There, I’ve said it. They’re just too easy (for top-level professionals).
OK, if FIFA changed the rules so that whoever actually drew the foul would have to take the kick, then I could consider allowing it. That way, the player that does all the work and may have had a legitimate scoring chance can get credit for all of that.
Hockey and basketball both require the player that was fouled to take the kick. I really don’t understand why soccer doesn’t.
But, having someone get fouled in the box and then handing the ball to Mbappe or Kane or whoever, so they could have an 80% chance of scoring, and then counting it in their stats as if they scored a regular goal, is ridiculous.
I get your point, pk’s are kind of a cheap way to pad your goal count, especially if you aren’t the one that was even fouled. I like your idea of requiring the player fouled to take the kick, I would fully support that change!
Basketball and hockey, and probably loads of other sports, thought of it first.
Adding together shots that have a 20% chance of scoring with ones that have an 80% chance practically seems like a units error, like adding dollars and yen, or feet and yards, without doing any conversions.
Hockey does included penalty shots taken during a game in goals scored. It does not include tie-breaking penalty shots. Does soccer include the latter?
No, just the penalty shots that happen during regular gameplay.
Of course, those are really, really rare in hockey and are taken by the player fouled. In soccer, they happen all the time, often multiple times per game.
Also, hockey penalty shots are much harder than soccer ones.
ETA: About 30-35% in hockey, and they are only given for real scoring opportunities, vs. 80% in soccer, given for any foul in the box.
Basketball strategic fouling: fouling a player known to be a terrible free-throw shooter with an eye to, at least, breaking up current offensive flow and possibly gaining possession after winning the rebound battle after the free throw misses.
I assume there’s no such corresponding strategic use of fouling in soccer?
I agree with the proposed change. Also, how are the stats of he goalkeeper handled? Does s/he have PK’s counted differently WRT saves and on/off target attempts during normal play, etc? I mean, if the goalkeeper is great but the team in front are just really aggressive, and s/he end up facing a bunch of PKs versus standard shots during normal play, that would seem to affect their stats, too.
It wouldn’t work, because the team that was fouled would put their best penalty shooter there.
So, foul Shaq and then have Steph Curry take the shots.
I don’t know the answer to this, but it’s a good question!
ETA: Apparently, PKs that score during regulation or O/T are counted exactly like regular goals, in terms of the goaltender stats. I would change that, too, in soccer. In hockey, since the penalty shot is rare and still difficult, I probably wouldn’t.
Part of the discussed proposal is exactly the same as basketball: player fouled is the player kicking. Stategic fouling becomes practical, at least from the pure “likely outcomes” perspective. But I don’t know how possession or field position is affected by PKs so I can’t judge if the after-kick effects might be a factor.
Alright, that confirms my vague suspicions. Not knowing practically anything about soccer, I couldn’t mentally predict the aftereffects of such a change. You’re right that the differing scales of the games (in terms of scoring, flow, and possessions) eliminates the tactical incentives for strategic fouls.
There IS a tactical incentive for fouling in soccer (football), but not WRT penalties, and it takes a different form than in basketball. Some teams foul the star player of the opposing team to get that player off his/her game, or even to injure that player. It’s an insidious tactic, but it happens. A good referee can stop it by issuing cautions to the offending team, even if the team is employing a rotational fouling scheme, where different players take turns fouling the opposing star player. It’s called ‘persistent infringement’ and can be applied to a single player who is fouling a lot, or one player for whom their foul might have been their first of the match but is the fourth or fifth on the opposing star player.
ETA: As for the original question, I agree that lumping goals from penalties with goals from the run of play pads a player’s stats. I’d be ok with having a separate goal count, one type for each. Doesn’t basketball have a separate statistical category for three point shots for individual players?
Analytics people mostly talk about non-penalty goals / 90. Yeah, it made Messi and Ronaldo seem more impressive than, say, Luis Suarez in similar years, but it’s not really that big a deal IMO.
Yes but both. They track combined as well as 3-point percentage. They track everything imaginable. The main record of points scored is total points for everything, foul shots, two point and three point.
They should count as goals, but they shouldn’t pad their goal stats.
For example, when a game goes to penalties at the end, they’re still getting 75%, and those aren’t the regular penalty takers, just normal amazing soccer players.
Like I said, if the fouled player was actually taking the shots, maybe I could understand it, but they’re just handing goals to the top player.
In that case, I suggest statistical lines be categorized as Goals Scored (GS), Penalties Scored (Pen or PS), Scored with Dick (SwD or GSwD because I opined in another thread that goals scored by dick should count double).
I’m often skeptical of statistics in sports because of the poor quality of the underlying data. The more subjectiveness or arbitrariness of the data the less useful it is.
So anything like this proposal is a good one, by making categories more limited.