Only around 6 / 1,000 shots in the premier league create XG higher than a penalty (so Arsenal had 3/4). And the majority of fouls that lead to a penalty have less than a 10% chance of leading to a goal (including way too many non-deliberate handballs)
Penalties have actually been getting easier with VAR ensuring keepers stay on their lines and the new rules stopping the keepers distracting the taker.
I think it would make the game fairer and more exiting if penalties weren’t an almost guaranteed goal. So I came up with some ideas to reduce the impact of penalties:
- Require the fouled player to take the penalty.
- Offer indirect free kicks for non-deliberate handballs.
- Prohibit stuttered run-ups, making the kicker’s approach more predictable for goalkeepers.
- Move the penalty spot back.
- Use VAR to penalise diving more harshly
Let me know if you agree that penalties are too hard and if so how we could change them?
I’ve also explored more ideas in a new video, consider giving it a watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6elPY8ZvtI.
You must log in or register to comment.
I think they should take the penalty wearing beer goggles.
Have you ever made yourself dizzy and tried to kick a football? Might be good craic if they implemented it
Nah. Place your hand on the ball, run 10 rounds around the ball with your hand still on it and then shoot.
why would we change something that was designed this way on purpose? I don’t understand the question, it is supposed to be easy and it should discourage fouling in the box
i’ve been looking for a video like this. i’ve always thought that penalties rewarded soft fouls waaaaay too much
HonestlyI think two things:
Keeper should be allowed off the line, and no stuttered run ups
As soon as the penalty taker takes one step forward, the keeper should also be able to move off the line and do whatever they want. That rule would also probably reduce long drawn out stuttered run ups as the keeper could literally run out and boot the ball away before the penalty taker has a chance to shoot
Tbh this would be great
May not be a popular opinion but penalties would be better if they were like old MLS pens.
Attacker vs keeper both have a chance to think and react and you can honestly say it’s a 50/50 situation.
I strongly agree on the third point. Stuttered run-ups should be banned. Not to mention that players look so stupid when they do a weird walkup and miss (looking at you, Zaza).
We suggested in the last thread that non penalty taking players were allowed to enter the box and challenge as soon as the penalty taker began moving towards the ball as a means to stop this.
How about awarding handballs/pullbacks as indirect freekicks instead?
Maybe award penalties based on severity of the challenge… instead of having these “soft penalty” debates, just have them as indirect freekicks instead, and the most blatant stonewallers, as penalties still 🤷🏻♂️
I’ve always felt that too many occasions don’t merit a free shot on goal from 12yds. Like a foul near the edge of the box when there’s 5+ defenders between them and the goal. I think the occasions aren’t specific enough to merit the change, but it would be ideal imo to see those instances become direct free kicks inside the box instead, allowing a wall since there were defenders there when the infringement occurred.
Then don’t break the rules and foul opponents in your penalty area
If that’s the case, then punish everything in the box. Referees already apply selective reasoning to penalties, as ‘contact not warranting a penalty’ is always used to justify decisions. If it would be a free kick outside of the box (like Hojlunds grab on Rodri) then punish it accordingly.
It isn’t expressly treated any differently
How many dives or simulations do we see in those exact scenarios?
Not particularly many
That’s an entirely separate issue.
Michael Cox (The Athletic) suggested having a semi-circle penalty area a la 5-a-side.
This way, any foul within this area would be close enough to goal to justify a penalty.
Then again… If the offensive player is running away from goal i.e. to the touchline, then this idea falls flat.
Also encourages diving as the rewards are so great. The spirit of the game has been lost.
I think the solution to that problem isn’t harder penalties.
It’s harshly and consistently punishing dives, which we very rarely ever do.
Agreed and not giving soft penalties
What the fuck is xg?
Sounds like a load of wank to me
What the fuck is xg?
Chelsea FC coping mechanism.
I’d just get rid of penalties for anything other than clear denial of a goal scoring opportunity, where the offence prevents the direct opponent shooting.
Why are we giving free shots on goal for a dubious handball that takes place in the far corner of the box when we’ve no idea if it will result in a chance to score.
As others have said, the risk/reward for forcing a penalty is heavily gamed towards the attacker, and just invites all manner of diving and conceited attempts to ‘win’ a penalty. Case in point, the Kane dive vs Malta (?) which he was correctly carded for diving for as an example.
Give them direct free kicks 30 yards from goal, or an indirect fk in the box, for everything else
Why are we giving free shots on goal for a dubious handball that takes place in the far corner of the box when we’ve no idea if it will result in a chance to score.
While I agree with the sentiment, this approach would be far too subjective to apply consistently.
Penalties are supposed to be a reward, they should obviously hugely favour the attacking team?
First won’t work, what if someone is fouled and injured? Do they have to take it injured? Does someone else? Then what’s to stop them playing an injury just so someone better at penalties will take it?
Why? It’s a penalty, so the game can be stopped while the injured player receives treatment, if they want to play on they can take the penalty. If they don’t want to take it then the person that takes their place off the bench can take the penalty.
They take it unless they are substituted
No. The game should be kept to the original principles as much as possible. If we keep changing things, eventually you have a whole new game.
The game is fine, it just needs better refereeing
So you think it’s okay for a dubious handball on the edge of a box filled with defenders to result in an 80% chance of a goal?
Agreed with this, and to answer some other comments, the problem with handball is the recent changes, not the penalty. The whole point of a punishment for breaking the rules is that it’s worse. If you only have penalties for sure goals then the game would massively change the other way to favour the defender, we would see almost no goals and the game would suck. Its already super hard to score and you want to make it harder by encouraging fouls.
With VAR we should be able to catch a lot more diving, so maybe make the diving punishment worse if you think it’s such a big problem?
Agreed with this, and to answer some other comments, the problem with handball is the recent changes, not the penalty. The whole point of a punishment for breaking the rules is that it’s worse. If you only have penalties for sure goals then the game would massively change the other way to favour the defender, we would see almost no goals and the game would suck. Its already super hard to score and you want to make it harder by encouraging fouls.
With VAR we should be able to catch a lot more diving, so maybe make the diving punishment worse if you think it’s such a big problem?
Penalties are supposed to discourage tactical fouls to prevent goals. We want them to almost never be worth it. The game is more exciting if attackers are allowed to finish the plays and score open play goals, unless the defenders can stop them by fair means.
Now the discussion about hand ball when there isn’t a clear chance is a tricky part. But I prefer rules to deal with that actual problem rather than making penalties harder to score.
Although penalties discourage tactical fouls, they encourage the attacker to look for contact and go down. Attackers often play for the foul and go down with little contact rather than looking for the finish.
That’s a small downside yes but the upside outweighs that… defenders also need to stay honest and not give unnecessary contact in the box
So many games are decided by dubious penalties. I wouldn’t say it’s a small downside
If you go the reverse way you’re going to be saying “so many games are decided by X cheap tactical foul in a clear goal scoring opp”
Agreed. Would rather the game be decided by a soft pen than defenders get away with tactical fouls in the box. It’s just the lesser of two evils. Obviously ideally it’s decided by neither but if I had to choose between being on the receiving end of simulation from an attacker or something like Barca vs Chelsea 2009 (I’m a Chelsea fan so that’s the first thing that popped into me head), I’m choosing the former. There has to be a stict punishment for denying a goalscoring opportunity. There’s no worse feeling in football than when you’re possibly about to score, the attacker fouls/handballs etc in the box and the defending team don’t end up conceding.