Why the retake?

[Jev]

So an attacking player commits encroachment. Basic knowledge of psychology will tell you it's nearly impossible not to react when another player encroaches but in this case the attacker was miles ahead. The penalty is saved, and they get a retake because of an offence committed by one of their players.

Surely if that's the actual rule, anyone with a brain can see that we should just go ahead and change that first thing Monday morning?

 

[bosnian_red]

Wan Bissaka also encroached according to my commentators

 

[L1nk]

Because Wan Bissaka was also encroaching on our end

 

[DickDastardly]

But if he scores the pen?

They still have to retake it.

 

[Pexbo]

So an attacking player commits encroachment. Basic knowledge of psychology will tell you it's nearly impossible not to react when another player encroaches but in this case the attacker was miles ahead. The penalty is saved, and they get a retake because of an offence by one of their players.

Surely if that's the actual rule, anyone with a brain can see that we should just go ahead and change that first thing Monday morning?

Yeah it’s definitely a broken rule and I think it’s an oversight.

EDIT - Ah maybe it wouldn’t have been retaken but for AWB, I’m watching without sound.

 

[Jev]

Wan Bissaka also encroached according to my commentators

Yeah, because it's virtually impossible not to do when you see someone next to you doing it. The only real offender is the guy who does it first. And again, he was miles ahead of anyone else.

 

[Ralaks]

It is completely stupid. I believe the rule is broken as it can be interpretated different ways.

https://www.thefa.com/football-rule...laws/football-11-11/law-14---the-penalty-kick

It should only be the player touching the ball where it matters. I believe any sane referee would've given an indirect free kick. And if it was the other end, Jon Moss would've done exactly that.

 

[sullydnl]

If both teams have players encroaching, either of those players becoming involved prompts a retake.

Why that is the rule, I have no idea. I guess the idea is to slant the rules towards the attacking team, because a penalty is supposed to be towards their advantage?

Either way it was absolutely the correct decision, the rule just seems slightly odd unless there's some reasoning I'm not quite getting.