I have wondered about this for a long time. Hope someone knows the answer.
Let's imagine that teams A and B play against each others in a cup final. This is the most important game of the season. Team B attacks and finally there is a situation where the ball is going towards the upper corner of teams A's goal. The keeper is lying on the ground and isn't able to do anything. There is though one defender standing right under where the ball is going. He jumps and tries to hit the ball with his head to avoid the goal, but fails of course. I guess everyone has seen situations like this.
So I ask, why doesn't the defender jump and take the ball into his hands? Of course team B would get a penalty shot, but it is a much better situation than a certain goal. What would be the consecvenses of such a save? Of course this would be against the spirit of fair sportmanship, but we all agree that much naughtier things are made in almost every game.
The defender would be sent off, for sure-and probably banned for a good long time. BUT in the last minute of a cup final, they're more likely to miss a penalty than score it, especially if they're Michael Owen.
Statistically it's actually worth doing that in a football match, but only after 16 minutes of the game.
Basically, I think the defender would do it, and the other teams fans would hate him (unless they scored the penalty) and the home team's fans would at least respect what he was trying to do.
Is that all? I'm really surprised that this isn't done more often. After all lots of much worse things happen in sports, such as injuring your opponent and doping.
Besides the obvious red-carding, penalty, presumable ban of at least one match, and fine, there would most likely be a massive general stink caused.
The press would pillory the guy, and he would just be given severe amounts of abuse for being so un-sporting.
And if this was in a cup-final or something, and the resultant penalty was missed (let's assume Michael Owen, Dennis Bergkamp or Chris Waddle is taking it) the culprit's career would pretty much be over I reckon. The uproar would be unimaginable.
It just wouldn't be cricket.
I was reading this article where Joseph Blatter president of the FIFA wants to rule out all ties from football (soccer) and always have a winner and a loser in every game.
I think the idea is great, but what I don't agree with is to define who wins or who loses in a penalty shoot out, which I consider is more about luck than skill, talent and performance.
Blatter is famous for making bad decisions on the FIFA board. He's negligent about referee mistakes, and he once said that he wants the uniforms of female players to be more revealing so guys would show more interest in female football.
My friends you have a football referee on this board: me (i'm talking seriously!)
A part the fact that if the goalkeeper is injured someway the referee as soon as he notice it he MUST stop the game because a team can't play without the goalkeeper (he's the only one player that can't be helped from doctors while the game is going)
but the situation described is different so...
---> Well in a situation like this: red card and penalty.Disqualified for at least one match.(at least, but it's not the referee to judge it)
If Owen miss it...they should injury HIM!!!!!
the defender is not fair, but if he does it....
It's foul!
i would say it's better to take the ball with the hands than to kick one opponent leg and break it :)
i don't like Blatter ideas, too original!
:D Of course I knew that and that is exactly why I wondered and still wonder why this doesn't happen more often. Why don't you make fun of some of the naive replies I got back then instead?
Worth handling on the line and risking a penalty. But look at Henry against Ireland, everyone saw his handball and he even admitted it, his reputaion is permanently tarnished now.
Let your heart rule your head.
I was wondering the same thing myself - if some of these serious (red card) fouls are pre-meditated. I was surprised with what happened in the last Ghana game.