- Print Topic - Archive

What will happen when Professor Smith from Pontefract Polytechnic discovers that taking penalties in front of hostile fans gives the other side a 3.1% advantage? Pens being taken at both ends? A wall going up? Good job the EFL love innovation.

Not sure about the ABBA system.
Gimme Gimme Gimme more time to think it over.

Taxi. !!!!

Actually makes a lot of sense , similar to a tennis tie break, the pressure goes on opposite sides every couple of kicks. Takes away a lot of the so called advantage going first.

“IFAB have identified a theory that the current arrangements for penalty kicks potentially provide an unfair advantage to the team taking the first kick so we are keen to see if the new system has an impact on one of the most discussed issues in football."

Thanks for that Harvey. As usual you have no hard evidence for your ideas but because there is a theory that is potentially correct some jobsworth has come up with a cunning plan to justify their existence. Actually one of the most discussed issues in football is the shambles that the EFL is in under your leadership. It's not broken you are.

Taking pens at both ends would be better,

The ref can do the pens at one end and the 4th official could do the other end,

That would save the ref running up and down the pitch after a 2 hour game.

Just thought,

If the 4th official gets injured a police person could officiate the pens at one end. ;D

Quoted from grimsby pete

Taking pens at both ends would be better,

The ref can do the pens at one end and the 4th official could do the other end,

That would save the ref running up and down the pitch after a 2 hour game.

I like the idea of that, but it would mean the goalkeepers are 'behind enemy lines' at both ends of the pitch

Quoted from hheh2

I like the idea of that, but it would mean the goalkeepers are 'behind enemy lines' at both ends of the pitch

Then it would be fair don't you think ?

Better than one behind and one with his own fans.

Quoted from grimsby pete

Then it would be fair don't you think ?

Better than one behind and one with his own fans.

It would be fairer and means the goalkeepers don't need to move from the goal lines

Quoted from Vance Warner

“IFAB have identified a theory that the current arrangements for penalty kicks potentially provide an unfair advantage to the team taking the first kick so we are keen to see if the new system has an impact on one of the most discussed issues in football."

Thanks for that Harvey. As usual you have no hard evidence for your ideas but because there is a theory that is potentially correct some jobsworth has come up with a cunning plan to justify their existence. Actually one of the most discussed issues in football is the shambles that the EFL is in under your leadership. It's not broken you are.

Well said.
I'm guessing the "unfair" advantage only materializes if you score the first pen (and dissipates/reverses if you don't).
If you think it sensible to resolve tied football matches via a penalty shoot-out that's how it should be, surely?

Personally, I'd toss a coin.
Saves some footballer having nightmares, and a goalkeeper imagining he's a hero for saving a crap penalty.

(But the older I get, the more difficult it becomes for me to even understand why the football authorities are doing stuff - let alone approve of them.)

Why oh why are things changed all the time -nearly everything that is changed is so petty- like being able to pass backwards from the kick off etc-somebody trying to justify their job

Missing a penalty in a vital game can be life-changing. There is no pressure on a keeper as he is expected to concede. They balance favours keepers.

Why not make it fairer and more interesting; the "penalty" taker can take a kick from anywhere on the edge of the 18 yard box. I would like to see how teams approached this.

Quoted from golfer

Why oh why are things changed all the time -nearly everything that is changed is so petty- like being able to pass backwards from the kick off etc-somebody trying to justify their job

Because the game is being run by businesspeople who detect some infelicity in the fans perception of the game, and tinker with it.
Checkatrade indicates the direction/misguidedness of their thinking, I'd suggest.
Either their tinkering works (and so profitability is maintained) or it doesn't (but at least we can't be accused of not trying to address the issue).

Capitalism sucks*. I'd keep politics out of sport if politics would stay out of sport - but money doesn't talk these days, it shouts so loud other
voices/opinions are drowned out.

[*IMO]

I think there are other things that Harvey could look at. Such as handball. 99% of penalties given for handball are not handball. Yes the ball might hit another players arm / hand but lets get this right hand to ball = handball. Penalties are given when a player attempts to cross the ball yet a defender stood 3 yrds away ball hits arm penalty given.

Quoted from Meza

I think there are other things that Harvey could look at. Such as handball. 99% of penalties given for handball are not handball. Yes the ball might hit another players arm / hand but lets get this right hand to ball = handball. Penalties are given when a player attempts to cross the ball yet a defender stood 3 yrds away ball hits arm penalty given.

Sure - defenders with their hands behind their backs will always look ridiculous to me.

My personal gripe is with forwards - running at full pelt - who ram into defenders and draw a foul for (imo) fouling the defender by charging into him.

Yes I know defenders can be cunning with their obstruction techniques, but if a guy is standing motionless (let's say) - how can he be committing a foul?
If you are motionless, by definition you can't be doing anything much - apart from breathing and standing!

Perhaps a stationary defender could indicate to the ref that "I'm just standing my ground" (and therefore cannot be penalized) by placing his hands
behind his back?

Oh wait a moment..... ;D

Quoted from 137

Sure - defenders with their hands behind their backs will always look ridiculous to me.

My personal gripe is with forwards - running at full pelt - who ram into defenders and draw a foul for (imo) fouling the defender by charging into him.

Yes I know defenders can be cunning with their obstruction techniques, but if a guy is standing motionless (let's say) - how can he be committing a foul?
If you are motionless, by definition you can't be doing anything much - apart from breathing and standing!

Perhaps a stationary defender could indicate to the ref that "I'm just standing my ground" (and therefore cannot be penalized) by placing his hands
behind his back?

Oh wait a moment..... ;D

Yeah thats another one. But my biggest bug bare is when a defender is obstructing the attacker from getting the ball when leaving it to go out. I thought thats classed as obstruction if your not playing the ball.

What about BAAB? The second penalty is taken before the first. That'd even it up.

Quoted from Meza

Yeah thats another one. But my biggest bug bare is when a defender is obstructing the attacker from getting the ball when leaving it to go out. I thought thats classed as obstruction if your not playing the ball.

If I played now it would drive me mad-I'm afraid I'd be shoving a few defenders into touch.

Can we use it against Germany? ;)

Heard on radio a few weeks back, a match that could potentially end in a penalty shoot out should have the pens taken before KO - no more playing for penalties.

Quoted from mariner83

Heard on radio a few weeks back, a match that could potentially end in a penalty shoot out should have the pens taken before KO - no more playing for penalties.

Maybe not but you'd have the shootout winner playing for a draw instead.