escape2victory Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 end to penalty woe ?? Interesting read. Maybe rather than have three pens, they go straight into sudden death so its keeps the players hanging around to a minimum and adds to the excitement. I do initially like it and although there still is a penalty element involved it does take away the pure lottery and would make it a bit farer. Would maybe like to see it introduced in the League Cup etc to see how successful it is in reality.
potter3 Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 Think it's a good idea, I don't like penalty shoot-outs anyway.
davieG Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 Seems reasonable on the face of it but we could still have 5 penalties a piece or more if they keep scoring. Seems like players could be hanging around for 15 to 20 minutes or more getting cold before then playing 30 minutes of extra time.
escape2victory Posted 5 February 2008 Author Posted 5 February 2008 Straight to sudden death? Year so that it could only take 2 pens to decide who has the "advantage". Then go straight into extra time, not much waiting around for players so they can stay loose etc, but as Davie G says, you could get a situation where they keep on scoring or missing, which could go on for 20 odd mins before extra time starts. This does seem a bit extreme, though i suppose the england and dutch under 21's managed it.
Simi Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 Yeah this is good. Soon we can split extra time into four quarters and have cheerleaders in between.
escape2victory Posted 5 February 2008 Author Posted 5 February 2008 Yeah this is good.Soon we can split extra time into four quarters and have cheerleaders in between. Having the lottery of a penalty shoot out seems more "americanised" to me. Football is a team sport. This suggestion puts the emphasis back on the team ethos. Penalty shoot outs make it an individual sport. Good drama. Its just not football though.
Alexikokopops Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 Straight to sudden death? They do a sudden death penalty shootout straight after the 90 minutes. Whoever wins that has "The Advantage", and then 30 minutes of extra time is played as usual. If either team is winning after them 30 minutes they win the match, "The Advantage" only comes into play if both teams are drawing after them 30 minutes, in which case the team with "The Advantage" wins the match. Designed to make extra time more important and to stop teams playing for penalties (Ukraine vs Switzerland at the last World Cup springs to mind). Also means that the game doesn't rest on what is basically a lottery. Interesting idea.
davieG Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 If it's supposed to put the ooooooooooooompth!!!!!!! back into extra time maybe they should do it before they kick off because these games that are currently decided by penalties are often a bore for the normal 90 minutes you can even forget the extra time then.
Joe. Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 Rubbish. Penalty shoot-outs are brilliant and there's no need to change them. They'd be over almost immediately if they went straight to sudden death. And why change it anyway?
Bert Posted 5 February 2008 Posted 5 February 2008 Why can't things just be kept normal? I wish the offside law would be changed back to normal too.
SOCCERROO FOX Posted 6 February 2008 Posted 6 February 2008 Keep it the same change very rarely works
Trav Le Bleu Posted 6 February 2008 Posted 6 February 2008 I heard the guy (Birtles) being interviewed on Radio 5 last night and was gonna start a thread, but unsurprisingly got beaten to it. I think it's brilliant. Penalty shoot-outs are dramatic and tense, often memorable - the 30 mins that precede them rarely are This will sort that out!
Alexikokopops Posted 6 February 2008 Posted 6 February 2008 Rubbish.Penalty shoot-outs are brilliant and there's no need to change them. They'd be over almost immediately if they went straight to sudden death. And why change it anyway? So you'd rather watch 30 minutes of drab football followed by a penalty shootout than a possibly slightly shorter penalty shootout followed by 30 minutes of extra time where both teams have a lot more to play for and which should, hopefully, be more entertaining?
AyewJoking Posted 6 February 2008 Posted 6 February 2008 What if a team wins advantage 3-0 then sits back and defends for the entire extra time? I'd rather stick with the current penalty shoot out. Clamp down on things like goalkeepers moving off the line before the kick is taken.
Ric Flair Posted 6 February 2008 Posted 6 February 2008 Didn't think i'd like this idea as i'm a big fan of penalties, even with all the heartache suffered watching England. But this is a decent idea, use it in a tournament we are in though for fooks sake.
Ric Flair Posted 6 February 2008 Posted 6 February 2008 What if a team wins advantage 3-0 then sits back and defends for the entire extra time?I'd rather stick with the current penalty shoot out. Clamp down on things like goalkeepers moving off the line before the kick is taken. The opposition goes Gung ho.
Jordan Posted 6 February 2008 Posted 6 February 2008 Having the lottery of a penalty shoot out seems more "americanised" to me.Look at how the four big American sports decide championship games that are tied after regulation time and you'll see just how foreign the idea of a "lottery" to decide the title is to us. Deciding a World Cup winner on penalties would be like deciding the winner of a tied Super Bowl on a field goal kicking contest or the NBA Finals on a free throw shooting contest. FIFA and its member leagues ought to Americanize its tiebreak system for fairness' sake. Football is a team sport. This suggestion puts the emphasis back on the team ethos. Penalty shoot outs make it an individual sport. Good drama. Its just not football though.The only changes that "The Advantage" brings are switching the order of extra time and the shootout, possibly shortening the shootout. Since a game that's tied after 120 minutes would still be decided by PKs, the effects are purely psychological. [Edit: so I agree with you on PKs to decide games.] The only fair way to decide a one-game final is to keep playing until you have a winner.
AyewJoking Posted 6 February 2008 Posted 6 February 2008 The opposition goes Gung ho. It might be funny but it wouldnt make for a good spectacle.
joely22 Posted 6 February 2008 Posted 6 February 2008 Having the lottery of a penalty shoot out seems more "americanised" to me. Football is a team sport. This suggestion puts the emphasis back on the team ethos. Penalty shoot outs make it an individual sport. Good drama. Its just not football though. Next thing will be the term "goal" being changed to "touchdown".
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.