but what do I know.
:shrug:
Printable View
but what do I know.
:shrug:
Perhaps not, but it does allow people to make poor, ABBA-related puns. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat Vegas
Both sides gets 5 pelanties each - how can that not be fair :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat Vegas
The fact is that penalties are a rubbish and deeply unsatisfactory way of deciding any football match. No amount of tinkering with the format is going to change that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda
We had four. They only had three.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda
That seems fair to me.
Its only been used once and neither side got 5 penalties.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda
I think you should still have to take them, even if you have already lost.
yeah, but look how **** the way the MLS used to do it wasQuote:
Originally Posted by Pat Vegas
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRITqS6WEn0
Of course - we should get 10Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
However you do it is shït, since it bears no relationship to the course or balance of the game, but still decides its outcome. It's just a more pressured equivalent of tossing a coin.Quote:
Originally Posted by IUFG
It isn't related to tossing a coin at all because you have absolutely no way of affecting the outcome of the coin. The better you are at taking & saving penalties, and the better you are at maintaining your technique under pressure, the more likelihood that you will succeed, and will have deserved it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Yes, but being good at taking or saving penalties isn't a reflection of anything other than being able to take or save penalties. As such, it doesn't reflect anything about the game or the relative abilities of the players and reduces the game itself to meaninglessness. This makes it an enormously unsatisfactory and arbitrary way of settling a game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
30 minutes of ET, if still level, golden goal with reducing amounts of players on the pitch. Goalkeepers have to drink a shot of tequila every two minutes (might not work with the likes of Ali Al-Habsi, but worth a punt imo).Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
:hehe: how about after ET they bring in double sized goals.Quote:
Originally Posted by IUFG
And two balls.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat Vegas
Golden goal was rubbish. Really anti-climactic, and just felt wrong.
What could reflect the game of football more than smashing the ball past the keeper and into the net?Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
In redg's absence someone has to stress this point imo.
I like this. Although I like unlimited golden goal time after half an hour with no player reductions. This would force teams to either throw caution to the wind or just die of exhaustion.Quote:
Originally Posted by IUFG
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
I agree about golden goal. It was one of those ideas that on paper looks much better, but is in fact rubbish
True, but it is an English disease, this notion that it is a lottery/coin toss/no reflection of blah blah blah….Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Where two teams have failed to win the game in 120 minutes they resolve it through a test of bottle and one specific skill.
We almost always fail this test. It may render the game meaningless but it does prove one thing- that we, the English, don’t have the bottle for it. Until we accept that and try and address it we will keep losing shoot outs. WE prefer to just write it off as meaningless, a lottery, flip of a coin.
Its *******s.
It being arbitrary and unsatisfactory is no excuse for being shįt at it, I agree. Generally speaking, Arsenal do pretty well in penalty shootouts, don't we? Not sure I'd describe us as a particularly bottly club, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
Perhaps we could even take the thing further in insisting each team designate just one player (obviously its striker or chief penalty-taker) to execute all its kicks until the winner is decided.
Then instead of the tragedy of some poor unknown squad member who's never taken a pen in his life costing his side the match or even a trophy, you have the real drama of a mano a mano contest (not literally obviously, unless one wishes to focus on the goalkeepers, I suppose) between the two teams' Galáctico stranieri; Kun v Alexis, for example, or even Ronaldo versus Messi.
A finer spectacle, imo, and much fairer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
I was thinking we have quite a remarkable record over the past 10 years or so but then realised I had completely blocked the Bradford debacle out of my mind. Think that is the only one we have lost since 2000, though that season was pretty special (lost to Boro in the League Cup, Leicester in the FA Cup, Galatasaray in the Uefa Cup - all on pens. And we were only in the Uefa Cup because Kanu missed a penalty in the Fiorentina Champions League game)Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
It's not a disease, P. In fact, it's a sign of our rude health. After all we invented the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
Or, to put it another way, the Germans, who are practically perfect at penalty shootouts, of course, would never create such a wonderful game as football. Could never create such a wonderful game as football.
Obviously by we I mean England. Arsenal's record is a mixed bag, which is about right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
The new system is a step in the right direction, but there is a greater inbalance which still remains. The penalties should be taken at both ends of the pitch. It is a huge advantage for them to be taken at the end where the mass of your supporters are. I saw Arsenal suffer in two European finals - v Valencia and Galatasaray. I am sure that statistically many more shoot-outs are won by the teams when the shoot-outs are taken at the ends where there fans are.
It's easy to organise kicks at each ends with so many officials. And (unless the goalkeepers take kicks, which is rare and likelier to become rarer after Cortois' effort yesterday) it will be so much quicker to get through them as the keepers will be ready and waiting between the posts.
I have a feeling TV people like it at just one end for some reason - in which case there is no chance of a changeQuote:
Originally Posted by Yesterday Once More
Contractually obligatory 'Unlike your mum, who likes it at both ends'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda