Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Penalty Mark Shape #67

Open
ahasselbring opened this issue Dec 6, 2022 · 1 comment
Open

Penalty Mark Shape #67

ahasselbring opened this issue Dec 6, 2022 · 1 comment
Labels

Comments

@ahasselbring
Copy link
Member

ahasselbring commented Dec 6, 2022

In numerous previous competitions, we have been surprised by the penalty mark being actually a circle instead of a cross and had to have it changed. A different way to handle this would be to make circle-shaped penalty marks legal and require teams to cope with both variants (in case of taped lines, the cross may still be the more natural thing to construct). The main reason to do so would be that real soccer doesn't require a cross either.

I don't have a strong opinion on this myself, but to me, the cross shape seems like an artifact from earlier times that should be reconsidered from time to time. Or am I missing any reason why a cross is the only right thing:tm:?

(The same discussion applies to the center mark/dash.)

@rvilling
Copy link

rvilling commented Dec 7, 2022

Not sure this is worth doing in 2023. It doesn't change game play in any meaningful way. For a big team with spare development capacity it is easy to address. For a small team who will focus on the main developments in the rules (particularly given the later call for participation this year) this is the kind of thing that disrupts behaviour (e.g. kickoff, penalties) for no very good reason.

It would be reasonable to add this to a "planned rule changes" appendix at the back of the rulebook to allow people to plan for it in 2024.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants