Re the first comment - shut up and and don't be such a dick. The commentator is accurate enough - it's just a way of highlighting a near-miss, and also highlighting the fact that the defence has been poor.

Re the second point - They know owing to the result of the penalty. If the keeper dives the wrong way, clearly the taker has sent him the wrong way. If the keeper saves the shot he has guessed right. Fairly straightforward, no?
( disasterprone "Pyjamas caused the Holocaust", Mon 12 Apr 2010, 9:48, 1 reply)

Utter nonsense
In the first comment the woodwork has made no active intervention, therefore there has been no act of saving. You might as well say, when a shot goes just wide that the defending side was saved by the grass or the air between the goal and where the ball passed the goal. It makes no sense at all.

On the second point, they have no idea at all whether the keeper guessed or followed the ball.If the ball broke to a forward twelve yards from the keeper in normal play you wouldnt expect him to just guess where the shot might go, so why must it be the case for a penalty? Equally if the keeper does decide in advance which way he is going to dive and he is wrong, he has not been actively sent the wrong way, the taker has not influenced the keeper in anyway.

So, no it's not straightforward at all and you should try to be less twatbastardy in future.
(Cave Duck, Thu 15 Apr 2010, 0:03, closed)