The Goal kick in which the goalie blasts a kick to midfield with a less than 50% chance of maintaining possesion seems to me to be the dumbest and most overlooked play in soccer. Imagine if in Basketball everytime a team scores the other team brings the ball out and immedietly tosses it in the air down court. Wouldn't that be idiotic? Same goes for soccer. Why not MAINTAIN possesion 100% of the time by just kicking it to someone just outside the box and have them bring the ball up like on any other play. This way you maintain the pace and control of the ball for a longer amount of time. Everytime I see a goalie blast it and lose possesion, which is almost always because the defenders have momentum towards the ball, I just shake my head and wonder when a coach will tell them not to do that anymore.
It's not possible to have a ball possession as secure as e.g. in Basketball when you want to get over the court, so kicking the ball in the opponent's half is the better option.
Like anything,it depends on your team's strengths on the day versus the opponent. A lot of times,the long kick downfield gets headed out of play by the defenders,giving the kicking team posession at midfield.
as said above, you have much more control when using your hands, so your comparison with basketball isn't really very good. basically if a team would do as you suggest (what they sometimes do), they'd risk loosing the ball in the danger area, because the opponent would go forward and try to get the ball there. but if you kick the ball into the midfield, though you have a lower probability of keeping possion with first couple of touches, the ball is way out of the danger area. and even if you loose the ball, you can go at once after the ball again, where you have quite a good chance of getting it back again as the opponent hardly ever has full control over the ball. in short, it's simply not worth the risk
A few things to consider... 1. The size of the football field compared to a basketball court... this allows your best dribbler and passer to come back and get the ball each time... 2. The frequency of the occurance... teams score way more often (basketball) than the ball goes over the by-line (football). 3. Many teams have midfielders/forwards who are good in the air... and if you combine that with defenders who are not the best passers in the world then it makes sense to put it long... 4. Some teams do build from the back, but it is uncommon at the highest level... football is a game that is ever evolving... now we have 5-3-2 formations when before there were 2-3-5 formations. If the goalkick was such a waste of time then by now we would have seen more than a few teams stop playing it long.
Hi all, First post here on BS... One aspect to a long goal kick is phychological. If you've been pressured on defense for a long period of time, sending the ball into the opponent's half is sometimes a psychological lift. That said, I still prefer to build posession out of the back starting with a short gk on the ground.
In basketball it is acceptable to lose possesion near your goal once or twice a game resulting in a quick two points by the other team. No big deal when the total score of the game is typically in the 80's or 90's for each team. Such a mistake in soccer, however, is much more costly. One cheap goal can, and usually is, the difference maker in many top flight matches. Managers aren't willing to risk the loss of the entire game simply because they want to keep possesion after a goal kick. The risk/reward doesn't make sense.
In the pro game where you can have some keepers nearly kick a goalkick from their 18-yard box to the opposing 18-yard box, a long goalkick isn't that bad of an idea if you either have fast forwards who can get behind the defense or fowards who are stong in the air. If I knew that a team was never going to send a goal kick long, I would push every one up and presure the opposing team. It wouldn't give them much of a chance to pass and build out of the back. You can still build out of the back, but you still need the occasional long kick to keep the other team from just moving forward and presuring the short pass.
As valuable as possesion is in soccer, you cannot possible compare it with a game like basketball in which you are supposed to score on about half of your possesions in order to win. I agree that it is usually a better option to play the ball to a defender, but if your opponent is pressuring and you are unable to get out of your side of the field, a good strong kick may be the best thing. Also you have to consider if your team has better defensive ballhandlers who are unlikely to lose posession, or better midfielders who are likely to win loose balls. At the lower levels (like high school for example) the latter is more likely, so a long kick is usually the best option. At top level, I like teams who start with possesion from the back, because it is a sign of a good team with confidence. But you need to mix it up to keep the opposition honest.
Come on, guys. Be nice. There are a lot of American posters who didn't grow up with the game and are just learning it.
I might kind of agree with the original post: the blast-it-downfield-goalkick is the most boring thing to watch. I almost would want to put in a rule change: the GK can't play the ball past midfield (if played from inside the 18-yard box). The ball must touch somebody in their half of the field, or the defensive team gets the ball (at the midfield line). [In my rule, a large bounce over the midfield stripe doesn't even count, it must hit a player.]
I think you have been playing a bit too much indoor. Seriously, the last thing soccer needs is a rule like this. Why don't bring back the old NASL 35-yard off-side lines and add hockey's 2-line pass rule. Other than the fact that you find goal kicks boring, why should we limit how far a keeper can kick the ball? It's not like indoor where the keeper could basically score from the other end of the field everytime he kicks it. If anything this rule would make the game more boring buy giving the defense the advantage. If the keeper can't air the ball out and try to reach one of his strikers down field, what's stopping the defense from pushing down and presuring the short pass out of the back that you want to create? A rule like this would kill building out of the back with short passes.
I think it's hard to compare and NFL kick-off to a a goalkick because a kick-off kick serves a differnt purpose - to give the other team the ball. I actually have to say this is one of the plays in the NFL worth watching. The guy who catches and carries the ball usually gets crushed by the Defense or there's the occasional exciting run-back for a TD.
Sawker does not have 'plays'! It is runs in a continuous motion (except for freekicks, penalties, kickouts & throwins - which are not 'plays'). Funny story: If you look at a very early episode of Sopranos (possibly even the pilot) Meadow was playing football (as in sawker), and all of a sudden the coach shouts something along the lines of "Fox Red 42", which leads to them running down the pitch and scoring; my friends and I were almost in tears watching this.
If anything, your scenario actually creates some kind of play: defensive player (with the ball) versus an offensive player (trying to get the ball). And if the opposition gets possesion, then obviously they've got less than half the field to negotiate, to get a shot on goal. I think this might create more scoring chances.
I think we sort of agree here? Yes it would create more scoring chances for the opposing team and that's not somethig that you want to do. Turning the ball over in your own half near you goal is a great way to give the opposing team a shot on your goal. Also keep keep in mind, that on goal kicks, the ball must leave the 18-yard box before being played by a team mate, so it's not like the keeper can make a short 2 yard pass to restart on goal kicks, he would have to pass to a heavily presured player outside the box, or just clear it upfield and risk giving the other team a restart at half field. If you institute the proposed rule limiting goal kick distance the defense would not be kept honest and have to cover both the long kick and the short kick. It would give the opposing team an imposing advantage when there is a goal kick. The defense would just presure the ball on the goalkick and make it extremely difficult to make a short pass to build play from the back. With current soccer rules, teams can build out of the back or go long. Having the option forces the defense to cover the long kick and creates space in the back to occasionally build from the back because the defnse has to back up so the ball doesn't go over their heads and allow a forward to run onto it.