ive actually spend some time thinking about this and theres no good answer to this. i played soccer my whole life and had many multi game days. 90 minute games are hard enough on your body, i couldnt imagine having to play for 140 mins or until the next goal which is what your saying should be done. i agree playing until the last goal would be a better way to decide the champion but its just not possible in this sport. if you wanted to play until the last goal you would have to allow for unlimited subs in the extra time, and allow for players to come back on the field after being pulled out. this way players can catch a breath without having to be pulled out of the game completely, but many would say that takes away from the game.
and theyll never "have a second game" like they do in the us open (golf) because it take away to much money.
and theyll never "have a second game" like they do in the us open (golf) because it take away to much money.
It might not be a great solution, but it sounds better than pentalty kicks.
I don't thnk penalty kicks are a good solution, but it is not as bad as people think. Making a penalty kick after playing 130 mintues of soccer is not nearly as easy as people think. The fatigue effects the kick more than people believe.
What do you guys think about this idea from Van Gaal. Sounds better than penalties.
Van Gaal's most remarkable comments discussed the abolition of penalty shootouts. The former Holland coach wants a 'gladiatorial game' instead, which would favour the better footballing side.
"In extra-time, I'd like to see a 'gladiatorial game': every five minutes one player would be withdrawn, until it is six-a-side. After 120 minutes, the game would continue indefinitely until a golden goal," said van Gaal to Kicker.
Van Gaal's most remarkable comments discussed the abolition of penalty shootouts. The former Holland coach wants a 'gladiatorial game' instead, which would favour the better footballing side.
"In extra-time, I'd like to see a 'gladiatorial game': every five minutes one player would be withdrawn, until it is six-a-side. After 120 minutes, the game would continue indefinitely until a golden goal," said van Gaal to Kicker.
To legitimize the winner they need to do what the NHL does and play until there is a winner with a real goal even if it means playing with less players on each side. Penalty kicks do not IMHO indicate which team is better.
As far as I'm concerned have both teams play without goalies (no players from either side can enter goal mouth zone). Drastic I know but still soccer instead of the soccer equivalent of home run derby. I am sure thousands of minds that know the sport better than I do have wrestled with this problem without coming up with a feasible solution.
Maybe play on half a field by moving the nets closer to each other by 25 yards on each end. This would still be soccer in all other forms except the pitch would be shorter to give the players a chance to get up and down the field without near as much energy sapping running. Kind of like Arena Football to a small extent. Has to be more exciting than anti-climatic penalty kicks.
wil.
As far as I'm concerned have both teams play without goalies (no players from either side can enter goal mouth zone). Drastic I know but still soccer instead of the soccer equivalent of home run derby. I am sure thousands of minds that know the sport better than I do have wrestled with this problem without coming up with a feasible solution.
Maybe play on half a field by moving the nets closer to each other by 25 yards on each end. This would still be soccer in all other forms except the pitch would be shorter to give the players a chance to get up and down the field without near as much energy sapping running. Kind of like Arena Football to a small extent. Has to be more exciting than anti-climatic penalty kicks.
wil.
I admit drastic measures like shortening the field instead of penalty kicks are just that drastic but nearly anything is better than having games decided by penalty kicks. The NHL added a 5 minute 4 skater on 4 skater OT to all of their regular season tie games and it made for some very exciting wide open hockey with maybe 20% (I'm guessing) of all ties getting decided by a real goal. The penalty shot competition that comes next if no OT goal is scored is IMO useless and not even hockey.
If FIFA is married to using penalty kicks as the final tiebreaker it relies on to determine what country takes home the most coveted sports trophy, globally speaking. Then at least back up the kicker to where the keeper has a 50/50 chance of actually making a save (if such a spot exits).
Most failed kicks are the result of nervous strikers (ala Roberto Baggio for example) missing the net completely or even worse hitting the the goal post somewhere and having the ball bounce right back at them. Occasionally a keeper will guess correctly and get hit with the ball as he dives to one side or another. Create a scenario where the striker has to really make a great kick to score and at the same time allowing the Keeper the opportunity to make a game saving stop.
Using a penalty kick from a distance difficult enough for the striker that gives the keeper an equal chance to either to make a save or yield a goal and you can eliminate the most successful kicks out of five system from point blank range and use a system similar to college football where the side that scores wins if the other side fails to score. Repeat until you get a winner.
Then again maybe ST is right, let them play until one teams scores no matter how long it takes. We are only talking about one game every four years.
wil.
If FIFA is married to using penalty kicks as the final tiebreaker it relies on to determine what country takes home the most coveted sports trophy, globally speaking. Then at least back up the kicker to where the keeper has a 50/50 chance of actually making a save (if such a spot exits).
Most failed kicks are the result of nervous strikers (ala Roberto Baggio for example) missing the net completely or even worse hitting the the goal post somewhere and having the ball bounce right back at them. Occasionally a keeper will guess correctly and get hit with the ball as he dives to one side or another. Create a scenario where the striker has to really make a great kick to score and at the same time allowing the Keeper the opportunity to make a game saving stop.
Using a penalty kick from a distance difficult enough for the striker that gives the keeper an equal chance to either to make a save or yield a goal and you can eliminate the most successful kicks out of five system from point blank range and use a system similar to college football where the side that scores wins if the other side fails to score. Repeat until you get a winner.
Then again maybe ST is right, let them play until one teams scores no matter how long it takes. We are only talking about one game every four years.
wil.
Last edited:
If hockey players, who play a much rougher game, can go to 5 OT's
or longer to decide a game, why are soccer players such wimps
that they can't do the same?
It must have something to do with the European sytle of acting like
they've been shot by a shotgun every time an opposing player gives
them the slightest feather of a touch.
I see this in the NBA too. Although there are exceptions, like the
Canadian Steve Nash who played with vision in only one eye.
or longer to decide a game, why are soccer players such wimps
that they can't do the same?
It must have something to do with the European sytle of acting like
they've been shot by a shotgun every time an opposing player gives
them the slightest feather of a touch.
I see this in the NBA too. Although there are exceptions, like the
Canadian Steve Nash who played with vision in only one eye.
Bottom line is that the inability to settle ties on the field competitively is a major flaw in "The Beautiful Game" itself. The showcase of the sport is the World Cup played every four years only to be determined by which team can score more free kicks out of five attemps from point blank range than it's opponet can. 25 games a century and the big shots who control the sport cannot come up with something better than this to decide the winner of it's premier event.
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/m-CX2AkWVV8&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/m-CX2AkWVV8&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/m-CX2AkWVV8&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/m-CX2AkWVV8&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
please dont compare hockey players to soccer players, it couldnt be anymore different, and yes ive played both. first of all soccer is a game of stamina where hockey is a game of 2 minute sprints then 4 minute rests.
ive actually played a couple tournaments where we had a gladiator style over time. our rules were that you had 15 minutes of overtime and if nobody scored you would play 7 on 7 with no goalie for 10 minutes. if no one scored after that you would have to put a NEW team of 6 players on (you cant put a player back on until your whole team has played). you keep doing this until you get to 5 players each or until someone scores, rotating 5 players every 10 minutes. to be honest it never gets that far, its usually decided in the first couple of minutes because theres no goalie. i got to 5 on 5 once but we scored in about 20 seconds. i really think true soccer fans would hate this, but it works for junior tournaments where you have to fit in a bunch of games in a day
ive actually played a couple tournaments where we had a gladiator style over time. our rules were that you had 15 minutes of overtime and if nobody scored you would play 7 on 7 with no goalie for 10 minutes. if no one scored after that you would have to put a NEW team of 6 players on (you cant put a player back on until your whole team has played). you keep doing this until you get to 5 players each or until someone scores, rotating 5 players every 10 minutes. to be honest it never gets that far, its usually decided in the first couple of minutes because theres no goalie. i got to 5 on 5 once but we scored in about 20 seconds. i really think true soccer fans would hate this, but it works for junior tournaments where you have to fit in a bunch of games in a day
IMO.... there are good commetns about changing rules, the problem is that removing players, in such a big fiel will kill the rest of the player, the strategy must have to change so much, that the teams will lose their particular way to play. That would be like removing a QB from football, both teams will have to play only by running, and not having able to throw a long pass will affect must of the teams. Unfortunately, i belive that penalty kicks are not the best way to end up an important game, because you can have one of the teams making a great game, attacking for 120 minutes and the other can just play defensibly and at the end win just with one good shot at the penalty kicks... but changing to another to end up a game, will kill the essence of soccer.
Also penalties are what soccer fans are used to; they settle games at every level of the game and in just about every country (the US tried some odd variant in the past which failed miserably). Penalties are also a part of the regular fabric of the game, where as changing player numbers / pitch sizes etc are not.
The fact is that it settles cup ties all around the world, and the world cup should be no different. And that from an England supporter, who must have gone out of nearly every tournament in the last 20 years on Penalties ;o)
The fact is that it settles cup ties all around the world, and the world cup should be no different. And that from an England supporter, who must have gone out of nearly every tournament in the last 20 years on Penalties ;o)
