Alternative to the triple punishment rule

As we're unlikely to see terraces again at football, this is the virtual equivalent where you can chat to your hearts content about all football matters and, obviously, Arsenal in particular. This forum encourages all Gooners to visit and contribute so please keep it respectful, clean and topical.
remigardeshair
Posts: 382
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2014 1:47 pm

Re: Alternative to the triple punishment rule

Post by remigardeshair »

I wasn't being entirely serious.

Where is my sarcasm smiley mods :x

skizz_b
Posts: 1857
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:26 pm
Location: LDN

Re: Alternative to the triple punishment rule

Post by skizz_b »

VoiceOfReason wrote: We're talking here about 'technical' fouls that prevent goal-scoring opportunities.

Technically, aren't all fouls fouls? Or are we to say that technically fouls that are not technical are fouls but the technical fouls aren't? :rubchin:

User avatar
northbank123
Posts: 12436
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 12:05 am
Location: Newcastle

Re: Alternative to the triple punishment rule

Post by northbank123 »

rodders999 wrote:To be fair the keeper not being allowed to pick up a back pass revolutionised the game. Anyone watch re-runs of Italia '90? Absolute muck :banghead:
Agreed. But that was a change which made a significant positive difference to the game.

It's the same as with goal-line technology debate - there are one or two borderline/controversial incidents a season and when they occur people make out like the game of football is being ruined by the current laws. It's such a miniscule aspect of the game and makes up a tiny tiny fraction of on-field injustices.

And that's if you do think it's an injustice. Our keeper flew out, got nowhere near the ball and clattered the player that was through on goal as he rounded him. It was a terrible misjudgement and as a keeper you know since you first put on a pair of gloves you're gonna get sent off for that. It's not the laws' fault that Bayern are a miles better team than us and we weren't able to make any tactical/personnel changes so the game was a pretty awful spectacle second half.

robbo10
Posts: 3473
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 2:43 pm

Re: Alternative to the triple punishment rule

Post by robbo10 »

I think Kim Jong-un could come up with some revolutionary rule changes for football and the "last man" conundrum :twisted:

User avatar
DB10GOONER
Posts: 62227
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland.
Contact:

Re: Alternative to the triple punishment rule

Post by DB10GOONER »

remigardeshair wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:I agree with Rodders. The rule should be changed so that goalkeepers can only be booked, not sent off.
What if the goalkeeper prevents the 'clear goalscoring opportunity' with a two footed drop kick to the forwards head?
Is the two footed drop kick to the head of, say, John Terry (playing as a temporary striker due to ill health or injury of regular strikers) and does it catch him full in the face? Then I'm all for it and I would applaud said keeper's fantastic endeavour. 8)

User avatar
Herd
Posts: 6386
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:00 am

Re: Alternative to the triple punishment rule

Post by Herd »

I STILL DONT SEE HOW THAT WAS A PENALTY ,ROBBENS FOOT WAS DANGEROUSLY HIGH AS THE KEEPER CAME OUT AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN PENALISED FOR IT NOT THE OTHER WAY ROUND . END OF !

User avatar
Bendtners Drinking Buddy
Posts: 2392
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 10:53 am

Re: Alternative to the triple punishment rule

Post by Bendtners Drinking Buddy »

Id have a "Red1" Card - the keeper is suspended for the next match, or as said above a mandatory sub. Sending keepers off ruins games, unless of course for violent conduct etc, and now football is such an expensive game fans shouldnt be ripped off.

I guess the problem is.....what if 5 minutes later the same thing happens?

Post Reply