BBO Discussion Forums: The Penalty Shoot Out. Isn't There Another Way? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

The Penalty Shoot Out. Isn't There Another Way?

#1 User is offline   FelicityR 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 980
  • Joined: 2012-October-26
  • Gender:Female

Posted 2018-July-04, 01:53

Being a woman I'm not a great football fan but I sat down with my husband last night and was completely absorbed in the England vs. Colombia game. Well done England! However, my husband is not totally convinced that a penalty shoot out is the best way to end a football match that ends in a draw after extra time.

We discussed this for a time after the game, and I thought my husband's suggestion - I would! - would be a better way to end the match, although I do realise that a penalty shoot out makes for a lot of excitement.

His suggestion was:

1. After extra time is finished, both managers have to remove five players from the field. If a team has had a player sent off that would make for a six against five game, and an element of fair play during the match would be acknowledged..

2. The game would then go to sudden death, and the next goal scored would be winner. He said that 'a sudden death goal' has been tried before with full teams, but with six (or less due to red cards) players a side it would be easier to obtain a quick result..

3. The managers would be allowed to introduce any players not used on the substitutes' bench for this period, so fresh players are available.

4. A coin would be flipped for the teams to decide which end they would play at during this period. The ball would be thrown in by the fourth official (over his head) at the halfway line with his back to players, and the game will recommence. (Or alternatively - as I suggested - it starts again at the halfway line with two players of each side allowed in the centre circle about a yard apart from the ball, and the whistle is blown to restart the game.)


Ok, I acknowledge we are amateur watchers of this game of football - I believe it is called 'soccer' in North America - but both of us think that a penalty shoot out is a sometimes cruel, perhaps slightly unfair way of ending a football match, especially one as high ranking as the World Cup.

If England had lost that penalty shoot out....maybe this post would have been more valid, especially - as I saw it - some of the Colombian players were unsporting picking up six yellow cards against England's two.

Do you too think a penalty shoot out is the right way to end such a high profile game? Thanks for your replies in advance.
0

#2 User is online   sfi 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,576
  • Joined: 2009-May-18
  • Location:Oz

Posted 2018-July-04, 03:41

The match has to end at some point, and penalties seem a reasonable way to do it. Whatever you choose is basically going to be a 50-50 proposition if they haven't sorted it out before then. I'm not crazy about your husband's alternative, since it really becomes a different game with different skills rather than a subset of what has gone before.

I've always thought the old US format of the running penalties was worthy of more consideration. Basically it was a one-on-one where the outfield player starts well away from the goal and can dribble. It seems like it includes more facets of the game while still having the same timeframe as the penalty shootout. It never got much of a look-in since it was an American innovation though.

BTW, the sudden death goal (it was called golden goal) concept was a good thought that didn't work in practice. Rather than teams playing more aggressively to try and score, they actually played more conservatively to avoid conceding. There was also briefly the "silver goal", where a team would win if they were up at halftime in extra time. It looks like that introduced in 2003 for the European champions league and was dropped about 9 months later.
0

#3 User is offline   LBengtsson 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 974
  • Joined: 2017-August-10
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2018-July-04, 04:49

Sweden will win in game over England on Saturday. No penalty shoots needed. That is right way ;)
0

#4 User is offline   The_Badger 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,125
  • Joined: 2013-January-25
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England
  • Interests:Bridge, Chess, Film, Literature, Herbal Medicine, Nutrition

Posted 2018-July-04, 05:23

View PostLBengtsson, on 2018-July-04, 04:49, said:

Sweden will win in game over England on Saturday. No penalty shoots needed. That is right way ;)


In your dreams...England are far too creative for the Swedes. That game against Colombia and the penalty shootout lifted our spirits immensely. I have high hopes of England in the final now. We have played good football so far and we have a young team with nothing to lose.

As for the fairness of the penalty shootout as the OP questioned, well I personally don't agree with your husband's suggestion. As sfi indicated, there have various other methods tried to resolve a football game that has ended in stalemate. The only thing that I would add that I would increase the number of penalty shooters to seven, as with just five it is invariably just one player who is made the scapegoat for the loss of a match due to penalties. As a football fan, I think a penalty shootout is a brilliant climax to a match, and it really supercharges the emotions of the players and the fans. And as other football fans will know, England have lost several until last night's triumph so as an Englishman I should be biased against penalty shootouts.
0

#5 User is offline   JanisW 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 129
  • Joined: 2017-September-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 2018-July-04, 06:58

The proposed form of deciding a game is actually not unknown in sports. In fact it is used in Icehockey. Russia went on to beat Germany in the olympic final playing 4 vs 4 (actually 4-3 because of a 2min suspension) compared to 5-5(4).

The idea has some merit, but if it ever was to become relevant, it would have to replace OT and not start only after OT is finished. Also I think 6 vs 6 is a bit too much, more reasonable would be 8-8 or 9-9. Note that this could go on forever, therefore you would have to force a decission at some point. If you really wanted to avoid penalties you would need a tiebraker, like less red/yellow cards received.

Another option (f.e. used in chess) is to force one side to win. If all else was tied, the World Championship in chess can possibly be decided in a game where White has to win, but added to the first move advantage gets to play with 5min vs 4min for black.

Translating that into Football, would mean something like, playing 10 vs 9 in a 30min OT (or other numbers in case of any red cards suffered) and the team that had to remove a player wins in case of a tie after OT.

regards
JW
0

#6 User is offline   Tramticket 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,070
  • Joined: 2009-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent (Near London)

Posted 2018-July-04, 07:52

This is an old idea. Disgraced ex-FIFA president Sepp Blatter wanted to get rid of penalties and various ideas were proposed (see e.g. here). The idea of a 1 on 1 timed shoot-out from 35 yards was trialled in North American Football (and I mean FOOTBALL NOT Gridiron).

All of these suggestions were even worse than the penalty shootout and Sepp Blatter was of course barking mad (see e.g. here).
0

#7 User is offline   Al_U_Card 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,080
  • Joined: 2005-May-16
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2018-July-04, 19:17

To end a tie, the goalies take a free kick from their own end (starting at the center line) toward an empty opponent's goal. If both goalies "score" then they re-kick from a greater distance until one makes it and the other doesn't. Only fair, as the goalers get scored on and it's their "fault" so they can get even.
The Grand Design, reflected in the face of Chaos...it's a fluke!
0

#8 User is offline   Aberlour10 

  • Vugrapholic
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,018
  • Joined: 2004-January-06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:At the Rhine River km 772,1

Posted 2018-July-10, 14:45

I vote for the Golden Goal in the overtine. It would reduce the number of penalty shootings and make ihe play more spectacular for the kibbers
Preempts are Aberlour's best bridge friends
0

#9 User is offline   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,899
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2018-July-10, 15:00

I'd prefer to see something slightly more difficult than a penalty where the presumption is not that you really ought to score.

For example, 5 kicks taken by different players from the back of the D, where the D meets the 18 yard line on each side, and say 5 yards wider than that on each side.
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users