PDA

View Full Version : Not Enough Goals?


counterattack
30 Oct 2005, 10:17 AM
Repeatedly these forums are home to threads that seek to find a solution to the underscoring in Football.

If one accepts the idea that the 0-0 or 1-0 game is less desirable than a 3-2 or 5-4 game, then a solution is needed. Most of the solutions involve some mechanical change to the game. Changing where offsides can be called, increasing the goal dimensions – you have seen numerous examples. Yet, no one notes the one change that is no real change at all. That is going back to a custom of play that was common in the first half of the twentieth century, but fell out in the second half-- namely, the liberal calling of Penalties in the Penalty Box.

I will not go into all whys that decreased the calling of penalties in the box. Some have to do with improvements in defense. Most have to do with the official’s reluctance to impose such a high impact ruling on the outcome of the game. Yet the whole idea of even having a Penalty Box is to insure that play in front of the goal is more likely to produce a result as opposed to outside the box. The same way in the other field sports, that a kick from just about anywhere in the attacking half of the pitch can produce points. In Football, the reward for getting the ball into the attacking Penalty Area is supposed to be the real possibility of a Penalty Kick or a goal. This part of the game has been missing for decades. It explains why, at one time, a side would have as many as five forwards.
It also produces a game with more long balls and searching balls that can produce results.

Is that the kind of game that we want? I am not so sure. The game we have now involves complex and rapid series of one-touch passes, cleaver deception, and individual play that results in fewer goals, but ones that are more memorable. A 5-4 game decided by 3 PKs in the course of the game, is not necessarily the best game of football you will ever see. Still, it seems to me it is far preferable to the ghastly 0-0 tournament game ended by 10 PK attempts. That monstrosity is the best argument for those who dislike the game and how it is played.

king_saladin
30 Oct 2005, 10:28 AM
If officials properly called penalties, then the defenders wouldn't keep fouling in the box, and you wouldn't have +3 penalties per match. Instead you would have better attacking open play.

Teso Dos Bichos
30 Oct 2005, 10:31 AM
I think it is a lot simpler than that. There has been a vast improvement in the field of goalkeeping. Plus modern keepers are given an even greater advantage by a ridiculous amount of protection they get from the officials. Stick an average modern keeper between the sticks back then and the number of goals scored would drastically drop. That is the difference.

Fulham Fan
30 Oct 2005, 10:34 AM
Whatever rule change you make will always influence tactics. Managers seize on everything. I can understand wanting to reward a team that dribbles or passes its way into the area. But realistically, improving the chances of earning a penalty would just mean more lob-it-in longball from desperate teams.

Bertje
30 Oct 2005, 01:00 PM
They can start by dropping insane rules like the offside rule in which a player who is not "joining the play" cannot be offside. This ridiculous rule makes it that it is a lot harder to play on offside and thus be an attacking team.

It is a fable that very attacking teams are bad defenders, they just prefer a different way of defending which leaves more space to attack. But with all these insane rules the FIFA has been implementing this becomes a lot harder and thus teams are more likely to play defensive since they'll get their chances anyway.