Michael Owen says diving is “a very difficult subject to talk about” and he’s not kidding.
The difference between the two kinds of it — one acceptable, the other not — is a truth that dare not speak its name in England, as Ian Wright once discovered.
The Arsenal great was chosen for interview by Sunday newspaper reporters in the build-up to an international and, being a refreshingly candid fellow, said he wouldn’t mind taking a tumble in the interests of an England victory as long as some semblance of a foul was involved.
The FA press people threw up their hands in horror and the journalists — to my shame but it was a democratic decision — agreed to suppression to save Wright (above) from a pseudo-corinthian mob and, I suspect, retain for England such moral high ground as was left from the ‘Hand of God’ incident.
Now Owen, always honest about this, speaks in the wake of demands by Tony Pulis, his manager at Stoke, for retrospective bans on divers, mentioning falls in World Cup matches against Argentina in 1998 and 2002 and admitting that in each case he could probably have stayed on his feet.
But why should he have done? Why should any attacker allow a foul to impede progress earned by technique, speed or intelligence?
As Owen says: “There is a major skill in trying to outwit an opponent. No one is for blatantly diving but there is a part of a striker that actually tries to entice the leg to come out to try to win a penalty.”
He was partially supported at the Leaders In Football conference by the influential former referee Pierluigi Collina.
According to the Italian, a player has a right to fall if fouled but referees should award fouls even if a player does not fall. This is the essence of the matter and should be incorporated into the laws.
