.......should penalty shoot-outs be scrapped?
Many of you will be asking this if we do our normal trick against Germany.
I've always said yes and I believe that I have the perfect solution (although I know FIFA don't think there is actually a problem).
For me you have to find a way to encourage attacking play (too often a team will play for a draw in hope of a win on penalties). However the main aim is just simply to do away with such an absurd way of finishing the match.
Ideas have previously been put forward such as corner counts, shots on target etc. The latter is hard to define for someone may for example shoot and get a deflection - how do you judge if the original shot was on target?
I would therefore put in place a count of goalkeeper touches. The team whose goalkeeper touches the ball the least wins the game. Simple to count and define, and would totally scare teams out of defensive tactics. If it was a draw and the scoreboard showed that goalkeeper A had touched the ball 40 times and the goalkeeper B had done so 41 times then team B would be going all out to shoot to force A to make another save. This would inevitably lead to some teams 'accidentally' actually scoring thus ensuring fewer drawn games in the first place.
So, what do you think? Let's discuss it BEFORE we moan about it again.
0
Comments
Let's practice penalties and do a bit of research beforehand.
We know we are going to play Germany, it shouldn't be too difficult to do a bit of analysis on which side of the goal German penalty takers generally prefer.
Good point although it would be interesting to see goalkeepers unsure or not whether to touch the ball in certain situations.
Don't you think that penalty shoot-outs are a 'bit harsh?' 10 - 20 qualifying games, 3 group games, 4 knock-out games and then one penalty decides who wins the cup (1994 & 2006). I personally find that a crap way of finishing a match let alone a tournament.
Then the team who wins the shoot-out just play for the draw.
I don't like shoot-outs but I don't think there is a better solution.
Alternatively, all the subs come on and we have a massive game.
Or, crossbar challenge.
That sounds so clichéd. If we were already practicing my idea and someone suggested penalty shoot-outs then you'd probably say the same thing.
Definitely better than a shoot-out as it requires several skills. This idea could be extended to having one defender (plus goalie) and two attackers with a 20 second time limit.
Five goes each for each team. It hardly takes much longer than a shoot-out.
although do like the other idea that everyone has to take a penalty then maybe onto sudden death if tied
exactly what i was thinking lol
If you are desperate to fiddle, change to a tennis tiebreaker scoring system where it is necessary to gave a two-penalty advantage. This removes the need to blame one player for not scoring their penalty. But this is just dancing around the edges.
If you are serious about this you need to address the root cause, which means reducing the number of drawn games. Various ideas - make the goals bigger, reduce the number of players in extra time. But let's face it, a penalty shoot out is exciting and entertaining - so why change it?
A shoot out is whoever has the strongest mentality, unfortunately England in the past don't have it, as we didn't this season...
I don't like the idea of the match finishing and we're all left just waiting to find out which keeper touched the ball the least. Sounds a bit like boxing.
One of the best things about football is that it is so simple ie most goals wins.
A US shoot out would be good but comes down to the same thing as pens.
No duckworth lewis style systems in footie please,
As Henry says - better the result is settled out on the pitch by the players than by some bloke with a notebook and thick rimmed specs in a Fifa office.
Tbh Jimmy, I think your idea has quite a few flaws - firstly the one above about keepers getting a touch on shots that go in, whilst the guy at the other end doesn't get close, but also teams will just be able to chip gentle but accurate shots in from distance forcing the keeper to make an easy save and thus touch the ball - it won't necessarily have to be a genuine attempt to score and would be just as dull and cynical as shutting up shop and waiting for the shoot-out.
Perhaps we could use a system where the player starts with the ball at his feet 40/50 yards from goal whilst two defenders run in from each corner flag, thus giving the striker an option of shooting early and unchallenged, but from distance or backing his ability to work a shot closer in once the defenders are in front of him. That wouldn't however solve the issue of playing out time.
Ultimately though I think it should be decided on the pitch in a clear cut manner - using stats would just be an recipe for controversy and matches to be potential be decided in appeal courts months after the event.
I was talking about having the shoot-out before the game. I was going to rip your hare-brained keeper touches idea apart but couldn't be bothered.
I'm all for them. Just don't see any other way of doing it.
Those that want them scrapped I ask you this.....if you had a time machine and could go back to 1998 and if the footballing gods offered you a 2-0 win in normal time that day or the actual outcome what would you take?.
I'm pretty sure that used to happen (possibly to decide the European Cup Final?)
An oldie with a better memory than me may be able to confirm.
Of course, it was felt to be a totally inadequate and anticlimactic way to decide a big game.
Hence penalties!
I don't like that idea either. The count would be on the scoreboard and updated with each touch.
I'm glad someone else said this before me because (as expected) I'm getting quite a lot of criticism for my idea.
Some people say that penalty shoot-outs test mental toughness, stamina, etc which is a major component in football, but they test those qualities as individuals not as a team. The test is also heavily biased towards goalkeepers.
I only suggested the 'goalkeeper touches' idea because it's a new idea. Frankly I'm quite happy with some of the old ideas (such as the US method described above) but unfortunately no-one is willing to give them a try (even in a crap competition like the J. Paint Trophy).
To test the whole team we could try the one goalkeeper, one defender and two attackers idea. This done five times each would mean that every outfield player has to play the role of attacker once each. OK, so only five defenders and one goalie get involved but it's a vast improvement on what we do now. It's a team game and the whole team should be made to decide the match.
Lastly, for anyone arguing that penalties are good because they are dramatic, I fail to see how the above idea could not be even more dramatic and exciting.
I'd take the 2-0 win. One thing I DON'T like about the way we won in 1998 was the fact we did it on penalties.
But have you seen any other way tried out? That's the whole point of my argument. Just because you've never seen any other way done of doing something, doesn't mean that there isn't a better way.
At least you know where you are with penalties - one kick and it goes in or it doesn't. With the one on one running in thing - or maybe two running in with one defender - it just makes it all a bit too complicated. Who keeps the time? What happens if the ball is going in when times up, what happens if the defender/keeper brings the attacker down - do they get a penalty??? - endless arguments.
Penalty - one shot - one outcome - everyone knows the rules - simple.