Should Penalty Shootout's have the ability for a rebound?

Juninho10

Well-known member
I was thinking about this the other day...... I don't think it should happen - it was more a WHAT IF

Should Penalty Shootout's have the ability for a rebound? - I don't know how the rebound would work in reality, but I guess the keeper having to turn it around the post / over the bar and the ball 'going out of play' ends the opportunity

Maybe if the keeper saves the ball and the ball doesn't travel 'over' the 6 yard box line / or the keeper manages to retrieve the ball before it reaches the line.... then the player can't rebound the shot

THEN I thought....

What if the 5 standard penalty kick takers had to include a goalkeeper to take a penalty

THEN I thought....

What if the 5 standard penalty kicks had to have a non-goalkeeper in goal for 1 of the 5
 
no, but maybe we should look at the system used in the MLS when it first started. You start 35 yards from goal and you have 10 seconds to score, 1-vs-1-tastic. A much better challenge and test of players ability.

More entertaining too. I'm in.
 
More entertaining too. I'm in.

Ok, I'll go with this, but only once it gets to sudden death. Or else the attacking player had a choice. Or, even better, the goalkeeper had the choice once they saw who the opponent was. Or spin a coin.
 
We used to do 'beat the keeper' at the Riverside at half-time, back in the days when there was such a thing as 'half-time entertainment.'
 
We used to do 'beat the keeper' at the Riverside at half-time, back in the days when there was such a thing as 'half-time entertainment.'

I do vaguely remember it. It was mostly awful though wasn't it? Preferred the penalty comp.

I dunno, there's just something about the thought of say, Rudy Gestede, having to dribble the ball towards the keeper from 35 yards out and try and find a cool finish that fills me excitement.
 
I do vaguely remember it. It was mostly awful though wasn't it? Preferred the penalty comp.

I dunno, there's just something about the thought of say, Rudy Gestede, having to dribble the ball towards the keeper from 35 yards out and try and find a cool finish that fills me excitement.
I used to quite like it. Because it was usually someone wearing work shoes or hiking boots who had never played football (or not for a long time) nearing the penalty area not having a clue what to do when one on one with a professional (young) goalkeeper. More often than not it was quite funny I thought.
 
I think it works ok as it is, but I'd change it a bit -

At the end of the first five penalties for each side, if the scores are tied, then a team that has had a player or players sent off loses.

And no, if the goalie saves it then it's a missed penalty even if the taker can kick the rebound in.
 
I was thinking about this the other day...... I don't think it should happen - it was more a WHAT IF

Should Penalty Shootout's have the ability for a rebound? - I don't know how the rebound would work in reality, but I guess the keeper having to turn it around the post / over the bar and the ball 'going out of play' ends the opportunity

Maybe if the keeper saves the ball and the ball doesn't travel 'over' the 6 yard box line / or the keeper manages to retrieve the ball before it reaches the line.... then the player can't rebound the shot

THEN I thought....

What if the 5 standard penalty kick takers had to include a goalkeeper to take a penalty

THEN I thought....

What if the 5 standard penalty kicks had to have a non-goalkeeper in goal for 1 of the 5
Or what if.....

When you attend you are given a raffle ticket and 5 minutes before the teams come out a draw takes place 11 players from the home fans, 11 players from the away fans and the order of the the numbers drawn forms the order of the penalty takers with the first number drawn automatically designated as the keeper. In fact you could charge for the raffle tickets, a bit like they do in 20/20 cricket when you get an orange t-shirt and if you take a catch you win some cash and top up matchday revenue.
 
Why not lets make the takers use their wrong foot or blindfold them and the keeper for comedy value. Mind, before you know it VAR will be deciding the outcome without the need for footballers to take a spot kick.

Or radically, we could just leave the rules alone and enjoy football the way our forefathers intended........ just a daft thought.
 
They could have a look at what hockey does (field hockey).

Similar to a penalty shot in ice hockey, the attacker gets a chance to run with the ball in a one-on-one situation against the goalkeeper.[4] The attacker starts on the 23-metre line with the ball and the goalkeeper starts on the goal line. When the whistle is blown, both can move and the attacker has 8 seconds to score a goal.[5] Unlike a penalty stroke or penalty corner there are no restrictions on strokes the attacker may use to score and a goal is scored in the usual way. If the attacker commits an offence, the ball travels outside the field of play,[nb 3] or 8 seconds elapse before the ball crosses the line a goal is not awarded. If the goalkeeper unintentionally fouls the attacker then the penalty shoot-out is re-taken; in the event the foul was intentional[nb 3] a penalty stroke is awarded.[3]

and I don’t mean give the players sticks. 😛
 
Penalty shootouts are fine as they are. They're not really for entertainment are they? They're for splitting teams who can't be split by any other means. If you want entertainment, lets have multiple replays back.

They favour the taker anyway; no need to add rebounds.

I think the ABBA system is probably fairer than ABAB, but its still a case of the winner takes it all.
 
Why not lets make the takers use their wrong foot or blindfold them and the keeper for comedy value. Mind, before you know it VAR will be deciding the outcome without the need for footballers to take a spot kick.

Or radically, we could just leave the rules alone and enjoy football the way our forefathers intended........ just a daft thought.

Take pens in flippers(y)
 
Penalty shootouts are fine as they are. They're not really for entertainment are they? They're for splitting teams who can't be split by any other means. If you want entertainment, lets have multiple replays back.

They favour the taker anyway; no need to add rebounds.

I think the ABBA system is probably fairer than ABAB, but its still a case of the winner takes it all.

I can imagine it now the manager asking the team who in the squad wants to take one and back comes the volunteer response.... I do, I do, I do, I do, I do
 
I’ve often wondered about the rebound option, pen taker gets one extra kick if he can get to it first outside the 6 yard mark. I mean you wouldn’t want penalties going to 14-13 or anything like that, so get it over with.
 
They could have a look at what hockey does (field hockey).

Similar to a penalty shot in ice hockey, the attacker gets a chance to run with the ball in a one-on-one situation against the goalkeeper.[4] The attacker starts on the 23-metre line with the ball and the goalkeeper starts on the goal line. When the whistle is blown, both can move and the attacker has 8 seconds to score a goal.[5] Unlike a penalty stroke or penalty corner there are no restrictions on strokes the attacker may use to score and a goal is scored in the usual way. If the attacker commits an offence, the ball travels outside the field of play,[nb 3] or 8 seconds elapse before the ball crosses the line a goal is not awarded. If the goalkeeper unintentionally fouls the attacker then the penalty shoot-out is re-taken; in the event the foul was intentional[nb 3] a penalty stroke is awarded.[3]

and I don’t mean give the players sticks. 😛
That's what the MLS shoot outs were like, the fans liked the format but hated that they did in any league game that ended in a draw.

 
Back
Top