So if the ball is handballed on the line, a goal is instantly given without the need for a penalty?
Hmmm sounds like they need to use Video Techology for this as the ball could hit the hand but if it had stayed out the way it could have hit the post or crossbar etc.
Earlier on I read about professional fouls changing from a straight red to a yellow. Utter bollocks.
If you mean the rule where a professional foul inside the box is punished by a yellow card and a penalty instead of the current rule where it is a red card and a penalty, I actually think that is a good change.
Earlier on I read about professional fouls changing from a straight red to a yellow. Utter bollocks.
If you mean the rule where a professional foul inside the box is punished by a yellow card and a penalty instead of the current rule where it is a red card and a penalty, I actually think that is a good change.
in what way do you think it's good? Genuinely interested to know.
Does this penalty box rule apply to deliberate handball as well do you know?
So if the ball is handballed on the line, a goal is instantly given without the need for a penalty?
Hmmm sounds like they need to use Video Techology for this as the ball could hit the hand but if it had stayed out the way it could have hit the post or crossbar etc.
Do you remember Suarez's last minute hand ball on the goal line in the World Cup Quarter Final against Ghana.
Ghana were denied a goal (and place in the semi final) as Gyan missed the penalty under pressure.
Earlier on I read about professional fouls changing from a straight red to a yellow. Utter bollocks.
If you mean the rule where a professional foul inside the box is punished by a yellow card and a penalty instead of the current rule where it is a red card and a penalty, I actually think that is a good change.
in what way do you think it's good? Genuinely interested to know.
Does this penalty box rule apply to deliberate handball as well do you know?
I would say because a red card and a penalty is double punishment.
It's good because currently a player/team is punish 3 times for what could be a very minor foul, that happened to happen in the box. So a fairly innocuous, not deliberate trip (sometimes an attacker is just too fleet of foot for a defender), and for that accidental trip, if it "denied a goal scoring opportunity", the attacking team get a penalty, a man sent off, and that player gets a one match ban.
I'm of the opinion that if the foul would be worth a red elsewhere on the pitch (over the top, violent, etc.) then fair enough, but a foul that would result in a yellow or no card shouldn't become a red just because it's in the area.
I'm not a fan of the whole "denied a goal scoring opportunity" rule anyway. With a penalty you're denied nothing as you are immediately given a replacement goal scoring opportunity. The rule was original around Professional Fouls, i.e. deliberately fouling an opponent to gain an advantage, or at least roll the dice and swap a certain goal for a penalty that might be saved/missed. The reason it was changed as it was impossible for the referee to know if it was professional foul, or just a mistimed/clumsy challenge. The "denied a goal-scoring opportunity" is far easier for the official to judge (though they still get it wrong too often).
The problem lies in how referees are scored/rated. If you give nothing when it should be yellow, or yellow when it should be red then you're marked down quite harshly. However, it you give a red when it should have been a yellow, you can always argue that something was said, or it looks worse from your angle, etc. and adjudicators don't mark down overzealousness anywhere near as harshly. Hence we have a generation of officials who have been trained that if in doubt then a decision is better than no decision, that a card is better than no card and a dismissal is better than leniency. It's also why you get the farcical situation that happened in the Spain/Holland final, where the referee literally didn't know how to officiate when told not to be card-happy.
best rule change and well overdue is that a player can get treated on the field and stay on the field if the challenge that injured them resulted in a card
best rule change and well overdue is that a player can get treated on the field and stay on the field if the challenge that injured them resulted in a card
The professional foul rule has always been overly punitive even without the triple whammy. The sort of foul it was designed to stop was the deliberate one to prevent a certain goal. Willie Young's foul on Paul Allen in the 1980 cup final is a perfect example of this.
Instead a large number of red cards under the rule have been for fouls that were genuine last ditch attempts for the ball.
It makes the game more difficult for referees but as I understand it the principle change is that a professional foul is only a red card offence if in the opinion of the referee the foul was committed intentionally to deny an obvious goalscoring opportunity. If a penalty is awarded, no goalscoring opportunity was ever denied so I think it's a positive change that in most cases a penalty won't be accompanied by a straight red.
I've long thought a penalty goal should be awarded for goal saving handballs and for fouls which denied a certain goal. If that's going to happen then it's a good thing in my view.
Earlier on I read about professional fouls changing from a straight red to a yellow. Utter bollocks.
If you mean the rule where a professional foul inside the box is punished by a yellow card and a penalty instead of the current rule where it is a red card and a penalty, I actually think that is a good change.
in what way do you think it's good? Genuinely interested to know.
Does this penalty box rule apply to deliberate handball as well do you know?
I would say because a red card and a penalty is double punishment.
Not if the penalty is missed!!!! It's the same with it being outside the box, if that is still to be deemed a red card offence then surely if the free kick is scored it's also double punishment. Also if a penalty goal is given, does the player still get sent off because that is the ultimate double punishment. My opinion is don't change it.
Comments
Hmmm sounds like they need to use Video Techology for this as the ball could hit the hand but if it had stayed out the way it could have hit the post or crossbar etc.
Does this penalty box rule apply to deliberate handball as well do you know?
Ghana were denied a goal (and place in the semi final) as Gyan missed the penalty under pressure.
Good rule change in my opinion.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/world_cup_2010/matches/match_58/default.stm
a fairly innocuous, not deliberate trip (sometimes an attacker is just too fleet of foot for a defender), and for that accidental trip, if it "denied a goal scoring opportunity", the attacking team get a penalty, a man sent off, and that player gets a one match ban.
I'm of the opinion that if the foul would be worth a red elsewhere on the pitch (over the top, violent, etc.) then fair enough, but a foul that would result in a yellow or no card shouldn't become a red just because it's in the area.
I'm not a fan of the whole "denied a goal scoring opportunity" rule anyway. With a penalty you're denied nothing as you are immediately given a replacement goal scoring opportunity. The rule was original around Professional Fouls, i.e. deliberately fouling an opponent to gain an advantage, or at least roll the dice and swap a certain goal for a penalty that might be saved/missed. The reason it was changed as it was impossible for the referee to know if it was professional foul, or just a mistimed/clumsy challenge. The "denied a goal-scoring opportunity" is far easier for the official to judge (though they still get it wrong too often).
The problem lies in how referees are scored/rated. If you give nothing when it should be yellow, or yellow when it should be red then you're marked down quite harshly. However, it you give a red when it should have been a yellow, you can always argue that something was said, or it looks worse from your angle, etc. and adjudicators don't mark down overzealousness anywhere near as harshly. Hence we have a generation of officials who have been trained that if in doubt then a decision is better than no decision, that a card is better than no card and a dismissal is better than leniency. It's also why you get the farcical situation that happened in the Spain/Holland final, where the referee literally didn't know how to officiate when told not to be card-happy.
Instead a large number of red cards under the rule have been for fouls that were genuine last ditch attempts for the ball.
It makes the game more difficult for referees but as I understand it the principle change is that a professional foul is only a red card offence if in the opinion of the referee the foul was committed intentionally to deny an obvious goalscoring opportunity. If a penalty is awarded, no goalscoring opportunity was ever denied so I think it's a positive change that in most cases a penalty won't be accompanied by a straight red.
I've long thought a penalty goal should be awarded for goal saving handballs and for fouls which denied a certain goal. If that's going to happen then it's a good thing in my view.