or to join or start a new Discussion

Articles/all comments
These 189 comments are related to an article called:

Alternative to Penalties

Page 7 of 8

posted on 25/5/12

the 6 a side thing would be terrible

comment by Superb (U6486)

posted on 25/5/12

Sheriff >

The golden goal has to be brought back. Otherwise teams just sit back and hold out for pens.

6 players on each side in extra time would work well because it would be more difficult to defend and there would be more space on the pitch for attacking players to exploit.

Also it would test the skill of the manager because he would have to choose which 6 players to play.

Do you go for attacking players or defensive players or a bit of both ?

It would make fascinating viewing

comment by Superb (U6486)

posted on 25/5/12

the 6 a side thing would be terrible

-------------------------------------------------

Why would it be terrible ?

It would certainly make scoring a goal in extra time much more likely.

comment by Tu Meke (U3732)

posted on 25/5/12

CROSSBAR CHALLENGE

posted on 25/5/12

There is already a perfectly viable alternative to the penalty shootout. Score more goals than the opposition in normal time. Job done!

comment by (U9863)

posted on 25/5/12

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

posted on 25/5/12

Golden goal was intended to make the game more exciting but what happened was teams became ultra cautious in extra time and it was boring as hell to watch. It was as if teams preferred to play it safe and take their chances with pens instead!

comment by Superb (U6486)

posted on 25/5/12

But if we had Golden Goal with only 6-a-side in extra time then teams wouldn´t be able to sit back and defend as there would too many open spaces.

posted on 26/5/12

Take the goalies off after 90 mins.

comment by (U14518)

posted on 26/5/12

The game is 11 a side not 6 a side. Why we do not play the golden goal is beyond me it is far more conclusive than penalties and also the result is from open play.

posted on 26/5/12

set up a thunderdome in the centre circle. Each team sends in their best fighter.
TWO MEN ENTER, ONE MAN LEAVES...

posted on 26/5/12

have the penalties before extra time.

posted on 26/5/12

have the penalties before extra time.

---------------------

...In the first minute

posted on 26/5/12

i shouldve explained that better.

if its level after 90 minutes, then you have penalties to decide who wins in the event that it's still level after extra time.

posted on 26/5/12

if its level after 90 minutes, then you have penalties to decide who wins in the event that it's still level after extra time.

---------------

I'm trying to think what's wrong with that suggestion, because it just doesn't sound right. But in all honesty I can't think of anything wrong with it at all. On reflection, I actually think its a great idea.

comment by Superb (U6486)

posted on 27/5/12

if its level after 90 minutes, then you have penalties to decide who wins in the event that it's still level after extra time.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Because whoever won the penalty shootout would simply park the bus in extra time.

Terrible idea.

posted on 27/5/12

Because whoever won the penalty shootout would simply park the bus in extra time.

Terrible idea.
==================

Sides spend extra time walking round waiting for penalties anyway.

It would do just the opposite of what you say and make one of the teams go all out to win it.

Just as an early goal always improves a football match, the solution I have suggested would improve extra time, as well as providing the solution to the problem highlted by FIFA.

posted on 28/5/12

comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 21 hours, 37 minutes ago
if its level after 90 minutes, then you have penalties to decide who wins in the event that it's still level after extra time.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Because whoever won the penalty shootout would simply park the bus in extra time.

Terrible idea.
------------------------------------------
Exactly. They've already won the game, so why attack?

posted on 28/5/12

That pens before extra time argument has been mooted about before

I'd be happy with that myself...could be a winner.. if the golden goal thing is not to return

comment by Superb (U6486)

posted on 28/5/12

It would do just the opposite of what you say and make one of the teams go all out to win it.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Penalties before extra time doesn´t work.

The team that won the shootout would simply park the bus and I could see the winning team simply stcking 4 or 5 players on the goal line with the rest of the team doggedly defending and lumping the ball away every time they got a chance.

With only two 15 minute periods of play in extra time teams would easily be able to hold out for that long if they were properly organised and it would make terrible viewing.

posted on 28/5/12

Exactly. They've already won the game, so why attack?
=========================

No, they are half a goal ahead with 30 minutes to go /

posted on 28/5/12

With only two 15 minute periods of play in extra time teams would easily be able to hold out for that long if they were properly organised and it would make terrible viewing.
========================

What you mean in the same way it makes for terrible viewing any time one side is ahead with half an hour to go ?

posted on 28/5/12

so...we havn't got a solution then......

posted on 28/5/12

My other solution is to have a judging panel awarding points during the 90 minutes with the 'points winner' announced at full time in the event of a draw.

If it is still level after extra time, then the points winner wins.

It is subject to the same (totally unfounded imo) criticism though as having pens before extra time, plus it has an element of subjectivity which is bound to produce controversy.

posted on 28/5/12

points awarded for what though...

One team defending are as much deserving of defending well as an attacking side doing similar


Page 7 of 8

Sign in if you want to comment