That Alvarez penalty

Rule is fine as it is.

There's nothing in the rules saying that Alvarez should take a quick run-up to take the penalty, if he chooses to do that and slips it's on him.
 
I would imagine that the reason why there are differences in how offences by goalkeepers and players are treated is because most penalties are scored.
 
HTG said:
It’s a very simple and transparent rule. It works extremely well. I see no issue at all with it.
Click to expand...
I have seen a reasonable argument in favour of retaking the pen in these scenarios.

When keepers illegally leave their line and save a pen, it gets retaken rather than the penalty taker being rewarded with a goal. So by the same token penalty takers should get a 2nd chance to retake if they slip and hit it twice.


People pretending that it's not hit both feet, or that the ref should ignore the rules in the name of "spirit of the game" are mad.

You can't just change the rules of the game in the middle of a shootout, to be nice to the underdog.
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
I would imagine that the reason why there are differences in how offences by goalkeepers and players are treated is because most penalties are scored.
Click to expand...

Goalkeepers also now get booked for moving off their line.Should a player then be booked for slipping and hitting the ball twice?

Imagine a 90min penalty against Utd for Liverpool, Salah slips hits it twice and the ref calls it, nobody on here would be calling it a stupid rule then.
 
Oranges038 said:
Goalkeepers also now get booked for moving off their line.Should a player then be booked for slipping and hitting the ball twice?

Imagine a 90min penalty against Utd for Liverpool, Salah slips hits it twice and the ref calls it, nobody on here would be calling it a stupid rule then.
Click to expand...
Nobody here is claiming pen takers should be booked for slipping, so you are essentially having this argument with yourself.
 
Oranges038 said:
Goalkeepers also now get booked for moving off their line.Should a player then be booked for slipping and hitting the ball twice?

Imagine a 90min penalty against Utd for Liverpool, Salah slips hits it twice and the ref calls it, nobody on here would be calling it a stupid rule then.
Click to expand...

They get a warning first don't they?

And again, that's a false equivalence because one is a deliberate act and the other is an accident.
 
Oranges038 said:
Imagine a 90min penalty against Utd for Liverpool, Salah slips hits it twice and the ref calls it, nobody on here would be calling it a stupid rule then.
Click to expand...

Plenty of us would. Its a stupid thing to enforce in these situations. Its akin to the offside rule being enforced even if a player isn't involved in play at all. Theres a reason they have that caveat. Because it makes no sense to punish a team for something that has no advantage. No one is going to try and perfect the "slip as I kick the ball to touch it a tiny bit with my other foot before hitting it".
 
the rule is stupid, but the more I think of it, the more it’s on Alvarez. He’s a skilled enough footballer to not plant his left foot so close to the ball
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
I would imagine that the reason why there are differences in how offences by goalkeepers and players are treated is because most penalties are scored.
Click to expand...
I don't know if your implication is goalkeepers are never penalised but penalties have been ridiculously biased against them since VAR came in and they'll force multiple retakes for any infraction they can find if the taker doesn't score.
 
mctrials23 said:
Plenty of us would. Its a stupid thing to enforce in these situations. Its akin to the offside rule being enforced even if a player isn't involved in play at all. Theres a reason they have that caveat. Because it makes no sense to punish a team for something that has no advantage. No one is going to try and perfect the "slip as I kick the ball to touch it a tiny bit with my other foot before hitting it".
Click to expand...

Not a chance would Utd fans call it a stupid rule if Utd benefitted from it.

CassiusClaymore said:
They get a warning first don't they?

And again, that's a false equivalence because one is a deliberate act and the other is an accident.
Click to expand...

The Firestarter said:
Nobody here is claiming pen takers should be booked for slipping, so you are essentially having this argument with yourself.
Click to expand...

No but people are calling a rule to be changed for an incident that has happened once.

Retakes only really happen when a keeper saves it if they step off their line.

Should they also be awarded if the player scores and the keeper is off his line? What if the player puts it wide? Do they get another go?

If a player slips and double touches and it flies wide? Do they get a retake? Or just if they score? And what happens if they miss the retake? Do they get a third go?

Does it apply to everything else then? Goal kicks, throws, corners, freekicks, do tou get a retake if you slip?
 
Oranges038 said:
Not a chance would Utd fans call it a stupid rule if Utd benefitted from it.





No but people are calling a rule to be changed for an incident that has happened once.

Retakes only really happen when a keeper saves it if they step off their line.

Should they also be awarded if the player scores and the keeper is off his line? What if the player puts it wide? Do they get another go?

If a player slips and double touches and it flies wide? Do they get a retake? Or just if they score? And what happens if they miss the retake? Do they get a third go?

Does it apply to everything else then? Goal kicks, throws, corners, freekicks, do tou get a retake if you slip?
Click to expand...
It should mirror the goalkeeper on the line rule. Repeat only if pen is scored.
 
The Firestarter said:
It should mirror the goalkeeper on the line rule. Repeat only if pen is scored.
Click to expand...


We can't have it both ways, complain if referees and VAR get it wrong, but when they get it right, call for rules to be changed just because it was applied correctly and some people didn't like it.

Double touch rule is fine and was applied correctly.
 
DJ Jeff said:
I don't know if your implication is goalkeepers are never penalised but penalties have been ridiculously biased against them since VAR came in and they'll force multiple retakes for any infraction they can find if the taker doesn't score.
Click to expand...
No, just that someone had earlier commented about whether it's fair that a goalkeeper gets to retake the penalty if they step over the line whereas the shooter doesn't.

It's unfair in the sense that the treatment isn't equal. But it's fair in the sense that the conditions aren't equal either: goalkeepers already concede most penalty kicks.
 
FriedClams said:
the rule is stupid, but the more I think of it, the more it’s on Alvarez. He’s a skilled enough footballer to not plant his left foot so close to the ball
Click to expand...
Why is the rule stupid?
 
Oranges038 said:
We can't have it both ways, complain if referees and VAR get it wrong, but when they get it right, call for rules to be changed just because it was applied correctly and some people didn't like it.

Double touch rule is fine and was applied correctly.
Click to expand...
Rules (or some of their interpretaions) get changed all the time. Annually, in fact.
 
HTG said:
Why is the rule stupid?
Click to expand...
I think the people arguing this mean that yesterday's situation is not what the rule referres to or was implemented for - rather it's for players who want to take a deliberate touch forward and then score the penalty which is obviously not allowed. So in that regard it would make sense to add a rule for unintentional double touches.

I actually think the rule is fine though. Things like Alvarez' penalty happen like once every few hundred penalties, tough luck if it happens to you. Doesn't need a separate rule for me.
 
CassiusClaymore said:
That's all that needed to be said. The rest of the sentence is irrelevant and the second sentence is a tedious strawman argument.
Click to expand...

Eh? Real time on camera view... If you want to be like that about it, nothing retrospective should ever happen. If it wasn't obvious to the ref or linesman then just leave it?

Don't bother giving retrospective bans for elbowing or biting either.

We didn't have the same view as the guys in VAR.
 
This things only happen to Atlético :lol:

In the images from behind(can't post media) and from the front-side in the first page you can see how the ball deforms when it touches the left foot.
 
One Night Only said:
Well it wasn't obvious on first glance, but when you see the slowed down replay it's fairly obvious.

Yeah, I'm sure nobody is really trying to handball it in the box either, or score on an own goal, maybe we should just disallow them too?
Click to expand...

CassiusClaymore said:
That's all that needed to be said. The rest of the sentence is irrelevant and the second sentence is a tedious strawman argument.
Click to expand...
I don't think that is all that needs to be said.

The whole point of VAR is that it's impossible at times to be 100% certain of some things with one view at full pace, and so VAR has been introduced to provide things like multiple views, paused / slowed down images, etc. All of which makes a more accurate decision possible. And, therefore, when an image clearly shows the double contact, then that's all that needs to be said as that image clears up the issue much more than the onfield officials having to guess.
 
fergiewherearethou said:
It is impossible to apply a rule if you do not set any boundaries or limits. If it's a touch, it's a touch, doesn't matter how clear it is, if it's an offiside, it's offside, by 1cm, 5cm, or 50cm, it does not matter.
Common sense would mean no VAR, which would imply having mistakes or errors which we've always seen in the past.
VAR clearly affects the emotion and drama of football, I hate that, I hate it when I see the players and fans celebrating only to see a goal ruled out in 30 seconds, but if we want a level playing field there is this sacrifice.
Click to expand...
Then set the boundary to be more reasonable, leave it to the linesman to call and have a rule where VAR can only interfere if there's more than a few inches of a mistake, which would mean the attacker gained an unfair advantage. A toenail is not an unfair advantage.
 
The problem for me isn't the application of the rule, but the wording of the rule which makes this a judgement call rather than something black-and-white.

You can take a free-kick with "two feet" if you so wish. It's part of the rules of the game. There is nothing in the penalty rule that clarifies whether you can or can't do this. All it states is that you cannot hit it twice in succession, which is the same as every other dead ball restart. So if you hit the ball with both feet at the same time, there is nothing to rule it out. For me the burden of evidence then falls on the VAR team to demonstrate that Alvarez either clearly hit it with his right or left foot first, and then hit the ball with the other foot at a different time. If it cannot be evidenced, then the goal should have stood for me.
 
Last edited:
They should change the rule because that is clearly not what it was intended to prevent. Its not the first time this has happened and its a bit silly
 
Oranges038 said:
Should all rules be changed if they applied correctly just because some people don't like it?
Click to expand...
It should be changed because in such a situation it's extremely harsh. If a keepers foot been a millimeter in front of the line can lead to a retake so should be the tiniest of touches of the ball by the other foot of the taker.
 
The Firestarter said:
It should be changed because in such a situation it's extremely harsh. If a keepers foot been a millimeter in front of the line can lead to a retake so should be the tiniest of touches of the ball by the other foot of the taker.
Click to expand...

Slips happen, it affects the outcome of games, you can't go around changing rules because someone slips and it's harsh, this isn't u10s football, there's millions at stake for both clubs.

If a goalkeeper slips on the line and can't dive, it should also be retaken?

If the keeper slips taking a goal kick or a freekick and he puts the ball straight to the opposition. Should he get to retake it, if they score?

Just because it's too harsh?
 
SuperiorXI said:
Then set the boundary to be more reasonable, leave it to the linesman to call and have a rule where VAR can only interfere if there's more than a few inches of a mistake, which would mean the attacker gained an unfair advantage. A toenail is not an unfair advantage.
Click to expand...
As is always pointed out in these discussions, wherever you draw the boundary there'll always then still be debates about a matter of inches / cms being the difference between deemed advantage and non-advantage.

And then it becomes a subjective call, in which different officials / managers / players / pundits / fans will often have different opinions on which call should be made.

The more subjective the rules (the more left open to personal opinion / 'common sense') the more debate there'll be and a wider variety of decisions reached in games leading to inconsistency. The more clear cut and final a rule is, the more consistency there should be about how it's interpreted and the decisions made.

In the offside case, trying to rule on how much of an offside becomes an unfair advantage, and how much of an offside should be allowed as 'they're only a little offside', just leaves it open to massive subjective debate and inconsistency.
 
If a penalty is retaken following a keeper transgression (straying off their line) then why isn’t that the case for the taker? Why does it need to be completely ruled out?

Ridiculous rule. Needs changing to ensure only deliberate attempts at playing the ball twice (the reason the rule was brought in to begin with) are ruled out.
 
SuperiorXI said:
I think rules like this one, similar to offsides being ruled at extreme accuracy, are to the detriment of the game.

Go back to why the rules were added: it's to stop an unfair advantage. Does Alvarez truly gain an unfair advantage there? Does he bollocks. Same with offisdes where the attackers toenail is offside, is there an advantage? My arse is there. In the realms of particle physics perhaps but not in reality.

I would like to see some common sense applied back to rules of the game, it will make for a more enjoyable experience.
Click to expand...
Spot on
 
AdamColeBebe said:
Spot on
Click to expand...
He did gain an unfair advantage by touching the ball twice. It’s that simple.
The people yelling for common sense to be applied would be the first ones to get angry, the second they realise that common sense isn’t a universal thing and everyone understands something different by that.
You are just arguing for more arbitrary decision making and subjective judgement.
 
SuperiorXI said:
Then set the boundary to be more reasonable, leave it to the linesman to call and have a rule where VAR can only interfere if there's more than a few inches of a mistake, which would mean the attacker gained an unfair advantage. A toenail is not an unfair advantage.
Click to expand...
but if you are a toenail over this next boundary you still would have the same discussion, right? Somewhere a line needs to be drawn.
 
Bertie Wooster said:
As is always pointed out in these discussions, wherever you draw the boundary there'll always then still be debates about a matter of inches / cms being the difference between deemed advantage and non-advantage.

And then it becomes a subjective call, in which different officials / managers / players / pundits / fans will often have different opinions on which call should be made.

The more subjective the rules (the more left open to personal opinion / 'common sense') the more debate there'll be and a wider variety of decisions reached in games leading to inconsistency. The more clear cut and final a rule is, the more consistency there should be about how it's interpreted and the decisions made.

In the offside case, trying to rule on how much of an offside becomes an unfair advantage, and how much of an offside should be allowed as 'they're only a little offside', just leaves it open to massive subjective debate and inconsistency.
Click to expand...
Why don't they have a panel-based system then? You could have 3 refs in a room on the VAR and if they unanimously agree the linesman made a clear and obvious mistake: the attacker gained an unfair advantage by being offside, therefore it gets pulled back.

If 3 people are in a room looking at the footage and the guy is offside by a fraction of an inch, they can just go with what the linesman said, not offside by reasoning: didn't gain an unfair advantage.
 
Bertie Wooster said:
I think it's more than that. It's the club benefitting from it. I'm very confident that had it been a Real Madrid player that was penalised, far more 'neutrals' would just be happy about it and wouldn't be yelling about it being dreadfully harsh / unfair / biased - or calling for the rule to be changed.
Click to expand...

Wouldn’t be an issue, if it’d been Mbappe they wouldn’t even have ruled it out.
 
HTG said:
He did gain an unfair advantage by touching the ball twice. It’s that simple.
The people yelling for common sense to be applied would be the first ones to get angry, the second they realise that common sense isn’t a universal thing and everyone understands something different by that.
You are just arguing for more arbitrary decision making and subjective judgement.
Click to expand...
So if the ball didn't move that 1mm are you saying he'd have missed the penalty? I am of course open to being educated on how he got an unfair advantage here.
 
Oranges038 said:
Slips happen, it affects the outcome of games, you can't go around changing rules because someone slips and it's harsh, this isn't u10s football, there's millions at stake for both clubs.

If a goalkeeper slips on the line and can't dive, it should also be retaken?

If the keeper slips taking a goal kick or a freekick and he puts the ball straight to the opposition. Should he get to retake it, if they score?

Just because it's too harsh?
Click to expand...
Are you some beta version of chatgpt ? You are repeating essentially three things. Did you not get that the suggestion is to retake the pen only when it is actually scored, such that some "advantage" has been gained? In the case of missed penalty, just like the case of scored penalty with keepers feet in front of the line, no retaking would be necessary. Hope this helps.
 
SuperiorXI said:
Why don't they have a panel-based system then? You could have 3 refs in a room on the VAR and if they unanimously agree the linesman made a clear and obvious mistake: the attacker gained an unfair advantage by being offside, therefore it gets pulled back.

If 3 people are in a room looking at the footage and the guy is offside by a fraction of an inch, they can just go with what the linesman said, not offside by reasoning: didn't gain an unfair advantage.
Click to expand...
Yes if you want to give the attacker more leeway this would be a possible solution I guess. But what you wont solve with this is players and fans feeling screwed over by a decision because your idea wont change that because that's not possible.
 
Bertie Wooster said:
I think it's more than that. It's the club benefitting from it. I'm very confident that had it been a Real Madrid player that was penalised, far more 'neutrals' would just be happy about it and wouldn't be yelling about it being dreadfully harsh / unfair / biased - or calling for the rule to be changed.
Click to expand...
El Zoido said:
Wouldn’t be an issue, if it’d been Mbappe they wouldn’t even have ruled it out.
Click to expand...
I think it's quite childish to immediately assume 'if it was Real player, there would be no discussions" just like "if it was Real player, this wouldn't be disallowed", leave this tribalism to Madrid/Barça fanatics, but I'm pretty sure vast majority on the Caf was perplexed by this not because it was a player X against team Y, but just because it was a very unusual situation in a very tense moment.
 
SuperiorXI said:
Then set the boundary to be more reasonable, leave it to the linesman to call and have a rule where VAR can only interfere if there's more than a few inches of a mistake, which would mean the attacker gained an unfair advantage. A toenail is not an unfair advantage.
Click to expand...
I guess it is impossible to measure how many inches would be an advantage, even though I agree that a toenail is not, there are 2 options, you are either offside or you are not.
 
Oranges038 said:
The double touch rule is quite simple, once you kick the ball from a set piece, you can't touch it again until someone else does. Same applies to freekicks, goal kicks, corners and throws.

Generally when you kick the ball it will only make contact once with your kicking foot. Unless you shin volley it and it rolls the whole way down your leg and off your toe.

This is obviously an extreme example, but the rule has been applied correctly. If it happens during regular game time, fairly sure it is a freekick to the opposition.

The bolded also makes no sense, curling the ball is based on how much power and spin you are able to apply to it, nothing to do with having smooth feet.
Click to expand...
Try spinning a ball by touching it once at one exact point and come back at me please. You can only dink it that way basically.

You need friction to impart any kind of spin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.