Alert: UEFA to trial ABBA during KTFM

Discussion in 'Referee' started by juneau-AK, May 3, 2017.

Tags:
  1. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    The fairness question between the system has nothing to do with whether they get to take a kick -- that is only a question of whether it would be futile. And neither system can create greater futility issues. (What Evan pointed out was not a difference in fairness, but a trivia question.) the fairness question is based on the assumption there is a different pressure being first or second in a pair of kicks and more evenly distributing that pressure.
     
  2. threeputzzz

    threeputzzz Member+

    May 27, 2009
    Minnesota
  3. EvanJ

    EvanJ Member+

    Manchester United
    United States
    Mar 30, 2004
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You're correct that I was not trying to say one system is better than the other. Pierre Head understood what I meant.
     
  4. Thezzaruz

    Thezzaruz Member+

    Jun 20, 2011
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Sweden
    Yea I misunderstood you somewhat, sorry about that. And PH might have understood you but he did go on about fairness issues. ;)


    btw, I think you are wrong. :D
    Technically you can have a team score 4 straight unanswered PKs, you just have to go into round 6 to get there.

    R1 - A scores, B misses
    R2 - A scores, B misses
    R3 - A scores, B scores
    R4 - A misses. B scores
    R5 - A misses, B scores 3-3 and a tie so;
    R6 - A misses, B scores 3-4 with 4 straight makes right? :alien:
     
  5. EvanJ

    EvanJ Member+

    Manchester United
    United States
    Mar 30, 2004
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You're right. I wasn't thinking about the possibility of the first two or more makes being scored by the losing team.
     
  6. Thezzaruz

    Thezzaruz Member+

    Jun 20, 2011
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Sweden
    Yea I didn't think of it until I was writing my reply and looking back to see where/why I misunderstood you. One of those "wait a minute" moments. :D
     
  7. espola

    espola Member+

    Feb 12, 2006
    Coin toss before each round?
     
  8. camconcay

    camconcay Member+

    Atlanta United
    United States
    Feb 17, 2011
    Georgia
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Any chance the losing team doesn't like it and the winning team does? :eek:
     
    MassachusettsRef repped this.
  9. chwmy

    chwmy Member+

    Feb 27, 2010
    You suggest this in jest but what could be "fairer" than that?
     
  10. EvanJ

    EvanJ Member+

    Manchester United
    United States
    Mar 30, 2004
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I would like to know the order before kicks are started.

    You could do something like the NFL overtime where both teams get to choose something. The team that wins the coin toss will probably choose to receive the kickoff rather than choosing which way they want to go, and the team that loses the coin toss gets to decide which way they want to go. With penalty kicks, the team that wins the coins toss could get to choose one of four things:

    1. Kicks will be ABAB and the other team gets to decide who is A and who is B
    2. Kicks will be ABBA and the other team gets to decide who is A and who is B
    3. We will kick first for the first attempt for each team and the other team gets to decide ABAB or ABBA
    4. We will kick second for the first attempt for each team and the other team gets to decide ABAB or ABBA

    I admit that would be complicated.
     
    Pierre Head repped this.
  11. camconcay

    camconcay Member+

    Atlanta United
    United States
    Feb 17, 2011
    Georgia
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I like this idea a lot, however, it would not work well in most of the games I do - we have trouble getting an answer to "do you want to kick first or second" I can't imagine the head explosions when faced with 4 choices :confused:
     
  12. Pierre Head

    Pierre Head Member+

    Dec 24, 2005
    It is actually only 2 choices, as usual with a coin toss. Winner chooses either the method or the order. Loser chooses from whatever the winner does not select.

    PH
     
  13. camconcay

    camconcay Member+

    Atlanta United
    United States
    Feb 17, 2011
    Georgia
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    OK - it is one choice from 4 options my point is in the youth game having to decide 1 thing from 2 options is difficult, adding 2 options and trying to explain ABAB versus ABBA could cause impressionable young brains to overload assuming every referee has it down to start with (a poor assumption based on my experience in the levels I referee).

    And again I like the suggestion having each team be able to choose something when at the KFTPM stage.
     
  14. RefGil

    RefGil Member

    Dec 10, 2010
    No, it's two choices, each from two options:

    Choice #1: Do you want to pick the method or the order?

    If they pick method:
    Choice #2: ABAB or ABBA?

    Then, to the other team:
    Kick first or second in the first round?

    The they pick order?
    Choice #2: Kick first or second in the first round?

    Then, to the other team:
    ABAB or ABBA?

    (just been helping my daughter study for the GRE, so I'm in a particular mindset) :geek:
     
  15. camconcay

    camconcay Member+

    Atlanta United
    United States
    Feb 17, 2011
    Georgia
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If team A wins the toss they have one choice. They choose from 4 options although actually only 2 categories (team kicking first - order of subsequent kicks) but they are considering 4 options.

    1)kick first
    2)kick second
    3)ABAB
    4)ABBA

    Team B then has one choice from the remaining 2 options in the one remaining category.

    There are 2 choices, but the winner of the toss only gets one, the losers gets the other.
     
  16. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    We can tinker till the cows come home, but KFTM will never be a truly fair way to decide who wins a game . . . .
     
    voiceoflg repped this.
  17. fairplayforlife

    fairplayforlife Member+

    Mar 23, 2011
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Which is why arguably a 60/40 split shouldn't have been enough to change the system in the first place.

    Oh well. Based on some of the proposed changes we have been reading about I think the next couple years are going to be a fun roller coaster.
     
  18. Scrabbleship

    Scrabbleship Member

    May 24, 2012
    And your great solution is what exactly?
     
  19. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    Fairness and practicality collide. The truly fair soccer results are either a replay or extended time.

    KFTM are a gimmick -- at least they are better than a coin flip.

    I'd like to see an experiment with a different version of golden goal. The problem with golden goal was that teams played not to lose rather than to win -- knowing that KFTM were pretty much a coin flip in disguise. So I'd like to see going back to golden goal without KFTM a the end. Open up the field by having each team remove two players at the start of extra time. Ten minute periods, flip ends and remove a player every ten minutes. I think it would be rare that extra time lasted the current 30 minutes. Games would end with a goal.

    Alternatively, after the first 20 minutes, the GK becomes a field player, unable to use his hands.

    Or, the old ASL created shoot out was better than KFTM -- I think its flaw in FIFA;';s eyes is that it was created by Americans.
     
    Scrabbleship repped this.
  20. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    +1 with @socal lurker

    I was going to write that there is an irony in us (and FIFA and the IFAB) trying to tinker with the KFTM format to get the odds as close to a coin flip as possible. It sort of shows that we accept it's just a game of chance, separated from the game of skill that had been played prior.

    Replay is ideal from a purist perspective, but never going to happen for logistical reasons (and even though I'm close to a purist, even I'd concede it probably shouldn't happen even if it could).

    I'm all for the "remove a player" principle. We already have matches that finish with fewer than 11 players, so it's not a gimmick, per se, and involves situations that teams already train for. I'd personally say you remove 1 player at full time and then an additional player every 10 minute period (so if no one gets sent off, you're playing 8 v 8 during the 110'-120' range should you get there, which would be the current end of extra time). You might have the rare game make it past 120' to the 7 v 7 format, but I doubt it would be commonplace. You can tinker with the rules (there would be arguments both for allowing and not allowing substitutions) and I'd personally not make such a format golden goal, because an 8 v 8 battle to force an additional extra time would be awesome to watch, but I don't think anything has to be a deal-breaker. But the framework of removing a player each per set period of time makes the most sense to me because it's still soccer and it probably shortens, rather than prolongs, games.
     
  21. EvanJ

    EvanJ Member+

    Manchester United
    United States
    Mar 30, 2004
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If you were a coach, would you want to spend practice time all season teaching players about 9 v 9, 8 v 8, etc. that could only happen months later in possible playoffs? You could have situations where Team Y scored because Defender 1 on Team X forgot that Defender 2 on Team X had been removed.
     
  22. camconcay

    camconcay Member+

    Atlanta United
    United States
    Feb 17, 2011
    Georgia
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Somewhat true for lower levels although having spent my time there it would make practice different and fun and many already practice small sided anyway.

    In all honesty how many practice KFTPM or PK's at all until playoff time?

    At professional levels I would think they are extremely capable of handling playing short, especially since they will be equally short (if they end regulation 11v11 that is). As an experiment it seems very easy to try and see how it works.
     
  23. unclesox

    unclesox BigSoccer Supporter

    Mar 8, 2003
    209, California
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    UEFA went back to the ABAB format for the U-21 Euros. Such a shame.
     
  24. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Did they "go back" or is the tournament just not part of the trials? I genuinely don't know the answer to that, but the distinction is important.
     
  25. unclesox

    unclesox BigSoccer Supporter

    Mar 8, 2003
    209, California
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    I just know they used the ABAB format.
    I'm assuming ABBA will be used in the Confederations, if needed (?)
     

Share This Page