Hows this for a mad/bad idea for soccer..........

ROCKMAN

Was just thinking as I was watching the Rugby World cup.And their idea of bonus points .(In case people don't know if a team scores 4 tries they get 1 bonus point.)
How there my mad idea would this work in football .If a team scores say 3 or 4 goals they get a bonus point, Would it help the game and make teams play more attacking football and therefore more entertaining football or would it just increase the gap between the top teams and the rest of the league.
Ok if you cannot see it working in the league what about the group stages of the Champions League.

So am I mad and should just keep taking my pills or could it work?

leninbenjamin

stuff like this is regularly brought up on these forums. i think such an idea has merit, soccer could learn a bit from rugby imo, but there's so many things on the list of possibilities that will never be be considered for a long long time at least. a better idea would be to figure out how to get rid of FIFA and get a fairer/more open/less money hungry/less conservative system in place

_blank_

This was yet another reason for me to absolutely despise rugby.

Teams get points for LOSING now? What. The. Fúck?

So, if a team wins 6-4 in a football match, the losing side should get a point?

Totally ridiculous.

MrJoeSoap

The better teams would always be likely to score three or four goals more often than the smaller ones, so I'd imagine it would only increase the gap. So far this season the following clubs would have bonus points...

Arsenal 3
Newcastle 2
Fulham 2
Tottenham 2
Man City
West Ham
Liverpool
Bolton
Portsmouth
Wigan
Everton
Chelsea
Blackburn
Reading

Two of the clubs with more than one point are in the top five, ironically enough the other two are in the bottom four. I'd imagine over the season the gap would increase a bit. You wouldn't happen to be an Arsenal fan, would you?

ROCKMAN

MrJoeSoap wrote:

The better teams would always be likely to score three or four goals more often than the smaller ones, so I'd imagine it would only increase the gap. So far this season the following clubs would have bonus points...

Arsenal 3
Newcastle 2
Fulham 2
Man City 2
Tottenham 2
West Ham
Liverpool
Bolton
Portsmouth
Wigan
Everton
Chelsea
Blackburn
Reading

Three of the clubs with more than one point are in the top five, ironically enough the other two are in the bottom four. I'd imagine over the season the gap would increase a bit. You wouldn't happen to be an Arsenal fan, would you?

First of all not an Arsenal fan, but what interesting in your post is the likes of Man City, who everybody will expected to fall back as the season does on but with bonus points would it keep them and teams like them (the so called second tier teams) in the title race longer.....

MrJoeSoap

Actually realised after I posted it that they've only score 3+ once. Apologies.

event

also, in rugby, you can definately tell if a try is deserved, as they go to the video ref, they are rarely given in error.

in football, what if a goal was given that wasnt over the line, which resulted in a bonus point?

leninbenjamin

event wrote:

also, in rugby, you can definately tell if a try is deserved, as they go to the video ref, they are rarely given in error.

in football, what if a goal was given that wasnt over the line, which resulted in a bonus point?

well that's where i think the definitive need for video analysts should come in.

BKtje

Teams get points for LOSING now? What. The. Fúck?

It gives teams a goal to keep playing (or aim for if your a minnow vs a top side) instead of just letting their heads drop.

Wouldn't really work in footie though, especially the loosing point.

redspider

I think a different points stucture, such as one that awards attacking football, would help, and bonus points are something I have been thinking about too. So, you're not mad! ;-)

I think if a team is winning 2-0, they are more likely to sit on that than seek a third. So, if 3 goals gets a bonus point, then that should encourage some more attacking football. Staying within one goal of the winning side should also get a bonus point. The question is, what to do with draw's. In rugby, with a sport with more scores (points), a draw is hard to come by and a sharing of the points is deserved. Maybe in soccer, we could reduce a 1-0 win to just two points and keep a no-score draw at 1 pt each and a score-draw at 2 pts each.

It would make the point scoring system slightly more complex but nothing that most people over 4 wouldnt be able to grasp.

eg:

0-0 - 1pt each
1-0 - 2 pts for the winner, 0 for the loser
1-1 - 2 pts each
2-0 - 3 pts for the winner, 0 for the loser
2-1 - 3 pts for the winner, 1 for the loser (within 1 goal)
2-2 - 2 pts each
3-0, 3-1 - 4 pts for the winner, 0 for the loser
3-2 - 4 pts for the winner, 1 for the loser
3-3 - 2 pts each
4-0, 4-1, 4-2 - 4 pts for the winner, 0 for the loser
4-3 - 4 pts for the winner, 1 for the loser
4-4 - 2 pts each

etc

Goal Difference should still apply.

Another simpler system is where a team would get a point for every goal scored although that doesnt necessarily work too well when teams have major off-days. If only football were logical.

But overall, there are definitely things that could be done to encourage a more expansive spectacle. Whether Platini and FIFA will entertain any of them though remains to be seen.

Redspider

patmac

The best thing Soccer can learn from Rugby is to give the referee some respect and not to question his authority, also get rid of the playacting, a few 3 match retrospective bans for diving, feigning injury etc and move the ball on 10 yards for dissent would stop the ruination of what used to be the beautiful game.

_blank_

redspider wrote:

I think a different points stucture, such as one that awards attacking football, would help, and bonus points are something I have been thinking about too. So, you're not mad! ;-)

I think if a team is winning 2-0, they are more likely to sit on that than seek a third. So, if 3 goals gets a bonus point, then that should encourage some more attacking football. Staying within one goal of the winning side should also get a bonus point. The question is, what to do with draw's. In rugby, with a sport with more scores (points), a draw is hard to come by and a sharing of the points is deserved. Maybe in soccer, we could reduce a 1-0 win to just two points and keep a no-score draw at 1 pt each and a score-draw at 2 pts each.

It would make the point scoring system slightly more complex but nothing that most people over 4 wouldnt be able to grasp.

eg:

0-0 - 1pt each
1-0 - 2 pts for the winner, 0 for the loser
1-1 - 2 pts each
2-0 - 3 pts for the winner, 0 for the loser
2-1 - 3 pts for the winner, 1 for the loser (within 1 goal)
2-2 - 2 pts each
3-0, 3-1 - 4 pts for the winner, 0 for the loser
3-2 - 4 pts for the winner, 1 for the loser
3-3 - 2 pts each
4-0, 4-1, 4-2 - 4 pts for the winner, 0 for the loser
4-3 - 4 pts for the winner, 1 for the loser
4-4 - 2 pts each

etc

Goal Difference should still apply.

Another simpler system is where a team would get a point for every goal scored although that doesnt necessarily work too well when teams have major off-days. If only football were logical.

But overall, there are definitely things that could be done to encourage a more expansive spectacle. Whether Platini and FIFA will entertain any of them though remains to be seen.

Redspider

:rolleyes:

You sound like a child. Or an American.

"I want to see goals daddy, why aren't they scoring goals daddy, it's just. not. fair daddy, there were no goals today daddy, I wasn't entertained enough daddy".

Good defending is an art. In this set up good defenders get nothing.

Perhaps teams should abandon defenders altogether and just go all out for goals, maybe a 1-3-6 formation.

MrJoeSoap

DesF wrote:

Perhaps teams should abandon defenders altogether and just go all out for goals, maybe a 1-3-6 formation.

Boardeaux are fvcked.

Nunu

Football has had many cases of match fixing in the past - not so much at the very highest leagues (bar Italy!). I think awarding bonus points for a set number of goals would be open to abuse by those wishing to fix matches and would actually increase the liklehood, sadly.

Fifa is trying it's best to avoid settling groups etc. with teams on same points by goal difference because of the possibility of match fixing. Nowadays it seems that head to head is the way of seperating teams.

So, I think Fifa would probably not entertain this idea on those grounds.

_blank_

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Boardeaux are fvcked.

We won 2-0 last night

leninbenjamin

DesF wrote:

This was yet another reason for me to absolutely despise rugby.

Teams get points for LOSING now? What. The. Fúck?

So, if a team wins 6-4 in a football match, the losing side should get a point?

Totally ridiculous.

in fairness it makes sense. how many times do we see smaller teams going to the likes and Old Trafford or Stamford Bridge and not even trying because they know they wont win, or there will be no benefit in it for them. giving the likes of Derby or Fulham a point for going out and doing their best or at least trying would possibly balance things out better.

_blank_

No.

Teams should NOT be rewarded in any way for losing games.

Really, this is an incredibly stupid idea.

What teams have you seen going to Old Trafford or Chelsea and "not even trying".

My friend, there is a difference between '"not trying" and "trying not to lose".

leninbenjamin

meh i can't remember a clear example, but i know some of the teams in relegation battles previously have rested players on trips to Chelsea and United, saving them for matches they felt they could win. it might be rare enough but it does happen occasionally. didn't some people accuse Redknapp of doing that previously when he was giving out about Pool resting players for Champions league battles a few years back?

and i'm not talking about parking the bus, i'm talking about not going in for 50-50s, not sprinting fulls stretch to get back when exposed, that kind of "relaxed attitude".

MrJoeSoap

leninbenjamin wrote:

meh i can't remember a clear example, but i know some of the teams in relegation battles previously have rested players on trips to Chelsea and United, saving them for matches they felt they could win. it might be rare enough but it does happen occasionally. didn't some people accuse Redknapp of doing that previously when he was giving out about Pool resting players for Champions league battles a few years back?

and i'm not talking about parking the bus, i'm talking about not going in for 50-50s, not sprinting fulls stretch to get back when exposed, that kind of "relaxed attitude".

If its so rare it hardly warrants a complete overhaul of the points system.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. There are plenty of other things that need to be fixed, ropey refereeing, diving etc...

smackbunnybaby

DesF wrote:

No.

Teams should NOT be rewarded in any way for losing games.

Really, this is an incredibly stupid idea.

What teams have you seen going to Old Trafford or Chelsea and "not even trying".

My friend, there is a difference between '"not trying" and "trying not to lose".

i think you should get a bonus point if you lose by less than 7

_blank_

leninbenjamin wrote:

meh i can't remember a clear example, but i know some of the teams in relegation battles previously have rested players on trips to Chelsea and United, saving them for matches they felt they could win. it might be rare enough but it does happen occasionally. didn't some people accuse Redknapp of doing that previously when he was giving out about Pool resting players for Champions league battles a few years back?

and i'm not talking about parking the bus, i'm talking about not going in for 50-50s, not sprinting fulls stretch to get back when exposed, that kind of "relaxed attitude".

What's wrong with this?

Do the so called bigger teams not rest players for games that they see as less important?

And here's a concrete example.

Alex Ferguson's selections for early Carling Cup games.

If Harry, or any other manager feels his team would be better served by having a 'relaxeds attitude' for a match against the top 4/5, so they can be more focussed on a potential relegation six pointer, is that so wrong?

Your attitude here smacks of elitism.

If the big teams are allowed to rest players, for whatever reason, the the 'smaller' teams should be allowed to do so aswell, without the threat of giving up a 'bonus point'.

MrJoeSoap

Bonus points for winning more throw-ins and/or corners. That would keep the ball in play more and thus create a more exciting game. Or else it would lead to people trying to win throws off opponents all game, either way the fans are the real winners.

Call Me Jimmy

I think it's an idea worth thinking about, a bonus point for scoring 3 or more goals or something.

Although Desf, you seem to think that just because people have more of an incentive to score that there'll will be no tackling in football matches and I don't see how you've come to that conclusion. There will still be just as many tackles to appreciate, it just means teams would show more of a desire to get forward when they are on the ball

EDIT: Also, who would you rather watch on tv given the choice between Arsenal and Chelsea?

EDIT2: And calling people children for wanting more attacking football (not necessarily goals) is a load of bollox. I'de rather see arsenal in a 0-0 draw than chelsea in a 2-0 win atm... You're right, defending is an art but so is playing flowing,attacking football and more people prefer to see that then the ball bouncing from shin to shin for 90 mins.

EDIT3: I'm not an arsenal supporter btw.

Eirebear

Your all fecking crazy.

Think about it, if we awarded teams bonus points for scoring more goals it would give a completely unfair advantage to the top teams.
Are defenders not players too? Do they not deserve to be rewarded for their play? maybe we should give bonus points to the teams who have clean sheets?

Oh no! we couldnt do that because then teams would play to their strengths and defend, FFS people this is football not basketball.

As for the guy who suggested the ridiculously complicated sytem based on goals scored, do you not remember English football in the 80's where you recieved 1 point for a no score draw and 2 points for a score draw?
IT DIDNT WORK!!!!

_blank_

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

I think it's an idea worth thinking about, a bonus point for scoring 3 or more goals or something.

Even if you lose?

6-4, does the team that scored 4 goals get a bonus point.

I disagree fundamentally with awarding a losing team, call me old fashioned, but that's the way I am.

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

Although Desf, you seem to think that just because people have more of an incentive to score that there'll will be no tackling in football matches and I don't see how you've come to that conclusion. There will still be just as many tackles to appreciate, it just means teams would show more of a desire to get forward when they are on the ball

No, eventually if points were being handed out for the amount of goals being scored, we'd eventually see games like that farcial game between Man City and Fulham last weekend. Brutal defenders and fair to middling attackers just there to pick up the scraps. Are you seriously telling me that both those teams deserved a bonus point for that game? Seriously?

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

EDIT: Also, who would you rather watch on tv given the choice between Arsenal and Chelsea?

What does it matter what I'd rather watch on TV? Is this what we've come to? Only appreciating football teams that score a lot of goals?

What would you rather watch, the 3-3 with SIX GOALS ZOMG!!11one!!1 or Arsenal's 5-0 win at the weekend?

My answer is Arsenal, the obviously have some concept of how to defend.

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

EDIT2: And calling people children for wanting more attacking football (not necessarily goals) is a load of bollox. I'de rather see arsenal in a 0-0 draw than chelsea in a 2-0 win atm...

Read the post again.

He wanted to award an increasing amount of bonus points for more goials scored.

EDIT

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

EDIT3: I'm not an arsenal supporter btw.

Your loyalties didn't influence my answer, just fyi.

_blank_

Eirebear wrote:

Your all fecking crazy.

Think about it, if we awarded teams bonus points for scoring more goals it would give a completely unfair advantage to the top teams.
Are defenders not players too? Do they not deserve to be rewarded for their play? maybe we should give bonus points to the teams who have clean sheets?

Oh no! we couldnt do that because then teams would play to their strengths and defend, FFS people this is football not basketball.

Yes, this is a point I was making too.

But no, people just want to be entertained by the ball hitting the back of the net and the scoreboard ticking over. Just like Americans with an attention span of a jellyfish.

Hey lads, what about awarding half goals for teams that hit the woodwork?

Ridiculous isn't it?

MrJoeSoap

Crossbar and in should definitely count double. Bring back Tony Yeboah.

leninbenjamin

DesF wrote:

What's wrong with this?

the paying fans lose out as the qaulity of the game falls

DesF wrote:

Do the so called bigger teams not rest players for games that they see as less important?

yes and they are regularly criticised for it

DesF wrote:

And here's a concrete example.

Alex Ferguson's selections for early Carling Cup games.

If Harry, or any other manager feels his team would be better served by having a 'relaxeds attitude' for a match against the top 4/5, so they can be more focussed on a potential relegation six pointer, is that so wrong?

fair enough, a valid point but seeing as it's in a separate competition i wouldn't be too bothered personally. its league's we're talking about here. and woulnd't those extra points benefit those teams who do put on a better performance in those games? it'd just be another way of earning points for the manager of struggling teams to contemplate

DesF wrote:

Your attitude here smacks of elitism.

If the big teams are allowed to rest players, for whatever reason, the the 'smaller' teams should be allowed to do so aswell, without the threat of giving up a 'bonus point'.

now that just rankles me... elitist? for having a different viewpoint to your own? that comment is just petty...

now contrary to your own opinion i'm not trying to punish teams for resting. i'm just mooting a possible method for having more games up to a higher standard in the run of the season for the benefit of fans, instead of having teams switch off after the first goal is conceded. in fact, it might balance the table further and show a truer reflection over the course of the season as to who performed best etc. or it might not. who knows.

Edit: in fact DesF it might serve your purposes too ya know. think of Arsenal v Derby, 5 goals, and pretty much all with horrible defending, Derby gave up the ghost in my view after that first goal imo. now what if Derby still felt they had something to play for, they might have actually started defending. DEFENDING DES, that art you love so much! hell if they managed to keep it within one goal say, they would have gotten a point! fans get a much more contested game, Arsenal come away with three well earned points, Derby come away with a well earned point. EVERYONE WOULD BE HAPPIER!

now please tell me how you think such an opinion might be elitist...

Eirebear

how about we ditch draws all together and go for the old J league approach of penalty shoot outs in the event that both teams are level....that worked quite well :rolleyes:
Or even better...as the above one would eventually cause teams to play for penalties...maybe we should award the game to the team who won the most corners like they used to do in schoolboy football?

If it aint broke...dont try and fix it

DerekD Goldfish

Completely stupid idea
I cant see any merit in whatsoever

_blank_

leninbenjamin wrote:

the paying fans lose out as the qaulity of the game falls

Are you trying to suggest that great defending somehow takes from away from the quality of a game?

Amount of goals scored != Quality of game.

In fact, I'm sure when Australia beat American Samoa (or whoever the feck) 36-0 there a few years ago, it was a crap match. But still, at least Australia would have gotten twelve bonus points for it. Everyone's a winner, baby.

And it was a league of sorts, a qualifying campaign.

leninbenjamin wrote:

yes and they are regularly criticised for it

But never sanctioned.

You'd be sanctioning teams for it if they were denied bonus points.

leninbenjamin wrote:

and woulnd't those extra points benefit those teams who do put on a better performance in those games? it'd just be another way of earning points for the manager of struggling teams to contemplate

Right, look at it this way.

Manager of Derby told his players that 'their season didn't start' until after the Liverpool game. Essentially he looked at the fixtures, though 'ah feck this, we won't beat Liverpool, even if we give it 100%' so told his players not to worry too much about it. Instead to concentrate on playing the 'lesser' teams, who Derby can compete with, get points.

I'm abiguous on this actually, any team can have an off day (Newcastle) and get beaten, but 8/10 times, the top 4 will beat Derby this season. Their manager knows this, so why send out the players to maybe over exert themselves, when they have a better chance against teams more at their own level?

leninbenjamin wrote:

now that just rankles me... elitist? for having a different viewpoint to your own? that comment is just petty...

OK fair enough, apologies.

leninbenjamin wrote:

now contrary to your own opinion i'm not trying to punish teams for resting. i'm just mooting a possible method for having more games up to a higher standard in the run of the season for the benefit of fans,

Why you equate amount goals to standard of game is beyond me.

ROCKMAN

Eirebear wrote:

how about we ditch draws all together and go for the old J league approach of penalty shoot outs in the event that both teams are level....that worked quite well :rolleyes:
Or even better...as the above one would eventually cause teams to play for penalties...maybe we should award the game to the team who won the most corners like they used to do in schoolboy football?

If it aint broke...dont try and fix it

But it is broke
bigger clubs getting richer
the gap getting bigger
the league winners are predictable year after year
the refs making bad decisions every week
did the ball cross the line yes or no debate at least once a season
was it a peno ??
diving
red cards
vicious tackles going unpunished

MrJoeSoap

ROCKMAN wrote:

But it is broke
bigger clubs getting richer
the gap getting bigger
the league winners are predictable year after year
the refs making bad decisions every week
did the ball cross the line yes or no debate at least once a season
was it a peno ??
diving
red cards
vicious tackles going unpunished

The thing is, the "it" to which you are referring is not the points system. It isn't the points systems fault that the bigger clubs are getting richer and the gap is increasing.

Call Me Jimmy

I'm loving the way the people completely against bonus points for scoring more goals just lump anyone who would consider the idea into the meathead american/japanese group. Did anyone in this thread propose half-goals for hitting the woodwork? No.

Amount of goals scored != Quality of game.

Of course not but most of the time it does. And by rewarding when teams score more goals it means they set up to play attacking footballing and it is a more open game, it's not about the goals scored it's about what it takes to score more goals.

MrJoeSoap

leninbenjamin wrote:

the paying fans lose out as the qaulity of the game falls

Are you arguing that the standard of football is falling? Maybe we should pay the players less then, see how they deal with that.

leninbenjamin

DesF wrote:

Are you trying to suggest that great defending somehow takes from away from the quality of a game?

ok, one of us has completely lost the plot.

at one stage in this thread you mentioned that Rugby was nuts for giving points to teams who don't win, and i quoted that and replied that it could work.

i'm not talking about giving points for more goals, i'm talking about giving points to losing teams who manage to keep the within a certain range, say one goal, which would actually result in better defending imo. obviously though it would mean that the points tally would have to be entirely different but in theory there might be justification for it. say 5 points for a win, with one point in the balance, if the winning score is say above a certain range the winner gets it, if its below the loser gets it... apologies if i did not make this clear. kinda like the rugby you were giving out about.

Edit:

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Are you arguing that the standard of football is falling? Maybe we should pay the players less then, see how they deal with that.

meh, more that the gulf between teams is becoming exaggerated and is resulting in some games that just aren't great to watch. standard would be the wrong word, maybe the competativeness of certain matches would be better. i'm just saying a rejigging of the points system could possibly work in favour to lessence the gulf possibly

Savman

Stop the madness this is the worst idea ever.
I propose a different system: whoever scores the most goals, wins.

MrJoeSoap

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

I'm loving the way the people completely against bonus points for scoring more goals just lump anyone who would consider the idea into the meathead american/japanese group. Did anyone in this thread propose half-goals for hitting the woodwork? No.

And it's funny how people are advocating change for changes sake. If the standard of football is dropping, which I certainly don't think it is, then it isn't because three points are being awarded for a win, and one for a draw. It goes much much deeper than this, managers are focusing on three competitions at a time (a la Benitez on Saturday, why bother spending £20m plus on a striker if he can't handle two games in four days ffs, maybe spend an extra million on cotton wool while you're at it). There are many other reasons but I'm not too pushed to go into them now.

There is nothing wrong with the current system.

MrJoeSoap

Savman wrote:

Stop the madness this is the worst idea ever.
I propose a different system: whoever scores the most goals, wins.

Have you ever been called a visionary?

Savman

leninbenjamin wrote:

ok, one of us has completely lost the plot.

at one stage in this thread you mentioned that Rugby was nuts for giving points to teams who don't win, and i quoted that and replied that it could work.

i'm not talking about giving points for more goals, i'm talking about giving points to losing teams who manage to keep the within a certain range, say one goal, which would actually result in better defending imo. obviously though it would mean that the points tally would have to be entirely different but in theory there might be justification for it. say 5 points for a win, with one point in the balance, if the winning score is say above a certain range the winner gets it, if its below the loser gets it... apologies if i did not make this clear. kinda like the rugby you were giving out about.

No no no no no. If you like the rules of Rugby, go and watch Rugby. In football you get your due reward, sometimes that reward is sweet FA. There is no bonus for being piss poor and losing, kinda like life. The league system, at present, is absolutely perfect IMHO. The team that wins the league, does so deservedly becuase they won the most games, scored the most goals and collected the most points over the course of the season.

That is the perfect system, there simply isn't a better way of doing it. Bomus points me arse - I'd say that notion will be about as successful as the yanks "kick in" proposal in the 90's. That really took off.:rolleyes:

Eirebear

ROCKMAN wrote:

But it is broke
bigger clubs getting richerthe bigger clubs have always been richer..and what about west ham/man city and numerous others who have had money pumped into them?
the gap getting biggerThen its up to teams to do better, do you really think that giving "bonus points" will change that?
the league winners are predictable year after yearthats the exact same point as above
the refs making bad decisions every weekand bonus points will change this how? referees have historically made bad decisions
did the ball cross the line yes or no debate at least once a seasonagain, bonus points will change this will it? what would football be if it wasnt for the debates before/during and after games?
was it a peno ??maybe?
divingok maybe we should offer bonus points to people who dont dive?
red cards yes, they generally come after a yelland a few more fouls
vicious tackles going unpunishedand this never happened in the 60's 70's 80'?

So many of your points are completely ridiculous...if football is so bad why do you bother watching?

MrJoeSoap

leninbenjamin wrote:

say 5 points for a win, with one point in the balance, if the winning score is say above a certain range the winner gets it, if its below the loser gets it...

All that is going to do is make the gap between the bigger and smaller teams infinitely bigger. I suspect you haven't thought your argument through.

I can guarantee that if you were to go back over any season of the Premiership and apply that system the results would make you change your mind.

_blank_

Savman wrote:

Stop the madness this is the worst idea ever.
I propose a different system: whoever scores the most goals, wins.

Heh, maybe it should be the team who create the most chances, eh?

_blank_

Bonus point for keeping within a certain distance would make average teams go on the hunt for goals once they go, say, two down.

What would happen then is that the better teams would then exploit the even more exposed defence and get a hatful of goals.

Hmm, yes, it would be more goals for sure, but the average team would be conceding more, not scoring them.

OR, the losing team would shut up shop at 1-0 down, bring on an extra defender or two in a bid to earn the 'bonus' point for entertaining us all for eighty minutes with six defenders on the pitch.

FFS lads, it's completely unworkable. Completely ridiculous.

If you want to see games with high scores, where the losing team gets a nice pat on the head, go and watch rugger.

PHB

Bonus points work in things like rugby where you score many timesin a game, in soccer, one goal can and often is all that wins or loses a match, bonus points just don't really work imo as a proper format, especially not in the league. As for the CL, enough goals are scored as it is

Ultimately, rugby needs things like this to make the sport more appealing to everybody. Soccer is popular enough as it is

All I want from rugby is their use of video technology, also I kinda like the idea of a sin bin to be honest. I don't think punching somebody in anger should be a red card, while I think trying to injure somebody should be. Not only would it increase the fun of matches, it would also decrease the ability of a ref to screw up games.

_blank_

PHB wrote:

I don't think punching somebody in anger should be a red card,

You don't think punching someone should be a red card?

GAA for you then

ROCKMAN

PHB wrote:

Bonus points work in things like rugby where you score many timesin a game, in soccer, one goal can and often is all that wins or loses a match, bonus points just don't really work imo as a proper format, especially not in the league. As for the CL, enough goals are scored as it is

Ultimately, rugby needs things like this to make the sport more appealing to everybody. Soccer is popular enough as it is

All I want from rugby is their use of video technology, also I kinda like the idea of a sin bin to be honest. I don't think punching somebody in anger should be a red card, while I think trying to injure somebody should be. Not only would it increase the fun of matches, it would also decrease the ability of a ref to screw up games.

I must say I like your idea of using the sin bin. Punish the player and their team but would not ruin the game hmmm

PHB

DesF wrote:

You don't think punching someone should be a red card?

GAA for you then

lol I think to be honest, if it's done with intent to injure somebody, like a deliberate punch, it should be a red card. But if its something done in anger, like pushing somebody in the face with your hand, it should be a sin bin. I really don't like this whole, can't raise the hands culture.

eirebhoy

DesF wrote:

Bonus point for keeping within a certain distance would make average teams go on the hunt for goals once they go, say, two down.

What would happen then is that the better teams would then exploit the even more exposed defence and get a hatful of goals.

Hmm, yes, it would be more goals for sure, but the average team would be conceding more, not scoring them.

OR, the losing team would shut up shop at 1-0 down, bring on an extra defender or two in a bid to earn the 'bonus' point for entertaining us all for eighty minutes with six defenders on the pitch.

FFS lads, it's completely unworkable. Completely ridiculous.

If you want to see games with high scores, where the losing team gets a nice pat on the head, go and watch rugger.

The bonus point for finishing within a goal of the opposition is a ridiculous idea. A bonus point for a certain amount of goals might work but it shouldn't carry the same weight as a draw. Maybe 6 points for a win, 2 for a draw and 1 for a certain amount of goals but that's a bit mad.

MrJoeSoap

Increasing the number of points for a win just flat-out won't work, no matter what bonus points are handed out. It'll only increase the gap.

PHB

Increasing the number of points for a win to 3 made a huge difference, 4 I think is just too much of a gap.