Should They Stay Or Should They Go?

By: Rob | August 30th, 2009

So after all the hoo-ha about Eduardo’s stumble and fall, this weekend bought up a few more similar incidents (inevitably) that made me question the keeper’s role in all this. I mean, although Eduardo clearly dived, he wouldn’t have had the chance had Boruc stayed up on his feet, made himself big and stopped any Eduardo strike. How likely would Eduardo have been to score from the angle he was at?

Yesterday when Arsenal took on Man United, the roles were reversed (above), as a Ryan Giggs pass sent Wayne Rooney through on goal the striker saw Almunia coming, chipped the ball over him, and waited to be bought down. Almunia obliged, and Man United got a penalty against the run of play that put them back in the match.

And then again, as The Galácticos 2.0 got underway (below, after the jump), Raul was put through on goal with a punishing through ball, found himself one on one with the keeper and then, knocked the ball away from the keeper and waited for him to commit himself, before winning a penalty.

On both occasions, Rooney and Raul were heading away from goal, and both strikers knew exactly what they were doing in drawing the foul. I’m not saying either wasn’t a penalty-kick, but what I am saying is that keepers have to get a bit more savvy in these situations.

Look at the Rooney one again. Rooney charges through from a brilliant pass, and he’s taking the ball well away from goal. Surely if Almunia stands his ground, the United striker has made the angle very difficult to score from.

And as for Raul, well he isn’t in a position to score at all. Maybe to cut it back, but he would have to hold it for support, which would give the Deportivo defence time to recover.

All I’m saying is that if they aren’t going to get the ball, its not really worth giving away a penalty by going down, is it?

Other inspiring things from those matches – Iker’s beard, Arshavin’s hulk out, and Wenger’s sticking it to the man after being sent off.

Some Related Stories:

Category: English Premier League, Europe, Spain La Liga

« Inter give Milan a massive wake up call | Home | Deadline Day approaching – Jenas to Inter? Really? »

The Offside RSS Feeds

sscouser

#16 - AD1000 Says:
Can people stop saying how Arshavin scoring makes his not getting the penalty ok. If we had got the penalty I assume Van Persie would have scored thus increasing his confidence but more importantly Fletcher would have got a yellow card. He was easily their best player and card would surely have slowed him down causing him to think twice before making some of the challenges.
http://www.arsenalvision.co.uk...
b

I'm pretty sure most every official on the planet, if they were being honest, would say that you don't give a penalty for a soft foul in the box. That it's a case by case decision. That it requires the official's professional opinion to apply the rules.

But again, only someone watches a lot of football would understand that, I guess.
Dustin

"And only someone who doesn’t watch much football could say that."

And someone who doesn't Ref Football can say, whatever the hell you just said.
Zito

That's the logic that you're using, it's mind numbingly bothersome. I can't see how you can even type it without seeing how wrong it is.
sscouser

Without going into a deep philosophical argument let me just conclude that a ball placed at the crest of a hill might roll into any of several valleys depending on slight differences in initial position.
Rob

sscouser - fine, using the butterfly effect we can go into quite a deep philisophical argument, but basically the penalty was deemed irrelevant as Arsenal scored right after, surely.

Zito - eh what?
Zito

Rob, I guess since slaves were free eventually, slavery doesn't count. That's just stupid logic.
sscouser

Rob, if the Arshivin Penalty were awarded we don't know who would have taken the penalty and how Arsenal players would have celebrated (and thereby affecting everything else). 20 seconds can have a big impact on things. "If only I had waited for another 20 seconds, I wouldn't have been hit by the train"
bobby_digital

rooney dove...only difference is almunia made contact...and u can also claim that rooney would have never got the ball anyway as his touch sent it out of bounds right into the advertisements.... but it was united playing at old trafford, its an unwritten rule that they always get the advantage at home...
Rob

"Then it’s also safe to say that had “Arshavin’s penalty” been awarded then the Rooney penalty incident wouldn’t have happened because the dynamics of the game would have changed. In other words, “Arshavin’s penalty” if awarded would have been a game changer. Agree?"

In this instance, I'd say no. The outcome from the penalty would likely be an Arsenal goal, and the outcome from them not getting a penalty was a goal, because Arshavin banged it in anyway.
Michael

I think the non call on Fletcher is the biggest issue here. I mean Arshavin had more control of the ball and Fletcher had no touch on the ball at all. Clear and cut penalty. I think Almunia clearly is to blame on the Rooney penalty. He is a top flight keeper you cannot make that mistake. I thought it was a penalty. I think Diaby is to blame here. That is a mistake that should never happen. In THAT game in THAT situation. That was the game. He blew it.
sscouser

@ Rob/Joel: "I’m not so sure about Arshavin’s penalty claim, but his goal (20-something seconds later) wouldn’t have happened."

Then it's also safe to say that had "Arshavin's penalty" been awarded then the Rooney penalty incident wouldn't have happened because the dynamics of the game would have changed. In other words, "Arshavin's penalty" if awarded would have been a game changer. Agree?
Zito

Doesn't matter if he scored seconds later, who is to say that he would not have scored again if he was given a penalty, that argument is simply illogical. I mean, because he scored later, that excuses not giving a blatant penalty? That's just bullshit, justice should be served regardless of what happens after.
b

"the rule is foul in the box = penalty kick. not some wholly subjective unwritten law of the forefathers of whatever other bullshit thing that someone wants to come up with."

And only someone who doesn't watch much football could say that. Things that would be fouls anywhere else on the field are routinely ignored in the box. Why? Because you want the game decided by the players, not officials. And not penalty fishers.
b

a foul in the box is a penalty. touching a striker's dragged leg while he's already diving after he's chipped the ball away? it's a penalty if you're Man U at Old Trafford. otherwise, i'm not so sure. i'd say let them play.

Arsenal lost the game because they're still a bit inexperienced. doesn't change the fact that that was a shit penalty and a pathetic play from a supposedly world class striker.
Joel

@sscouser - I'm not so sure about Arshavin's penalty claim, but his goal (20-something seconds later) wouldn't have happened.
Rob

Well No, not really. Arshavin scored from the same move as the penalty he didn't get, so you can justifiably say he wouldn't have scored had he got the penalty, thus the penalty call is irrelevant. Gallas was offside, and was called as such.
Zito

That Arshavin tackle was a clear penalty, I hulked out myself when he didn't get it. Then the ref turns around and gives Rooney the penalty -insert ManU hate here-. Anyways, the keepers know they're against professionals and as we have learned from Arshavin and others in the past, there's no such thing as an impossible angle, and if it is, the keepers don't want to risk it. It's comes down to whose reflexes are faster, the attacker who can nick the ball away in time, or the keeper who can smother it and not get a penalty.
sscouser

@ Bob: "Arshavin more than made up for that call though"

In stoppage time Arsenal had the ball in the United net but unfortunately Gallas had strayed offside by a whisker. If you say one can "make up" then Arshavin's penalty shout should have been compensated by declaring Gallas onside. In other games that would have been a goal.
matt

is a foul in the box not a penalty? i mean honestly the only reason this is getting any media play is because arsenal can't come up with a better excuse for them fucking up big games plain and simple. rooney was fouled in the box. eduardo wasn't touched. again, it's not even debatable. the rule is foul in the box = penalty kick. not some wholly subjective unwritten law of the forefathers of whatever other bullshit thing that someone wants to come up with.
Rob

Arshavin more than made up for that call though.
b

i actually think they should go. but i like the unwritten rule that you don't give a penalty for taking someone down who's headed away from goal. rooney was penalty-fishing. there was no way he was going anywhere. not only that, when he "chipped the ball over the keeper" he chipped it out of bounds. that's not a penalty. by the same token, eduardo was going nowhere but out of bounds. no penalty.

swallow the whistle and make the teams play.

now darren "sweep the leg" fletcher was the recipient of some ridiculous old trafford luck not to be called for his obvious penalty...