Talk:Panenka (penalty kick)

In the article, would it be fair to compare this move to the eephus pitch in baseball, which is something similar (a rarely used, really unexpected and slow pitch)? 199.20.117.174 (talk) 13:12, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Archiving references

@Gog the Mild: need archiving here. Dey subrata (talk) 20:36, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Decription?

I'm extremely far from being an expert, but I can't make sense of this:

The aim of the technique is not to chip the ball over the goalkeeper, but to take advantage of the fact that many goalkeepers will dive to either side of the goal in anticipation, rather than waiting to see in which direction the ball is going. It is a very risky technique, because the subtle touch on the ball gives it a very slow speed,...

Now, if the aim is to take advantage of the keeper diving to either side, the best strategy seems to me to be to kick in the middle, with full force. Why the subtle touch - if not in order to give the ball a curve that takes it above the keeper in case he doesn't dive?--Nø (talk) 14:42, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

I came here to ask the same question. 112.119.11.22 (talk) 19:46, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

I think the hope is that, if the ball is moving more slowly, the keeper will have already committed by the time the ball gets there, and cannot recover to the center of the goal. A harder shot might allow the keeper to react before they dive. Of course, it's really all just about guessing the proper timing. Aguero's Panenka the other day was saved because Mendy had barely put a hand on the ground when the kick came in, and he stood right back up to save it. If the kick were harder, Mendy could have just stood and caught it. A fraction of a second later and, hard or soft, Mendy would have been on the ground, and the ball would have gone in. Tarfu92 (talk) 13:10, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

There's also the thought that putting a hard shot in the air has a better chance of being mis-hit and going over the goal entirely. Tarfu92 (talk) 13:10, 11 May 2021 (UTC)