4 ms·

> Most penalties are poorly taken. According to a study of over 100,000 penalties by InStat, about 75% end up in goal [1] It's easy to argue therefore that th

> Most penalties are poorly taken. According to a study of over 100,000 penalties by InStat, about 75% end up in goal [1] It's easy to argue therefore that they fulfill their objective within the rules of football: to concede significantly positive scoring odds to an opponent who has otherwise been denied the opportunity to do so. From what perspective are most penalties poorly taken? Classical mechanics, aesthetics...? [1] https://instatsport.com/football/article/penalty_research https://instatsport.com/football/article/penalty_research

canuckintime 5y ago
Aesthetics wise. It's a 'penalty' shot, it'd be pretty ineffective penalty i.e. punishment if the shot wasn't often successful. So I'm unhappy with the Aesthetics because keepers know it's largely successful and just guess and jump the gun (or study the stats of the takers and then... just guess) which in turn let's the the takers focus on faking out the keeper with stutter steps and weird run ups. I prefer to see penalties where the kicker focuses on the skill of putting it in a spot nd the keeper responds to that. They instituted (or started enforcing) the rule that keepers can't jump off the line before the kick is taken. For purely aesthetic reasons, I'd like something similar so they react to the ball instead of guessing
- arcturus17 5y ago
  The rule revision you're alluding to is merely focused on the statistical outcomes and advantage distributions, and not aesthetics. > I prefer to see penalties where the kicker focuses on the skill of putting it in a spot nd the keeper responds to that It's fine that you prefer this, but this isn't what the penalty rule is about. The rule is balanced so that you create a sufficient advantage for the taker. If you pile requirements on the taker, you probably need to compensate with other advantages (ex: take the penalty from 10m instead of 11m). I can see why this is not something that FIFA would want to touch, ever.
  - canuckintime 5y ago
    > If you pile requirements on the taker, The requirement is actually for the keeper not the tacker. But yes, I know I'm tilting at windmills

canuckintime 5y ago

Aesthetics wise. It's a 'penalty' shot, it'd be pretty ineffective penalty i.e. punishment if the shot wasn't often successful. So I'm unhappy with the Aesthetics because keepers know it's largely successful and just guess and jump the gun (or study the stats of the takers and then... just guess) which in turn let's the the takers focus on faking out the keeper with stutter steps and weird run ups. I prefer to see penalties where the kicker focuses on the skill of putting it in a spot nd the keeper responds to that. They instituted (or started enforcing) the rule that keepers can't jump off the line before the kick is taken. For purely aesthetic reasons, I'd like something similar so they react to the ball instead of guessing

arcturus17 5y ago
The rule revision you're alluding to is merely focused on the statistical outcomes and advantage distributions, and not aesthetics. > I prefer to see penalties where the kicker focuses on the skill of putting it in a spot nd the keeper responds to that It's fine that you prefer this, but this isn't what the penalty rule is about. The rule is balanced so that you create a sufficient advantage for the taker. If you pile requirements on the taker, you probably need to compensate with other advantages (ex: take the penalty from 10m instead of 11m). I can see why this is not something that FIFA would want to touch, ever.
- canuckintime 5y ago
  > If you pile requirements on the taker, The requirement is actually for the keeper not the tacker. But yes, I know I'm tilting at windmills