Almost every nagging question answered, almost every debate settled in our favour and if ever there was a game that silenced our critics the one that humbled Liverpool was it, was it not? Indeed, so good was the Shed End’s own match thread I’ve spent the last few days drinking in the comments rather than contributing myself - and I’m much the wiser for the experience. For once we appear to be unified right across our own park, with the possible exception of the Deco disbelievers and the Ballack baiters who will surely dwindle in number if performances such as Sunday’s continue throughout the rest of the season. All that is left to moan about is our style and attitude, or at least that’s all the doom mongers can draw solace from, whether it be by reference to the former and a low boredom threshold [which has already been covered in a scathing topic last week] or the latter, which centres primarily on Didier’s low pain threshold and is my subject here…

A rambling introduction, I know, but no more so than the recent meanderings we’ve had from the likes of Alan Hansen and any number of apologists for Liverpool’s performance in general and the Torres/Drogba comparison in particular. Their reasoning goes as follows:- yes, Torres had a quiet game and Drogba had two influential assists, but, that said [very quickly] who would want a player with Drogba’s drama queen approach, especially when compared to the pretty boy’s exemplary record in the going to ground department? This is, in essence, the last refuge for those, such as Hansen, who desperately want a reason to diss the Drog in moments like these and you have to say that a lot of our own supporters feel exactly the same way when it is our striker who has the quiet game interspersed with his usual spate of clownish tumbles. Not me, I’m happy to admit, as I’ve long since regarded the antics to be part and parcel of a very shrewd game plan not dissimilar to one used by several great strikers of the past, but before developing this point let’s look at the one statistic that fell in Torres favour when compared with Drogba on Sunday.

Okay, some would say that a fouls against stat is never one that has much of a bearing on a result, but, be that as it may, Torres was deemed to be fouled four times and Drogba only the once. Anyone reading this and not seeing the game might assume that Torres was therefore the more competitive and combative of the two players, or maybe Carragher kept Drogba quiet by fair means whilst JT had more of a job on his hands. As we know, the ninety minutes told an entirely different story and the fact that Didier was adjudged to be fouled only once in that game would beggar most observers belief. No, what we were really seeing was a referee waving through a few of the tackles on Didier on past reputation and present theatrics, most of which were orchestrated by him at specific moments, in specific places, and of times of his choosing.

Never was the ‘win some, lose some’ philosophy more subtly displayed than in a Didier exaggerated dive, but, whereas Robin van Persie can be praised for his honesty in admitting he’s an exponent of the art of exaggeration, our guy will forever be Public Enemy No.1 in such circumstances. Not that he minds, because the whole mystique of when and where the big man tumbles is under his control and it’s not as though his doing anybody any harm, is it? Not like your Paul Scholes who can [often does] do harm with a mistimed tackle, which is misguidedly and frequently laughed off by Andy Gray and Co as a trivial misdemeanour he should be excused. Just why a harmless Didier delve into gamesmanship should be so despised by the same Schole’s apologists in the media remains a mystery, but no matter because we’re back to my strikers of the past comparison and one in particular serves the Drogba case for mischievous deception very well.

Back in the late fifties Jimmy Greaves arrived on the scene with quicksilver speed that was used to devastating effect, yet he was not averse to some befuddlement of defenders, much as Didier does with his sudden losses of power and footing. Tired of being cut down in full flight or repeatedly obstructed, Greaves would often let a couple of passes go through half-heartedly or without giving chase at all only to hammer after the next at full tilt - the lazy goal hanger one moment, the lightning striker the next. The defender knew he couldn’t match Greaves for pace, it was just that he never knew for sure when he would have to put in the effort. Same goes for defenders marking Didier in the modern era, except that he is pilloried for his deceit and rarely given the benefit of ’touching’ and ‘contact’ doubt bestowed on the van Persie’s of this world. Yet still, even with the pitfalls he continues to ply his trade in this way, especially in the big games, safe in the knowledge that defenders are confused and one as slow as Jamie Carragher can easily be exposed as only being half as good as JT - either that or Torres is rubbish.

There will, of course, be those who say that going down too easily, thereby casting unfair doubt, has the major drawback of gaining a reputation and you’re bound to miss out in the long run, perhaps citing the Ovrebo incidents as a case in point. Well, the answer has to be that every player in history has been tempted to employ a bit of deviousness in and around the box and, short of wheeling a wooden horse to the edge of the area, there is little by way of imaginative scheme left to be tried and tested, let alone be deemed within the bounds of true sportsmanship. With that thought in mind, Didier’s antics have to be one of the clearer indicators in any lie detecting from the moral high ground on this issue. So he goes over easy, he moans a lot, he gives Oscar-winning performances, but we all know what to expect, we’re all used to it by now and his track record shows that, when it really matters, come Hell or high water, he’s deadly serious and staying on his feet. Referees judging future penalty claims please note.

Almost every nagging question answered, almost every debate settled in our favour and if ever there was a game that silenced our critics the one that humbled Liverpool was it, was it not? Indeed, so good was the Shed End’s own match thread I’ve spent the last few days drinking in the comments rather than contributing myself - and I’m much the wiser for the experience. For once we appear to be unified right across our own park, with the possible exception of the Deco disbelievers and the Ballack baiters who will surely dwindle in number if performances such as Sunday’s continue throughout the rest of the season. All that is left to moan about is our style and attitude, or at least that’s all the doom mongers can draw solace from, whether it be by reference to the former and a low boredom threshold [which has already been covered in a scathing topic last week] or the latter, which centres primarily on Didier’s low pain threshold and is my subject here…

A rambling introduction, I know, but no more so than the recent meanderings we’ve had from the likes of Alan Hansen and any number of apologists for Liverpool’s performance in general and the Torres/Drogba comparison in particular. Their reasoning goes as follows:- yes, Torres had a quiet game and Drogba had two influential assists, but, that said [very quickly] who would want a player with Drogba’s drama queen approach, especially when compared to the pretty boy’s exemplary record in the going to ground department? This is, in essence, the last refuge for those, such as Hansen, who desperately want a reason to diss the Drog in moments like these and you have to say that a lot of our own supporters feel exactly the same way when it is our striker who has the quiet game interspersed with his usual spate of clownish tumbles. Not me, I’m happy to admit, as I’ve long since regarded the antics to be part and parcel of a very shrewd game plan not dissimilar to one used by several great strikers of the past, but before developing this point let’s look at the one statistic that fell in Torres favour when compared with Drogba on Sunday.

Okay, some would say that a fouls against stat is never one that has much of a bearing on a result, but, be that as it may, Torres was deemed to be fouled four times and Drogba only the once. Anyone reading this and not seeing the game might assume that Torres was therefore the more competitive and combative of the two players, or maybe Carragher kept Drogba quiet by fair means whilst JT had more of a job on his hands. As we know, the ninety minutes told an entirely different story and the fact that Didier was adjudged to be fouled only once in that game would beggar most observers belief. No, what we were really seeing was a referee waving through a few of the tackles on Didier on past reputation and present theatrics, most of which were orchestrated by him at specific moments, in specific places, and of times of his choosing.

Never was the ‘win some, lose some’ philosophy more subtly displayed than in a Didier exaggerated dive, but, whereas Robin van Persie can be praised for his honesty in admitting he’s an exponent of the art of exaggeration, our guy will forever be Public Enemy No.1 in such circumstances. Not that he minds, because the whole mystique of when and where the big man tumbles is under his control and it’s not as though his doing anybody any harm, is it? Not like your Paul Scholes who can [often does] do harm with a mistimed tackle, which is misguidedly and frequently laughed off by Andy Gray and Co as a trivial misdemeanour he should be excused. Just why a harmless Didier delve into gamesmanship should be so despised by the same Schole’s apologists in the media remains a mystery, but no matter because we’re back to my strikers of the past comparison and one in particular serves the Drogba case for mischievous deception very well.

Back in the late fifties Jimmy Greaves arrived on the scene with quicksilver speed that was used to devastating effect, yet he was not averse to some befuddlement of defenders, much as Didier does with his sudden losses of power and footing. Tired of being cut down in full flight or repeatedly obstructed, Greaves would often let a couple of passes go through half-heartedly or without giving chase at all only to hammer after the next at full tilt - the lazy goal hanger one moment, the lightning striker the next. The defender knew he couldn’t match Greaves for pace, it was just that he never knew for sure when he would have to put in the effort. Same goes for defenders marking Didier in the modern era, except that he is pilloried for his deceit and rarely given the benefit of ’touching’ and ‘contact’ doubt bestowed on the van Persie’s of this world. Yet still, even with the pitfalls he continues to ply his trade in this way, especially in the big games, safe in the knowledge that defenders are confused and one as slow as Jamie Carragher can easily be exposed as only being half as good as JT - either that or Torres is rubbish.

There will, of course, be those who say that going down too easily, thereby casting unfair doubt, has the major drawback of gaining a reputation and you’re bound to miss out in the long run, perhaps citing the Ovrebo incidents as a case in point. Well, the answer has to be that every player in history has been tempted to employ a bit of deviousness in and around the box and, short of wheeling a wooden horse to the edge of the area, there is little by way of imaginative scheme left to be tried and tested, let alone be deemed within the bounds of true sportsmanship. With that thought in mind, Didier’s antics have to be one of the clearer indicators in any lie detecting from the moral high ground on this issue. So he goes over easy, he moans a lot, he gives Oscar-winning performances, but we all know what to expect, we’re all used to it by now and his track record shows that, when it really matters, come Hell or high water, he’s deadly serious and staying on his feet. Referees judging future penalty claims please note.

Once again an excellent post. If you take away his histrionics you take away part of the player.

Bravo.

You are one of the main reasons I continually come back to these forums Dorset.

ok so Drogs is shrewd, cunning and clever enough to outwit his opponents, but I still reckon he's at his best when he stays on his feet

ok so Drogs is shrewd, cunning and clever enough to outwit his opponents, but I still reckon he's at his best when he stays on his feet

Totally agree with that,

I have had a lot of doubts about Drogba but this season again he is winning me over..on ability he is as good as it gets in most departments but to me his main strength is his strength and there are times he goes to ground too easily when he has the attributes to have stayed on his feet and fought harder like for the second goal Sunday,

Add to that he is often still on the ground when we have won the ball back and are on an attack and I feel if this is indeed a cunning use of the rules he could on average be of more use staying on his feet whenever possible.

I agree with the posts on here so far, Drogs conveniently sparked into life on Sunday after JT went across and gave him a good old talking to for rolling around the floor.

As much as his ''theatrical'' side does not sit well with the honest player within me, there is nothing he cant do. And for that, you have to be amazed.

Dorset. Good post.

However, please use paragraphs more often. Too much hard work to read without them.

Once again an excellent post. If you take away his histrionics you take away part of the player.

no you don't.

and just because equally unsavoury (or worse) traits of other footballers aren't given the same attention, that shouldn't be some kind of excuse for drogba's failings.

I really am struggling to see what point you're making, dorset. would you look on at a similar article about cristiano ronaldo and think "yes"? refusing to be an apologist doesn't make you disloyal.

drogba is one of the very best footballers in the world. if his "antics" on the pitch didn't happen would he be worse for it? no- in fact, referees would be less likely to ignore the many times he actually does get a kicking. hs feigning of injury is embarrassing, unnecessary and counter productive.

is there a need to teach old drog new tricks? no, there is a need to make him forget one or two that he already knows.

Edited October 7, 200915 yr by gullit4

Dorset. Good post.

However, please use paragraphs more often. Too much hard work to read without them.

The paragraphs break up individual thoughts...breaking it up more often wouldn't make sense...

no you don't.

and just because equally unsavoury (or worse) traits of other footballers aren't given the same attention, that shouldn't be some kind of excuse for drogba's failings.

I really am struggling to see what point you're making, dorset. would you look on at a similar article about cristiano ronaldo and think "yes"? refusing to be an apologist doesn't make you disloyal.

drogba is one of the very best footballers in the world. if his "antics" on the pitch didn't happen would he be worse for it? no- in fact, referees would be less likely to ignore the many times he actually does get a kicking. hs feigning of injury is embarrassing, unnecessary and counter productive.

is there a need to teach old drog new tricks? no, there is a need to make him forget one or two that he already knows.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

Fact is, he doesn't need to engage in gamesmanship- no truly great player should. It's not part of the game or 'getting an edge' like sledging in cricket- it's just plain cheating.

Ovrebo's incompetence aside, part of me would argue that if it was Lampard or Anelka instead of Drogba who was brought down by Toure against Barcelona, we would've had a penalty.

I agree with Gullit. It is a part of Drogbas game we could all do without. Maybe he does it to get a breather?

no you don't.

and just because equally unsavoury (or worse) traits of other footballers aren't given the same attention, that shouldn't be some kind of excuse for drogba's failings.

I really am struggling to see what point you're making, dorset. would you look on at a similar article about cristiano ronaldo and think "yes"? refusing to be an apologist doesn't make you disloyal.

drogba is one of the very best footballers in the world. if his "antics" on the pitch didn't happen would he be worse for it? no- in fact, referees would be less likely to ignore the many times he actually does get a kicking. hs feigning of injury is embarrassing, unnecessary and counter productive.

is there a need to teach old drog new tricks? no, there is a need to make him forget one or two that he already knows.

Words of wisdom from someone so young, if only I was attending the piss-up in November.

I think anybody who does'nt think diving is part of the game these days is living in a dream world. Dont get me wrong its something i dont like to see, but in Drogba's case its more making the most of the contact than diving and lets be fair there is always alot of contact when Drogba plays.

To me diving should be seperated into 2 departments because most look to gain an advantage from contact alla Drogba while others actually go down without any contact.....these are the cheats.

A good player can draw a foul, go down and give his team some breathing space when under the cosh(someone posted he might do it for a rest, sometimes its to give the team a rest), or win a freekick in a dangerous position. Thats not cheating to me but clever professional play. Others can go over without anybody near them and appeal for a desperate penalty without contact, thats cheating.

The problem most have on here is how the media darlings are excused(Gerrard,Rooney etc) and Drogba is slaughtered for it, and again i stress Gerrard is guilty of cheating at times not being proffesional.

The most interesting point in Dorsets post for me was the chasing down of defenders or lost causes that Drgoba does. Its interesting to read his comparison to Greaves about not chasing everything all the time, not because of lazyness(i remember Gullit telling his forwards he did'nt want them chasing everything but would prefer them to reserve energy for that 1 key chance they would get in a game) but in order to keep the defenders on their toes, will he go for this 1, wont he etc.

I thought it was a good read with some interesting points, Drogba is frustrating at times and in a perfect world nobody would ever go down unless they could avoid it but thats not the case and anybody who tells you they cant stand Drogba would love to have him in their team.

no you don't.

and just because equally unsavoury (or worse) traits of other footballers aren't given the same attention, that shouldn't be some kind of excuse for drogba's failings.

I really am struggling to see what point you're making, dorset. would you look on at a similar article about cristiano ronaldo and think "yes"? refusing to be an apologist doesn't make you disloyal.

drogba is one of the very best footballers in the world. if his "antics" on the pitch didn't happen would he be worse for it? no- in fact, referees would be less likely to ignore the many times he actually does get a kicking. hs feigning of injury is embarrassing, unnecessary and counter productive.

is there a need to teach old drog new tricks? no, there is a need to make him forget one or two that he already knows.

Let me try to expand on the main point I wanted to get over in my post, G4, but first tackle your Ronaldo related query which implies double standards on my part where, I can assure you, none exist.

Let’s start by dispensing with the ‘Drogba the diving cheat’ accusation because I think we can both agree that he never goes down without some form of contact and the guilt attached to him is founded almost entirely on the claim of exaggeration and theatrics. Therefore if, as I believe, Drogba’s main crime is the dubiousness of injury after being tackled it’s clear that Ronaldo is not easily compared with him as he frequently stands accused of going over unaided and that is the most obvious form of cheating in everyone’s book. Also, although both players are forwards Ronaldo’s work in this area [for that is what it is] is almost totally confined to in and around the box whilst Drogba tends to get his treatment, fair or foul, well away from the main danger area which, if it doesn’t tell you anything, indicates to me that a lot of what is dished out to him is delivered without fear of major retribution and is often much more of the ’kicking’ you allude to than the ‘feigning’ that you find so unnecessary and unproductive. He’d still be better off staying on his feet? Quite honestly, nine times out of ten, chance would be a fine thing.

“So what, it’s all unsavoury†I hear you say and you are right, but your word ‘unproductive’ speaks volumes in so far as all work in this area is done for gain and c3blu is spot on when he points out that a good player can draw a foul, go down and give his team some breathing space when under the cosh, or win a free kick. No doubt when Didier went down late in the game on Sunday and used up a couple of minutes on a non-injury you were screaming at him ‘Get up and let the opposition play, this is all so unsavoury!!’, but most of us do not have such a finely tuned sense of fair play and merely grub around finding it hard to differentiate between the rights and wrongs of a player’s reaction to a foul - let me see, is that one unnecessary or can we call it productive? I’m guessing JT knows better than any of us and, when hauling Didier to his feet in the dying moments, probably whispered something along the lines of “That’s enough for today, mate.†Okay, I admit I could be wrong, but whatever was said, when you’re 1-0 up with minutes to go, I’ll wager he didn’t include the word unsavoury.

Back to my main point on Didier - he does a great job for the team all over the pitch and his enthusiasm knows no bounds, albeit often exceeding boundaries of self control in moments of high tension [the point BST was making], but never in the nasty or vindictive way so often seen in other great players deemed to have similar power, strength and will to win. Should he on occasion decline the continual invitations to stand up and take his punishment like a man, preferring a drama queen approach and in effect do what every other player in the game does in their own way (when did anybody ever post that Messi should stop the simulation, it’s not necessary?) without the same constant criticism, well why the heck shouldn’t he? The mere fact that he is no great actor, nor ever will be, doesn’t make him the exception when everybody bends the rules, or at least it shouldn’t, especially when in most cases the feigning under discussion is perpetrated to get a foul noticed, as opposed to making it appear that one has been committed.

The paragraphs break up individual thoughts...breaking it up more often wouldn't make sense...

Well, technically a sentence should only contain one idea, and a paragraph a series of connected ideas that make a single point, but hey, I just want to have good content presented even better. :D

Dorset. Good post.

However, please use paragraphs more often. Too much hard work to read without them.

Bloody Hell! I am (almost) speechless, but I don't know whether it's with admiration or shock! Dorset is the poster whose writing skills I admire more than any others. His grammar and syntax are superb! Are you a Sun reader? Is that why you need your reading material chopped up into little sound bites?

Well, technically a sentence should only contain one idea, and a paragraph a series of connected ideas that make a single point, but hey, I just want to have good content presented even better. :D

Who says so? Have you been reading an American manual on how to write English? This sounds like an extract from a book for teaching foreginers to write essays in English.

no you don't.

and just because equally unsavoury (or worse) traits of other footballers aren't given the same attention, that shouldn't be some kind of excuse for drogba's failings.

I really am struggling to see what point you're making, dorset. would you look on at a similar article about cristiano ronaldo and think "yes"? refusing to be an apologist doesn't make you disloyal.

drogba is one of the very best footballers in the world. if his "antics" on the pitch didn't happen would he be worse for it? no- in fact, referees would be less likely to ignore the many times he actually does get a kicking. hs feigning of injury is embarrassing, unnecessary and counter productive.

is there a need to teach old drog new tricks? no, there is a need to make him forget one or two that he already knows.

I have to agree with this. IMHO Didier is a better player when he does not go down at the slightest touch, look at his strength for the second goal, if he had gone down who knows what the result may have been. Well done JT.

Drogba has been superb this season, but lets face it the game got to him on Sunday and again we saw the Drogba that is frankly embarassing. He is one of the strongest players in the league and can stand up to most but then his theatrics after the slightest touches. TBH I had to hide my face.

Look lets be honest if JT thought he had to go and say somthing to Didier regardless how well he was playing in the middle of a match...Come on there is no making excuses for this.

I have to agree with this. IMHO Didier is a better player when he does not go down at the slightest touch, look at his strength for the second goal, if he had gone down who knows what the result may have been. Well done JT.

Drogba has been superb this season, but lets face it the game got to him on Sunday and again we saw the Drogba that is frankly embarassing. He is one of the strongest players in the league and can stand up to most but then his theatrics after the slightest touches. TBH I had to hide my face.

Look lets be honest if JT thought he had to go and say somthing to Didier regardless how well he was playing in the middle of a match...Come on there is no making excuses for this.

I see your current favourite player is Deco, smileysmiles, and I'm wondering if you have ever felt the need to hide your face when he's been on the end of a slight touch or two? Be honest.

I see your current favourite player is Deco, smileysmiles, and I'm wondering if you have ever felt the need to hide your face when he's been on the end of a slight touch or two? Be honest.

Just as you must be Dorset when Drogba is rolling around on the pitch feigning injury. This is the problem with him and the reason why, despite rating no footballer more highly, I could never love Drogba the way I do Lampard or Cole.

In your first post you seemed to discuss only his falls on contact. Everything you wrote there was accurate. But my reading of the criticism he gets, both on this site and in general, is the feigning of injury and not the diving per se.

In fact I am certain that Hiddink lost patience with him last season when he took him off. It looked to me that he was saying "Well if you're that much in pain, off you come son". There is no doubt Drogba could have finished that match.

I think the general impression of Drogba is that he is a brilliant player, but a complete tosser. I imagine that is exactly how we would feel about him if he weren't a Chelsea player.

sorry dorset- he feigns injury, and he dives as well. I refuse to be an apologist for either.

when he goes down to win a free kick to use up some time, I don't scream at how unsavoury it is, no one does. they do, however, get annoyed and implore him to get up. you see, you don't need a finely tuned sense of fair play to spot cheating when it is so blatant, and drogba's emotional blackmail (to get the opposition to kick the ball out of play) is as blatant as you get. the reaction from the stands is instant, because it takes no time to condemn something that is obviously not right.

what I imagine does take time, is to spot an act that is obviously not right, and rationalise that act so one can find it palatable.

I think the general impression of Drogba is that he is a brilliant player, but a complete tosser. I imagine that is exactly how we would feel about him if he weren't a Chelsea player.

Pretty much nailed right there.

Imagine if Drogba played for Liverpool. Just for one second. Seriously now (with the amount of almost psychotic fascination that goes on with that club on here) he would be pilloried left right and centre.

He is without doubt a magnificent player. We have one of the best players in the world in our team , but yet how many Chelsea fans do you know who would say he is their favorite Chelsea player ?

On the pitch (when he is on his feet) he is awesome, a sight to behold. But yet if he left us tomorrow whilst understanding that a serious chunk of our play would be totally affected, how much would i care ? Would i miss him ? Hard to say. Would i be relived that some of the embarrassment he causes us is over ? Well, no actually because im used to the histrionics now, in fact they make me laugh. I expect them. I enjoy how he winds up the other fans, but there is more to football than that.

Another thing that gets me is at times (often in the post match interview) he comes across as such a nice genuine guy! So hes likable and at the same time detestable!

One thing i will say - Im still waiting for the apology for Moscow. I'll never forgive him for that. But he got us there so who am i to moan? As ever regarding Drogba there is another side.

Thats just how it is and how its going to be !

Edited October 8, 200915 yr by bjd

I was only saying to a mate the other day, imagine if he played for someone else for a sec. We would HATE him. No mistake.

Given this, i can quite understand him getting slaughtered.

The main point is though, to an extent, he is victimised, because how many others also do this, and yet it goes unmentioned? This is what i do not agree with.

Honestly I don't know what the fuss is all about since, on average, I only find myself saying "Get up Drogba" about 4 or 5 times a game.