Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
He stopped during the run up, which isn't allowed. You can slow down, like Richarlison did to an extreme degree last week, but you can't stop.
I think the rule is that if you stop in the run up, it's no goal and no retake. Can anyone confirm?
I think the rule is that if you stop in the run up, it's no goal and no retake. Can anyone confirm?
-
- Posts: 1941
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 6:52 pm
- Been Liked: 745 times
- Has Liked: 463 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Encroachment is the other issue- a zealous VAR operator could have forced a retake for that, or for Fabianski leaving his line. But given one of the Everton penalties saw Everton encroach with no action taken, the cynic in me is at the stage where I think it'd only have been retaken if we had scored it, or Everton missed theirs.
I'm a supporter of VAR big time in principle but cannot abide the pick & choose approach it often takes.
I'm a supporter of VAR big time in principle but cannot abide the pick & choose approach it often takes.
These 2 users liked this post: warksclaret IanMcL
-
- Posts: 3072
- Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 5:47 pm
- Been Liked: 1102 times
- Has Liked: 857 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Keeper off his line, 3 players in the box. How that isn’t retaken is beyond me.
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Not a fan of jazzy stop start run ups - just run and kick the bloody ball and stop showing off.
These 3 users liked this post: longsidepies Dark Cloud Juan Tanamera
-
- Posts: 1853
- Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2017 11:30 am
- Been Liked: 301 times
- Has Liked: 28 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Stupid thing is it worked, keeper sat down, then he had to roll it in but ****** it.
This user liked this post: Elizabeth
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
You’re allowed to stop in the run up but not as you are about to kick the ball. The rule says the following is an offence:
“...feinting to kick the ball once the kicker has completed the run-up (feinting in the run-up is permitted); the referee cautions the kicker”
-
- Posts: 16764
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:05 am
- Been Liked: 3778 times
- Has Liked: 7573 times
- Location: Derbyshire
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
It should have been retaken.
Unless they changed they rules again earlier on today, which is entirely possible.
Unless they changed they rules again earlier on today, which is entirely possible.
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Assume if pen is missed rather than saved then no retake however it was a clear red card offense. Keeper clearly was intent at bringing Cornet down and was not attempting to play the ball. No different to Collins at Brentford.
-
- Posts: 30717
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11060 times
- Has Liked: 5663 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
either way, it was a **** penalty.
This user liked this post: Goobs
-
- Posts: 4405
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:43 am
- Been Liked: 1467 times
- Has Liked: 997 times
- Location: Burnley
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Never a red and no retake as offences on both sides.
Simple fact is Jay should have told him to do one and Cornet should have put it away when Jay bottled it.
Simple fact is Jay should have told him to do one and Cornet should have put it away when Jay bottled it.
-
- Posts: 4406
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:13 am
- Been Liked: 1259 times
- Has Liked: 1368 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Get that right, there is no way Jay bottled out of taking that penalty . What actually did you want him to do to get the ball off Cornet ?
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Jay looked to have the ball in his hands when Cornet came up to him for it, it’s at that point Jay should have told him where to go.
-
- Posts: 18106
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:35 am
- Been Liked: 3875 times
- Has Liked: 2073 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Jay wasn't happy giving the ball up
-
- Posts: 3563
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:55 am
- Been Liked: 2604 times
- Has Liked: 301 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
I'm surprised there wasn't a retake, given the encroachment, and the fact the keeper had both feet well off the line. Isn't that a VAR responsibility to check for that?
-
- Posts: 7313
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
- Been Liked: 1827 times
- Has Liked: 3965 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Rather like when Matt Taylor famously missed against Leicester, there was absolutely no reason why Cornet shouldn't take that penalty.
Taylor was a proven penalty taker over many seasons, and Cornet put away his last penalty in the AFCON with confidence and ease. He was the last Burnley player to score a penalty in a competitive match. If Jay had taken it and missed, all those now criticising the fact that Cornet took it would probably now be saying. "Why didn't Cornet take it?"
As it turned out I'm afraid he missed, but I don't see much wrong with the logic of him taking it.
Taylor was a proven penalty taker over many seasons, and Cornet put away his last penalty in the AFCON with confidence and ease. He was the last Burnley player to score a penalty in a competitive match. If Jay had taken it and missed, all those now criticising the fact that Cornet took it would probably now be saying. "Why didn't Cornet take it?"
As it turned out I'm afraid he missed, but I don't see much wrong with the logic of him taking it.
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
That was more of a red than Collins the other week. In slo mo Max is just about to tap it into an empty net and Fabianski lifts his arm up to trip him, ball is long gone
-
- Posts: 12373
- Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
- Been Liked: 5211 times
- Has Liked: 921 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
As per Law 14 if the penalty misses the target and the ref believes the goalkeeper offence did not clearly impact the penalty taker then the penalty should not be retaken.
- if the ball enters the goal, a goal is awarded
- if the ball misses the goal or rebounds from the crossbar or goalpost(s), the kick is only retaken if the goalkeeper’s offence clearly impacted on the kicker
- if the ball is prevented from entering the goal by the goalkeeper, the kick is retaken[/i]
- if the ball enters the goal, a goal is awarded
- if the ball misses the goal or rebounds from the crossbar or goalpost(s), the kick is only retaken if the goalkeeper’s offence clearly impacted on the kicker
- if the ball is prevented from entering the goal by the goalkeeper, the kick is retaken[/i]
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
It wasn't retaken as no save were made. Had it been saved with the keeper a yard or two off his line it would have been retaken.
Fact is it were an absolute shambolic effort, he AND Jay need a bollo8ing for assumingly going against the set up of Jay taking penaltys.
Ontop of that I don't think it were a pen. Fabianski didn't seem to touch Cornet
Fact is it were an absolute shambolic effort, he AND Jay need a bollo8ing for assumingly going against the set up of Jay taking penaltys.
Ontop of that I don't think it were a pen. Fabianski didn't seem to touch Cornet
-
- Posts: 2237
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:37 am
- Been Liked: 1358 times
- Has Liked: 440 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
It looked to me like the ref pointed at Cornet just after he stalled/stopped during his run up. I assume that had he scored the ref would have blown and made him retake it, but he missed anyway, so there was no need.
-
- Posts: 9476
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
- Been Liked: 1185 times
- Has Liked: 779 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Don’t say that it goes against the conspiracy straw clutching agenda the footballing world have against Burnley, I see it simply as we were rightly awarded a penalty we didn’t capitalise on that opportunity & that’s it.JohnMcGreal wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 7:24 pmIt looked to me like the ref pointed at Cornet just after he stalled/stopped during his run up. I assume that had he scored the ref would have blown and made him retake it, but he missed anyway, so there was no need.
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
I noticed encroachment from both sides, however, if only the West Ham players had encroached would Cornet have been allowed to re take it?
-
- Posts: 2600
- Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:22 pm
- Been Liked: 699 times
- Has Liked: 362 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Well I'd say in this instance the goalkeepers actions clearly impacted the kicker because Cornet waited for Fabianski to move before then shanking it. Its not as if he'd already picked a side and then skied it. If Fabianski is a foot further back, then the available goal visible to Cornet is widened, and he goes more for accuracy than powerDevils_Advocate wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 6:40 pmAs per Law 14 if the penalty misses the target and the ref believes the goalkeeper offence did not clearly impact the penalty taker then the penalty should not be retaken.
- if the ball enters the goal, a goal is awarded
- if the ball misses the goal or rebounds from the crossbar or goalpost(s), the kick is only retaken if the goalkeeper’s offence clearly impacted on the kicker
- if the ball is prevented from entering the goal by the goalkeeper, the kick is retaken[/i]
-
- Posts: 12373
- Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
- Been Liked: 5211 times
- Has Liked: 921 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Fabianski is allowed to move, the rule is he must have one foot on the line. You then mention that Fabianski being off his line narrows the goal but then if that is the case how can this law exist because by your logic it would be impossible for a keeper to be off his line and not be narrowing the goal.Roosterbooster wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 9:57 pmWell I'd say in this instance the goalkeepers actions clearly impacted the kicker because Cornet waited for Fabianski to move before then shanking it. Its not as if he'd already picked a side and then skied it. If Fabianski is a foot further back, then the available goal visible to Cornet is widened, and he goes more for accuracy than power
The fact that this scenario has been specifically created indicates that your definition which would render it useless is not a correct interpretation. They key to this part of the law is the phrasing "clearly impacted" with the emphasis on clearly and in this case where Cornet has sent the keeper the wrong way and then screwed it wide Fabianski being off his line did not have a clear impact to Cornet missing.
This user liked this post: boatshed bill
-
- Posts: 10974
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:38 am
- Been Liked: 5188 times
- Has Liked: 804 times
- Location: On top of a pink elephant riding to the Democratic Republic of Congo
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Just f***ing hit the thing and stop p1ssing about.
These 2 users liked this post: Tricky Trevor jjclaret
-
- Posts: 8539
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:06 pm
- Been Liked: 2473 times
- Has Liked: 2010 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Hypothetically would we have been better off if he had gone down just outside the box?
Johnson would have been off for DGSO and we would have had a central FK, 20yds out.
Johnson would have been off for DGSO and we would have had a central FK, 20yds out.
-
- Posts: 16906
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
- Been Liked: 6967 times
- Has Liked: 1484 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Hypothetically yes, because we missed the penalty. But you don’t get a much better chance to win a game than to be given a free shot at goal from 12 yards to take a 2 goal lead.Tricky Trevor wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 12:03 amHypothetically would we have been better off if he had gone down just outside the box?
Johnson would have been off for DGSO and we would have had a central FK, 20yds out.
This user liked this post: addisclaret
-
- Posts: 681
- Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 4:10 pm
- Been Liked: 176 times
- Has Liked: 707 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Less than hypothetically we would have been better if he had just scored, which was the easier option.Tricky Trevor wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 12:03 amHypothetically would we have been better off if he had gone down just outside the box?
Johnson would have been off for DGSO and we would have had a central FK, 20yds out.
-
- Posts: 2600
- Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:22 pm
- Been Liked: 699 times
- Has Liked: 362 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
I'm not disputing that Fabianski is allowed to move. My point is that Cornet's technique and placement is dependent on knowing where the goalkeeper is, rather than just picking a side and giving it a good wellyDevils_Advocate wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 10:32 pmFabianski is allowed to move, the rule is he must have one foot on the line. You then mention that Fabianski being off his line narrows the goal but then if that is the case how can this law exist because by your logic it would be impossible for a keeper to be off his line and not be narrowing the goal.
The fact that this scenario has been specifically created indicates that your definition which would render it useless is not a correct interpretation. They key to this part of the law is the phrasing "clearly impacted" with the emphasis on clearly and in this case where Cornet has sent the keeper the wrong way and then screwed it wide Fabianski being off his line did not have a clear impact to Cornet missing.
Yes, being off you line narrows the goal. That's basic geometry. But if you put your head down and welly it, then the position of the keeper and his effect on the goal is irrelevant if you miss the target. However, if your placement depends on the keeper's position, as it did for Cornet, then that narrowing of the space affects the finish.
So with this technique, the position of the keeper as you strike the ball can clearly affect the result.
And even if you disagree with all that, it seems bizarre to me that a keeper can break the rules, and a player miss but still not have a retake, but when an opposing player behind them encroaches and they miss, then it it is a retake. How is someone 10 yards behind you more important than the opposing player directly between you and the goal??
-
- Posts: 4649
- Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 3:41 am
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 3192 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
ONLY FOR THE TOP TEAMS!dandeclaret wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 6:33 pmI'm surprised there wasn't a retake, given the encroachment, and the fact the keeper had both feet well off the line. Isn't that a VAR responsibility to check for that?
-
- Posts: 1060
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 7:55 pm
- Been Liked: 332 times
- Has Liked: 1118 times
-
- Posts: 302
- Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 1:02 pm
- Been Liked: 23 times
- Has Liked: 123 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
He did'nt score, the selfish ####,end of story.
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
I’m sending videos to Cornet of Graham Alexander and Alan Shearer on exactly how to score a penalty. None of this stupid and pathetic running up and stop starting. It’s called hitting the bloody thing.
This user liked this post: jjclaret
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Actually that's not true about 'offences from both sides' - two wrongs don't make a right. The advantage was with West Ham as Cornet missed so if a West Ham player encroached, or the goalkeeper broke the Law, the kick should be retaken. It's irrelevant if a Burnley player also encroached.
'If a defending team player (including the goalkeeper) commits an offence and the penalty is missed/saved, the penalty is retaken.'
'a player of both teams offends, the kick is retaken unless a player commits a more serious offence (e.g. 'illegal' feinting).'
https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-go ... nalty-kick
-
- Posts: 4405
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:43 am
- Been Liked: 1467 times
- Has Liked: 997 times
- Location: Burnley
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
Fair enough. I should have checked.Hipper wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 9:06 amActually that's not true about 'offences from both sides' - two wrongs don't make a right. The advantage was with West Ham as Cornet missed so if a West Ham player encroached, or the goalkeeper broke the Law, the kick should be retaken. It's irrelevant if a Burnley player also encroached.
'If a defending team player (including the goalkeeper) commits an offence and the penalty is missed/saved, the penalty is retaken.'
'a player of both teams offends, the kick is retaken unless a player commits a more serious offence (e.g. 'illegal' feinting).'
https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-go ... nalty-kick
-
- Posts: 12373
- Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
- Been Liked: 5211 times
- Has Liked: 921 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
You might think the rule is bizarre and you might have a valid point but at the end of the day that is the rule and that is why the ref allowed the penalty miss to stand and why VAR did not get involved.Roosterbooster wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 2:26 amI'm not disputing that Fabianski is allowed to move. My point is that Cornet's technique and placement is dependent on knowing where the goalkeeper is, rather than just picking a side and giving it a good welly
Yes, being off you line narrows the goal. That's basic geometry. But if you put your head down and welly it, then the position of the keeper and his effect on the goal is irrelevant if you miss the target. However, if your placement depends on the keeper's position, as it did for Cornet, then that narrowing of the space affects the finish.
So with this technique, the position of the keeper as you strike the ball can clearly affect the result.
And even if you disagree with all that, it seems bizarre to me that a keeper can break the rules, and a player miss but still not have a retake, but when an opposing player behind them encroaches and they miss, then it it is a retake. How is someone 10 yards behind you more important than the opposing player directly between you and the goal??
Im not interested what you and others think about the laws of the game because I was just explaining to anyone wondering why the penalty was not required to be retaken because of the keeper not being on his line.
This user liked this post: Middle-agedClaret
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
We had a manager on the sidelines and a captain on the pitch - didn't they know who was designated to take pens
If Cornet was not the designated pen taker then some people just needed to grow some and take charge
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
At Burnley, if you win the penalty you can take it,that's why Maxwel took it.
This user liked this post: jjclaret
-
- Posts: 4649
- Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 3:41 am
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 3192 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
If it was Liverpool you'd see a replay of it followed by a retake........just saying.
Plus their goalie was off his line.
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
The good news, if there is any, is that both Max and J Rod were up to and felt confident enough to take it. Just hope his bad miss doesn’t effect him too much, think he’ll be fine.
-
- Posts: 4751
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
- Been Liked: 953 times
- Has Liked: 238 times
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
We would have never won that penalty under Dyche, Cornet was positioned on the edge of the box, under Dyche he would have been on the post.
This is another small tweek in tactics.
This is another small tweek in tactics.
Re: Would Cornet's penalty have been disallowed?
This is actually an interesting point.claretandy wrote: ↑Wed Apr 20, 2022 7:24 amWe would have never won that penalty under Dyche, Cornet was positioned on the edge of the box, under Dyche he would have been on the post.
This is another small tweek in tactics.
I can’t remember us ever looking threatening from a corner counter attack.
For a team that doesn’t have much possession, it’s quite strange that we’ve never really caught teams on the break.
Definitely a threat that Cornet adds if used properly.