find astounding about this article is the bit where he says that if we went on the attack, Dzeko would have bounced back up.......no fucking shit, as happens in every game of football, in the land, week in week out.

i'm all for constructive criticism, but for this guy to single city out as deploying this as a tactic is a shocking piece of journalism.

http://www.football365.com/news/1776/84 ... ity-tactic

Manchester City get their comeuppance

Liverpool's first goal at Manchester City on Sunday really didn't sit well with me.

As Edin Dzeko lay on the floor clutching his legs following a strong tackle from Daniel Agger, Liverpool refused to kick the ball out of play despite boos ringing around the Etihad Stadium and the protestations of some City players. Eventually, the ball fell to Daniel Sturridge, who superbly fired home.

Dzeko got booked for his protests and City boss Roberto Mancini was adamant after the game that Dzeko was fouled, also saying the visitors should "probably" have kicked the ball out of play.

I can certainly understand City's frustration at no foul being awarded - I'm undecided on it, but City know better than most that winning the ball does not always matter - but enough time had elapsed after Dzeko going down that Mancini's men cannot possibly blame anyone but themselves for conceding.

You may be wondering, then, why the goal did not sit well with me.

Well, every Manchester City fan will disagree, but I believe it is a tactic of their players to feign injury when the opposition has the ball, making them kick it out of play to bring an end to their attack and allow City's players to regroup.

I'm not offended by any of the dark arts in football, but this is certainly one of the more cynical ones. It's a tactic Neil Warnock has used for as long as I can remember, yet it goes largely unnoticed.

Had City won the ball back against Liverpool and gone on the attack themselves, Dzeko would have jumped to his feet. Even if he hadn't, City would have played on if they felt there was a chance to score. Yet we are supposed to believe Liverpool should have kicked the ball out?

It would have been very sportsmanlike of a Liverpool player to have done so, and any act of sportsmanship deserves praise. But in direct response to blatant gamesmanship by Dzeko, I'm delighted Liverpool played on and scored.

[Patrick]

But no mention of sturridges dive.... Scouse twat

[phips]

meh. whatever. Dzeko was staying down on purpose hoping Liverpool would kick it out, they didn't and they scored. we have no one to blame for the goal but ourselves. whether Dzeko was down or not made no impact because if he had gotten up he'd be nowhere near the ball anyways.

i guess it is lame for the writer to apparently single out City considering Barca and all Portuguese and Brazilian players that play for the national team feign injury for one reason or another.

I have noticed that many City players stay down, like Balo, Barry, and Dzeko, but that, very unfortunately, is part of football right now. Do i wish City players especially didn't do that? Yes because I don't like seeing the club i support "cheating", but....

but this article is stupid. most writers are stupid. i don't think there's a bias here, i just think this incident was the most recent and fresh in the guy's mind.

[Tokyo Blue]

Since when is being fouled gamesmanship?

See, this is the problem with the internet. People who have fuck-all brain and/or an agenda can publish and folk assume they are a journalist. This person is clearly a fan of one particular club (I think I can narrow it down to one of two clubs) and not an objective journalist looking for truth.

[Dunnylad]

One swallow doesn't make a summer - good to see there's plenty of research done into that article listing all the times we've faked injury & opposition players have kindly put the ball out of play. The Dzeko incident was more about fans thinking it was a free kick than him faking it - sadly anyone these days thinks they are a journalist & sites like that give them a ready made soapbox

[Foreverinbluedreams]

meh. whatever. Dzeko was staying down on purpose hoping Liverpool would kick it out, they didn't and they scored. we have no one to blame for the goal but ourselves. whether Dzeko was down or not made no impact because if he had gotten up he'd be nowhere near the ball anyways.

Eh? no one to blame but ourselves? Dzeko was fouled, should be a a City free kick in a dangerous area, instead, because of the ref's incompetence Liverpool have possession they shouldn't have, they counter and score.

[ayrshireblue]

I don't think many fans were upset at Liverpool keeping the ball in play. The protestations were that it was a definite foul on Dzeko. If people can't see that then there is no point arguing with them.

[Goaters 103]

I don't think many fans were upset at Liverpool keeping the ball in play. The protestations were that it was a definite foul on Dzeko. If people can't see that then there is no point arguing with them.

This.

Absolutely hits the nail on the head.

[Nigels Tackle]

I have to admit that whilst I would consider myself to be a fairly even handed city fan, able to both praise and criticse my club, this bile strewn article about city having a tactic of feigning injury to delay play, really has me stumped!

I dont really have much of a problem either with Dzeko's reaction or the fact thaf Liverpool went on to score. it was a bad decision, we all move on.........but what I find astounding about this article is the bit where he says that if we went on the attack, Dzeko would have bounced back up.......no fucking shit, as happens in every game of football, in the land, week in week out.

i'm all for constructive criticism, but for this guy to single city out as deploying this as a tactic is a shocking piece of journalism.

http://www.football365.com/news/1776/84 ... ity-tactic

Manchester City get their comeuppance

Liverpool's first goal at Manchester City on Sunday really didn't sit well with me.

As Edin Dzeko lay on the floor clutching his legs following a strong tackle from Daniel Agger, Liverpool refused to kick the ball out of play despite boos ringing around the Etihad Stadium and the protestations of some City players. Eventually, the ball fell to Daniel Sturridge, who superbly fired home.

Dzeko got booked for his protests and City boss Roberto Mancini was adamant after the game that Dzeko was fouled, also saying the visitors should "probably" have kicked the ball out of play.

I can certainly understand City's frustration at no foul being awarded - I'm undecided on it, but City know better than most that winning the ball does not always matter - but enough time had elapsed after Dzeko going down that Mancini's men cannot possibly blame anyone but themselves for conceding.

You may be wondering, then, why the goal did not sit well with me.

Well, every Manchester City fan will disagree, but I believe it is a tactic of their players to feign injury when the opposition has the ball, making them kick it out of play to bring an end to their attack and allow City's players to regroup.

I'm not offended by any of the dark arts in football, but this is certainly one of the more cynical ones. It's a tactic Neil Warnock has used for as long as I can remember, yet it goes largely unnoticed.

Had City won the ball back against Liverpool and gone on the attack themselves, Dzeko would have jumped to his feet. Even if he hadn't, City would have played on if they felt there was a chance to score. Yet we are supposed to believe Liverpool should have kicked the ball out?

It would have been very sportsmanlike of a Liverpool player to have done so, and any act of sportsmanship deserves praise. But in direct response to blatant gamesmanship by Dzeko, I'm delighted Liverpool played on and scored.

feigning injury features in chapter 4 of roberto's 1995 edition of the italian coaching manual

[Bridge'srightfoot]

Every teams guilty of it. Guess he singled out Dzeko because it's the most recent.
I think he was fouled though anyway.
I'm not a fan of kicking the ball out of play for an opponent, it should only be the referee who can stop play. I remember a few years agao against West Ham, Faubert goes down 'in agony' - rolls around the floor and as soon as the ball was kicked out he jumped straight back up.

[City64]

No mention of that fat ugly cunt shrek who swears at officials every single match he plays and always go to ground when deemed fouled plus the pure unadulterated filth that comes out of taggerts gob both on and off the field day in day out ???

fuck me yet more rag propaganda drivel !

[phips]

meh. whatever. Dzeko was staying down on purpose hoping Liverpool would kick it out, they didn't and they scored. we have no one to blame for the goal but ourselves. whether Dzeko was down or not made no impact because if he had gotten up he'd be nowhere near the ball anyways.

Eh? no one to blame but ourselves? Dzeko was fouled, should be a a City free kick in a dangerous area, instead, because of the ref's incompetence Liverpool have possession they shouldn't have, they counter and score.

The ref didn't blow for a foul and has no obligation to stop the play. therefore play goes on. Liverpool scored. There is no one to blame but the City players. Its the same as their second goal, no one to blame but the City players.

[Im_Spartacus]

The ref didn't blow for a foul and has no obligation to stop the play. therefore play goes on. Liverpool scored. There is no one to blame but the City players. Its the same as their second goal, no one to blame but the City players.

Nobody is complaining about us the goal and us stopping playing are they?

We are just saying that it should have been a foul

[bobby brows]

City are under orders to stay on their feet and not surround the referee by Mancini.

I notice that the 'article' cannot name another single example of City fans feigning injury.

[LookMumImOnMCF.net]

City are under orders to stay on their feet and not surround the referee by Mancini.

Are you ITK? I assume he's ok with imaginary care waving?

[Foreverinbluedreams]

The ref didn't blow for a foul and has no obligation to stop the play. therefore play goes on. Liverpool scored. There is no one to blame but the City players. Its the same as their second goal, no one to blame but the City players.

Nobody is complaining about us the goal and us stopping playing are they?

We are just saying that it should have been a foul

Exactly, so we have the ref to part blame for not making the correct decision in the first place.

[bobby brows]

City are under orders to stay on their feet and not surround the referee by Mancini.

Are you ITK? I assume he's ok with imaginary care waving?

apologies. The players are under orders. Mancini's the twat that thought he knew the best way to Wembley and got us fined for being late for the cup final. The source was Daniel Taylor about 3 years ago when he was the guardian's manchester football correspondent. the context of the discussion was something along the lines of taggart's mind games compared to Mancini's.