FIFA president wants penalty shoot out alternative

[Suave Charlie]

Sepp Blatter is such a wanker. He wants to take away penalty shootouts and not use goal line technology. I suppose an alternative to penalty shootouts would work in england's favour, that's something FIFA never do.

You had to expect he would have something to say if an English team were to win the title. He's done a lousey job of hiding his dislike up to this point.

Penalties work very well, in my opinion. They require skill and guts and are definitely good for drama and entertainment value.

I think penalties are a terrible way to decide the result, it just turns it into a crap shoot. Much more skill is involved in building up a play that leads to a goal than in penalties.

 

[Bobic]

Simple, they should don The Bubbles


Skip the first minute to get straight to the awesome.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Sepp Blatter is such a wanker. He wants to take away penalty shootouts and not use goal line technology. I suppose an alternative to penalty shootouts would work in england's favour, that's something FIFA never do.

You had to expect he would have something to say if an English team were to win the title. He's done a lousey job of hiding his dislike up to this point.

Penalties work very well, in my opinion. They require skill and guts and are definitely good for drama and entertainment value.

I think penalties are a terrible way to decide the result, it just turns it into a crap shoot. Much more skill is involved in building up a play that leads to a goal than in penalties.

Well, yeh...no argument about open play being more complex and interesting. But, as was the case in the final, they had played for 2 hours and not gotten a result.

The penalty shoot out is an exciting and effective way of deciding a match that is refusing to decide itself.

 

[Suave Charlie]

Well, yeh...no argument about open play being more complex and interesting. But, as was the case in the final, they had played for 2 hours and not gotten a result.

The penalty shoot out is an exciting and effective way of deciding a match that is refusing to decide itself.

They should just keep going till the other team breaks down in exhaustion, the team that really wants it will somehow persevere

There is no flaw to that plan.

 

[MetalMagpie]

Why don't they just use the golden goal?

I seem to remember that went out because it rarely actually solved the problem. Both sides just ended up defending. (Because who's going to risk going on an all-out attack if the next goal could lose you the match?)

I would personally be behind them using the same system as fencing. If a 15 point fencing match is a draw at the end of time, a coin is flipped to decide which fencer gets "priority" and then another minute is fenced. The first hit wins, but if no hits are scored then the fencer with priority wins by default.

Yes, it introduces chance into the match. Yes, it might seem unfair. But it sure as hell ensures that the final minute is worth watching!

On the other hand, defending is a lot easier in football than in fencing, so this might not work after all.

 

[Yopaz]

They should have a game of dodge-ball using only their feet. The teams would be 5v5 on either half of the centre circle. Last man standing.

Now this would be pretty entertaining. I think we should use this rather than penalty kicks.

Honestly though I think penalty kicks work because after a whole round players are getting tired and just extending the time wont do them any good. There's no telling how long it could go on. I guess they could judge which team had played the best, but that doesn't sounds too good either. Penalty kicks work, though I agree that it doesn't fit in with the spirit of the sport.

 

[Jordi]

he just saying that football is a game of strategy, teamwork and skill.

penality shots is just about skill and acurracy and it kind of sucks if a whole team that played good loses because one team member misfired his shot.

and it might reduce the dives in some games.

How do you figure? (the bold part)

Anyway, I agree with the rest of that analysis. It sucks. It also sucks that one (or a few) player(s) must shoulder the blame for the loss. Poor Schweinsteiger...

Some ideas:
- If you just want to alleviate the blame factor, you can have the whole team simultaneously shoot from the half-way line. You could still probably see who scored and who missed using video replay, but it'd be much harder, and presumably many more than one player will miss. It doesn't sound as exciting as penalty kicks though, and it's still not very strategic and teamworky.

I don't generally like the idea of playing until a team scores, because I'm afraid of injuries and extremely prolonged matches when all the players are to tired to walk. However, you could do some variants that will make the match be over much sooner:

- Remove the keepers
- Remove (a lot of) players and play on a smaller pitch
- Continue removing players every 3 minutes or so
- Maybe even add more balls

Most of these things are in the interest of making scoring much quicker and limiting physical effort (less players that don't need to run as far).

As a kid I used to play this game where everybody had a bottle or traffic cone or something, and the other players would try to kick it over with the ball (I don't know the English name). You could do that with a subset of the players in the middle circle or something and remove a player when his bottle is knocked over. It's a little silly, but it sounds like fun to me.

 

[bliebblob]

Ehh? I always thought penalties are by the far the most exciting thing that can happen in a soccer match. It's so tense, you could cut the air with a knife.

Well than how about a trick battle? It has the extra advantage of bringing back some "boom-shaka-laka" to soccer.
Many players can do some very nice moves but they never do because it's an unnecessary risk. So let's give them a chance to put them to good use.
Ofcourse that would involve some sort of jury arbitrarily deciding which trick is better. That's probably not gonna end well...

Idea nr 2: multitball! Just throw in like 50 balls and see who can get the most into the other team's goal. (extra referees may be necessary)

 

[OmniscientOstrich]

Whoever gives Sepp the largest bribe shall be declared the winner, I imagine that's where he's taking it. >.> Really though, in this instance I think I'll echo the old mantra of 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it.'

 

[Lionsfan]

As an American my opinions are whichever one helped us out more. Nobody was complaining in '99 when we won the Women's Cup on Penalties, but now after 2011 everyone was against them

I'll say this, as a Hockey fan I absolutely hate when games are just decided based on a skills competition

 

[Chairman Miaow]

There certainly must be a fairer way to decide the winner, but I doubt any other way would match the tension.

 

[Jordi]

he just saying that football is a game of strategy, teamwork and skill.

penality shots is just about skill and acurracy and it kind of sucks if a whole team that played good loses because one team member misfired his shot.

and it might reduce the dives in some games.

How do you figure? (the bold part)

Anyway, I agree with the rest of that analysis. It sucks. It also sucks that one (or a few) player(s) must shoulder the blame for the loss. Poor Schweinsteiger...

Some ideas:
- If you just want to alleviate the blame factor, you can have the whole team simultaneously shoot from the half-way line. You could still probably see who scored and who missed using video replay, but it'd be much harder, and presumably many more than one player will miss. It doesn't sound as exciting as penalty kicks though, and it's still not very strategic and teamworky.

I don't generally like the idea of playing until a team scores, because I'm afraid of injuries and extremely prolonged matches when all the players are to tired to walk. However, you could do some variants that will make the match be over much sooner:

- Remove the keepers
- Remove (a lot of) players and play on a smaller pitch
- Continue removing players every 3 minutes or so
- Maybe even add more balls

Most of these things are in the interest of making scoring much quicker and limiting physical effort (less players that don't need to run as far).

As a kid I used to play this game where everybody had a bottle or traffic cone or something, and the other players would try to kick it over with the ball (I don't know the English name). You could do that with a subset of the players in the middle circle or something and remove a player when his bottle is knocked over. It's a little silly, but it sounds like fun to me.

because i am a

Right.

anyway you seem to suggest that the football/soccer match turns into a dodgeball like match.

When you say dodgeball, do you mean the game where you need to hit each other with the ball? I think that would lead to very different dynamics than needing to hit/defend bottles/cones.

besides that it would not be really good to remove the keeper since it would turn out like one of those matches in africa that ends with 90:87 results.

The easy scoring is kind of the idea. But you wouldn't let it come to 90-87, because it'd be sudden death (or first to 2/3/4/whatever works).
But come to think of it, this might make possession too powerful. This is not of itself bad, because you could think of a fair way to decide who gets it (referee ball or something), but it might lead the other team to make very tough fouls because the stakes are so high.

 

[robot slipper]

A penalty shoot-out is always exciting and tense, and most people understand the concept of it - even people who aren't football fans. My gran (may she rest in peace), for example, would always sit up and pay attention if there was a penalty shoot-out.

If it HAD to be done, during the shoot-out they could blindfold the shooter and goalie, and so the team with the most players who can channel the Force the best will win.

 

[doggy go 7]

Have a player from each team being removed every 5 mins, until one team scores.

capatcha: goose bumps; my genious does have that effect

 

[Guffe]

Nah, I think penalties after 30 extra min is just fine.
People are tired and the preassure is something that differs the really good ones from the good ones.
Also I always shit my pants of nervosity when it goes to penalties.

 

[shootthebandit]

why dont the managers have a game of FIFA 12. have it displayed on the big screens in the stadium they could have playstations or xboxs set up in the dug out

 

[M-E-D The Poet]

I vote for golden goal with extra substitutes then.
Or actually : mandatory substitutes
That could work
Freshen up the play.

 

[Shadows Risen]

I'm perfectly happy with 30 extra time and then penalties. The tension is brilliant and it's a way to end the game. The only down-side is being English, I normally see us lose shoot-outs (CL final excepted).