Penalty

[Dalelane01]

When denied a clear goalscoring chance by a foul anywhere on the pitch would you rather
1 be allowed to have a penalty with whoever made the foul to stay on the pitch because you have the penalty
2 continue as the law is now

3 the player gets sent off and you get a penalty
4 or something else
My own opinion is the player stays on the pitch but a penalty is awarded

 

[tomtheblade]

My preference might change based on when it happens in the game. If it occured after 10 minutes, the sending off may be more desirable so the opposition has to spend most of the game with 10 men.
In the last minute that's nowhere near as useful, so give me the pen.

Of course we cant actually structure the rules that way, but just pointing out that both punishments can have different effects.

I understand why the rule is what it is now though. If the attacking player is pulled down in the area then it will be both a sending off and a penalty anyway, and if its outside the area then it's harder to make the case that he would've scored, so just the sending off ensures a harsh punishment.
If you keep the player on and award a penalty and the team misses it, then they've essentially got away with it. The red makes sure that won't happen.

 

[Dalelane01]

Being selfish on saturday i would have pre fered the penalty .yeah we could have missed billy would have hadanother chance and if we did score virtually end of game .anyway we didnt need it in the end .but like your comment and opinion tom the blade

 

[Tezza1889]

Great idea, have you not thought that if a team are a goal down and thier “ainsworth” decides to do somebody, then it’ll only be 2-0 IF they score the pen.. with the star player now in the treatment room..

The World Cup would be hilarious, ronaldo would be dead before the group stages were over..

Let’s leave it as it is eh..

 

[Topplayersleave]

Also depends what the score is, if you're winning 4-0 send the twat off, if you're losing 1-0 a penalty is better

 

[LoughboroBlade]

There’s too much tinkering to the rules going on as it is in my opinion. Think they’re fine without this sort of change. It was annoying not to get the goal, but tbh forcing them to play with 10 men and an outfielder that could barely move in goal should have been something we could have exploited a bit more – the resultant free-kick was a great opportunity to double our lead simply by getting anything on target, and sadly we wasted that chance (though ultimately not costly).

 

[PokerBlade]

Preference depends on the scoreline and time on the clock.

I think you could argue a ten man team going all out in the last five minutes on Saturday were more likely to score a single goal than an eleven man team were to score two goals.

If we were already two goals up then going down to ten men and losing a player in their next game would be better for us.

 

[Dalelane01]

What about this scenerio though .we are in last game of season we need a point to get to the premier one minute to go .we have a clear goalscoring chance but the said player is brought down outside the penalty area.would you sooner not have this choice
Player sent off .or penalty the fact that you had the choice would make the law better .i know it wont happen .but the offending player might think twice about committint the foul

 

[Dnblade]

While we're on about Penalty shouts...anybody notice Ayling handball first half from Bash's header...maybe ball to hand but at the time I thought he knew what he was doing stretching his arms wide...If that has been at the other end we would have had them whinging they should have had a pen aswell as all the other excuses they are coming out with.

 

[Bladesthorpe]

While we're on about Penalty shouts...anybody notice Ayling handball first half from Bash's header...maybe ball to hand but at the time I thought he knew what he was doing stretching his arms wide...If that has been at the other end we would have had them whinging they should have had a pen aswell as all the other excuses they are coming out with.

Never a penalty stop grasping at straws.

 

[TCsLoveChild]

How about if a penalty is awarded the team conceding can chose to keep their man on the field but give a way a "goal" instead of a penalty, OR, have their man sent off but concede the penalty? Just an idea UTB

 

[Dnblade]

Never a penalty stop grasping at straws.

Yeah fair enough pal...like I said,maybe it was ball to hand,but at the time I thought we had a shout.

 

[Bladesman]

I'd sooner see a better standard of officiating before we start pissing around with the laws of the game.

Even with VAR some of the officials still can't get it correct.

 

[BushBlade]

Yeah fair enough pal...like I said,maybe it was ball to hand,but at the time I thought we had a shout.

Distance of travel was probably too short. His arm was in an ‘unnatural position’ but the ball didn’t travel far so he had no chance of trying to move his arm.

 

[Dalelane01]

I'd sooner see a better standard of officiating before we start pissing around with the laws of the game.

Even with VAR some of the officials still can't get it correct.

Totally agree.mistakes will always be made.whether e mess with the laws of the game or VAR

 

[GreasyChipBeattie]

I think it should like a pentalty try in rugby.
If the ref deems the player would have scored, just give the goal.
Maybe book the player as well rather than sending him off?

 

[Kozzy_is_my_Dad]

When denied a clear goalscoring chance by a foul anywhere on the pitch would you rather
1 be allowed to have a penalty with whoever made the foul to stay on the pitch because you have the penalty
2 continue as the law is now

3 the player gets sent off and you get a penalty
4 or something else
My own opinion is the player stays on the pitch but a penalty is awarded

Walking into this thread like...