Why does SOCCER has such a cheap way to decide games???

Question

I am absolutely baffled as to why the Idiots who made the penalty kick made the penalty kicks?? Do they not see ITS ALL GUESSWORK?????? How many times have we see the goalie dive the wrong side??? It might as well be rock-paper siccors. And whats the crap about a penalty shot in the crease, does no one realize no one can touch an offensive player in the zone for the risk of getting called??
And are the Refs blind or are they just plain Stupid, do they not see you need to tackle the ball-carrier to get the BALL BACK?? I think the panelty shot should be disallowed, if not, at least move it back a few yards, so that the goalie can ACTUALLY SEE what he was saving...
Anyone with me or against me, any opinon welcome!!!

sry, I agree with the laging theory, But all I am saying is why dont they move it back a few yards so that the Goalie can see what he/she is suposingly saving. Do you guys see that the goalies are just guessing as to which side they are diving? or is it just me..

Answer 1

Although you make some points, if you actually played a sport, it would be easier for you to understand. First of all, have you ever ran for an hour and a half before, with sprinting and slowing down randomly? If you have and then felt like running some more, you're messed in the head/ really weird and need to go submit yourself to an army lab for research. Most likely, you have not and have no idea how it feels to have exerted yourself for so long. Would it be fair for FIFA to say "just keep running?" If that happened, their tiredness of the strikers combined with the not-so-tiredness of the keeper, there would be an even lower chance of getting a goal. Penalty kicks are a way for the game to end if players are just too tired to come up with a goal.

Your next point, "Do they not see ITS ALL GUESSWORK??????" also makes no sense. Did you see the game between England and Portugal? Did you see the Portuguese keeper, Ricardo, correctly read the shots of every single English player? If you didn't you could claim ignorance, but if you did, there is no way you could pass that off as simple guesswork.

Your next point, "does no one realize no one can touch an offensive player in the zone for the risk of getting called??" makes even less sense. Do basketball players all move out of the way for fear of getting called? Do hockey players suddenly let the attacker go straight to goal because they don't want to give up a penalty? In professional FOOTBALL, there are limitations on what is illegal contact and what is legal contact. Did you see some football games? Did they all involve an attacker getting into the 18 yard box? The chance of a penalty kick actually occurring is very little. less than 10 games out of the entire world cup this year had PK's during regulation time. What does this mean? It means that the chance of a penalty kick being given to the attackers is very rare.

Next point: "do they not see you need to tackle the ball-carrier to get the BALL BACK??" has absolutely no meaning in sports. Of course you have to get the ball back, but you can't do it any way you pleased (except in American football). Can a basketball player just punch someone and complain to the ref, "I was just getting the ball back!" The point is to get the ball and score, but a player must do it within the rules of the game. If he commits a foul, the ball is given back, just like most sports.

Your next point, "so that the goalie can ACTUALLY SEE what he was saving..." have some value but not too much. Penalty kicks are awarded to players who have been robbed of a opportunity to score by a defender. This should be in a very easy position in order to compensate the attacking team. If the ball was too far away, defenders would commit a lot more fouls because they know that is would be unlikely for the opposing team to score. The PK is a threat of almost a guaranteed goal to keep play clean in the box.

Although you may have you own thoughts on the way a long game should be ended, the current one is probably the best one that puts enough emphasis on a FOOTBALL skill (unlike rocks, paper, scissors).

Answer 2

I do understand what you're trying to say but remember that the players get really tired. The only way they get to a penalty kick is if no one scores in overtime and by that time they would have been running for 2 hours. That's a lot and they are pretty tired by then. A penalty kick is there for a reason...yes it's not the greatest way to determine a winner but then again they do practice for this and goalkeepers are supposed to have superfast reflexes. There should be an alternative to penalty kicks because at times the better team may lose due to great guesswork by the goalkeeper but as of right now..this is how it is. If you can come up with a better way that will suit the players condition and involve the goalkeepers too...try sending that into like a national soccer corporation or something like that. Get it heard and maybe that's what we'll see in the next World Cup Games.

Answer 3

I don't Know your son or you personally obviously, But Diets tend to fit better to the person rather then being forced upon them, I think you should consult your son about it, any town or city center should have a nutritionist to consult, they can help your son find a diet that suits him, and as for exercises, just a hobby like base ball isn't going to be enough as exercise, good full body exercises may include swimming, runnning, boxer-cise etc. I would highly recommend Boxer-cise, if you can find a group at a local gym it's a very rewarding, fast paced form of exercise, and if you want to see results then that's probably the way to go, I would say that you should start doing an hour a week for about a month or so and then build up 2 days a week 3 days a week etc. \but all of the exercise in the world won't make a difference if he doesn't have the right diet, it depends how YOU want him to lose weight, he can lose weight through dieting, or exercise. The right diet can help you lose weight consistently (low calorie intake etc) but a good workout requires a higher calorie intake (but NOT under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES junk food, I mean carbohydrates, proteins etc) a nutritionist can explain further, but i'm afraid i can't help much.

Answer 4

I think penalty kick shootouts need to be thrown out, but penalty kicks as they happen in the game, no. I mean, sure, a bad ref could give a team a penalty, but a bad ref could give a team a penalty, but a bed ref could make any number of bad calls that change the game, not necesarily a penalty. And penalty kicks were made for fouls inside the box, they were not made to "decide matches". And also, it isnt all guess work either. Ricardo, Portugals keeper, faced five penalties- four in Portugals shootout against England, and one in their semifinal against France, and he went the right way EVERY time, all five. So if the keeper is good, it isnt just guess work. Also, he saved three of those five, and got his hand on the other two. Personally, I have seen the keeper go the wrong way 43 times. And again, you can tackle someone inside the box as long as it is a legal tackle. Fouls inside the box are just the same as every other part of the field. However, because the result is a penalty kick, they tend to be noticed a lot more. There are bad reffs in every sport, and every tournament. There are also good refs. Asking for not one single bad call is entirely realistic. Yes, in this tournament they were worse than usual. No, in other tournaments, they werent this bad. The penalty system (in the game, not shootouts) is fine, just as the carding system is fine, just as the offside system is fine. It is the refs who make these systems work or not.

Answer 5

You are absolutely right. I think they should continuing playing until someone scores. And someone WILL SCORE. Look at baseball: after the ninth inning of a tied game they continue till someone scores, and generally it doesn't take that long. I think PKs are a cruel way to award a world cup...Imagine if we had that rule in baseball: then we would have five batters come up and try and hit one pitch each; whichever team hits the most pitches would win...PATHETIC>>>

Answer 6

I totally agree with you. I think that FIFA should take out PKs... esp. PKs in final. i mean...why should anybody receive the World Cup by PKs. PKs = nothing more than, I can score from a 12 yards line. Brazil didn't deserve the 1994 trophy using PKs and neither should Italy deserve this year's trophy by PKs which they were avenging from their lost in 1994. PK winners = soring losers. agree?

Answer 7

It's a boring game to start with. Get some real athletes in there for a change.

Answer 8

I actually do not agree with you. If a penality is really bad and it is in front of the goal, it should be a near 'free-bee' situation since the defense practically robbed the other team of a goal.

Answer 9

well with the PK...i understand why they are doing it...its because most players were playing for 1 1/2 hours long and then to keep going and then no one scoring..the game could go on forever.

Answer 10

LMAO! rock paper scissors would be more fun though...you have a lot of good points. maybe you should write the person who invented pks a very long email. lol.