Is football’s double punishment too harsh?
Roar Rookie By Lincoln9, 29 Oct 2012 Lincoln9 is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- A-League, Brett Emerton, football, Perth Glory, Steve Pantelidis, Sydney FC
Brett Emerton celebrates with Sydney FC teammates (Image: Supplied)
Related coverage
Football has one rule which is in need of an overhaul, where the penalty far outweighs the crime.
The double blow of a red card and a penalty for last man challenges, regardless of their severity, is something that needs to be reviewed, and Sunday’s match between Sydney FC and Perth Glory provided a perfect case study as to why.
Perth were a team in control of the match for an hour, then one fairly innocuous incident cost them both a player and, essentially, a goal, changing the entire complexion of the match.
There is no disputing that as the rule stands, it was a red card to Steve Pantelidis.
But it was the kind of challenge that, if it had happened elsewhere on the field, would have been a free kick at best, probably not even a yellow card.
Brett Emerton was in a good position, but was by no means a certainty to score. That does beg the question as to why Pantelidis chose to put his arm across the Sydney player’s body, but it was something so simple, with no harm caused to the opposing player, that completely changed the match.
How do you change the rule to make it fairer? If the last man incident happens inside the box, give a penalty and a yellow card. The penalty is punishment enough for the defending team, and the yellow card a personal punishment for the player.
If the incident occurs outside the box, where it will only be a free kick with a far reduced chance of scoring, then the referee should still issue a red card to prevent this change to the rule being abused by cynical play.
If the challenge in question was worthy of a red card, regardless of its status as a last man challenge, then the referee’s interpretation should be different.
Yes, I am a Perth Glory supporter – but this is an issue affecting football worldwide. The Pantelidis incident is one that I believe makes this rule topical, but it is by no means the only time such a scenario has happened in the world.
This piece is not meant as a discussion on Pantelidis’ challenge as a particular isolated incident, or the relative merits of Sydney or Perth to winning that particular match.
It is an overriding and broader issue which, in this instance, robbed the fans of a chance to see a match reach the natural conclusion it would have over 90 minutes of battle, rather than five seconds of technicality.
Passionate about your football? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily football email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
- Explore:
- A-League, Brett Emerton, football, Perth Glory, Steve Pantelidis, Sydney FC
October 29th 2012 @ 8:58am
Parko said | October 29th 2012 @ 8:58am | Report comment
Absolutely out of the question. Not sending off cheats in this situation reduces the number of goal scoring opportunities in a sport already criticised for not having enough action around the goalmouth. Assuming the average team has 5 defensively minded players, every game could have 10 good goal scoring opportunities spoiled by players shoving attackers onto their backside in full knowledge that they’ll only get a caution. Sydney v Perth only had about that many good opportunities each in the entire game. Nobody wants football reduced to having the majority of goals scored by penalty kicks. And in addition, you make it seem like scoring from a penalty is a sure thing, which could not be further from the truth.
You call this an “innocuous” incident “with no harm caused to the opposing player”. Rubbish. The replay clearly shows him tugging Emerton’s shirt after removing his arm from around Emerton’s body. Pantelidis didn’t even make a token attempt to get the ball. It was blatent, dirty foul play and he deserved eveything he got. This sort of thing needs to be stamped out of football completely.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:29am
Brick Tamlin of the Pants Party said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:29am | Report comment
It is harsh but they are the rules,you commit the foul and your the last man its a straight red,whether its in the box or not.Panta could have done better Emerton is not known for his fantastic finishing(delightful lob aside)and thats coming from a Glory fan.There are some incidents that need looking at like the Kewell handball in Sth Africa when you compare it to the Suarez one.Suarez deserved to be sent off i havent seen such a blatant handball in my life whereas Kewell was in the way of a pile driver moving through the air i think a yellow and a penalty would have been punishment enough.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:30am
Skyblues > Wandererscum said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:30am | Report comment
We need a 10 minute send-off type of thing, something more harsh than a ycard but less dynamic than a red. Seems so obvious.
October 29th 2012 @ 4:23pm
cliffclavin said | October 29th 2012 @ 4:23pm | Report comment
i think the system they have in hockey (and ice hockey too) is good where they have a green(?) card which is a five minute sin-bin thing. would be good in football – give the fourth official something to do as well – in terms of monitoring the penalty time
October 29th 2012 @ 9:49am
Rusty0256 said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:49am | Report comment
The problem in changing a rule where the last man tackle is not sent-off inside the penalty box is that defenders (especially those not already on a yellow) would have no hesitation in dragging a striker down once inside the box knowing that
a) they are only going to get a yellow card and
b) the keeper at least gets a 50/50 chance of pulling off a penalty save
You might even get a situation where a defender tracking back will actually hold off making the challenge until the attacker is in the box – if that is not cynical I don’t know what is!
And point b) above is amplified if that last defender, cynically pulling down the opposing striker happens to be the goalkeeper (as so often happens). So do we then tweak the rule again so only a goalkeeper can be sent off if the offence occurs in the box?
October 29th 2012 @ 9:50am
Towser said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:50am | Report comment
One wonders if this would be raised if Panta had gone in studs raised & chopped down Emmo causing injury so that he(Emmo) could no longer continue?
If we followed this line of thought a referee would have to make decisions on the viciousness of the action preventing a clear goal scoring oppurtunity inside or outside the box.
“Sorry Panta your feather duster arm across the body only deserves a penalty no red card”
“Sorry Panta your two footed lunge from 3 metres away taking Emmo into the stands deserves a red card and a penalty.
Its the offence that counts,start fiddling with it & the injustices will get worse not better.”
October 29th 2012 @ 9:51am
Fussball ist unser leben said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:51am | Report comment
Nothing in life is fair. Not all penalties & fines fit the crime committed.
Football is just a metaphor for life: the emotions – highs & lows – the injustices, the excitement & the mundane.
Every player knows the Laws of the Game when he takes the pitch.
Here’s a thought … if you’re the last defender & you’ve been beaten and it looks like your opponent is going to score, don’t foul him!
October 29th 2012 @ 10:00am
Brian said | October 29th 2012 @ 10:00am | Report comment
Did you have that opinion after Kewell was sent off against Ghana?
October 29th 2012 @ 10:19am
daniel said | October 29th 2012 @ 10:19am | Report comment
Kewell’s send off was a for a deliberate hand ball in the penalty area. It was probably the worst call Ive seen in many a world cup, but the ref now has a very nice house in Ghana for when he retires. Two very seperate reasons for being sent off though.
October 29th 2012 @ 11:31am
langou said | October 29th 2012 @ 11:31am | Report comment
Just on the Kewel decision. There were only two options
1) no free kick and play continues
2) penalty and red card
He wasn’t sent off for a “deliberate hand ball in the penalty area” as there is no such thing as a accidental handball. He was sent off because the handball denied an obvious goal scoring opportunity.
October 29th 2012 @ 10:43am
Fussball ist unser leben said | October 29th 2012 @ 10:43am | Report comment
Extremely upset by the Kewell decision … but that’s football – players make mistakes, coaches make mistakes, match officials make mistakes.
The ref has to make an instantaneous decision and there is absolutely NOTHING that can ever be done to ensure that every human on earth arrives at the same interpretation of the same observable facts.
To this day some say Berisha’s penalty was unjust; and some say it was just.
Some say Grollo’s penalty was just; some say the opposite.
October 29th 2012 @ 3:26pm
Brian said | October 29th 2012 @ 3:26pm | Report comment
The Kewell one is why the rule is unjust as Iangou said the ref has 2 options and he basically decides the game there and then. The thing in football is that two players can commit the same offence and receive vastly different penalties. One gets sent off after 5 minutes and one in injury time.
The Kewell one was early which is why a penalty and a yellow card would have been just.
October 29th 2012 @ 3:43pm
Sleemo said | October 29th 2012 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
“The ref…basically decides the game there and then” – disagree. If that’s the case why did Australia draw with Ghana 1-1 instead of lose after being down to 10 men for 65 minutes? Shouldn’t they have lost? Similarly how did Melbourne Victory hold on to draw 2-2 with the Roar this time last year after being down to 10 men for 89 minutes and 9 men for 50 minutes? Shouldn’t they have lost too? Shouldn’t the Roar have lost against Adelaide two years ago when up 1-0 at 50 mins and having a man sent off, instead of winning 4-0? Your logic is incredibly wrong.
“Two players can commit the same offence and receive vastly different penalties…one gets sent off after 5 minutes and one in injury time” – so you’re saying that, for example, an horrific studs-up challenge in the fifth minute shouldn’t be punished with a red card, but one in injury time should be? Why? If you commit an offence you should be punished the same, regardless of what time in the game it happens. Again your logic is terrible. If that were the case, look out for all the shocking red-card offences in the first ten minutes of the game because it’s “unfair” for a team to be disadvantaged for a longer period when one of their players makes a horrible challenge early in the game. Yeah right.
“The Kewell one was early which is why a penalty and a yellow card would have been just.” – You obviously don’t understand the law. What happened there gave the referee two options – play on or stop the game, award a penalty and send Kewell off. He had absolutely no discretion to caution him instead. It was either a penalty and red card or nothing. No referee at that level is going to make up the rules as they go along just because something happened in the game. If the laws said “a red card offence should be punishable only with a yellow card if it occurs in the first half” or similar, it would be a different story.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:51am
nk7792 said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:51am | Report comment
I disagree, you pull someone down, a professional foul, deliberate in every sense, you deserve to sit down, and if its a foul in the box then a penalty is the only appropriate outcome.
October 29th 2012 @ 10:14am
langou said | October 29th 2012 @ 10:14am | Report comment
Bring that in and I can guarentee you that defenders would have no hesitation in taking a yellow and chancing their luck with a penalty.
October 29th 2012 @ 10:16am
Minister for Information for the Democratic People's Republic of Football said | October 29th 2012 @ 10:16am | Report comment
This article was written by Steve Pantelidis. The picture looks a little bit like him.
October 29th 2012 @ 10:16am
daniel said | October 29th 2012 @ 10:16am | Report comment
Steve knew the rules and he did it anyway (for the life of me, I’m still trying to work out why). I am also a Glory fan, but have to totally disagree with you on this one mate. Besides, how do u decide the threshold of when a foul is innoculous like Steve’s and when it is too hard and deserves a red? It all becomes too subjective and difficult to referee.
I think Sunday’s match, whilst frustrating for us Glory supporters, showed exactly why football is such an amazing game. Unlike higher scoring codes where the outcome is often a foregone conclusion, in football the better team doesnt always win. This is what makes our game so exciting and why I luv it so much. Sure we were on the wrong end of the score this time, but next time it could be Australia getting a cheeky 1-0 win over Brazil.