Let's rewrite the rules of football........The Penalty Goal - Proposal # 1

[Mick Mac]

Proposal Number 1 - "The Penalty Goal".

If a defending player handles the ball on the line and there is NO doubt that the ball was going into the goal - then there should be no need for a penalty - the referee should be allowed to award a goal.

[????]

Keeper brings down player whose rounded him...same rule?

[ruffers]

Disagree with the proposal - sending off and penalty is sufficient punishment.

[Mick Mac]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Keeper brings down player whose rounded him...same

> rule?

Yes. That seems fair.

[Mick Mac]

ruffers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Disagree with the proposal - sending off and

> penalty is sufficient punishment.

Obviously does not work though - this tempts people to handle on the line, stop the goal and cheat their way into the world cup semis. Current rules allow cheats to succeed.

[????]

wot mick didn't say

[Mick Mac]

Boo

[SimonM]

Hard cases make bad law. What if he were a yard off the line? or 2? Red card and penalty is appropriate and proportionate

[Mick Mac]

Why? the scenarios are not related - What happens to the goal that was being scored but for the handball? A sending off does not result in a goal and a penalty does not necessarily result in a goal either, so the right result is not achieved.

[DJKillaQueen]

It's an interesting proposal but would have some problems that would require video technology to sort. For example, any foul in the penalty area is a penalty (and it could be argued that some players can score form anywhere while others can't). The referee has to decide if it's a red or yellow card but referees often get it wrong when there are lots of players in the box. Also how far out does the GK foul have to be and at what angle to the goal? It not always a given that a player would have got around the keeper, kept control of the ball and scored on target.

The point of the red card and penalty is to put the affected team at advantage and in 99% of cases it works. It's enough.

[SimonM]

What happens to the goal that was being scored but for the handball?

There was no goal. It never existed. The only way to score a goal is to get the ball into your opponent's net. It's a basic principle, set in stone, toasted in blood etc etc

[Mick Mac]

At the end of the day guys you are supporting a rule which allows cheats to stop a goal and progress to the world cup semi finals. If you are happy for that to continue then we will just have to disagree.

We need to disincentivise players from cheating, not offer them rewards when they do.

[Narnia]

I thought you understood the point I made previously Mick that the free kick awarded leading to the handball incident wasn't a free kick and that Uruguay should have been awarded a penalty beforehand. How can you call them cheats?

[Mick Mac]

I was not referring to you at all Narnia. I don't see an earlier free kick as in any way relevant to the point I'm making.

A player handles the ball on the line as he knows the punishment is a penalty and not necessarily a goal. If the punishment was a goal awarded by the referee then the players would not see the same "opportunity" presented by handling the ball on the line. These players currently take advantage of a gap in the rules, which could easily be closed.

[Narnia]

Don't you think what the player did Mick was more instinctive than deliberate, though it's defined as 'deliberate'? I think the scourge of diving/feigning injury is much worse than an act like this. At least it's transparent and leaves no doubt.

[Loz]

I would argue that he didn't cheat anyway. He committed a foul and accepted the consequences under the rules. He saved the goal and won he game for his team. It's no real difference than, say, pulling the shirt of a player to stop him getting head to ball.

If you want to talk about cheats, lets discuss the divers and actors and the like. The players who feign injury to get a free kick or, worse, a player sent off.

Rule change proposal: All games with television coverage shall be retrospectively reviewed by a panel of referees after the game, with cards and suspensions given out for 'simulated actions'.

[Jeremy]

Yep. The rules state that if you commit a foul in the area, you give away a penalty. He was playing the game according to the rules. Sure, what he did is not in the spirit of the game, but I don't think it's "cheating" as such.

Of course, it's alright when England bend the rules slightly. Remember when Sheringham dived against Greece, in a qualifier for the 2002 world cup? Beckham scored from the free kick, meaning England progressed into the competition. The reaction of the media - "Sheringham used all his experience there"! If anything this is worse, as England deliberately tricked the referee.

[Mick Mac]

Would Maradona's handball in 1986 or Henry's handball against Ireland be viewed as cheating? I'd say yes.

Why is this handball not cheating? It does not excuse the act that there is a punishment in the rules, this is still cheating. Seeking to gain an unfair advantage through illegal means.

[Narnia]

Mick, your main arguement was that the wrong team reached the semi-final through cheating. It was cheating but they had been cheated themselves during the match. Besides the guy who 'saved' they goal didn't have the benefit of time to think about his actions.

[Mick Mac]

Narnia - can't you follow the thread in logical order - Loz and Jeremy are saying this is not cheating, I'm responding.

I agree with you there were other forms of cheating in the game, this is one that directly amd obvioulsy prevents a goal. Which for me is wrong and should be addressed.

[Narnia]

Yes Mick I can. You still can't get away from the point that Uruguay got into the semi's deservedly.

[Mick Mac]

You are right - that one I cannot swallow. I hate cheating in any sport. The more it impacts the result the more it is inappropriate.

[Keef]

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ???? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Keeper brings down player whose rounded

> him...same

> > rule?

>

>

> Yes. That seems fair.

But people have missed shots from even a couple of yards out. You donb't know that the player would have scored, however likely it may be.

[Mick Mac]

Agreed I don't know that he would definately have scored, but in rugby it does not have to be definate, just probably.

Penalty try

In both rugby league and in rugby union, if the referee believes that a try has been prevented by the defending team's misconduct, he may award the attacking team a penalty try. Penalty tries are always awarded under the posts regardless of where the offence took place. In rugby union, the standard applied by the referee is that a try "probably" would have been scored. The referee does not have to be certain a try would have been scored.

[Narnia]

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You are right - that one I cannot swallow. I hate

> cheating in any sport. The more it impacts the

> result the more it is inappropriate.

Jeysus Mick, the effin Uruguayans should have had a penalty before. How do you deal with that?