Penalties

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

For the first time as a neutral, I was wholly dissatisfied with a game going to pennos. Normally, it's great drama, but the WCF was a game of high quality & deserved to be won 'clean'.

 

What are the alternatives though? FIFA has toyed with other methods, but none were particularly effective. Golden goal didn't work & robbed us of the (rare) occassions where you'd get an ET like the 1982 WCSF Germany & France where there were 4 goals in ET (or the 1989 FACF, where there were 3).

 

I don't think the silver goal was given enough of a chance.

 

I think that after 30 mins ET, it should then go to 15 min periods, where substituted players can be re-used & a limit of subs per-period, until there's a winner - like the final set in Wimbledon; theoretically that can go-on forever. At least that way someone has to try to score.

[Cobs]

just send it straight to sudden death, no penalties.

[Stevie H]

take the penalty shoot-out before the thirty minutes extra time is played. that way you have a winner pre-established and therefore one team really has to go for it in extra time. if it's still a draw after the thirty minutes, then the team which won the earlier penalty shoot-out goes through.

[StevieC]

The oft mooted (I think Ripley advocated it in another thread) method of removing one player from each team every 5 minutes of extra time until there's four left (as a minimum- one team would have more players if an opposing player had been sent off- they play until someone scores- golden goal wins.

 

It's easily legislated and controlled, tests the fitness of the players and tactical acumen of the coach and can reward both talented attack and dogged defence.

[Cobs]

The oft mooted (I think Ripley advocated it in another thread) method of removing one player from each team every 5 minutes of extra time until there's four left (as a minimum- one team would have more players if an opposing player had been sent off- they play until someone scores- golden goal wins.

 

It's easily legislated and controlled, tests the fitness of the players and tactical acumen of the coach and can reward both talented attack and dogged defence.

 

"another one of mine...."

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

just send it straight to sudden death, no penalties.

Sudden death, no penalties.

 

Kinell, real carnage

[StevieC]

just send it straight to sudden death, no penalties.

 

 

nothing to stop another hour and half of stalemate and boredom there no matter how knackered they are.

[Ripley]

 

"another one of mine...."

Is it really?

 

I've changed my mind.

[Cobs]

nothing to stop another hour and half of stalemate and boredom there no matter how knackered they are.

'course there is

 

there's no 'get out' of penalties, someone has to score a goal

[Stevie H]

'course there is

 

there's no 'get out' of penalties, someone has to score a goal

there'd be diving a-go-go every time a team got near the penalty area.

[Cobs]

there'd be diving a-go-go every time a team got near the penalty area.

plus ca change

[Stevie H]

plus ca change

true, true.

[StevieC]

'course there is

 

there's no 'get out' of penalties, someone has to score a goal

 

so they'd be schit scared to make a mistake and the detenté would go on, and on and on and on...

[Cobs]

so they'd be schit scared to make a mistake and the detenté would go on, and on and on and on...

or they'd go, "sitting back here with everyone defending our area is not going to win us this game, we can't play for penalties, we have to go and score a goal...."

[Gilps]

My only issue with extending periods of extra time would be the increased tiredness of the players. Its already often a slight advantage at QF, SF or final stage if your match was done and dusted in 90 minutes while your opponents played extra time - how much more so if they've carried on until they dropped?

 

Not really an issue with the final, obviously. Although the chances of injury still surely increase the longer you make players play with increasingly tired bodies.

[johngibo YPC]

Sudden death, no penalties.

 

Kinell, real carnage

 

unfair to do it in a world cup though with so little space between the games. A game may go on for 3 hours and then they could have another game 4 days later. So a team is unfairly penalised just because they have a harder game, or are playing better opposition

[StevieC]

or they'd go, "sitting back here with everyone defending our area is not going to win us this game, we can't play for penalties, we have to go and score a goal...."

 

 

Don't think many teams would chance it tbh. Their needs to be more of a hook to make en masse defending and hoping to nick one less of an attractive strategy and reward a positive attitude and making goals more likely- such as removing players.

 

The other alternative is each manager has to remove 5 players before extra time starts- again a tactical and fitness related battle with a much more open pitch.

[berdoing]

No. Penalties is fine. Let's face it, the teams have had 120 minutes to sort themselves out. It's their own fault if they can't do it in that time.

[Coyler]

Keep the penalties, or at least pretend you're keeping the penalties, then whichever team at the end of 120 minutes has been blatantly playing for penalties like a pack of pricks loses.

[Stevie H]

keep penalties, but make all players wear blindfolds. it's a lottery after all.

[Coyler]

Make the ref wear a blindfold, then the loudest fans win.

[Cobs]

unfair to do it in a world cup though with so little space between the games. A game may go on for 3 hours and then they could have another game 4 days later. So a team is unfairly penalised just because they have a harder game, or are playing better opposition

tough

 

all the more reason for managers/players to go for it in ET.

 

Don't think many teams would chance it tbh. Their needs to be more of a hook to make en masse defending and hoping to nick one less of an attractive strategy and reward a positive attitude and making goals more likely- such as removing players.

 

The other alternative is each manager has to remove 5 players before extra time starts- again a tactical and fitness related battle with a much more open pitch.

and reduces the game to a farce - in a normal match such an eventuality would result in the game being abandoned.

 

if you look at the semi final between Italy & Germany, there was no way the Italians wanted that to go to penalties so they pressed forward and got their reward.

 

Remove the penalty option and teams at some stage during ET will realise they have to do that too

 

 

- i appreciate this also adds some credence to the take the penalties before playing ET argument, too.

Edited July 11, 2006 by Cobs

[Gilps]

 

 

if you look at the semi final between Italy & Germany, there was no way the Italians wanted that to go to penalties so they pressed forward and got their reward.

 

Remove the penalty option and teams at some stage during ET will realise they have to do that too

 

 

Isn't that slightly contradictory? If the Italians were only going for it to avoid penalties, would they still have done so if penalties weren't a possibility?

 

Think they would in this case, in the spirit they (and the Germans) had played that game, but haven't you just made a case that some teams will attack simply to avoid penalties?

[Cobs]

Isn't that slightly contradictory? If the Italians were only going for it to avoid penalties, would they still have done so if penalties weren't a possibility?

 

Think they would in this case, in the spirit they (and the Germans) had played that game, but haven't you just made a case that some teams will attack simply to avoid penalties?

and some teams simply defend to play for penalties

 

 

take the option away from them......

[John am Rhein]

there'd be diving a-go-go every time a team got near the penalty area.

 

And what's the downside?