Watching players train at a professional football club – and the higher up the leagues, the more noticeable it is – there are two cynical things that often stand out: the tactical foul and exaggerating contact.

One striker was even nicknamed “starfish” by his team-mates because of the way he threw himself at the merest brush on his back from an opponent, throwing his arms and legs out dramatically. And it worked. Buying free-kicks. Sometimes even penalties.

Welcome to the dark arts that can, unfortunately, make the difference. No matter how pure the philosophy of a manager is, it is evident in pretty much every team. It is a far cry from Brian Clough’s idealism. And even if it is nothing new it appears to be more and more prevalent. Marginal gains.

Wayne Rooney memorably said England were “too honest” and needed to be more “streetwise” on the pitch after they crashed out of the 2014 World Cup in the group stages. The player who did for them? Uruguay’s Luis Suarez.

But no one can accuse the Premier League of lacking streetwise players. It is becoming the scourge of the game. It used to be diving but the authorities are hot on that now and are quick to caution. So, players are more careful. They are more canny. They are more streetwise.

The big issue is exaggerating contact and feigning injury. Why? To try and get an opponent sent off. It is as simple as that. It is also, shrewdly, harder to prove.

Take two incidents from the game of the weekend: Arsenal’s win away to Liverpool on Sunday. There was Gabriel Magalhaes’ reaction, claiming to have been caught in the face by Alexander Isak’s hand. Gabriel appeared to throw himself backwards as if punched. And then lay on the ground holding his face as if in great pain.

Maybe he was. Maybe he was caught by surprise. Maybe it is a great disservice and unfair to suggest he was exaggerating. But it did not look like he was struck hard enough to warrant that dramatic reaction and, anyway, was the contact not to his chest? Although, smartly, it is impossible to prove he was trying to cheat because there was some contact, even if Gary Neville, on commentary duty with Sky Sports, called it “embarrassing”, adding: “He’s got to stop doing that.”

Similarly, in the second half, when Alexis Mac Allister went head-to-head with Noni Madueke and dropped to the turf, also holding his face, clearly claiming he had been butted by the Arsenal attacker who was already on a yellow card. In the end, it was Mac Allister and Jurrien Timber who were cautioned, with Jamie Carragher calling the former’s behaviour “embarrassing”. “It has got to stop, it’s ridiculous. I can’t stand it,” Carragher added.

The “it” is that exaggerated contact. The attempt to con the referee. To get an opponent punished. “People are trying to game the system,” Carragher said. And he is right.

There is another example. And that is a player appearing to throw himself down as he shields the ball when challenged. Invariably that player is awarded a free-kick – rightly or wrongly – and there was a fine example of this in the same game as Ezri Konsa was also “fouled” by Isak.

Maybe he was. But players have talked about the “art” of this move. It involves running then stopping suddenly, or even thrusting yourself back into an opponent who then collides with you, before you go over and usually grab the ball. It forces the referee to make a decision and because there was contact, however it was initiated, it is invariably a free-kick to the player lying down. Partly because that is the easiest call to make and the least controversial.

The irony in this particular fixture, of course, was that Isak was punished by the officials for not making the most of contact, for not throwing himself when he did not go down, or appealing for a penalty, after his shirt was clearly pulled by Timber. So, it can be argued, what price honesty, either? It prompted Liverpool manager Andoni Iraola to suggest he would tell his players to dive from now on.

It is understandable, even if it is the last thing we should want to encourage. Indeed, is it a result of referees having become so reliant on the reaction of players, because so many do exaggerate contact, that it is expected? And so when it does not happen – as with the Isak case – they are more reluctant to react i.e., they ask themselves: why did he not go down? Why did he not scream? If that is so, then it makes it even more incumbent on the VAR to intervene. As should have happened with Isak.

Uefa has previously ordered a crackdown on attempts to “dupe” referees with “acts of simulation or by over-reacting to light-contact fouls” in its competitions. It has largely worked with diving. But not with exaggerating conduct. Players still get away with it, possibly because it is harder to prove. With a dive, you can see whether there is no contact. With exaggeration, there is usually some contact, however minimal, so it is immediately more of a grey area, as its effect is therefore more difficult to quantify.

What is the answer? Greater vigilance and bravery from the officials and, dare it be said, more help from the VAR. It is the only way to deal with it because coaches and players will not. Not until they have to. Not until it is dealt with. Caution the exaggerator. Then they – and coaches – will think twice. As has happened with simulation, which is less of a blight on the game. Otherwise, gamesmanship wins.