A&H

Millers v Shrews

The Referee Store
Do Keith Shroud and the rest of us a favour by merging laws 10 and 14. Anything that removes content from the book can only be a good thing imo
 
Almost every referee chooses to bend the laws at some point. Anyone who says they don't is either uber strict and drawing attention to themselves, or isn't willing to admit to themselves that they do. How many penalise a keeper who holds the ball for 7 seconds before releasing? How many penalise a throw-in taker if it is taken from 1 metre away from where it went out. How many allow a quick free kick from an offside even though it was taken from 5 metres deeper from where the offence took place. And so on ...

The answer is not many, so it is difficult for the same referees to come out and say they would penalise encroachment at a penalty. Yes, it shouldn't happen, but neither should any of the things I have listed above which regularly do happen.
 
RustyRef said:
Almost every referee chooses to bend the laws at some point. Anyone who says they don't is either uber strict and drawing attention to themselves, or isn't willing to admit to themselves that they do. How many penalise a keeper who holds the ball for 7 seconds before releasing? How many penalise a throw-in taker if it is taken from 1 metre away from where it went out. How many allow a quick free kick from an offside even though it was taken from 5 metres deeper from where the offence took place. And so on ...

The answer is not many, so it is difficult for the same referees to come out and say they would penalise encroachment at a penalty. Yes, it shouldn't happen, but neither should any of the things I have listed above which regularly do happen.
Click to expand...

Which was the point I was trying to make, you won’t find a game that runs without rule breaks every 5 mins that go unpunished.

It’s all about game management / was the outcome affected.

Player encroachment on pens will always happen, if it doesn’t affect the outcome then why blow & by the way as per the pic in the opening of this thread good luck pin pointing who out of the 10 players encroached first booking them & then good luck selling either a re-take or idk.

I’m not saying it’s right or advise bending the laws but if it’s with good intentions & neither team has benefited then I don’t have an issue.

Not to mention nobody has our back out there if we can do something very very occasionaly to avoid controversy like let a penalty stand where no harm was done with players encroaching then I’m all for it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
hi
Since 1994 there has been over 2000 penalty kicks in the Premier League of which 83% have been scored, 13% saved and the balance 4% missed. I would say that in most if not all of the penalties including those scored there are encroachments. So goalkeepers and player get into a habit at all levels of moving hoping for the 1 penalty in 10 where the outcome can be affected. Goalkeepers know that they have to be on the move to have any chance of a save and their natural reaction is to pick a side and make a move.
As a result of this most officials let this slide and when it does happen with a result as in this case the forensic view shows a breach of Law 14. In real time and at pace it will look iffy yet many officials choose to let it slide and only call the mist blatant ones.
FWIW I think that Law 14 has to reflect the reality of what happens. Rarely is there ever a complaint by the kicking team of being unfairly offended against by encroachment. Most if not all see the saved pen as poorly taken, spurning a gift of kicking the ball past a player stood 12 yards away.
So my take on it the wording of law 14 should reflect the reality of what happens and only penalise situations where there is a second forward step by the GK on a save or where on a rebound a defender / attacker plays the ball having encroached before the kick. The debate about not enforcing the law would then be rare.
 
Thinking outside the (penalty) box. The best way to remove the difficulties that this law presents to the ref is to have all penalties taken in the same way that they are in a penalty shootout. That way the other 20 players on the FOP are uninvolved. If the penalty is missed then the restart is an IDFK from the penalty spot to the defending team.

I'm aware that this would be rather odd and a fundamental change to the game but it would remove all the encroachment issues
 
Ben448844 said:
Thinking outside the (penalty) box. The best way to remove the difficulties that this law presents to the ref is to have all penalties taken in the same way that they are in a penalty shootout. That way the other 20 players on the FOP are uninvolved. If the penalty is missed then the restart is an IDFK from the penalty spot to the defending team.

I'm aware that this would be rather odd and a fundamental change to the game but it would remove all the encroachment issues
Click to expand...

What encroachment issues?

Name me 5 major headline encroachment issues from last season..

Infact name me 1?
 
Ben448844 said:
Thinking outside the (penalty) box. The best way to remove the difficulties that this law presents to the ref is to have all penalties taken in the same way that they are in a penalty shootout. That way the other 20 players on the FOP are uninvolved. If the penalty is missed then the restart is an IDFK from the penalty spot to the defending team.

I'm aware that this would be rather odd and a fundamental change to the game but it would remove all the encroachment issues
Click to expand...
This was actually suggested by IFAB in their "Play Fair" proposals.
 
Whether encroachment is in a high profile game or not is irrelevant. Encroachment happens on the majority of penalties and it's a difficult situation for a referee. I'm simply offering a possible solution
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top