Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ulf Ottosson

An Idea following our Penalty Dramas

Recommended Posts

Given what has happened to us already this season regarding penalties got me thinking about how a simple rule change might help the situation. The idea is :

The Player who wins the penalty has to take the resulting kick unless he is injured and unable to take it then a named player choosen before kick off can take it.

In reality at the moment a player is more likely to go over a leg rather than jump it in the box, make sure the keeper takes him out rather than simply scoring etc... I accept this it''s ok the outright dive is a rare sight. I think changing the rules might make some player think twice and encourage them to finish the job off themselves. Don''t think messers ramires and di santo would be celebrating as much if they can to get up and take the kick.

As an aside could this rule to extended to all set plays? Good idea - can''t think of a downside? Could be done at all levels as well? The new back pass rule?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I cannot see that making any difference at all, in fact it may encourage players to win penalties as they know that they will be taking them and adding to their own goal tally. What we need is video-checking of all penalty decisions at the time, allowing a referee to rescind or reinforce his decision and if a player has dived in an attempt to con the ref, send him off.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="paul moy"]I cannot see that making any difference at all, in fact it may encourage players to win penalties as they know that they will be taking them and adding to their own goal tally. What we need is video-checking of all penalty decisions at the time, allowing a referee to rescind or reinforce his decision and if a player has dived in an attempt to con the ref, send him off.   [/quote]

You have hit the nail on the head, if this was the case for the Chelsea and Stoke game we may have won them both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm

I cant see video replays coming in for anything other than goal line decisions end of. Bearing that in mind I think this idea would be a move in the right direction.

I take the point that some players might be more likely to go over but I think even if this won''t stop all players it might make some think twice - for example Lampard has scored something like 39/40 pens I reckon ramires record won''t be so special so it would lessen the advantage gained.

This would bring Football into line with Basketball where by you draw the fall you take the free throws it''s logical.

The idea of extending it to the rest of the field would fundamentally change football - I think for the better...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I had an idea about video decisions in a match. Many people think the natural flow of the game will be stunted by the use of technology. My idea: every team has 2 challenges they can use in the game (just like tennis). If a team uses a challenge the full power of the challenge goes to the 4th official who has the prime access to the tech and the resulting cards and penalties awarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem with video decisions if is that unless it''s cut and dry i.e. a line decision, in or out. Then it''s not worth it - cricket is the perfect example sometimes they show replays from every angle but it''s no clearer.

Football would be even worse espcially as I said earlier most players look for the contact and if there is contact then surely it''s a penalty. It''s very very rare you see an outright dive it''s more and more someone deliberate falls over a leg

That''s why the player who wins it takes is a good alternative

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Cookieace"][quote user="paul moy"]I cannot see that making any difference at all, in fact it may encourage players to win penalties as they know that they will be taking them and adding to their own goal tally. What we need is video-checking of all penalty decisions at the time, allowing a referee to rescind or reinforce his decision and if a player has dived in an attempt to con the ref, send him off.   [/quote] You have hit the nail on the head, if this was the case for the Chelsea and Stoke game we may have won them both.[/quote]

 

The problem is with a video replay the Chelsea penalty would have been shown to be a penalty.  I agree with the Stoke penalty, was not in the box and I dont think it was even a foul.

 

Ruddy missed the ball, made contact with the player.  By the letter of the law that is a penalty.

 

I don''t dispute its not in the spirit as Ramires was only playing for the penalty, and in that instance it shouldn''t have been a red card as he never had an intention to go for goal, therefore Ruddy could not possibly be denying a clear goalscoring opportunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By using the system suggested of having x challenges with a fourth official deciding, there is nothing to lose. Even if the Stoke penalty decision was upheld, at least we had an appeal and a chance for a different decision.

It might result in fewer dives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I''ve an idea too... why try not to foul in the box?How about our defenders deal with balls at the back and not dither on the half way line resulting in an opposition counter attack?These ideas are more viable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I might be wrong but I always thought that it had to be a direct free kick to be a penalty. If someone crosses the ball and it hits the defender on the arm by his side, how is that a direct free kick? Surely it can only apply if the defenders arm is stopping a ball going into the net?

There are so many variables in interpretation nowadays, I believe if a penalty is awarded than the player gets a maximum of a yellow card and not a red, the penalty has given the attacking team back the chance to score.

As for the Scots now wanting video replay for these match changing moments than surely they would have been 1-0 down early as the Baros penalty was a cert in todays guidelines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Indy"]I might be wrong but I always thought that it had to be a direct free kick to be a penalty. If someone crosses the ball and it hits the defender on the arm by his side, how is that a direct free kick? Surely it can only apply if the defenders arm is stopping a ball going into the net?

There are so many variables in interpretation nowadays, I believe if a penalty is awarded than the player gets a maximum of a yellow card and not a red, the penalty has given the attacking team back the chance to score.

As for the Scots now wanting video replay for these match changing moments than surely they would have been 1-0 down early as the Baros penalty was a cert in todays guidelines.[/quote]Youre right, Indy.  That always has been the case - hence the reason why the backpass (punishable by an Indirect free kick) doesn’t result in a PenLike most of the laws in football, the players will seek to gain an advantage through any means - be it running 10 yards up the line for throws, moving free kicks forward or more centrally or trying to win penalties.  30 years ago the gamesmanship was the other way round - I can remember Willie Young from Arsenal hacking down Paul Allen from West Ham in the 1980 cup final when Allen was clean through.  Nowadays it would be a straight red, but at the time the only sanction was a yellow card and a free kick - which the Hammers missed.  It was incidents such as this ''Professional Foul'' that led ultimately to the introduction of the denial of goal scoring opportunity sanction.Ultimately any solution is flawed - whilst forcing the fouled player to take the kick may deny some it wont others (Rooney, Tevez) - whilst video evidence in mid-game may partially work (it would have at least have commuted the incident v Stoke to a free kick outside the area at most), as the game has stopped anyway, most incidents such as was it a foul, was it a goal scoring opportunity are all in the opinion of the referee - in which case VT wont add anything.  Remember that FIFA also try and keep any major changes to things that can be implemented at all levels - I don’t think we''ll be seeing ref cams at Eaton Park for a while yet….

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It wouldn''t work. If you have a penalty specialist such as Lampard, Ramires might have feigned injury, gone off for treatment and then come back on absolutely fine once Lampard had scored the pen, which would be farcical. And as for ''challenges'', no thanks. Football is a game of human error, and that encompasses officials as well as players. Look at the Ramires penalty – even if we''d appealed it, it was still open to interpretation – if the video replay team decided that Ramires was ''looking for it'' and overturned the decision and booked him for diving, can you imagine the controversy, when there was clear contact with Ruddy? We have to allow officials to use their judgement. I''d hate to see the game stopped for three minutes while the officials went ''under the hood'' like in the NFL, scrutinising endless slow-motion replays while the players stood around kicking their heels. The show must go on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For me the governing bodies should look at the rules. It use to be if you fouled some one you gave away a free kick / penalty. Now players are encouraged to ''draw'' the foul. In many cases this results in very harsh / debatable penalties and dismissals, where the defending player had no intention of fouling another player, and this unbalances the game, affecting the result.

I think if the ref determines that a player has drawn the foul, so to speak, this should be an indirect free kick (after all it is an indirect / unintentional foul). No one should be sent off, if they are deemed to have unintentionally fouled a player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you dont need a video to study if it was or wasnt a penalty... the game would never end!remember, theres no guarentee you will score a penalty... in some cases its actually more detrimental to go down! just ask Stoke!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats why any TV review would have to a take the form of a challange system as cricket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cricket stops for minutes on end.... find me where football does it?Tennis stops for ages...american football stops for ages....i think you see the pattern here...Football can go on for ages without a break, now, what if the ref does decide to view the decision and decides not to change his mind (which he is entitled too) what do we do then?what if the signal for the challenge is missed by the ref and in the mean time the other team go up the other end and score.... you cant disallow a perfectly fair goal to bring play back and award a penalty.I want this system so my sunday league team dont fall foul.. otherwise its not fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually Jas, football stops on any such incident, the players all chase the ref and theres normally a stopage in play. Hoe long would it take the 4th officicial watching the game on montitor to say yes or no, we all see it on the TV and most are two second jugements. I don''t believe having three reviews would take long at all IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Europe_93"]For me the governing bodies should look at the rules. It use to be if you fouled some one you gave away a free kick / penalty. Now players are encouraged to ''draw'' the foul. In many cases this results in very harsh / debatable penalties and dismissals, where the defending player had no intention of fouling another player, and this unbalances the game, affecting the result.

I think if the ref determines that a player has drawn the foul, so to speak, this should be an indirect free kick (after all it is an indirect / unintentional foul). No one should be sent off, if they are deemed to have unintentionally fouled a player.[/quote]But the rules effectively say that - the laws say that a direct free kick shall be awarded if a player is careless, reckless or uses excessive force to# Trip or attempt to trip an opponent# Kicks or attempts to kick at an opponent# Jumps at or charges at an opponent# Strikes or attempts to strike an opponent# Pushes an opponent# Tackles an opponent (ie without the ball)or does one of the following# handles the ball (except the Goalkeeper)# Spits at an opponent# Holds an opponent And a direct free kick given to the attacking team in the penalty area is a penalty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
More to the point if theyre not careless, reckless etc then there is NO free kick.  ''Drawing'' a foul however usually means the attacking player is too quick/clever and invites ''careless'' contact, which the defending player is unable to stop/avoid - which IS a foul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Ulf Ottosson"]I think the problem with video decisions if is that unless it''s cut and dry i.e. a line decision, in or out. Then it''s not worth it - cricket is the perfect example sometimes they show replays from every angle but it''s no clearer. Football would be even worse espcially as I said earlier most players look for the contact and if there is contact then surely it''s a penalty. It''s very very rare you see an outright dive it''s more and more someone deliberate falls over a leg That''s why the player who wins it takes is a good alternative[/quote]

Maybe the rule should make the onus be on the attacking player to stay upright and if it is deemed that he was looking for the penalty by going over easily then it should not be given. Maybe they should also take into account the defending players attempts to withdraw from the challenge too. It all becomes rather subjective but I think the decision making could become quite fair and consistent when it is passed to a video ref who is in a secluded location and does not have to deal with the pressure of screaming fans. If the video evidence is inconclusive they could reject the appeal and go with the pitch referees decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it might help if fouls were given on occassions where the player

does not go to ground. At the moment it seems that the player has to

fall over to get the free kick/penalty. If the referees were more

inclined to give a foul even if the attacking player stayed on their

feet but gained no advantage, then perhaps the attacking player would be

less inclined to dive, by staying on their feet they would, in effect,

get two opportunities to score where a genuine foul has occurred.As it stands the attacker has little incentive to stay on their feet and try to score from open play. I can''t imagine many people would prefer to see goals scored from penalties rather than open play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Europe_93"]For me the governing bodies should look at the rules. It use to be if you fouled some one you gave away a free kick / penalty. Now players are encouraged to ''draw'' the foul. In many cases this results in very harsh / debatable penalties and dismissals, where the defending player had no intention of fouling another player, and this unbalances the game, affecting the result. I think if the ref determines that a player has drawn the foul, so to speak, this should be an indirect free kick (after all it is an indirect / unintentional foul). No one should be sent off, if they are deemed to have unintentionally fouled a player.[/quote].....a few months ago i watched my dvd of the 1966 world cup final. the rules on player contact were virtually if not totally the same then and not a single arm or hand was layed on an opposing player. in other words they played to the laws of the game in wich ANY wilfull contact with arm or hand is penalised. i don''t advocate going back to this, but all the wrestling must be stopped. it has got to the stage where little football actually takes place from corners and freekicks, just all in wrestling in the penalty area .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think the idea is sound. You do down you man up and take the pen (and the abuse from the crowd).

As I said before unless you it''s a line decision then video ref''s won''t work

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about changing the rule(s) about giving penalties and set it back to what ever the rule(s) were about 30 - 40 years ago?

Its got really stupid that whenever a goalkeeper makes a genuine attempt to get the ball he is at risk of getting a penalty awarded against him and being sent off.

Anybody see how Scotland had a penalty awarded against them for what looked like a dive to me. No wonder McQueen on Sky Sports was fuming!

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who would be given the power to challenge? The Captain or manager from 50 yards away?

If,as happens, a team trys to pressurise the Ref into giving a goal/Pen, even though they really know it wasn''t, but the Manager is shouting for a review, can you imagine the Captain waving frantically at the Bench to not waste a ''challenge''?

Also, it is possible, that a potential goal has been scored, but in a short space of time, whilst play is carrying on and a team is deciding to call for a review, someone else commits a horror tackle and breaks someones leg,(deserving of a red card), and the review finds that a goal should have been awarded and play should not have carried on, what do you do then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pardon me for stating the bleedin obvious, but isn''t this all just swings and roundabouts?

 

How many times has Holt drawn a foul? He''s an expert at it FFS!

 

And if you''re a team who plays the game like gentleman, is 100% honest in everything, never draw a foul, never go down a little easily then moan and moan when everyone else does it against you, then more fool you! You play the game as it is now, as the law allows at present. Not how it used to be, how you''d like it to be or even how the rules should be!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What we need is not a change in the laws of the game, but a change in the way they are interpreted by the officials. Surely, if a forward goes into the penalty area "looking for" a penalty, or trying to "draw" a foul, then, by definition, it is not a foul, and the forward should be booked for unsporting conduct. This is exactly the sort of thing the new goal-line officials should be looking for, and we could cut out a lot of this type of cheating without having to resort to video technology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the OP; the player who is fouled should be the one to take the penalty. He who is denied the opportunity to score gets another chance from the spot. Simple and fair. Should the fouled player be injured in the clash then let the club captain take it. 

I despise the saying ''player xyz has just won his side a penalty'' - it''s not sporting behaviour. Why should any side''s ''penalty expert'' be given a golden chance to net the ball unless he was the one who was fouled?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×