'Sinn Fein said:
And while I realize it is probably harder to discern a dive from a fall due to contact, I'd liberally define dive so as to encourage everyone to keep their feet when they can.
I'm sure this is what you're getting at when you say "when they can", but I would just like to reiterate that there are situations where players are taught to disengage and go to the ground rather than trying to stay on their feet. I know you know this, but I think it bears repeating.It's easy to criticize when watching on TV, but when you're playing the game at full speed, even the slightest touch can send a player toppling over. Further, I think it's damn near impossible in certain situations for a governing body to determine on review whether a player committed a dive or not. If I'm Ashley Young and I'm making a move in the box and the defender inadvertently steps on my foot, I'm probably going to lose my balance and fall down whether I want to or not. There is the issue of a player going down on no contact, but I think you could potentially make the case that nearly any player who engages in contact may be knocked off-balance and not be "diving", as we refer to it.
The idea of going to ground too easily is an issue, no doubt, but that's going to happen with the nature of the game. The risk/reward for going down at the slightest touch in the box heavily favors flopping, assuming the player isn't already on a yellow.
I do have a problem with the embellishment. There's no need to lay out like Superman (re: Bonzai's pic) and then writhe around for 2 minutes on the field until the trainers bring out the magic spray.
I agree with the general point that the games should be reviewed by the governing body, but I'd honestly be a little wary of the governing body being a little too liberal with the punishment. Of course, given the FA's track record on this matter so far, I don't think that's a worry....