Sam Allardyce has given the green light to the Irons players to “make a meal” out of contact if it meant they get the decisions they deserve.
The Hammers boss – annoyed by referee Neil Swarbrick during the defeat to Arsenal – reckons hitting the ground is ok “as long as it’s not simulation.
With both Chelsea and Sunderland profiting from controversial penalty decisions against the Hammers in recent weeks, Allardyce declared when asked if a player need to fall over to get a foul: “As long as it’s not simulation – as long as you get the right decision from it.”
And he added: “If you’re not touched and you go down because you’re not touched, that’s not the way forward.
“But if you can’t get what you ordinarily should get, then you’ve got to consider the fact that if you make a meal of it, you make a meal of it because the contact is sufficient enough.
You mean cheat ,like you do with your pretence of being a good manager? Allardyce you are so not what West Ham United stands for.
It must be particularly hard for you Rugbyirons at this time of the year seeing Sam and Lynn celebrating their 40th wedding anniversary. I bet it seems like only yesterday when Sam nicked your date at the 1972 Dudley New Year Disco. You need to let go mate.
Not sure that going public with this will help the cause particularly if this is read by refs as I guess it probably will be, but I can understand and share the frustration felt.
I only comment on him.He’s condoning cheating which says it all.
Mate, you really do need to step back and cut him a little slack. I doubt I’m alone if I tell you that I only have to see “rugbyirons” to know that what follows will be an attack on Sam Alladyce. You are entitled to your opinions and to air them, but give him some credit. Condoning cheating? I think quite the opposite.
Dangerous ground, Mr Allardyce. It would be naive to suggest that managers don’t encourage players to go down if they might gain an advantage, but to deliberately fall, when you could remain upright is ethically wrong. It’s just subtle diving.
Whilst I know that it will always happen, I don’t have to like it.
I’m not sure Sam is saying that Marko. I think it’s a fine line when the striker gets clattered and tries to stay up but ends up losing the ball. Do you recall Jarvis getting clattered last year and stumbling for about 10 yards and the ref not giving the pen. I think that’s Sams point the ref should blow for that irrespective of wether he goes down.
The words he has used are “to make a meal of it.” As metaphors go that’s pretty clear. He means to exaggerate the effect another player’s contact has had on you.
I emphasize, again, that I am not naive. I know it’s always going to happen, because sometimes it does influence the ref. I simply find it sad.
Yes, of course, refs should be looking at the contact in terms of a foul, irrespective of whether a play falls over, but that will take brave refereeing and/or very clear directives to the refs.
Yeah I take your point Marko but I still think it’s aimed at the bigger picture of how a ref takes the easy option of not rewarding the pen just because the player doesn’t go down. Video ref would sort the whole issue in a flash.
He’s trying to encourage refs to give penalties when players stay on their feet. I think there was a game this year when there was a blatant foul on one of our players in the box. Think it might have been carlton Cole. The player stayed on his feet. We would have won that game had he gone down for a deserved penalty. Allardyce is right there’s a difference between going down to get a deserved penalty and blatantly diving when there’s not much contact if any.