Penalty Goal

AddickFC81

Looking at the incident that got that burnley sent off did actually look a bit harsh as the ball struck him on the upper arm near the shoulder when he was trying to keep his arm in. But the penalty was given and the lad was sent off. Jacko could have hit harder for sure but it was a good save by the keeper as he had to stretch low for it which can be a difficult place for the keeper to get to. But the point I would most like to make is that if the ref has ajudged the player on the line to have handled it and sends him off then should a penalty goal have be awarded to us instead of a penalty kick? With a peanlty kick there is a risk that the taker does not score like with Jacko. A penalty goal is awarded as a goal would have been scored if the player had not handled the ball. In rugby you get a penalty try. Now remember at the last world cup when Suarez handled the ball on the goal line for Uraguay against Ghana? If doesn't handle it Ghana would have won that game as it was in the last second but the peanlty is missed and the game finishes level and goes into a penalty shootout and Ghana go out when they should have gone through. In that instance Suarez blatently cheats and cost Ghana a place in the last four of the World Cup. If a peanlty goal goal is awarded instead of a kick Ghana would go through. So is it worth trying in football?

ValleyGary

no.

the opposing team would then get punished twice. perhaps award the penalty goal but dont send the player off.

MuttleyCAFC

It is certainly worth trying but football is the most traditional of sports and would never make such a fundamental change IMO. It is true that morally it is harsh to send the Burnley Player off - but perfectly right according to the rules. This is because if he stops a certain goal, his team could gain an advantage if the penalty is missed as it was. A penalty goal would resolve this issue without th eneed to send the player off, but like I said- don't hold your breath.

Oggy Red

The referee has stopped play after the player has blocked the ball - the ball has not crossed the goal line, therefore the referee cannot possibly award a goal.

MuttleyCAFC

He can if you change the rules to allow him to.

fattmatt

Perhaps let the guilty team;s captain choose between a red card with a penalty, or just a penalty goal.

Oggy Red

No rules in football, Muttley. ;o)



The ball still must fully cross the goal line before a goal can be awarded.

Perhaps in this context, the ideal solution is for a penalty kick to be awarded .......but without an opposing keeper/defender on the goal line.

With an open goal facing the penalty kicker, all he has to do is slot the ball into the empty net.


It would give true meaning to the word 'penalty'.

croydonaddick

I think thats a good idea - penalty goal but no sending off, so the rest of the match less likely to be in favour of the team awarded the goal as they have the same number of players, but they gain a definite goal.

MuttleyCAFC

Would hate to be the first player to miss one of those!

Oggy Red

MuttleyCAFC said:

Would hate to be the first player to miss one of those!

Let's hope it's not Jacko !

Oggy Red

croydonaddick said:

I think thats a good idea - penalty goal but no sending off, so the rest of the match less likely to be in favour of the team awarded the goal as they have the same number of players, but they gain a definite goal.

Many games are ruined or unbalanced by the referee feeling he must apply the letter of the law.

With an 'open goal penalty ' awarded, agree with the option of the player being yellow carded only.

Would still need the referee to use his discretion, however, to red card an opponent who was blatantly cheating, cynical or violent.

Jayajosh

Prefer a penalty kick myself with the player being sent off. Gives us the opportunity to score a goal from a penalty with the odds in our favour and play nine men. My opinion will of course differ if its one of our players involved.

Sonicstud85

I really am torn between this, i think its good the way it is as teams should be scoring from the spot. However, the Suarez/Ghana situation was just so wrong and makes me wonder if a penalty goal should be awarded. I think something needs to be done to stop the fact that someone can tactically cheat to win a game.

AddickFC81

ValleyGary said:

no.

the opposing team would then get punished twice. perhaps award the penalty goal but dont send the player off.

Your right about a sending off or not sending off. Maybe just a booking. Under current rules if a defender handles on the line and the ball still goes into the goal then a goal is awarded and the defender is booked.

Kap10

There was an incident recently in a game, not sure what level, ball bound towards the goal a substitute gets on the pitch to stop it, sub gets a red card but the team still have eleven on the pitch and the attacking teasm fail to convert the free kick. To me a distinct situation whereby the rugby rule of a penalty goal (try) should be administered.

Bryan_Kynsie

Rather than sendings off, which change and potentially spoil games, it should be a penalty kick for what is currently a red card offence - wherever it is committed - with citing leading to a subsequent ban for dangerous stuff like they do in rugby. Offender still likely to get a ban (and to be cited if the ref misses it) and team likely to concede a goal. Should reduce the number of dangerous challenges.

I particularly think sending off keepers for handling outside the area is often inappropriate.

MuttleyCAFC

Yes, I agree that on many occasions of a keeper handling outside the area- it is down to a misjudgment and doesn't warrant a sending off. There are of course incidences when a sending off is right. The problem with the rules is something is black or white when often there are shades in between.