Imagine believing any of this is a good idea.
Uefa to scrap away goals rule
- Thread starter flappyjay
- Start date
Mad, isn't it?Imagine believing any of this is a good idea.
Do away with actually outscoring your opponent, even if it is from the penalty spot, and instead decide the result based on arbitrary stats.
Imagine believing any of this is a good idea.
. Pep team could won all the cl except last season if that's the case.One of the worst rules ever, there's a reason it didn't last long. It was shite and the majority of people rightfully hated it.
People are so dramatic whenever UEFA makes a decision, geez.
You can make a healthy case for and against the away goal rule. I'm glad to see it gone as it's such a marginal decisive factor, but I can also see that it's good for entertainment to incentivize attacking football.
You can make a healthy case for and against the away goal rule. I'm glad to see it gone as it's such a marginal decisive factor, but I can also see that it's good for entertainment to incentivize attacking football.
Still not a fan of this. I think it favours the attacking top teams too much, teams that are often stacked with deep attacking squads in lieu of the weaker teams who often try to sneak goals and then try to be defensively solid.
All it does in my opinion is remove the likelihood of upsets and increases the likelihood of the bigger teams progressing every season.
All it does in my opinion is remove the likelihood of upsets and increases the likelihood of the bigger teams progressing every season.
If they were scrapping away goals they really should have scrapped 2 legs. Last night was for nothing, it’s now basically an fa cup tie where we have home advantage.
There’s no reward for trying to win a game now.
There’s no reward for trying to win a game now.
Except for...potentially winning the game?
Under away goals we would be happier with the draw and they would be happy to draw 2-2 in the 2nd leg. Now only an outright win is enough for them in the 2nd leg, meaning they have to try and win the game - the reward of which would be progression to the next phase. Or am I missing something?
Must be the dumbest thing I've read today
What’s the point of risking it when home advantage in the 2nd leg is so huge? Especially when you’re free to go out and risk a little bit more without the away goal to punish you?
Oh the home team has to win it if they’re playing at home first but all incentive for the away team to risk anything is gone.
say Liverpool have every second leg at home in this competition, it’s actually -EV to put themselves at risk in the first leg.
Conversely what’s the point in an away team risking anything at Anfield in a first leg when the chances of getting anything is so slim anyway?
The point is to score. Score more goals = win. It is that simple.
If a team can't see the incentive to score in a sport where more goals = win then they can't be helped.
How does 1 team going through when the score is 1-1 make sense?
Feel like it’s the first time in history we could’ve taken advantage of the away goal rule and it doesn’t count!
Ah well still slight advantage us.
Ah well still slight advantage us.
The incentive is to get through. If you can nullify the away leg then why wouldn’t you? Why wouldn’t you play in a way that makes you big favourites to go through with a draw rather than opening yourself up to give the opposition a chance to have something to hold onto? Every top side in Europe seems to have a fantastic CL home record for a reason.
Even extra time in the second leg would be 30 extra minutes in your home stadium. It makes absolutely no sense to open up.
Look at the results. City and Liverpool are the only two away side that won and even then City doesn’t really count.
I'd say Atletico are just as capable of scoring 2 at OT as we are of keeping a clean sheet.
Horrible rule and glad it's gone.
And the only correct option in deciding on who gets through is more goals = win.
So your problem with it is the team who plays the 2nd leg at home has an advantage? Am I understanding you correctly?
If so, then tough luck. It's not possible to make everything 100% fair. Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you don't.
Glad its gone, its burned us more than its helped us (think only the PSG game comes to mind with it helping us)
No, my problem is the away team risking more by trying to score pales in comparison to nullifying the game and having the home advantage for the second leg.
It dawned on me watching the Madrid game and the way we set up last night.
Agreed. Home advantage is statistically proven. It forces the home side in the 1st leg to play more offensively encourages the away team to camp in their own half. Surely the advantage is skewed heavily to the team that plays at home in the 2nd leg.
True but with away goals wasn't the advantage skewed heavily to the team playing away in the 2nd leg? Especially for ties that go into extra-time.
We scored one in Madrid in 2013
I've not watched any of the Europa League or Conference league but I think it's had a positive impact in making games closer in the CL, where an away goal could often kill a tie in the second leg or make a comeback that bit more difficult.
Reading the comments about our tie with Atletico and I think teams like them will make ties boring with away goals or not.
Reading the comments about our tie with Atletico and I think teams like them will make ties boring with away goals or not.
I don't know the consensus but it has given some already defensive coaches license to abandon the idea of scoring away goals.
Villareal were a disgrace last night. They went to Anfield last night with no ambition of scoring a goal.
Villareal were a disgrace last night. They went to Anfield last night with no ambition of scoring a goal.
I still don't know whether this was a positive or a negative, but new changes are sure as hell terrible.
With the away goals rule we likely don't get the Madrid-PSG/Madrid-Chelsea madness though
It's in a way also more fair to me that you can't progress without actually beating your opponent
We did get Barca/psg , tot/ajax madness just fine.
The jury is still out on this one.
Had they done so, the result might have been even worse for them than a 2-0. This was down to a gap in quality, not scrapping the away goal rule.
No way City sets up as offensively as they did on Tuesday had the away goal rule still existed. It has some negatives, sure, but overall I still think it's a good change. One Liverpool goal in Villarreal would almost automatically see us through after a 2-0 victory at home under the old rules. Now, still likely, but it's not a total killer of the game.
If the away goals rule had never existed, and UEFA floated it as an idea today, it would be laughed out of town as one of the stupidest suggestions ever.
Watching the Real and Chelsea game go to extra time made me think how unfair it was that Real had an extra 30 minutes of home advantage in the tie. Think away goals after extra time would have been the best compromise.
There was nothing special about Villareal's game plan last night. It was the same in the Europa final, the difference being the level of the opposition.
Conversely, if the away goal was there, how unfair would it be that Chelsea had an extra 30 mins to get a crucial away goal?
Madrid had an extra 30 minutes in front of their own crowd in their own stadium though.
How is that remotely equal? Chelsea scoring 1 would’ve meant them needing to score 2, how the funk does ”well you’ve got more fans though” make that fair?
We had already scored 3 so clearly being in their own stadium wasn't stopping us from scoring, but getting a crucial away goal in ET to make it 4-1, they would have had to make it 4-3 to advance. That's a huge advantage for the away team.
I didn't say it's equal or that it makes it fair? I'm in favour of scrapping the away goal rule.
However if both teams are exhausted, the fans can give a (mental and physical) edge to the home team.
Surely offset by the extra home advantage Real had?
That’s about as small as a sample size as you could choose though. Generally home advantage is a thing in football. 49% of games are won by the home team compared to 29% by the away, that’s pretty significant.
Fair, but the idea that a team can progress without actually beating their opponent just seems wrong to me.
Agreed, why should one team go through over 180 minutes if two matches were drawn 1-1 and 0-0. I like it without.
What is the moaning about? This years UCL has been incredible.
The only bad thing is that this rule wasn't abolished about a decade earlier.