Blatter wants alternative to penalty shoot outs

GavRedKing

At the moment there is no other way of doing it really.

The next best option is to have a player start from the half way line have 10 seconds to score with only one shot.

Their is no point introducing a replay IMO.

Justin10

Shoot out is pointless, its there just to make sure the game is over.
The problem with replays, 1. People are disappointed no one won, 2. The cost of travelling and tickets, getting stadium ready etc.

Problem is there is no alternative.
One I could think of is 3 on 2. Attackers need score, Defenders need to clear the ball, if any decent alternative came I think it would be great to get rid of penalty's.

If cost wasn't a problem I think a replay best idea.

MagicMarker

Both teams could compete in an episode of Wayne Rooney's Street Striker.

MagicMarker

Oh, and personally, there should be a 30 minute extra time as normal, and then it just reverts back to the golden goal rule, however long it takes, but subs should be unlimited in this case.

SEPT 23 1989

A game of curbs to decide the winner

GavRedKing

MagicMarker wrote: »

Both teams could compete in an episode of Wayne Rooney's Street Striker.

Andy Ansah to decide the winner.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gx5iZitbjOU

Oranage2

- Multi ball, each 30 seconds another ball is thrown onto the pitch.
- Make the goals smaller and have a one on one.
- Crossbar challenge, team to hit the crossbar from the half way line wins.
- One on one pitch sprint, team nominates their fastest player and first one to the goal post wins.
- Basket ball free throw, hoops are brought out and the first person to get a free throw from the penalty spot wins.

jack presley

I don't see the problem with them playing until someone scored. Ok they'll be knackered but even in World Cups they'll have around 3 days off to recover. And if they are going to complain about having to play for so long, the solution is to score quicker!

In basketball and ice hockey they play multipli overtones until someone wins. And they get considerably less days off (I know the effort might not be the same) but some NHL extra times last as long as the original game.

I reckon you'll never go longer than 60 mins before a goal was scored

the_monkey

Conkers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_j4BtYGufY

Your Airbag

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwNbGlWPD20

Fr Tod Umptious

jack presley wrote: »

I don't see the problem with them playing until someone scored. Ok they'll be knackered but even in World Cups they'll have around 3 days off to recover. And if they are going to complain about having to play for so long, the solution is to score quicker!

In basketball and ice hockey they play multipli overtones until someone wins. And they get considerably less days off (I know the effort might not be the same) but some NHL extra times last as long as the original game.

I reckon you'll never go longer than 60 mins before a goal was scored

Not a bad idea

The fact that you will not have penalties will not encourage teams to 'park the bus'

Your Airbag

Monkey referees

Miley Byrne

Toss of a coin as always to see who goes first. Team A win the toss and decide to go first. Nothing new here I hear you say.

Well Team A then proceed to take 5 consecutive penalties. Followed by Team B. If they are still even they go to the next 5 players from each team. etc etc.
This way one player won't always be the fall guy that misses the final penalty. Obviously that could happen if team A score all five penos and Team B score their first four only for the fifth player to miss. But the scenario off all the heartache falling on just one player would have a much less chance of happening.

Helix

after the 2 extra time halves are over, if the game is still a draw play an indefinite amount of 15 minute periods. to win you have to be winning when the full time whistle is blown for the end of the period.

no golden goal, no 2 clear goals, simply if someone is winning when the whistle goes at the end of that 15 minute period, they win

it'd become about endurance, determination and fitness - much fairer when judging a football team worthy winners than the lottery of a shootout or a golden goal scenario imo

Pepe LeFrits

Infinite time golden ball, so we can get a 17 hour long Isner-v-Mahut type epic, followed by the amusing spectacle of the winning team getting demolished in the next round. Although I suppose football squads are big enough these days.

DazMarz

The two captains are given pistols, both stand back-to-back on the centre spot, walk ten paces (counted out by the referee) and the turn and shoot (a duel). The team whose captain is still alive at the conclusion is the winner, while the losers have to carry the dead body of their captain up the steps to claim their runners-up medals, placing one reverently around their captain's neck so he can be buried with it.

Helix

they could probably just cancel the final entirely and give the trophy to the team who provides uefa with the most revenue due to their stature

that's all they want at the end of the day

NabyLadistheman

Cross-bar challenge!!

JPA

Andy Carroll wrote: »

The winner is decided based on alphabetical order.

woop!, damn you arsenal.

GarIT

I think there could be two separate 6 a side matches. The keeper and 5 players play 15 mins, then the keeper and the other 5 players play 15 mins.

Or the cleanest team wins i.e. the team with the least cards/fouls.

delta_bravo

A rousing game of snatch the bacon should settle it

cgpg5

GarIT wrote: »

I think there could be two separate 6 a side matches. The keeper and 5 players play 15 mins, then the keeper and the other 5 players play 15 mins.

Or the cleanest team wins i.e. the team with the least cards/fouls.

Way too many variables here e.g people getting wrongfully booked, strictness of different referees, interpretation of fouls

Blatter talking sh*te as usual. here is a pearl from 2004 that could almost be considered contradictory to todays proposal

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/3663723.stm

Blatter wants end to draws
Fifa president Sepp Blatter
Blatter says football must "have courage" to change
Fifa president Sepp Blatter says he is in favour of finding a way to avoid drawn matches.

Penalties would seem the most likely way of deciding match outcomes, but he has not said this would definitely be the chosen method.

"When you play cards or other games, there's always a winner and a loser," he told German news agency SID.

"We should have the courage to introduce a final decision in every game of football."

So Blabber doesn't like draws but now he doesn't like the cruelty of losing on penalties? Probably having seen his mate Beckenbauer's team lose last week has changed his stance.

As for an alternative....I think there really is no better alternative that is feasible except for perhaps the American style shootout which wouldn't really differentiate much from what we currently have.

He goes on about the need for FIFA to embrace change in that article yet when it comes to goal line technology and fairness he himself is very reluctant to do anything from his ivory tower in Switzerland.

JPA

JPA wrote: »

woop!, damn you arsenal.

Jeez thank god we dropped Woolwich from the full title!

Kerrydude1981

Deleted User wrote: »

Blatter talking sh*te as usual. here is a pearl from 2004 that could almost be considered contradictory to todays proposal

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/3663723.stm



So Blabber doesn't like draws but now he doesn't like the cruelty of losing on penalties? Probably having seen his mate Beckenbauer's team lose last week has changed his stance.

As for an alternative....I think there really is no better alternative that is feasible except for perhaps the American style shootout which wouldn't really differentiate much from what we currently have.

He goes on about the need for FIFA to embrace change in that article yet when it comes to goal line technology and fairness he himself is very reluctant to do anything from his ivory tower in Switzerland.

That clown Blatter should be doing his all to introduce goal line technology instead of looking for alternatives to the penalty shoot outs,maybe its Blatter that should be taken out of the game

G.K.

There's a goal line tech trial tomorrow at Wembley during the international. What more can you ask...

G.K.

G.K. wrote: »

There's a goal line tech trial tomorrow at Wembley during the international. What more can you ask...

Not before time. Dont forget they had stopped Arsenal from trying out a system at their own pre-season tournament last summer.

Skid

I would keep the Penalties, they are tremendous entertainment (if you are not supporting either team)

One change I would make is to make all the remaining players on the pitch take a penalty, not just 5. There would be nowhere to hide for reluctant shooters, everyone would have to stand up and be counted.

MagicMarker

G.K. wrote: »

There's a goal line tech trial tomorrow at Wembley during the international. What more can you ask...

Aren't they away?

G.K.

What?

Jax Teller

G.K. wrote: »

What?

England are playing in Norway aren't they ?

cgpg5

Skid wrote: »

I would keep the Penalties, they are tremendous entertainment (if you are not supporting either team)

One change I would make is to make all the remaining players on the pitch take a penalty, not just 5. There would be nowhere to hide for reluctant shooters, everyone would have to stand up and be counted.

Far too long with 11. Plus the reason players "hide" as you put it is not down to being afraid/nervous (although it is a contributing factor at times), but it can be down to fatigue, injuries, poor record etc. 5 is plenty. 22 penalties (at least) just gets boring.

cgpg5

Coletrickle88 wrote: »

England are playing in Norway aren't they ?

Yeah it's in Norway I'm pretty sure..

G.K.

Ah, I mean the game against Belgium, whenever that is.

im invisible

Savman wrote: »

Must be nearly 'Men-in-white-coats time' for Mr Blatter.

Umpires? sure that will solve the goal-line technology problem, but i don't know what it has to do with drawn games

Samba

Both teams (including the managers) should have to play keepy uppies, first team's ball to hit the ground loses...

Still haven't worked a few details such as would it be one ball per man or per team.

What a load of balls!

Where To

Sing-off!!

Jax Teller

2 captains play Soggy Biscuit .

Macker1

As harsh as penos can be I don't see another good way of settling a stalemate. The art of taking a peno and for that matter saving one is part of the game. So is having the bottle to successfully score when under the pressure. The so called big stars need to be tested under that pressure so long may it continue.

:D:D:D:D

RGDATA!

premierstone wrote: »

Huge Le Tiss fan, but he is completelky wrong here, Blatter has been saying this for nearly 20 years, he first spoke of it after USA '94, good to see the old English chip on the shoulder is alive and well.

Blatter is indeed correct it is a very cruel and harsh way to decide a competetion, however unless he has a viable alternative solution he really should keep stum.

OK, Blatter is on the record as not liking penalties, but more recently (in 2010) he proposed scrapping draws in group stages of world cup finals. How did he want to do that?
"If there is no winner at the end of 90 minutes of play, we would proceed directly to penalty kicks," he told German magazine Focus."

He flip-flops all the time, lately on racism and goal-line technology. Le Tiss might have been partially wrong, but Blatter does not come across as someone who wants to or cares about really improving the game, he just likes to stamp the authority of his office on it every so often, often impulsively it seems. If he didn't happen to be the president of FIFA who would take him seriously?

Laois_Man

Here's my idea. Bring back Golden Goal combined with this.

Once a match reaches full time, each manager must withdraw 2 players making it 9 a side (assuming there's been no red cards - if you've had one, your down to 8).

After 105 minutes, it's 7 a side. Keep playing til a goal. It wouldn't take long.

eire4

Personally I would just bring back the golden goal rule. That added great excitment and was a dramatic way to win a game in extra time. Plus obviously it would cut down on the number of games that actually reach pk's.

ArmaniJeanss

eire4 wrote: »

Personally I would just bring back the golden goal rule. That added great excitment and was a dramatic way to win a game in extra time. Plus obviously it would cut down on the number of games that actually reach pk's.

Must admit I hated it. It robbed the game of that last X minutes of drama where the team who is a goal down throws the kitchen sink at it in an attempt to get an equaliser. No more keeper going up for a corner in the 119th minute

There was no evidence either that it led to more attacking football, the percentage of games in which a goal was scored in extra time was fractionally lower than before (very small sample size obviously).

Finally, it ran into problems with policing and stewarding (no one knew when a game was going to end) so I doubt it'll ever come back.

kitakyushu

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

There was no evidence either that it led to more attacking football, the percentage of games in which a goal was scored in extra time was fractionally lower than before (very small sample size obviously).

Ironically I'd almost guess that GG actually encouraged increased negativity as it meant you never got an opportunity to come back into the game if you conceded. IIRC this is why silver goal was introduced, to offset this curious phenomenon.

I think if golden goal was done in such as a way as that it became the *only* way to win then it would finally serve the purpose it was intended for i.e. to encourage attacking play in extra time.

rossc007

Laois_Man wrote: »

Here's my idea. Bring back Golden Goal combined with this.

Once a match reaches full time, each manager must withdraw 2 players making it 9 a side (assuming there's been no red cards - if you've had one, your down to 8).

After 105 minutes, it's 7 a side. Keep playing til a goal. It wouldn't take long.

This has the potential to go on indefinitely. Aside from that, less players doesn't mean more goals.

Aside from that one on one with the keeper option they tried a few years back, I haven't heard of any suitable replacement for penalties. Like the previous poster said, Blatter should keep his mouth shut unless he has an alternative.

cgpg5

rossc007 wrote: »

This has the potential to go on indefinitely. Aside from that, less players doesn't mean more goals.

Aside from that one on one with the keeper option they tried a few years back, I haven't heard of any suitable replacement for penalties. Like the previous poster said, Blatter should keep his mouth shut unless he has an alternative.

Eh, less players on the same size pitch would definitely lead to increased goals. It would be far easier run through a defence.

Imo some variation on the reducing players idea is the best way forward.

Guy:Incognito

donalg1 wrote: »

7 a side for 15 minutes after 90 minutes instead of extra time, no chance of a penalty shoot out then

Yep, just what players need after running for 90 mins, spendign 15 mins with 6 lads having to cover the whole pitch.Maybe include the rule that first person dies, their team loses.

You should give rugby 7's a go , its great craic*






* it's not :-)

ArmaniJeanss

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Must admit I hated it. It robbed the game of that last X minutes of drama where the team who is a goal down throws the kitchen sink at it in an attempt to get an equaliser. No more keeper going up for a corner in the 119th minute

There was no evidence either that it led to more attacking football, the percentage of games in which a goal was scored in extra time was fractionally lower than before (very small sample size obviously).

Finally, it ran into problems with policing and stewarding (no one knew when a game was going to end) so I doubt it'll ever come back.

+1.

Teams were so terrified of conceding they used to both park the bus. Silver goal was not a bad rule but golden goal should stay gone.

Im really stumped as to what alternative could be used to penalties. They may be harsh and the pressure is all with the kicker but tbh if you are paid tens of thousands a week then surely its not such a big ask to put the ball in the net from 12 yards? I know its not as easy as it looks but if a team aren't good enough to win on penalties then they cant really complain and it might sound harsh but thats my honest opinion.
My own team lost the 2000 Uefa cup final to Galatasaray on penalties and i cant really complain.

Perhaps a game of dodge ball might settle the issue

copacetic

Great, crazy all over the place shoot out for league 1 play off at the moment. Most of main takers miss, all sudden death ones knocking them in. I love them as long as my team isn't in them.
Currently 7 all after 10 pens each, Goalies up!