yeah, but look how **** the way the MLS used to do it wasOriginally Posted by Pat Vegas
but what do I know.
yeah, but look how **** the way the MLS used to do it wasbut what do I know.
“Other clubs never came into my thoughts once I knew Arsenal wanted to sign me.”
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.
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.
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.
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).
“Other clubs never came into my thoughts once I knew Arsenal wanted to sign me.”
how about after ET they bring in double sized goals.
And two balls.
Golden goal was rubbish. Really anti-climactic, and just felt wrong.
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.
What could reflect the game of football more than smashing the ball past the keeper and into the net?
In redg's absence someone has to stress this point imo.
I agree about golden goal. It was one of those ideas that on paper looks much better, but is in fact rubbish
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote