Ideas for replacing shoot outs

[Elninho]

How well does attacking play correlate into shootout success? Let's look at 1999, the last year that MLS used the shootout.

San Jose
10-3 in shootout (76.9%, 1st)
7th in league
48 goals scored, 6th/7th
49 goals allowed, 7th

DC United
6-3 in shootout (66.7%, 2nd/3rd)
1st in league
65 goals scored, 1st
43 goals allowed, 6th

Colorado Rapids
6-3 in shootout (66.7%, 2nd/3rd)
5th in league
38 goals scored, 9th/10th
39 goals allowed, 4th/5th

Columbus Crew
6-4 in shootout (60.0%, 4th)
6th in league
48 goals scored, 6th/7th
39 goals allowed, 4th/5th

Miami Fusion
5-4 in shootout (55.6%, 5th)
9th in league
42 goals scored, 8th
59 goals allowed, 11th

LA Galaxy
3-4 in shootout (42.9%, 6th)
2nd in league
49 goals scored, 5th
29 goals allowed, 1st

Tampa Bay Mutiny
5-7 in shootout (41.7%, 7th/8th)
8th in league
51 goals scored, 3rd/4th
50 goals allowed, 8th

New England Revolution
5-7 in shootout (41.7%, 7th/8th)
10th in league
38 goals scored, 9th/10th
53 goals allowed, 9th/10th

Chicago Fire
3-5 in shootout (37.5%, 9th/10th)
4th in league
51 goals scored, 3rd/4th
36 goals allowed, 3rd

Metrostars
3-5 in shootout (37.5%, 9th/10th)
12th in league
32 goals scored, 12th
64 goals allowed, 12th

Dallas Burn
3-6 in shootout (33.3%, 11th)
3rd in league
54 goals scored (2nd)
35 goals allowed (2nd)

Kansas City Wizards
2-6 in shootout (25.0%, 12th)
11th in league
33 goals scored (11th)
53 goals allowed (9th/10th)

This is interesting... strong attacking teams like Chicago and Dallas were unable to win shootouts, while San Jose and Colorado, both of which were not particularly good at attacking, were very successful in shootouts.

[Auriaprottu]

Originally posted by Slash/ED
but whats to stop you just throwing Harte on with two seconds to go to win the match?

Limited subs, as it is now. I forgot to mention in the previous post that I am totally opposed to adding subs.

But if you're going to use unlimited subs, why not let the game go on until someone scores a GG, or use repeated full OTs until one team is ahead at the end of a series?

[Slash/ED]

What if you've only used two subs on purpose, tatically knowing you've a free kick specialist on the bench who will win the match for you? isn't fair.

[Auriaprottu]

Originally posted by Slash/ED
What if you've only used two subs on purpose, tatically knowing you've a free kick specialist on the bench who will win the match for you? isn't fair.

How in the world is any of this unfair if both sdes know the rules before the start of the season? That's part of what scouts and coaches are for- helping a team adapt.

We're stuck between a rock and a hard place here. The only ways to avoid adding an unnatural twist to the game are to: 1) Let play continue until there is a clear winner at the end of some designated time period series, like the NBA. 2) Let play continue until a GG is scored, like playoff hockey, or 3) schedule a rematch- which could get unnatural if some hack takes out the opponent's star forward with seconds to spare in the first game's OT.

[thacharger]

Originally posted by benine




Well put. I think it's an american thing to think that the shoot out is okay because we've never suffered the agony of lossing a cup/game to a shoot out. I've played too many tournament finals that go to shoot outs (one is too much, fyi), games that my side has DOMINATED, only to be thrown off because some damned halfwit goalie guesses correctly. It leaves way too much to chance for how solid and balanced the rest of the great game is, belongs in the NBA or NFL and NOT in any FIFA sanctioned event/league.

Ah, the beautiful game in action. I think its funny your team lost.

[usscouse]

This thread has become a very American one. Even quoting from MLS stats. Even to the terminology.

American sports have overtime periods. Football or soccer if you must has 30 minutes of extra time played in two halves.

MLS played a strange but novel 35 yard charge the goalie thing (it seemed after every game) Even they got tired of this farce,

Unlimited Subs unlimited times, I know a lot of our US fans would like to see this, that way we can have an attacking team and a defending team at the discretion of the coach. Or a place kicker for free kicks and PKs (and that’s all he does)

All I can say is. If you don’t like sport, watch your own kind of football, it’s not a bad game.

I’ll agree the golden goal idea didn’t work. But after 2 hours of football there has to be a way to end the game and as of now only PKs seem to be the answer. At one time it used to be a toss of a coin, now that ‘was’ a bad idea.

In an ideal world a penalty kick is as good as a goal but as we’ve all seen, nervous shooters and good guesses by the goalies change the equation.

And counting corners is just plain silly. Instead of crossing the ball for a chance of a shot or header on goal, we can just kick it against the defenders legs and tally up the corners.

Until somebody comes up with a serious and a more satisfying way to end a great game then leave the extra time and PKs.

Name calling because you don’t like the way its done ‘without’ coming up with a better way (and I mean better) isn’t very bright either.

[Boro_lad]

i dont mean to sound patronising or like im taking the pi$$ but that idea about take a player off after 5 mins is the most stupid idea i have ever heard and will never ever be brought into the game of football.

That said i think that extra time and penalties are the correct way to decide a match. If you took penalties away then there would be no incentive to attack in extra time. When it comes to penalties it is the same for both teams and therefore it is fair to both teams.

I am an english man and i know we have been at the recieving end of a few bad results from penalties. But until a sensable, practicle idea comes along.(which it wont) Penalties will stay.


As for GG is like and i dont like it (if u know what i mean) i like the fact that the more attacking team has the advantage. However i dont like it as a lucky goal against the run of play would end the game without the chance for the other team to come back. This takes a way the real entertaining last 5-10 mins when the team is really pushing for a goal.

I think that we should go back tot he old style ET and stick by penalties.....

[Maczebus]

I concur, go back to the old style extra-time (giving teams chance to go behind then come back) and stick with penalties.

[counterattack]

Originally posted by maczebus
I concur, go back to the old style extra-time (giving teams chance to go behind then come back) and stick with penalties.

Even though there is absolute evidence that Penalties are artificial, un-football, and an abmomination, these wanker Brits cling to them like barnacles.

Why?

Because they were told to. It's the same old class system, don't rock the boat, do as you are told young man crap that got millions of of their fellow Brits to abandon that god awful little island and come over here to North America and think and act as full grown human beings with a mind of their own.

That's why.

[Boro_lad]

Its called an opinion....everyone is entittled to one....aparently this tosser ^^^^^^^^^^^^ above is not mature enough to understand that.


And whats that crap about penalties being "unfootball" well thats funny because i thought penalties were part of the game..but thatss just me ey?

And what is that crap about britains not "rocking the boat" What the F*** u on about?

And you say we should "act as full grown human beings with a mind of their own" oh im sorry,... u must be the expert on British culture, and state of mind i guess

Im going to start a US v UK childish post because i know he is just a kid and an exception

U say Britain is "GOD AWFUL" been recently have you...thought not again.

how about basing your arguement, however irelavent, on facts.



Your arguement has
1) no point

2)no bases

3) nothing to do with the point

4) Hold no new suggestions, obviously his small little brain couldnt think of anything senseble to say....

How about u go play in the kiddie playground until you grow up...

[Boro_lad]

Originally posted by counterattack


Even though there is absolute evidence that Penalties are artificial, un-football, and an abmomination, these wanker Brits cling to them like barnacles.



PenALTIES ARTIFICIAL??..SEEMED PRETTY REAL WHEN ENGLAND SEEM TO LOSE THEM... OR WAS I DREAMING?

[Slash/ED]

The sub thing is the stupidest thing I've ever heard in my entire life, I never thought an idea would top golden goal for awfulness but it has. Since you've written off all the Americans and British views I guess that means I'm the only one entitled to an opinion? Scrap Golden Goal, keep two halfs of extra time and solve it either with penaltys after that or that 35 yard charge dealie, Golden Goal is not only Rubbish and boring but it's prevented us from some of the most brilliant moments in football. Remember the UEFA cup final like I said, Liverpool V Alaves, if it wasn't for Golden Goal chances are that would have been one of the best extra times, to go right up there with that France Germany match, the extra time there was one of the best scenes in football.

[Maczebus]

Originally posted by counterattack


Even though there is absolute evidence that Penalties are artificial, un-football, and an abmomination, these wanker Brits cling to them like barnacles.

Why?

Because they were told to. It's the same old class system, don't rock the boat, do as you are told young man crap that got millions of of their fellow Brits to abandon that god awful little island and come over here to North America and think and act as full grown human beings with a mind of their own.

That's why.

If you want to do this, go to the rivalries forum.

But I guess this is just your little way of 'rocking the boat'.

Anyway little man, be a free-thinking man, but just follow BS rules.

[Slash/ED]

You do have to laugh at the unbeliveble irony of the statement though.

I wont say anything about it but to the person who posted that, espically the last part, I recomend listening to a song by Bob dylan, "With god on their side"

[Don Homer]

As always, this debate flies off and forgets the whole raison d'etre for the arguemt - to decide a match.

After TWO hours of football and to allow players to recover for the next game, a QUICK, DECISIVE, but FAIR solution is needed. Entertainment is NOT a factor I would include.

Of everything proposed, penalties still provides that the best.

The one thing I dislike about penalties is that someone has to miss and because its such a public and obvious failure, they are therefore blamed by the media, armchair fans, etc. for costing them their place in the next round. That annoys me, but ultimately football IS as much about human frailty, as it is about human achievement and someone has to screw up for someone else to win.

Its imperfect, but penalties does a dirty job pretty effectively.

[Boro_lad]

there are always "heros" and "villans" any way. If it is not decided on penalties and they lose people will always find a scapgoat to blame it all on.

Keep penalties and go back to classic ET

[counterattack]

Originally posted by Boro_lad
there are always "heros" and "villans" any way. If it is not decided on penalties and they lose people will always find a scapgoat to blame it all on.

Keep penalties and go back to classic ET

To quote another North American,
Helpless, helpless, helpless, helpless.

Good Lord, the whole concept behind this thread was a lively and creative back and forth on how to make the beautiful game its very best. Instead we get this jaundiced Euro Trash cynical blather about going back to classic ETs and penalties. Never mind that penalties are an artificial and ridiculous concept forced on the game in modern times. You really want to go back? At least go back to the extra match, if the first one is still deadlocked. Playing football until there is a clear result is far better then playing dodge ball at the end of classic struggle to decide a winner when one must be found.

In lieu of that original and genuine method of getting a result, try, just try, for once in your circumscribed lives to have an original thought and come up with a way to end a match without the golden goal OR the penalty shoot out. Just pretend others really care about your opinion, and that the hurly burly of give and take will actually create a gestalt with a worthy solution. I know they don't teach you this in Public Schools, but try anyhow. It won't kill you.

And all this from the people who gave the world Question Time. It is hard to believe.

[Boro_lad]

once again with the penalties are artificial...when i watch them they seem real....


And have you come up with an idea yet?...no didnt thinkk so

tat is because there are no sensable alternatives.

And until you come up with an idea u can F### off and stop with all this "Euro Trash cynical blather"

U call me what you like. Im just facing the facts.
1) there are no good alternatives

2) its been used a very long time

3) its effective, as a winner and loser is found quickly



Until you come up with an idea i suggest you stop putting me down for being reasonable and sensable suggestion.

Also you dont have to take these posts persoanlly. Non of my comments are personall attacks. how about u calm down and count to 10 before you type...

[Boro_lad]

you say penalties were moden thing thrown across..blah blah whatever....

they were introduced in the 80's. That isnt exactly recent times...

Come up with a better idea and i will agree with your arguement but untill you do...stop posting bollocks....

[SankaCofie]

Originally posted by benine
I've played too many tournament finals that go to shoot outs (one is too much, fyi), games that my side has DOMINATED, only to be thrown off because some damned halfwit goalie guesses correctly. It leaves way too much to chance for how solid and balanced the rest of the great game is, belongs in the NBA or NFL and NOT in any FIFA sanctioned event/league.

if you'd dominated so much then why didn't you win? the penalty kick shoot out is FINE for one thing... breaking ties. which is what it is used for. what makes you think watching ireland go out in pks would be any less boring then seeing them lose on a weak goal after they'd been running for 180 minutes?

pks are fine. losing in pks is SUPPOSED to be bitter and agonizing. losing in any manner of overtime would be.

that being said... i think goalies should be allowed to take two steps off their line during pks. it would make taking penalty kicks alot tougher, thus more of a skill win than a luck win.

otherwise. keep em.