Ice9 Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 What the hell was that penalty about? Very very bizarre.. BBC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 I believe he tried to replicate the famous johan cryuff penalty. Passing it to henry to score. The rules nowadays state that once the player has touched the ball [the player taking the pen] no other player from the same team can touch the ball until one from the oposing team has. The rules were changed to stop what johan cryuff did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stocka Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 Lol, I was there (I'm an Arsenal fan) and the whole stadium was like "Eugh?!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Laguna| Posted October 23, 2005 Share Posted October 23, 2005 If anyone hasn't seen it here's a video for y'all. http://s47.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=2LH1SQERW47MP0WVFYJUIFZ24Q And this is what they were trying to do: http://www.centricformacion.com/descargas/archivos/Johan%20Cruyff%20-%20Penalti.avi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted October 23, 2005 Share Posted October 23, 2005 Being a Gunner myself i thought it was great to see the light hearted side of the game being brought up. People seem to forget its just a game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Laguna| Posted October 23, 2005 Share Posted October 23, 2005 Being a Gunner myself i thought it was great to see the light hearted side of the game being brought up. People seem to forget its just a game Aye, it's allright for us to laugh looking back now with the 3 points safely tucked away but if say Vassel's goal been allowed then there would've major slamming of Pires. Ah, well hopefully we've learnt our lesson and we'll dissist from fancy penalties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice9 Posted October 23, 2005 Author Share Posted October 23, 2005 Im not sure he was trying to do the Cryuff thing, i think he was trying to dummy it and then Henry would really take it when the goalie was out the way. If he was trying to do the Cryuff thing, why the hell did he lose the ability to kick it for real? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramar Posted October 23, 2005 Share Posted October 23, 2005 Im not sure he was trying to do the Cryuff thing, i think he was trying to dummy it and then Henry would really take it when the goalie was out the way. If he was trying to do the Cryuff thing, why the hell did he lose the ability to kick it for real? If he wasn't going to take it, it would be an 'illegal' move. Pires has to touch the ball if he is the taker, they were definitely tying to emulate Cryuff and Pires fluffed it. I believe he tried to replicate the famous johan cryuff penalty. Passing it to henry to score. The rules nowadays state that once the player has touched the ball [the player taking the pen] no other player from the same team can touch the ball until one from the oposing team has. The rules were changed to stop what johan cryuff did. That is incorrect. The Cryuff penalty can still be accomplished, the rule is that another player must touch the ball before the player taking the penalty touches it again. Now I believe Mike Riley thought Pires touched the ball twice, hence why he gave a free kick. The confusion threw everyone, but if henry had just ran up and smacked it in (after Pires scuffed it with his studs of course), it would have stood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted October 23, 2005 Share Posted October 23, 2005 If he wasn't going to take it, it would be an 'illegal' move. Pires has to touch the ball if he is the taker, they were definitely tying to emulate Cryuff and Pires fluffed it. That is incorrect. The Cryuff penalty can still be accomplished, the rule is that another player must touch the ball before the player taking the penalty touches it again. Now I believe Mike Riley thought Pires touched the ball twice, hence why he gave a free kick. The confusion threw everyone, but if henry had just ran up and smacked it in (after Pires scuffed it with his studs of course), it would have stood. You are correct in that Riley gave the free kick as he believed Pires touched twice, but incorrect in that a pley from the oppostion must touch the ball before another player from the team taking the penalty does. There is one exception to the rule though and that is if the ball strikes the bar then a player can rebound it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramar Posted October 23, 2005 Share Posted October 23, 2005 You are correct in that Riley gave the free kick as he believed Pires touched twice, but incorrect in that a pley from the oppostion must touch the ball before another player from the team taking the penalty does. There is one exception to the rule though and that is if the ball strikes the bar then a player can rebound it. If a player takes the kick, if he hits the post and taps it in, its a goal kick, another player must touch it before he does again. This player can be of the same team or of the opposing. *ex-Referee's son* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted October 23, 2005 Share Posted October 23, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atomic Boo Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 lol that was a funny penalty they shd have just stuck with the simple formula Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts