A real alternative to penalties

kakee

I know there was another thread, but it became a bit messy so here is what I think would be a good alternative to penalties.

Before the game both managers/captains toss a coin.

If team A win the toss then they will win the game if it is level after 90 minutes. To stop team A from just defending, team B gets a one goal start.

Team B knows that if they concede and the game finishes level then they will lose so they will most likely need to get a second goal at least.

Team A knows that they have to score at least one goal in the game to have a chance of winning.

I think this way would work because the coin toss can be done as soon as the teams involved are known giving managers and coaches time to decide tactics etc.

The players would know what is needed and would not have to spend 30 mins of extra time afraid to make a mistake or playing for penalties.

For people watching it would be good as everybody would know what has to happen in the game as regards scoring and I think it would make all the knockout games more attacking and better to watch.

bren2001

Thats an awful solution.

kakee

bren2001 wrote: »

Thats an awful solution.

But why?

dor83

I'd rather have penalties, which is the fairest way to decide it in my opinion. I think a coin toss at the end of the game would even be better than that.

They should cut the teams numbers for extra time. 5 on 5

_blank_

Determine the outcome of a game before a ball is kicked?

Yeah, cool.

Xavi6

Merge with the other loony thread.

Giggsy11

Awful idea as all team B has to do is park the plane. Imagine Barca is team B and they get a goal head start, they will keep passing the ball for 90 mins without any real purpose.

The game as it is now is good way to decide the outcome of the game.

tony1kenobi

Des wrote: »

Determine the outcome of a game before a ball is kicked?

Yeah, cool.

Sepp Blatter likes this.

Bodhisopha

I've figured it out. Penalty shoot out before the game.

GavRedKing

kakee wrote: »

I know there was another thread, but it became a bit messy so here is what I think would be a good alternative to penalties.

Before the game both managers/captains toss a coin.

If team A win the toss then they will win the game if it is level after 90 minutes. To stop team A from just defending, team B gets a one goal start.

Team B knows that if they concede and the game finishes level then they will lose so they will most likely need to get a second goal at least.

Team A knows that they have to score at least one goal in the game to have a chance of winning.

I think this way would work because the coin toss can be done as soon as the teams involved are known giving managers and coaches time to decide tactics etc.

The players would know what is needed and would not have to spend 30 mins of extra time afraid to make a mistake or playing for penalties.

For people watching it would be good as everybody would know what has to happen in the game as regards scoring and I think it would make all the knockout games more attacking and better to watch.

I think thats rather silly TBH.

If Team A win the toss they win the game after 90 minutes if its a draw and Team B get an advantage from the off?

So if Team B are Barcelona/Real Madrid they have basically a 1 goal start already?

:eek:

LuckyLloyd

Penalties is a fine solution, I have no idea why this comes up so often. Well, actually, I do - it only is raised as an issue in a year where we are unhappy with the results of the final stages of the CL or International competition.

If Real had won the shootout and beaten Chelsea in the final we wouldn't be discussing this.

Anyone

Allocate a points system on the play in 90mins and Extra time.

Points are awarded for shots on target/shots off target, and deducted for yellow and red cards.

Team with the most points wins.

Although I still prefer penalties!

kippy

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Penalties is a fine solution, I have no idea why this comes up so often. Well, actually, I do - it only is raised as an issue in a year where we are unhappy with the results of the final stages of the CL or International competition.

If Real had won the shootout and beaten Chelsea in the final we wouldn't be discussing this.

Was it not Sepp Blatter that brought it up?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/may/25/sepp-blatter-penalty-shoot-outs?newsfeed=true

Giggsy11

Anyone wrote: »

Allocate a points system on the play in 90mins and Extra time.

Points are awarded for shots on target/shots off target, and deducted for yellow and red cards.

Team with the most points wins.

Although I still prefer penalties!

Problem with this system is teams will just shoot from any position just for points.

Skid

Anyone wrote: »

Allocate a points system on the play in 90mins and Extra time.

Points are awarded for shots on target/shots off target, and deducted for yellow and red cards.

Team with the most points wins.

Although I still prefer penalties!

That would never work, you would just have teams taking potshots from everywhere in the last 10 minutes to contrive their points 'score'

Although I still prefer penalties!

Keep the Penalties, we would miss them if they were gone !

LuckyLloyd

kippy wrote: »

Was it not Sepp Blatter that brought it up?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/may/25/sepp-blatter-penalty-shoot-outs?newsfeed=true

I know he brought it up, and that's my point - noises like this only come from the powers that be in years like this.

plasmaguy

I really really cannot wait until Sepp Blatter's presidency of FIFA ends.

As for penalties, they sometimes are the only exciting and memorable part to some very dour games, eg WC Final 94, Ireland v Romania, 1990, and so on.

They are harsh yes but always good entertainment. And it takes skill to score a penalty and even more so to save one.

They are actually a very good way to solve a match, far better than any alternative such as counting back fouls, yellow cards or some sh1te like that.

Anyone

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Problem with this system is teams will just shoot from any position just for points.

Yeah maybe, more so in extra time I'd imagine, was just an idea and no idea how you would award points. I'd rather see that though, than 2 teams playing out 30 mins without any intent of winning and playing for peno's.

Might remove some of the park the bus tactics and persistent fouling that has become common place in cup comps.

Anyway, the idea is to reward attacking play.

kippy

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I know he brought it up, and that's my point - noises like this only come from the powers that be in years like this.

Fair enough, sorry, I thought you were talking about posters on here discussing it.
Sepp Blatter and indeed a number of senior players in world and national Soccer should have left their posts long ago.

eagle eye

I was thinking myself that if the game finishes level that the players should all go off the pitch. The referee then puts the ball in the centre circle and the fans of each team start blowing as hard as they can from the stands and try and put the ball in the oppositions net. Whichever team's fans does this first wins obviously as its sudden death. If neither team can get the ball in the net before bedtime then whichever team's goal the ball is nearer to loses.

v3ttel

An awful, awful idea. Why bother play the match at all, and just leave it at the coin toss?

The team that gets the head start can defend for their lives, especially against a team like Barcelona, where the most used strategy is to try and knick one on the counter, even as it is!

Imagine APOEL going to play at the Camp Nou, and starting 1-0 down before a ball is kicked. They might aswell not bother turning up.

Can you imagine how ridiculous it would be:
"Who won the match tonight?"
"Barcelona"
"What was the score"
"5-0"
"Did they actually score 5?"
"No, they won the toin coss, started 1-0 up"
"Who scored"
"Messi got two, Alexis and Iniesta got the others"
"And the bogeyman got the first I suppose, Jesus, Sebb Blatter is some retard"
"Yeah, they just pushed forward and Barcelona picked them off with ease"

There is nothing wrong with penalties.

helimachoptor

It should be left as is.
As a spectator i love seeing penalties, yes its cruel as the team playing the best football for 120 mins may lose but... thats life.

Personally I love being involved in penalty shoot outs

_blank_

helimachoptor wrote: »

Personally I love being involved in penalty shoot outs

I hate it.

Lando Griffin

No no way.
If anything a crossbar chalange would be better as it would save the goalkeepers blushes
/end thread

Optimalprimerib

They should bring in the points system, if the ball goes over the posts. They could extend the posts upwards so it would be clearer to see. The outfield players would need a better advantage to use this method, so maybe they should be able to catch the ball.

If this was the case, there would never be draws so no need for penalties

kippy

Lando Griffin wrote: »

No no way.
If anything a crossbar chalange would be better as it would save the goalkeepers blushes
/end thread

In a peno shoot out the goalkeeper is only ever gonna be a hero.......
It's the one part of the game where they have literally nothing to lose.

kitakyushu

Tbh I'm increasingly liking that idea of the peno-shootout between FT and ET. The shootout is still the test of skill but it isn't this ridiculous summary of 120mins of football coming down to one kick of a ball.

Add to this the losing team in the shootout still has a 30min chance to recover and also if the 'negative' team actually loose the shootout then they'd really have to come out of their shell in ET.

However, as a neutral, peno-shootouts are great entertainment and a dramatic way to end a game so in that regard they can't really be beat.

steveLFC24

Just take a player off every 5 minutes in extra time until someone scores. Bit of tactics involved with which players to take off, and the outcome would still come down to skill rather than luck (well, unless there's an own goal or something). The game would open up very quickly with less players on the pitch.

Although I guess fatigue would be an issue if the game went on too long.

SlickRic

penalties are awesome drama.

and as a method, they are actually the fairest way to decide a game.

i have no idea why people take such issue with them.

both teams after 120 minutes, 210 minutes if it's a 2-legged affair, have proven to be as good as each other (i.e. they've both scored the same amount of goals), you have to separate it somehow.

the only other fair way of doing it would be to just let the teams keep playing after 30 minutes of extra time, at which point it would then be Golden Goal. but that would fúck with TV companies so it ain't going to happen.

so in closing...

1. penalties = awesome.
2. people like to moan about anything for the sake of it.

stevenmu

Team B would just put all 11 men on the goal line to defend their 1-0 lead.

What would work great is if after 90 mins they just kept playing and playing until someone scored. And every 5 minutes both teams would lose a player.

edit: oh, and for league style games, they need to get rid of the concept of draws, either one team wins or both teams lose, there should be no benefit to not winning.

gustavo

I heard one method they were discussing on the World Football phone in whereby there would be a penalty shootout at Full Time. then they would continue to play extra time as normal -if the scores were the same after extra time whoever won the penalties would go through.

cgpg5

gustavo wrote: »

I heard one method they were discussing on the World Football phone in whereby there would be a penalty shootout at Full Time. then they would continue to play extra time as normal -if the scores were the same after extra time whoever won the penalties would go through.

Really like this and reckon they should work on this principle (perhaps a variation).

However, as always there are cons involved. Penalties can go on long enough and it is quite hard to imagine playing 30 minutes afterwards. I know it's unusual but pens can often go on for some time (recent league one playoff and Holland England u20 2007 immediately spring to mind- I'm sure there are others).
As well as that negative tactics will often follow and one team will park the bus.

On the other hand though, it can be exciting watching one team go all out attacking and the other defending for their lives. It also gives players a chance to redeem themselves. At least one team will go all out and no doubt it will result in a far more entertaining 30 minute period than the one in place. Saying that I'd only use it for a final. Prior to that penalties are ok, especially as there has been about 210 minutes played without the sides being separated.

Granted something like this would have to be tested out in detail before possible implementation. Thought the silver goal would be a success when it came in but it proved a shambles tbh. Hindsight was a great thing.

It's my view that the current extra time is very often futile (particularly the last ten minutes) when very often teams will give up as such and let it run to penos.

cournioni

No. Leave the game decider the way it is. It is a hateful way to lose for sure, but it is the best solution. Teams and players have been matched physically and technically over the course of 120 minutes or 210 minutes as the case may be, so test their mental strength in front of goal when pressure is on. Test the goalkeepers ability to save a ball...

I don't care what people say, they are great to watch whether my team is participating or not, very dramatic. My favourite of the lot was APOEL vs. Lyon in the CL last 16 this year.

plasmaguy

Football is a cruel and harsh game and winning or losing by penalties is no more cruel than losing by a goal in open play, particularly a goal that should have been disallowed or else losing despite scoring a perfectly good goal.

Football is a cruel and harsh game sometimes, if Sepp Blatter actually played the game when he was younger, he'd know that.

When football is run by accountants you get suggestions like this one from Blatter.

Let's hope Platini or someone like that is next FIFA president or someone who at least played the game at a professional level.

helimachoptor

Des wrote: »

I hate it.

Its fantastic.. i never miss

cgpg5

cournioni wrote: »

No. Leave the game decider the way it is. It is a hateful way to lose for sure, but it is the best solution. Teams and players have been matched physically and technically over the course of 120 minutes or 210 minutes as the case may be, so test their mental strength in front of goal when pressure is on. Test the goalkeepers ability to save a ball...

I don't care what people say, they are great to watch whether my team is participating or not, very dramatic. My favourite of the lot was APOEL vs. Lyon in the CL last 16 this year.

The thing with the "advantage" rule (Pens before ET) is that there will be even more penalty shoot-out's as a result. It has the excitement of penalties plus an exciting period of ET. We simply don't have much of the latter nowadays. Teams often just seem to wait for pens. The last brilliant ET I remember was way back in 06 when Italy wanted to avoid pens v the Germans.

Saying that there is obvious disadvantages to it. However I don't like it the way it is. Still, I wouldn't go as far as saying that it's a "tragedy". I could nearly wager what Beckenbauer comes up with will probably prove worse.

Mongarra

There was a competition (I think it was the Dublin City Cup) for League of Ireland sides some years ago and, to the best of my recollection, if the score was level after extra time the team that had had the most corners during the game won. It was supposed to reward attacking play.

cgpg5

Mongarra wrote: »

There was a competition (I think it was the Dublin City Cup) for League of Ireland sides some years ago and, to the best of my recollection, if the score was level after extra time the team that had had the most corners during the game won. It was supposed to reward attacking play.

Have heard of this.

However it would be disastrous. You could have 80% posession, 30 shots on target and completely dominate and attack all day long yet you might win very few corners. Opposition could fluke one or two. Would be a lot of deliberately kicking the ball of defenders to win corners to from early on

Fighting Irish

I'd rather football just never existed than have something like the OP is suggesting

irelandrover

Maybe have the penalties before the extra time but then play the extra time as golden goal. This means that the team that won the penalty shoot out wouldn't be able to just sit back because if they do concede then they lose.

Schism

Without a doubt penalties are the fairest and easiest way to separate teams after 120 minutes.

Blatter is an idiot. I can't believe this man is in charge of anything football related. It'd be one thing if he had a revolutionary idea to take penalties place but he doesn't. It's more like he woke up that morning and decided, 'today, I don't like penalties. I must ask someone else to get rid of them for me'

CSF

kakee wrote: »

I know there was another thread, but it became a bit messy so here is what I think would be a good alternative to penalties.

Before the game both managers/captains toss a coin.

If team A win the toss then they will win the game if it is level after 90 minutes. To stop team A from just defending, team B gets a one goal start.

Team B knows that if they concede and the game finishes level then they will lose so they will most likely need to get a second goal at least.

Team A knows that they have to score at least one goal in the game to have a chance of winning.

I think this way would work because the coin toss can be done as soon as the teams involved are known giving managers and coaches time to decide tactics etc.

The players would know what is needed and would not have to spend 30 mins of extra time afraid to make a mistake or playing for penalties.

For people watching it would be good as everybody would know what has to happen in the game as regards scoring and I think it would make all the knockout games more attacking and better to watch.

Oh my Jesus what is going on in your head? This is ridiculous.

Lando Griffin

kippy wrote: »

In a peno shoot out the goalkeeper is only ever gonna be a hero.......
It's the one part of the game where they have literally nothing to lose.

Not if your the Sheffield Utd keeper.:cool:

ghostchant

I quite liked the form of penalties MLS used to use, which had more in common with ice hockey shoot-outs than traditional penalties. Each 'penalty' taker started 35 yards out from goal and had 5 seconds to run up and take a shot, so essentially each attempt was a one-on-one chance against the keeper. Think it rewards each player's skill more than traditional penalties, and was pretty exciting to watch.

UglyBolloxFace

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Penalties is a fine solution, I have no idea why this comes up so often. Well, actually, I do - it only is raised as an issue in a year where we are unhappy with the results of the final stages of the CL or International competition.

If Real had won the shootout and beaten Chelsea in the final we wouldn't be discussing this.

True, instead we'd be discussing how Real managed to knock Bayern out of their fairly won final-place:eek::pac:

uch

The Best solution is to get the Keepers to do a Handstand Competition if it finishes a draw.

kitakyushu

Lofted shots from the halfway line. Goalies are only allowed used Scorpion kick save method. Hitting the crossbar counts as two goals.

plasmaguy

But if we were indeed to suspend reality for a while and entertain Blatter's fantasy of a non shoot out solution to a draw, probably the fairest way would be to award the game to the team who had most possession in a game, as this would probably indicate they were the better side and the other team just parked the bus as Chelsea did for later rounds of CL.

There's pitfalls to this too, but at least it would encourage a more attractive form of possession football while the other team would be forced to actually hold onto the ball and try win it back.

ironictoaster

Heads and Volleys.

Nunu

Shoot outs are the only real viable way of settling games. The only improvement I could see made is re scheduling the shoot-out before extra time. If it's still level then AET winner of shoot out obviously goes through - NO other changes needed. I think it would also improve the competitive edge in ET too, for the most part.

I mentioned it in a thread here a few years back: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055087468&page=2