Bournemouth v Hull

[GraemeS]

I'm intrigued by an incident I've just seen on MOTD, right at the end of the match. A Bournemouth player gets into space in the box, lays it off to a teammate and if then obviously cleaned out. But the teammate is in a good amount of space at the edge of the box, takes a first time shot that goes narrowly over the bar (I think). Referee doesn't give the penalty.

Presuming he saw it and believed it was a foul, the question is raised - does an off-target shot justify playing advantage and ignoring a penalty claim? And would it be any different if the shot is on target but saved and resulting in a corner? The speed it all occurred at definitely made me think he could have justified pulling it back for the PK, as it must have been within 2 or 3 seconds after the foul that the ball was out of play.

 

[Brian Hamilton]

I watched the second penalty replay with interest considering the commentator's comment that it was the same as the first. I noticed that the attacker's feet went up before the top half of his body began moving. My interpretation of this is that he tried to sell the penalty to Martin Atkinson by picking his feet up and making out that he had been tripped. Just my opinion.

 

[Mintyref]

Might be a little biased here, but I agree with Brian on this one. As for advantage, if there is an unhindered strike at goal then for me that's as good as you'll get, advantage over.

 

[es1]

Might be a little biased here, but I agree with Brian on this one. As for advantage, if there is an unhindered strike at goal then for me that's as good as you'll get, advantage over.

Even with a penalty? In this instance the shot taken was 18 ish yards out, defenders sliding in, definitely not unhindered. And even if it were a clearer shot, you're really playing advantage from a penalty (unless a goal is an absolute certainty).

That said, I thought this wasn't a pen anyway

 

[JamesL]

Have done it myself whilst being assessed (as it was back then) Even gave the play on advantage shout.

Player ballooned over. Sold it to the players that the shot they had was actually better than a penalty. It was closer, still central, keepeer wasnt set etc. (indirectly said you should have done better) and no one complained.

Interestingly, I dont believe there was anything in the report specifically mentioning it. Was a few years ago and I no longer have a copy to check.

 

[Mintyref]

Even with a penalty? In this instance the shot taken was 18 ish yards out, defenders sliding in, definitely not unhindered. And even if it were a clearer shot, you're really playing advantage from a penalty (unless a goal is an absolute certainty).

That said, I thought this wasn't a pen anyway

Yes, even with a penalty. I have to say that the advantage would have to be quick, i.e. before I blew for the penalty. And I did state unhindered!
Not my fault a player had a crap shot.

 

[deusex]

Wasn't a foul, but assuming it was the penalty would be the correct decison. Don't even wait for the shot.
I've given a penalty in a similar situation only for the player to hammer the ball into the top corner. Unlucky, but I was happy with my actions as 95% of the time he's not scoring.
Of course if a player has a GREAT chance to score (better than a pen), which was certainly not the case here, then play advantage (very rare, not sure I've ever played advanatge in the area in 10 years)