Penalties |
Post Reply | Page <1 1617181920> |
Author | ||||
Double Maxim
Robbie Keane Joined: 24 Sep 2008 Location: Sunderland Status: Online Points: 42954 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
|
||||
Double Maxim without doubt the greatest drink in the world
|
||||
Sponsored Links | ||||
Double Maxim
Robbie Keane Joined: 24 Sep 2008 Location: Sunderland Status: Online Points: 42954 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Never a peno for Leeds v the Baggies live on sky now.
|
||||
Double Maxim without doubt the greatest drink in the world
|
||||
Double Maxim
Robbie Keane Joined: 24 Sep 2008 Location: Sunderland Status: Online Points: 42954 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Leeds should have had a peno v Villa Hutton fouling the Leeds player.
|
||||
Double Maxim without doubt the greatest drink in the world
|
||||
Double Maxim
Robbie Keane Joined: 24 Sep 2008 Location: Sunderland Status: Online Points: 42954 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
What was Albrighton thinking of on that peno?
Edited by Double Maxim - 06 Jan 2019 at 6:17pm |
||||
Double Maxim without doubt the greatest drink in the world
|
||||
Double Maxim
Robbie Keane Joined: 24 Sep 2008 Location: Sunderland Status: Online Points: 42954 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
What a daft peno to give away what was yer man from Spurs thinking of.
Edited by Double Maxim - 27 Jan 2019 at 4:35pm |
||||
Double Maxim without doubt the greatest drink in the world
|
||||
Double Maxim
Robbie Keane Joined: 24 Sep 2008 Location: Sunderland Status: Online Points: 42954 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
New peno rule from next season there will be no goals scored from rebounds from the keeper or the woodwork.
If that happens the ref will stop the game and re start it!
Edited by Double Maxim - 05 Mar 2019 at 7:43am |
||||
Double Maxim without doubt the greatest drink in the world
|
||||
Roberto Baggio
Robbie Keane UNBELIEVABLE JEFF Joined: 28 Jan 2010 Status: Offline Points: 37333 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
That's a silly rule IMO
|
||||
The Huntacha
Roy Keane Joined: 27 Mar 2012 Location: Dubai Status: Offline Points: 12781 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
That's quite possibly the worst rule ever introduced to football if that's true.
|
||||
Jimmy Bullard - "Favorite band? Elastic."
|
||||
9fingers
Paul McGrath Ballymun Resident #MONKEANO Joined: 30 Jan 2010 Status: Offline Points: 16144 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Can’t be true Shirley!
|
||||
Double Maxim
Robbie Keane Joined: 24 Sep 2008 Location: Sunderland Status: Online Points: 42954 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Exactly. I saw the report on SSN.
|
||||
Double Maxim without doubt the greatest drink in the world
|
||||
Shedite
Jack Charlton Joined: 09 Dec 2011 Status: Offline Points: 9820 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Devrozex
Jack Charlton Joined: 23 Oct 2010 Location: Dublin Status: Offline Points: 7676 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Have they given any kind of rationale for the rule? The other rules are fairly minor and also logical (i.e players subbing off being able to leave the pitch anywhere to cut down on time wasting) but I'm pretty confused about this one. Have they just decided that encroachment is too difficult to regulate and so have just come up with this idea instead?
|
||||
Fruice
Liam Brady Joined: 22 Nov 2014 Location: Cork Status: Offline Points: 1260 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
I'd imagine the reason behind it is the attacker has an unfair advantage from the rebound.
In that if it was normal play he would under pressure from the kepper coming out and have defenders getting close to him. Whereas with a rebound he as only a tap in most times with the kepper on the ground and he effectively has two relatively easy opportunitys from the spot and the rebound . This is only my thinking on it.
|
||||
KING-CON
Liam Brady Joined: 26 Oct 2010 Status: Offline Points: 1262 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Sky corrected the article and that penalties rule has been taken off. They say it isn’t coming into effect at the bottom now. Ridiculous if it was even considered.
|
||||
SuperDave84
Robbie Keane ooh Thomas, how could you do this to me! Joined: 26 Aug 2011 Location: Far Fungannon Status: Offline Points: 21384 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
The existing rule, afaik, provides that the taker is not allowed to hit it again until another player hits it - that seems to cover the woodwork issue anyway. That is, if the taker hits it, keeper doesn't get a touch, it hits the post and comes back to him and he touches it before anyone else, then he is deemed to have hit it twice. I think the correct ruling then is indirect free kick out, but I'm not sure. I don't think he's allowed to hit the rebound anyway.
|
||||
|
||||
ProudAndLoud
Davey Langan Joined: 12 Sep 2016 Location: Dublin Status: Offline Points: 801 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
100% correct indirect free kick
|
||||
SuperDave84
Robbie Keane ooh Thomas, how could you do this to me! Joined: 26 Aug 2011 Location: Far Fungannon Status: Offline Points: 21384 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Surely the smart thing would be to remove that issue rather than introduce another exception. Advantage should be to the attacking team.
|
||||
|
||||
pre Madonna
Robbie Keane I am MALDING Joined: 30 Nov 2014 Location: Trumpton Status: Offline Points: 44659 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Yeah, that's the same for any time the ball goes dead. It is obviously more likely from a penalty. As an aside, I have often wondered if football would be better without penalty areas. That is to say, still have penalties, at the referee's discretion, but for offences that stop goal-scoring opportunities anywhere on the pitch, rather than for just fouls in the penalty area. It would remove a lot of 'professional' fouls.
|
||||
Post Reply | Page <1 1617181920> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |