Penalties-Should they be dropped completely while technology catches up

[Postman Pat]

These are the ones that annoy me, Hernandez could have easily stayed on his feet but made sure there was contact. About 40 secs in.

 

[Scampi]

I am of the opinion that football as a game isn't suitable for the type of tv replays used in other sports to help referees/ umpires make decisions. I would however be in favour of two changes. First a panel to review all penalty decisions and punish any player clearly seen to have dived, and secondly to rescind any card issued to a player subsequently proved to have unfairly been booked (defender or attacker)

Second give the referee the power to award penalties for fouls outside the box where there is a clear goal scoring opportunity denied, and to remove the automatic red card for fouls inside the penalty area which prevent a clear goal scoring opportunity.

 

[Storer 68]

And maybe we should only allow a goal if it hits the back of the net until the goal line technology is brought in.

Surely it has to hit the FRONT of the NET for a goal. If the ball hits the back of the net its either a goal kick or a corner

 

[Storer 68]

The law just says that there has to be contact - doesn't differentiate on how that contact is achieved.

 

[Acker79]

and to remove the automatic red card for fouls inside the penalty area which prevent a clear goal scoring opportunity.

Why? If there's no punishment for attempting to deny a goal scoring opportunity, what will stop people from doing it more often? A penalty isn't punishment, a penalty is simply giving you back the clear goal scoring opportunity your opponent tried to deny you through illegal means, and can often make it a more difficult goal scoring opportunity, especially if the keeper has a particularly good record with penalties, or the takers have a poor record.

 

[Acker79]

The law just says that there has to be contact - doesn't differentiate on how that contact is achieved.

What law says that?

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/generic/81/42/36/lawsofthegame_2011_12e.pdf

 

[Storer 68]

These are the ones that annoy me, Hernandez could have easily stayed on his feet but made sure there was contact. About 40 secs in.

If there is contact which the ref deems to be worty of a free kick then it is a foul and therefore, having been comitted in the penalty area, a penalty kick is the appropriate award.

Law 11 - Free kicks http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/lawsofthegame/law/newsid=1290868.html
A penalty kick is awarded against a team that commits one of the ten offences for which a direct free kick is awarded, inside its own penalty area and while the ball is in play.Direct free kick
A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
kicks or attempts to kick an opponent
trips or attempts to trip an opponent
jumps at an opponent
charges an opponent
strikes or attempts to strike an opponent
pushes an opponent
tackles an opponent
A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following three offences:

holds an opponent
spits at an opponent
handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area)

 

[Acker79]

Yes. But that doesn't mean "contact = penalty" it means "specific types of contact as interpretted by the referee = penalties, other types of contact =/= penalty". It's a significant difference.

 

[Gritt23]

Surely it has to hit the FRONT of the NET for a goal. If the ball hits the back of the net its either a goal kick or a corner

Good point!!

On a similar vein, when a car alarm goes off, you then turn the alarm .... ? Off? Hang on, the alarm going off was when it made a lot of noise, so the opposite can't be off as well, but "your car alarm went off, but I managed to turn it on" can't be right either.

 

[sten_super]

These are the ones that annoy me, Hernandez could have easily stayed on his feet but made sure there was contact. About 40 secs in.

Those kinds of penalties annoy me anyway - it shouldn't be a penalty as he's kicked the ball out and has no chance of getting to it. He's only done it to beat the keeper to the ball so he can seek contact. For me it should only be a penalty if the fouled player has control of the ball or if there's proper excessive force used.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

Why is the result of every football match so important that every decision has to be spot on? Is it just money or something else? Before we had every major game televised and analysed, people accepted dodgy decisions as part of the game. Why not anymore?

I have always suspected, that the FA like to keep some things unclear - particularly thinking about the offside rule - so, keep a certain amout of argument. Call them "water cooler moments", things in the game that cause discussion/argument and ultimately more interest and therefore more viewing figures. Not that I'm cynical or anything.

 

[mune ni kamome]

I have always suspected, that the FA like to keep some things unclear - particularly thinking about the offside rule - so, keep a certain amout of argument. Call them "water cooler moments", things in the game that cause discussion/argument and ultimately more interest and therefore more viewing figures. Not that I'm cynical or anything.

Wow Tricky Dicky. I'd like to hear your views on John F Kennedy and Maddy McCann

 

[Scampi]

Why? If there's no punishment for attempting to deny a goal scoring opportunity, what will stop people from doing it more often? A penalty isn't punishment, a penalty is simply giving you back the clear goal scoring opportunity your opponent tried to deny you through illegal means, and can often make it a more difficult goal scoring opportunity, especially if the keeper has a particularly good record with penalties, or the takers have a poor record.

Because the imo it's often too severe a punishment and straight red cards should be reserved for violent conduct.

 

[Storer 68]

I have always suspected, that the FA like to keep some things unclear - particularly thinking about the offside rule - so, keep a certain amout of argument. Call them "water cooler moments", things in the game that cause discussion/argument and ultimately more interest and therefore more viewing figures. Not that I'm cynical or anything.

nothing to with the FA now. laws of the Game are the property of FIFA

 

[Storer 68]

What about - the ref can award the penalty as there IS contact and a foul but CAN CAUTION the player for unsporing behaviour

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

I'd be interested in experiments where you had two categories of penalty along the lines of hockey

1. For clear goal scoring opportunities - A penalty kick like we have now
2. Other fouls in the area - A penalty free kick which can be taken from anywhere within the "d" where the defnding side has a maximum of 6 defenders within their half.