Sky1981
Fending off the urge
I like Penalty shootout, the drama, the tense.
Although I understand why England fans normally hates them.
Although I understand why England fans normally hates them.
It's becoming less of a game of chance, too. Some of the penalty shootouts in recent years have been filled with unstoppable penalties. The element of luck is still there but less so than a decade or so ago.I like Penalty shootout, the drama, the tense.
Although I understand why England fans normally hates them.
It's a logistical nightmare and a momentum downer though, imagine all the works and cost for a replay.It's becoming less of a game of chance, too. Some of the penalty shootouts in recent years have been filled with unstoppable penalties. The element of luck is still there but less so than a decade or so ago.
That said, when it comes to games with so much on the line such as the World Cup final or the Champions League final, instead of going straight to penalties after extra time I genuinely think replays need to be brought in. Sepp Blatter was actually in favour of this some time around the 2006 World Cup if I remember correctly.
I don't necessarily think so if it's reserved only for the most special of occasions, replays will just have to be accounted for during the planning process. I also happen to think it won't be a momentum-downer and as a matter of fact I reckon the opposite will happen. Imagine the drama leading up to a World Cup final replay between, say, England and Germany. It would be something else.It's a logistical nightmare and a momentum downer though, imagine all the works and cost for a replay.
Prefer to just penalty it, if neither can't win in 120 chances are either of them is nor good enough either way. I may be alone in this but I do prefer a penalty shoot out as neutral and can't stand the extra 30 usually (unless the team I root for happens to be playing)
I remember at school once sharing a cup! It was long ago and shootouts were not even in anyone's head outside of the USA I don't think (and I think I'm right in saying those were not penalties but runs from the halfway line with the player one-on-one with the keeper).Definitely not. Though is it me or are a lot more finals being decided by penalties these days? I don't think there will ever be a good enough solution to fairly determine a winner without ruining the game. A replay would technically be the most fair way to decide it, but it's a logistical nightmare and then what if the replay ends in a draw too? Another replay? Best 3 out of 5?
Replays for games where so much is on the line (such as the World Cup final) is the most fair way to decide the outcome of a major football tournament. Say a World Cup final ends in a draw after ninety minutes plus extra time, a replay will be held three or four days later and penalties will only enter the equation if the replay also ends in a draw after two hours. Replays shouldn't be that big of a deal logistically, either, if reserved only for games that happen once in a blue moon. I'd even argue replays of major finals would add spice to the whole drama side of things, too. Like I said earlier, the build-up of a World Cup final replay between England and Germany would be monumentally epic.Definitely not. Though is it me or are a lot more finals being decided by penalties these days? I don't think there will ever be a good enough solution to fairly determine a winner without ruining the game. A replay would technically be the most fair way to decide it, but it's a logistical nightmare and then what if the replay ends in a draw too? Another replay? Best 3 out of 5?
I wonder how fotball would be if it went the other way around.Might as well go straight to penalties - more often than not teams are too frightened and too tired to go for the win in ET
That sounds interesting, you could be on to something here.I wonder how fotball would be if it went the other way around.
Start with penalties at extra time. The penalities get added to the score. Then comes extra time where the teams have the ability to attack or defend that lead, it gives a team the ability to not lose directly from penalties . If its draw again then It goes back to match winning penalties.
It's interesting but football doesn't really embrace radical change.I wonder how fotball would be if it went the other way around.
Start with penalties at extra time. The penalities get added to the score. Then comes extra time where the teams have the ability to attack or defend that lead, it gives a team the ability to not lose directly from penalties . If its draw again then It goes back to match winning penalties.
I agree with thisMight as well go straight to penalties - more often than not teams are too frightened and too tired to go for the win in ET
How about reducing teams to 9 players?
Wouldn’t that be worse?? Teams are tired and all of a sudden they have more ground to cover. If anything adding two players a team makes it easier.The solution is simple. After half an hour you carry on playing. Then, every 5 minutes a player is taken off each team until there is a winner at the end of one of the 5 minute intervals.
In Hockey, it's essentially impossible to play defensive time-wasting for a long stretch. If you try to just cycle the puck in the neutral zone and your own zone, you'll lose it. It's much safer to attack with the puck than to just give it away or run the risk of a dangerous turnover, unless we're talking about riding out a penalty or protecting a lead for the last thirty seconds.It works really well for the NHL. But in hockey it is ingrained in most teams to go for it.
I don't know, I hate seeing games decided by pens though. I think the ET is worth it for the occasions where you do get a decision.More and more teams seem to be sitting in during ET and holding out for pens.
Rather than golden or silver goal, I'd be inclined just to go straight to pens. With how much football there is being played now too, going straight to pens makes sense.
Does it though? The rangers and pens just went to triple OT, I was at that game. Players looked jaded and I paid a bunch for tickets so stayed till the end but it ruined my day at work the next day.It works really well for the NHL. But in hockey it is ingrained in most teams to go for it.
This. It’s stupid, but it’s fun.I think the shootout should come before extra time. Then once you have a winner you play the extra 30 minutes - those who missed get a chance to redeem themselves, and one side has to come out and chase the game.
let's introduce the 2 and 3 point line in footballNah diamond... Only goals from outside the box count.