4 ms·

If the goals were smaller and most penalties did not result in goal that would not mean they are poorly taken. These people are obviously the best in the world

• arcturus17 5y ago
  > If the goals were smaller and most penalties did not result in goal Then they arguably wouldn't be penalties. But there's no need to argue with me, I've been watching football for some odd 30 years and playing for a good subset of that. It has never occurred to me that penalties are taken poorly at the pro level - I've seen absolute dross at the amateur level, but I concur that most pro penalty takers are phenomenal, both from a statistical and aesthetical perspective. Not that I think there is that much value in the latter - by design, a penalty kick is the most aesthetically boring of all set pieces. A penalty kick ensues higher emotions due to the odds at play, but from a purely aesthetical point of view, I'd argue that even a corner kick has a much higher potential (a volley, a bicycle kick, a header, a fine-tuned "chess play" that cracks the defense open, etc.) And a penalty kick doesn't compare to the myriad other open plays in football which have infinitely more aesthetic appeal. A penalty kick is about creating a certain balance of odds, simple as. Every other consideration is secondary.