Steven P. Administrators Posted March 15, 2007 Administrators Share Posted March 15, 2007 I saw this on BBC Breakfast this morning, the proposal is to have a penalty shoot out (not clear if extra time needs to be played) then the winner of the shoot out gets 2 points and the loser 1 point for the original draw. I disagree with it because teams that have trouble winning and draw a lot could go up based purely on penalty decisions. I hate this in the World cup so I wouldn't want to see it in the English Premiership. Vote and tell me your thoughts. Further reading: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/6452013.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodel Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 I don't agree with the plan, penalties are a bad way to decide anything IMO. I'm more swayed by the idea of 0 points for a 0-0 draw, 1 point for a goal scoring draw and 3 for a win. That way it would encourage teams to go forward a bit more, but to be honest I don't really feel that what we already have needs any improving in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulCabby Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Draw!!!!!!!!!! Why change the system if it already works :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martyn Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Bad idea. You cannot simply rip out the traditions of the beautiful game like that. I think penalities are the best way to decide finals, but only finals. Penalities are an almost cruel way of ending a game, but if nothing else seperates the teams after 120 minutes then what can you do, as the game needs to be decided there and then, which is why the FA scrapped FA Cup Final replays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leesmithg Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Yet more speil by those that have not got a clue about the game they govern. On two points one about penalties firstly, all games that may require a penalty shoot out for the result if it's a draw, world cup, fa cup, european game etc, then have the penalty shoot out before the game starts, remove the negative aspect. On an unreleated point, when team are promoted up a division they cannot be relegated in the new season so they can get used to the pace. Then those teams that are happy to finish fourth from bottom just for the revenue might think twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven P. Administrators Posted March 15, 2007 Author Administrators Share Posted March 15, 2007 On an unreleated point, when team are promoted up a division they cannot be relegated in the new season so they can get used to the pace.Then those teams that are happy to finish fourth from bottom just for the revenue might think twice. Agree there totally! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted March 15, 2007 Veteran Share Posted March 15, 2007 While this topic is about soccer, I can draw comparisons to hockey that have already switched to this system. Important games should never be decided by a shootout. That annoys me at the Olympics to no end. That being said, a regular season game that ends in a draw is a bit of a disappointment (especially if you just paid $170 to see the game with a buddy). Therefore I do not mind if non-playoff games are resolved by a shootout. It adds closure. Poorly performing teams still get a point if they lose in the shootout much in the same way they would have received a point if the game ended in a draw. The winner of the shootout, however, gets an extra point and that is something worth fighting for. To summarize, shootout endings are fine for unimportant games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shibby Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 I think the way the league at the moment is fine. So what if a bad team got 1 point because they got a draw? just shows the other team can be just as bad for not winning. Important games needs to be golden goal or even pens. If a team needs a win, then they should play for a win in the first place, instead of being heart broken for getting knocked out in a shootout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulCabby Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 To summarize, shootout endings are fine for unimportant games. Which means that it won't happen the league :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rappy Veteran Posted March 15, 2007 Veteran Share Posted March 15, 2007 Bad Idea.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.pingu Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 It would lead to for example teams like wigan when playing against man utd to think they dont have a chance of winning and so stick 11 men behind the ball for 90 mins and wait for penalties. Hope they don't change it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted March 16, 2007 Veteran Share Posted March 16, 2007 Which means that it won't happen the league :) What you have to remember is that, in hockey, 16 out of 30 teams qualify. Yes, it often goes down to the wire as to who will be in and who will be out but the playoffs is almost like a 2nd season. I don't mind regular season hockey games ending in a shootout because they are relatively unimportant (only a third of the teams know they'll be fighting tooth and nail for every win needed to make the playoffs). A game that ends in a draw is unresolved. It lacks satisfaction. Playoff hockey games always have a winner because they'll play and play until the tie is broken (the longest was over 176 minutes of game time). However, I absolutely hate important games (like the Olympics) that end in a shootout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted March 16, 2007 Veteran Share Posted March 16, 2007 Just thinking of such a system makes me want to puke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts