Jump to content
IGNORED

Euro 2020 - Congrats Italy


disperse and recoagulate
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, ChewMagma said:

We can all say he should be braver, maybe even that it is better to die 3-1 by the sword than live through the agony of penalties, but elite sport can't think like that, it has to keep alive the opportunity for the victory as long as it can.

This is actually a great argument against having penalties as a decider, because it allows teams of very different ability the option to sit back and try and sneak a win - they don't really do much to say who was 'better'.

 

Sure, it can bring great drama/laughs (I'm thinking Switzerland v France and almost Switzerland v Spain), but in both those games the Swiss were hanging on waiting for the great leveller of spot-kicks and nobody would objectively say they are a better team. 

 

In most other team sports you don't have that fallback, so you do see risks being taken to win it. I therefore disagree with your view that "elite sport can't think like that" because in many other sports they do as a matter of course - it's just that football doesn't force teams to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok "elite football" then, but any modern elite sportsperson pursues the optimal strategy that minimises risk and maximises opportunity for reward based on the actual rules of their chosen sport.

 

As an aside I don't know what a more satisfactory and practicable alternative to penalties would be though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ChewMagma said:

Ok "elite football" then, but any modern elite sportsperson pursues the optimal strategy that minimises risk and maximises opportunity for reward based on the actual rules of their chosen sport.

 

As an aside I don't know what a more satisfactory and practicable alternative to penalties would be though.

 

Perhaps just keep adding more periods of extra time, but every five minutes both teams have to take off another player, until eventually it's just the two goalies hoofing it at each other.

 

Either that or multiball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Darren said:

 

Perhaps just keep adding more periods of extra time, but every five minutes both teams have to take off another player, until eventually it's just the two goalies hoofing it at each other.

 

Has any tournament (I'm thinking one for a younger age bracket) ever tried this as an experiment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  

12 minutes ago, Darren said:

 

Perhaps just keep adding more periods of extra time, but every five minutes both teams have to take off another player, until eventually it's just the two goalies hoofing it at each other.

 

Either that or multiball.

 

10 minutes ago, Eighthours said:

 

Has any tournament (I'm thinking one for a younger age bracket) ever tried this as an experiment?

 

I swear it's been tried in the States already.

 

Re penalties - there are extreme examples of teams playing for penalties from the very first minute, like this one from the 1991 European Cup final.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ChewMagma said:

Ok "elite football" then, but any modern elite sportsperson pursues the optimal strategy that minimises risk and maximises opportunity for reward based on the actual rules of their chosen sport.

 

As an aside I don't know what a more satisfactory and practicable alternative to penalties would be though.

Yeah, I don't know what solution could be found to replace penalties that doesn't reduce it to a one vs one moment (I remember the nascent US league of the 70s and early 80s had the one vs one from 35 yards and you had 10 seconds or something?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of all of those, taking players away would seem to at least retain the ethos of winning it on the pitch; I don't like the sound of ADG at all, again you are putting pressure on the attackers to score, so it's just a lengthier penalty shootout by another name. 

 

I wonder if anybody within the various authorities are still looking at the issue, or if it has been filed away in the 'too hard' pile? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChewMagma said:

 

As an aside I don't know what a more satisfactory and practicable alternative to penalties would be though.

 

1 hour ago, Darren said:

 

Perhaps just keep adding more periods of extra time, but every five minutes both teams have to take off another player, until eventually it's just the two goalies hoofing it at each other.

 

Either that or multiball.

 

1 hour ago, Eighthours said:

Has any tournament (I'm thinking one for a younger age bracket) ever tried this as an experiment?

 

1 hour ago, Smoothy said:

  

I swear it's been tried in the States already.

 


I know this isn’t the most serious discussion, but out of curiosity I looked up what happens in the Super Bowl if there’s a tie.

 

Basically it goes to golden-goal extra time, 10 minutes per period. If someone scores the game is over, otherwise they would add on another period of extra time. 
 

If it’s still a draw they just keep going (even changing ends after two periods of ET, just as they would after two periods of regulation play).

 

There doesn’t seem to be a theoretical limit on how many periods of ET could be added on. But then they don’t really need one because it’s vanishingly unlikely to happen.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Gigawatt said:

I know this has been mooted before: Do the penalty shoot out before the game. That way there’s less pressure, and at least one team is going to have to press to get a result in extra time.

This is somehow both the worst and best idea I've heard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reactionary in me isn't keen on putting the shootout first, though it might be an interesting experiment.

 

A problem with it is that it assumes two equally matched teams will be playing each other. In cases where the teams are clearly imbalanced, about half the time you're likely to end up with a situation where the weaker side now needs to win the game and the stronger side can be happy with a draw, giving you a less interesting game than under normal circumstances. Shifting the shootout to the start of extra time would only alleviate some of that.

 

The problem football faces is that it's a low scoring game, so you can't just play on indefinitely as in sports where scores occur with regularity. Any method of settling the tie other than playing on will always face scrutiny because it will always involve some change to the normal rules of play, and therefore not be reflective of the actual ability of the teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Gigawatt said:

I know this has been mooted before: Do the penalty shoot out before the game. That way there’s less pressure, and at least one team is going to have to press to get a result in extra time.

 

I've always advocated this as a good idea - OK Rashford you've missed your pen but now got 30m to help put that right. 

 

The counter arguments is that tired players stand around for ages getting cold before playing again increasing risk of injury - and the balance of ET is altered with 1 team potentially quite happy to park a very big bus. In theory at present both teams are trying to win the match, though that is often not the case.

 

I'd like to see it given go.

 

Not sure why ABBA never got tried too in pens at a tournament, the team going first has a big statistical advantage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bradigor said:

Play 7-a-side in extra time so more room on pitch and more opportunities for scoring.

 

My dad always says he would make teams take a player off ever few mins to achieve this space, leaving it as a 1 on 1 shoot out to the golden goal death

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jonathanhoey said:

 

 

 


I know this isn’t the most serious discussion, but out of curiosity I looked up what happens in the Super Bowl if there’s a tie.

 

Basically it goes to golden-goal extra time, 10 minutes per period. If someone scores the game is over, otherwise they would add on another period of extra time. 
 

If it’s still a draw they just keep going (even changing ends after two periods of ET, just as they would after two periods of regulation play).

 

There doesn’t seem to be a theoretical limit on how many periods of ET could be added on. But then they don’t really need one because it’s vanishingly unlikely to happen.

 

 

I've been thinking about ice hockey a lot with this discussion too, as no game ever ends in a draw. 

 

In the NHL (standard league), if the score is tied at the end of the game, It goes to overtime, and if still tied, to a shootout.

 

In the Stanley Cup Playoffs however, things get more exciting.  It goes to basically 'golden goal' overtime, until someone scores (no shootouts).  It's not one endless period either, they're broken into 20 minute periods (same length as normal play), with the break to tidy up the ice :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Gotters said:

 

Not sure why ABBA never got tried too in pens at a tournament, the team going first has a big statistical advantage. 


Obvious solution: both sides take each spot kick at the same instant, in the opposite goals. Countdown over the PA to the moment when the striker has to kick the ball. It’s on him/her to time it correctly. That way no one has the pressure of knowing “if I miss this we lose” etc.

 

A bit like when they play whole knockout matches at the same time so that the known result of the previous match doesn’t influence or even invalidate/render pointless the next one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Fry Crayola said:

The reactionary in me isn't keen on putting the shootout first, though it might be an interesting experiment.

 

A problem with it is that it assumes two equally matched teams will be playing each other. In cases where the teams are clearly imbalanced, about half the time you're likely to end up with a situation where the weaker side now needs to win the game and the stronger side can be happy with a draw, giving you a less interesting game than under normal circumstances. Shifting the shootout to the start of extra time would only alleviate some of that.

 

The problem football faces is that it's a low scoring game, so you can't just play on indefinitely as in sports where scores occur with regularity. Any method of settling the tie other than playing on will always face scrutiny because it will always involve some change to the normal rules of play, and therefore not be reflective of the actual ability of the teams.

Yeah, the shootout first idea puts a strange slant on the game for one of the sides because they can be much less expansive knowing a draw is fine for them. Plus, how would it be done - behind closed doors? Would the result of the shootout be communicated to fans/TV before the game? 

 

Also, as you say, any solution has to change the rules to artificially create an outcome. Its a real head-scratcher. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Darren said:

 

Perhaps just keep adding more periods of extra time, but every five minutes both teams have to take off another player, until eventually it's just the two goalies hoofing it at each other.

 

Genuinely always loved this idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Fry Crayola said:

The problem football faces is that it's a low scoring game, so you can't just play on indefinitely as in sports where scores occur with regularity. Any method of settling the tie other than playing on will always face scrutiny because it will always involve some change to the normal rules of play, and therefore not be reflective of the actual ability of the teams.

 

This is the biggest problem, most other team sports are more likely to have scores in any quarter of play, or give you methods of scorning something more easily from open play (i.e. drop goals in Rugby). I think you have to decide if playing for penalties is a valid tactic within the spirit of the game, if so then you leave them as is, if not then find a more entertaining solution;

 

  1. Wide On - Widen the goals for extra time, say 30cm either way, maybe just keep stretching them out every 15 mins. Stops teams trying to just defend deep as you'll have people banging them in from 30-40 yards with a wider goal. Not taller though, just wider.
  2. ISS98 Keepers (or Player Keepers) - You pick players to go in goal for each penalty much the same way as you decide who takes them. Players can't train for a particular keeper that way either. 
  3. Yahoo Auctions - Golden Goal but if anyone scores you have 5 minutes added to give the opposing team a chance.

 

Not entirely sure (2) is actually better, as a team could still play for penalties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got the fix! Random penalties! They get a lottery machine on the sidelines that spits out a ball for each team with a players shirt number at a random moment during the match, the number of penalties will also be random. Each time it happens, the penalties must be taken at the next break in play

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Add some spice: Extra time with snipers.

 

Each team has a special forces sniper on the roof equipped with tranquillisers. They can shoot 1 dart per minute reducing players till its just keeper vs keeper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's high-pressure competition, and there's little point in trying to reduce that. There are pros and cons a mile long for every difference, and it wasn't long ago I was all for ABBA and penalties before kick-off, but it's good as it is.

 

I remember way back in primary school we had one lad who reckoned a penalty should count as saved if the keeper gets a touch. Even if it goes in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.