MISL is not outdoor soccer, and is not futsal. It's soccer on a hockey-rink-sized carpet (at least back in the 80's it was). It's American. It's long been done with the arc. I'm fine with that remaining so. If MLS starts wanting the arc, then I'll start bumming out.
I agree, this version of the sport already has quite a few peculiarities (even if we disregard the multi-point scoring). I wouldn't have much of an issue with that, as long as it remains solely applicable to indoor football (though I honestly don't see the rationale - while efforts from long range are harder to execute, such regulations could cut down on feints and combination play). In addition, a lucky deflection could unduly punish the team that concedes the goal.
so far this year 5 games have been decided by the 3pt goal & they should of went to over time to decide a true winner why does it matter is you kicked the ball further away the the last guy to score its just plain stupid http://www.petitiononline.com/Misl101/petition.html
maybe they should add an extra point if the goal was preceded by dribbles past two opponents. that would make things interesting, more players like Robben/Robinho would form over time
Wow, I didn't suspect that the outcomes of so many games have been influenced by the new rule! I wonder what the footballers themselves think about the matter. It's doubtful that this rule is rewarding skill. In addition, my favourite teams tend to be unlucky when it comes to long range efforts, so I could certainly understand some of the outrage.
Exactly! Not only is it a stupid rule, but its applied backwards. Dribbling through the opposition seems more impressive than a lucky long-range strike.
Both are EQUALLY impressive, which IS the point. They are equal, so they both should count for the same. ONE POINT.