Penalty Shoot Outs: An alternative?

Originally Posted by BarryX

I'm not talking about just what happens in extra-time though. If it's a draw after 90 minutes, then play the extra-time. If it's a draw after extra-time, then the points system for shots on target for the full 120 minutes would come into play. Then something like possession in the opposition half, if it's still level.

That way, you encourage and reward teams for going for it, which is what we all want to see. A lot of extra-times are very drawn out affairs, without either team wanting to risk going behind. This suggestion would ensure that a Mou-style team, who've tried to stop the opposition for 90 minutes, rather than play entertaining stuff, would have to attack at all costs in extra-time. Far more entertaining.

The game would, of course, still be about trying to put the ball in the opposition net, up until the end of the 120th minute. In case that didn't happen, it would be far fairer to reward the team that tried their hardest to do so.

I understand what you are suggesting.

I just don't think it sits with the way the rest of the game works.

I want entertainment. games are often shit. even non-tournament games. the three points for a win rule was welcome. bonus points for shit finishing seems wrong, though.

Originally Posted by red red robbo

If a more attack minded team creates loads of chances but doesn't score then that comes under one of the universal laws that governs all out lives...

Shit happens

It's one of the things that makes football, especially knock-out football, so special, otherwise why bother to play the game, just run a simulation on a computer.

A boxer that can't knock out his opponent after battering him for 12 rounds, should and theoretically would never be deemed a lesser fighter for his failure to do so than his opponent. The points system in place in that sport encourages aggression, so he'll be rewarded for at least trying his best.

Not sure how running a simulation relates in anyway to what I'm suggesting, which is: Attack. Attack. Attack attack attack.

One problem I'd have with xG or similar as a metric for solving a deadlock is that it's only doable in big commercial league football or international football - and then only in rich countries. where the technology capacity allows for it. It makes the game a different game at different levels. Also one reason I was hesitant about VAR.

Cant decide a game on stats.

Team A has 3 shots on target, all good football, clear chances created, shots from 8-15 yards from goal, 3 good saves

Team B has 6 shots on target, closest one from 25 yards, most of them daisy cutters that barely reached the goal

The stats would send team B through, but that wouldn't be a fair reflection.

And where would you put blocked shots, because they dont count as on target in the stats.

Originally Posted by BarryX

A boxer that can't knock out his opponent after battering him for 12 rounds, should and theoretically would never be deemed a lesser fighter for his failure to do so than his opponent. The points system in place in that sport encourages aggression, so he'll be rewarded for at least trying his best.

Not sure how running a simulation relates in anyway to what I'm suggesting, which is: Attack. Attack. Attack attack attack.

Because in most instances you could look at the two teams and say in advance who is likely to have the most possession, shots etc.

there would be something quite satisfying about saying to mourinho, "sure, you held out for a draw, but we just don't want your brand of anti-football in the next round, so.. off you toddle, you cancer on the game."

Originally Posted by jem

there would be something quite satisfying about saying to mourinho, "sure, you held out for a draw, but we just don't want your brand of anti-football in the next round, so.. off you toddle, you cancer on the game."

Just the last bit would do for me.

Originally Posted by Whip Hubley

Penalties are great. And they're absolutely nothing to do with luck or anything else. All about if you've got the minerals to step up and score under pressure.


If there was no penalties, we'd never have been given the John Terry slip. One of the greatest moments in sporting history.

Yep - absolutely this

Similarly, we would never have seen DDG 'dossier' on Villareals penalty takers and where to dive for them, and him absolutely going the wrong way for most of them, despite him having it written down where they're going.

Best one was "down the middle" - DDG dives to his left, pelanty goes down the middle. Incredible

Originally Posted by wiganste

Yep - absolutely this

Similarly, we would never have seen DDG 'dossier' on Villareals penalty takers and where to dive for them, and him absolutely going the wrong way for most of them, despite him having it written down where they're going.

Best one was "down the middle" - DDG dives to his left, pelanty goes down the middle. Incredible

Maybe we should've done what we gave Ben Foster... a podcast

Leave it be. Penalties are top.

Originally Posted by andyroo

One problem I'd have with xG or similar as a metric for solving a deadlock is that it's only doable in big commercial league football or international football - and then only in rich countries. where the technology capacity allows for it. It makes the game a different game at different levels. Also one reason I was hesitant about VAR.

I hear what you're saying, but it's still doable at a professional level, at least (or in any major tournament). Not a big fan of VAR, but in an age when there's giant screen in stadiums and millions can see blatant mistakes, instantly, at home, I do think VAR is needed and is a work in progress.

Originally Posted by Marvel7

Cant decide a game on stats.

Team A has 3 shots on target, all good football, clear chances created, shots from 8-15 yards from goal, 3 good saves

Team B has 6 shots on target, closest one from 25 yards, most of them daisy cutters that barely reached the goal

The stats would send team B through, but that wouldn't be a fair reflection.

And where would you put blocked shots, because they dont count as on target in the stats.

I'm sure there could be a way to do it, quite fairly (not saying my basic proposal is a finished one by any means). But at the end of the day, coming up with such a solution to reward the team with the most attacking chances is a damn site fairer than one than one based on pot luck penalties IMHO.

Originally Posted by otbarney

Hitting the woodwork isn't a shot on target.

Cannot begin to explain how much this annoys me...it blatantly is.

cricket tried a bowl out to settle a tied game

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzrXyH-caoU

This debate has been ongoing for donkey's years. Penalties is the best solution. Run-ups is maybe the next best thing, but is fraught with difficulties, such as fouls etc. Golden goal never caught on due to even more boring extra time. As for totting up shots on target etc, that's %@#$&!s.

Penalties is definitive. Black or white. Leave it be.

Originally Posted by Bunker Buster

Cannot begin to explain how much this annoys me...it blatantly is.

Well not really, the area inside the woodwork is the target. Look at match stats, they never count them.

Originally Posted by Bunker Buster

Cannot begin to explain how much this annoys me...it blatantly is.

If you shoot at someone with a gun and the bullet goes through a slack bit of material under the arms of their shirt, or similar, and they are unharmed, is that on target?

No. You have missed the target.

Originally Posted by otbarney

Well not really, the area inside the woodwork is the target. Look at match stats, they never count them.

Stats, absolute xG no chance.....

Originally Posted by programmes?

If you shoot at someone with a gun and the bullet goes through a slack bit of material under the arms of their shirt, or similar, and they are unharmed, is that on target?

No. You have missed the target.

Jesus, it ain't that deep ...

Think it was invented by bookies to annoy / get more cash out of you.

The "goal" is the target the goal is made by three posts traditionally made of wood...

Obviously in the minority on this, then. Won't be starting that petition to FIFA afterall.

Originally Posted by Bunker Buster

Cannot begin to explain how much this annoys me...it blatantly is.

https://youtu.be/msLGIBiAth0

Originally Posted by BarryX

I hear what you're saying, but it's still doable at a professional level, at least (or in any major tournament). Not a big fan of VAR, but in an age when there's giant screen in stadiums and millions can see blatant mistakes, instantly, at home, I do think VAR is needed and is a work in progress.



I'm sure there could be a way to do it, quite fairly (not saying my basic proposal is a finished one by any means). But at the end of the day, coming up with such a solution to reward the team with the most attacking chances is a damn site fairer than one than one based on pot luck penalties IMHO.

Penalties aren't pot luck.


On target?

https://youtu.be/CQo-LSn-G74?t=99