Which I mentioned in my post and is irrelevant.
I totally agree with the OP.
Do you mean the ‘non foul PKs’? Handball is still a foul, and anyway I was addressing the OP’s idea, where it would be relevant.
Can you explain this a bit further? Making the fouled player take the kick seems like a really minor change, smaller than the changes to the offsides rule, the kick back to the goalie rule, even the recent change to how goal kicks had to be done.
Just some initial thoughts - it’s a team game, no one other than the keeper (and in some respects the captain) has any official special status within the team. If you illegally tackle someone in the box, the offence isn’t the fact that you unfairly denied this poor man his chance for glory, it’s that you unfairly stopped the team from a chance of scoring.
From a more practical point of view, the player who gets fouled in the box isn’t necessarily the one who is shaping up to score. If a full back has got into a position on the edge of the box to deliver a killer cross or pass to the striker and gets fouled, what would be the philosophical purpose of making the full back take the penalty rather than the striker?
The player who suffered from bad play has an immediate chance to exact legal revenge on the team who wronged them? Thereby reducing the incentive to exact illegal revenge on the player who wronged them?
Or does that sound too much like eye-for-an-eye hockey thinking?
Yes, it is too much like an eye for an eye. Anyway, why would you make it compulsory? If a team wants to give the wronged player the chance for immediate vengeance they can make the choice themselves. Tactically it would frequently be a very poor choice though.
Reducing the incentive to exact illegal or unsportsmanlike revenge is the responsibility of the individual and the team. If he wants to go after the guy then he can gamble on getting sent off if he wants to.
But anyway the fouls which risk a leg break rarely happen in the box, they’re usually in mid field where the risks for the fouling team are much lower.
And all of Messi’s.
In the last World Cup I was very impressed with how Messi successfully put away 5 consecutive penalties in a row, quite different from each other, in the final 3 games to help win the competition. (2 were in shootouts so wouldn’t count towards the Golden Boot anway).
I feel like we are on the same wavelength here. To not count penalties is just…weird.
So, do you think Messi’s 7 PKs show equivalent skill or as impressive as Haaland’s 7 regular goals?
Irrelevant, surely? Open goal tap ins, shots from 12 yards, or the half way line all count the same.
I don’t really know, I don’t think it matters that much. For me though, for Messi to score 5 very high pressure penalties in a row in 2022 (including 2 shoot outs) shows great guts, skill and tactical nous. Particularly since on TV right now they’re talking about how his overall penalty record isn’t that great.
Yes the fact he’s missed half of his 8 in normal play kind of shows they ain’t easy!
And yet, the average is like 80%, vs. regular shots at 20%. Just because he’s the Shaq of PKs doesn’t make them comparable to regular-play goals.
I don’t think we are ever going to agree on this one so I won’t labour the point 
Classic lumpers vs splitters.
If the raw data exists, one can always accumulate ever more detailed stats. Total goals by 10-minute stage of play. Total goals at home vs away. In tournaments vs regular season. As a post-foul PK, a shootout, or regular play. From left or right, near or far? Touched by the goalie or not?
All of those cases can be distinguished. And might prove useful fodder for the talking heads. But do any of these distinctions amount to a difference? I’d argue “no”; a point on the soreboard is a point on the scoreboard.
Except that someone will get the golden boot in this World Cup and I argue that relatively easy PKs shouldn’t be included with much more difficult regular goals.
Maybe you could go through previous tournaments and see if it makes a difference to the Golden Boot winner? I would be interested to find out. I do say again though the Golden Boot is pretty meaningless and there’s not a single player who wouldn’t sacrifice a chance to win the Golden Boot if it meant winning the World Cup.