re: The Penalty Box is too gotdamn big

quote:

---

and i doubt i would give a high school soccer player 50% odds

---

I would imagine the goalkeeper would be able to read hips and guess properly almost all of the time.

quote:

---

1 out of 3 to 1 out of 5 decided by PKs*

---

*ASSumtion made that every PK is the deciding goal in the game.

Here's a quick and dirty way to look at the numbers...
Out of 380 PL matches last year:
1063 goals scored
149 games were decided by one goal (59 were 1-0)

That means 8.1% of the goals were PKs.
If you assume that any goal has the potential of being the game winner. Then only 12 games were decided by a PK (8.1% of 149 is 12).
What's 12 games in 380? That would be 3%.

Now the question is, "Is 8% of goals being PKs acceptable?" That is just from the last year of the PL. Other leagues and years could be very different.

Bonus stat: 108 games ended in a tie (35 of which was 0-0) I had the number figured I'd share it too

quote:

---

A simple replay system

---

Boo!

a lot more no calls would help everything IMO. just tell the refs to make sure its a pk when you reward it. when in doubt say no call. would help with flopping too

Plus if you do the behind the net officials you could have three sets of eyes on the play.

if 8% of goals are pk's then i dont think that number is too particularly high

quote:

---

not sure what you mean by WC Elimination Round format.

---

Maybe I misunderstood what you said.

quote:

---

basically the thing that irks me and many others about PK's is how random they are. The goalie can only guess to where the kicker will kick the ball, leading many goalies to dive the wrong way. Pk's basically come down to luck and chance. Any person with soccer abilities can score a pk against a world class goalie.

---

I don't know that anyone can do it against a great goalie, but I guess I see your point.

My point is, in tournaments, if it is not aggregate scoring then you have elimination play. What do you expect them to do after 90 minutes? They already get 2 extra time periods of 15 minutes each. What else would you have them do?

ETA: Excluding Group Play; I mean once you get to an elimination round.

quote:

---

"Is 8% of goals being PKs acceptable?"

---

no IMHO

pks are ghey and are not a triumphant feat

if the foul is directly in front of goal AND player is on or near ball...then okay a simple flick,header,tap could have gone in...and a PK should be awarded

that's why I said to only change the dimensions.

people will still flop like figs, but at least you can set up a wall and they have to skillfully get the ball into the back of the net

You act like most PKs are given arbitrarily, which isn't the case at all. Most PKs are given in the vicinity of the goal mouth where the most desperate challenges occur. Decreasing the size of the Penalty area would help defenses in a big way, as challenges tend to become more last ditch in those areas. Without the danger of giving away a penalty, defenses would become emboldened and much more physical toward the goal mouth. Also decreasing the size of the penalty area would probably lead to a much more defensive game overall, as in modern high pressure systems rely on a sweeper keeper whose effectiveness would be reduced because of the limited area they would be able to handle the ball. The response to this would be deeper defensive lines, a much more physical game, and for what benefit? So less goals are scored from PKs? That is ultimately ridiculous, since it really hasn't ever been a problem, except in the minds of deluded Americans.

I'd much rather goalie technology introduced, along with some type of replay system for big decisions.

quote:

---

crazy4lsu

---

Agreed except on the replay idea

quote:

---

More of the issue in OP is that the pk's that are happening that arent really goal scoring chances that are on the edge of the box.

---

Meh.

Even if you look at the PK from last night's MEX/PAN game.... If he successfully splits those two defenders, he's either right in on goal, or at worst driving to the touch line to lay it back for an easy shot on goal.

Even though the foul occurred at the very edge of the box, it denied Panama a certain goal scoring chance.

Are you trying to say that incidents like that are common when penalties are given?

Obviously a dive by Larsson but I'd say a good percentage of refs would call that a foul, though whether it would be a penalty or not is a matter of some controversy.

I think the Wolves defender is Jody Craddock, who is in no man's land in terms of defensive positioning. He has to make that challenge or Larsson is free to either go to the by line or have a shot at goal.

What are you trying to prove by using this example?