So how are we all getting on with these new rules then?
Rather predictably, Aberdeen became one of the first teams to encounter the amended law regarding last-man fouls in the box, and, equally predictably, they copped the wrong end of it. The deletion of the red-card sanction for denying a goalscoring opportunity in the penalty area was intended to remove what has become commonly known as the “double whammy” of losing both a player and in all likelihood, via the ensuing spot-kick, a goal. It’s reasonable enough in theory.
But in situations such as that which befell Aberdeen in Maribor, the offending team suffered not just a single whammy, but effectively no whammy at all with neither a man nor the goal ultimately being surrendered. In fact, given that a Dons goal was essentially chalked off in order to award the penalty, it was a negative whammy; a whammy deflected and reflected straight into the solar plexus of the team being fouled.
Everyone, surely even including the referee, can agree that this part at least was a grave mistake. In olden times, when Jasmin Handanovic’s offence would have merited dismissal, there would have been no option but to halt the play and dispatch the Maribor goalkeeper, but given that this is no longer the case it would be ludicrous to argue that a 12-yard shot which the opponent has the opportunity to save is a greater advantage than, er, a goal.
Aberdeen should have been given the chance for Niall McGinn to convert the opening which Adam Rooney was illegally denied, and had he failed to do so then the penalty awarded in keeping with the advantage rule (“[the referee] penalises the infringement or offence if the anticipated advantage does not ensue at that time or within a few seconds”).
But we can only presume that this was merely teething troubles – referees are so used to blowing the whistle the instant they see fouls such as these that it is an automatic reflex which it will take time to train themselves out of – and that if a similar situation was to play out a few months down the line, when officials are more used to issuing yellow cards for last-man fouls than red ones, they will have the presence of mind to pause and be sure that the attacking team requires the penalty to profit from the position.
On the assumption that that’s how this law is intended to play out, the change is an interesting one and there are two sides to the argument. On the one hand, it is true that conceding both a penalty and a player had been a steep tariff for what were often minimally serious tackles, and that it was semantically harsh to dismiss a player for denying a goalscoring opportunity when the result remained what is statistically football’s best goalscoring opportunity of all: a penalty kick. However the fact does remain that, in the vast majority of such cases, teams and players who were penalised by this had been breaking the rules, either intentionally or at least foreseeably, and that they were already able to avoid this sanction by simply deciding not to foul someone in the box.
The red card offence was introduced in the first place as a deterrent to unfair play, so if defenders were choosing not to modify their behaviour despite the full knowledge of the potential sanction then surely that is their own lookout.
What we will now see instead is, in all probability, an increase in the number of fouls in the area, with defenders and keepers conscious of the fact that there is now a much higher chance of getting away with it completely, and more sides left feeling the frustration Aberdeen experienced last week. Time will tell, but this isn’t likely to be a great season to be one-on-one with a goalkeeper.
What we will now see instead is, in all probability, an increase in the number of fouls in the area, with defenders and keepers conscious of the fact that there is now a much higher chance of getting away with it completely, and more sides left feeling the frustration Aberdeen experienced last week. Time will tell, but this isn’t likely to be a great season to be one-on-one with a goalkeeper.
