FIFA new Law..

Chairmen of F.I.F.A. want to bring back the Extra Time rule and throw away the Golden Goal/sudden death rule..

Dont worry if it is to go through, it wont take effect this year, maybe in 2004..

If you ask me, its wierd, They should keep it as when sudden death hits the field, all the players start playing..

Keep it..

good call Blittzz (blows-off), extra time just gets every1 playin too defensive!

4 sum reason golden goal gets the teams abit more hungry to attack bcos there is much greater reward ie. winning!

Agreeable

More action no doubt, action to score..

I agree its stupid. I would like to see a player from each team go off every so often rather than end up in a penalty shootout. If this happened every 5 minutes you would never need penalty shootouts and it would be a fairer way to decide the winner.

Keep the golden goal rule with extra time. I'm one of the few who actually quite enjoy watching penaltly-shootouts. It's decisive, dramatic and it puts individuals under pressure and separates the men from the boys!

good call justahalf, that way they can't defend or play for the draw they have to try & score.

Golden goal is too much of a gamble. Teams in Golden Goal are more likely to play with 8 men behind the ball and hit on the break. It doesn't make them any more attacking.

Penalty shootouts are wonderful psychological challenges

ahhh...someone else who enjoys p-shootouts!

i have to agree with u fence smasher

True, but having extra time makes them play defensive to keep the draw, or not go as hard as they would in Sudden death, with sudden death they thrive to get the goal so they can end and all go home,

Ya keep the golden goal rule..

i say stay with the golden goal.

Pen. Shootouts are like Aces in tennis, exciting but doesnt make what the game is about.

But if the teams were so even in the first place, and can't sort it out after extra time, then go the P-S! Define the individuals! Find a winner! I'm sure teams don't play for a penalty shoot-out when its golden goal time. SO you have to sort it out somehow.

Exactly what I was going to say deco. It is a very arbitrary way of deciding a result that has almost nothing to do with skill in playing soccer. Why not have a competition for most accurate corner, or longest goal kick, or best tackles. You might as well toss a coin really. Sure its dramatic, but there should be more to deciding a winner of a game of soccer than that.

Scoring a goal is what it's about at the end of the day. I can see from a purist's point of view of where you are coming from but I'm sure you'd agree that people don't want to watch a game that goes on and on. The Penalty shootout provides a definite cap on that time restriction. There is still skill involved where an individual has to take up the challenge of whether they can withstand the pressure and outsmart the keeper or themselves whilst contributing to a team effort. Sometimes there is luck involved, but that's part of the game.

Penalty shoot-outs are 1-on-1 when the game of soccer is all about 11-on-11.

11 individuals make up one team

Who all play at once unless it is penalty shoot-outs.

Yep. But when golden-goal time expires, they have a penalty shootout!

If its all about goals, then the system they used to use in the US was better. The player had the ball from near halfway and had to beat the keeper in a 1 on 1. That is a better test of skill than a penalty.

Stick with the Golden Goal rule !

Justahalf: Dude, thats Ice hockey, dnt recall it being used in Soccer..
: /

It did used to be. It may have been 20 or so years ago though.

LOL
damn, that would have been interesting to watch..

Golden goal is too unfair. It doesn't allow a team to fight back at all.
I'm glad it's gone.

As for the penalty shootout - this is sometimes the best part of the game. You may not remember much from 1994 but you remember Baggio over the bar!

Do I remember, that was a shock.. could'nt believe it...

I thought the law was golden goal in extra time, then penalty shoot-out? One golden goal is one final chance which could be luck induced. However with a penalty shootout, the team gets more than one chance to redeem themselves if they stuff up (during the PS that is).

And any one goal victory can't be luck induced. I don't buy that argument at all for not having golden goals. To make that argument valid all victories should be by two goals to count.

To conclude, have the golden goal rule in extended extra-time and when this time expires have a penalty shootout to end it. If two teams can't sort their shit out in the extra time, then penalty shootout is the fair option.

Why not reduce the numbers of players on the field and let playing soccer decide the winner, rather than some arbitrary decision on which skill is going to be tested to get the winning team.

Yeah perhaps but I think time restrictions is the issue.

Because why should we go the Yank way and actually change the number of players on the field whereas with the current situation 11 are consistently on?

Americans have already tried to fuck up soccer, don't give them anything more

justahalf: its just not football if there are going to be 5 or 6 players runing around, you'd have to reduce the size of the field as well otherwise one guy would make one break when every1 is just buggered from running around and then he'd score and again it has been reduced to the situation where a single person has won the game, not the team. (kinda)

but won it using more soccer skills required in a penalty shootout. vadinho - the penalty shootout is as american as you get, dramatic television to please the masses and avoid having to replay the game. The yanks were the first to do this type of thing and the rest of the world has followed.

lol...relax guys..

blitzz - yes, in the MSL (US soccer league) I think they've either just brought back in or just turfed the "one on one" soccer penalty kicks NHL style. They're actually reasonably popular, and of course have the added dimension that the goalie has a chance to put pressure on the attacker.

the MLS has gone back to traditional penalty shootouts.

traditional being...? spot kicks?

That would be my guess..

They're gettind rid of Golden Goal cause the big clubs are sick of losing to lucky goals. Ig you can't beat someone in 90 minutes don't bitch and moan about a lucky goal. If it is so lucky and gainst the run of play then the game shouldn't have made it to extra time. Penalties are an unsatisfying ending as they are about as reflective of the game as a coin toss usually. Although if the game is tied after 120 minutes then penalties it must be, the game can't go on forever.

The 1994 final was crap cause Romario choked, Baggio was injured, and no goals forced penalties. Although they could have played 240 minutes without a goal in that game. I think 1990 was worse though when Argentina won shoot out after shoot out to reach the final, which was decided by a penalty anyway.

The one thing that is good about shoot outs is that the goalie finally gets some credit, he has everything to gain and nothing to lose... Cause there's no excuse for missing a penalty.

mmmmmm...

i think if they are gonna bring back extra time without the golden goal they should have less players on the field...

not american style, but Australasia style - take a leaf from touch rugby's book...

touch uses a drop-off system whereby players begin to drop off each team one at a time at timed intervals.

dropping off one defender at a time every 2 minutes for 10 minutes of E.T would throw the game wide open...

but you purists out there may abhor(sp?) such suggestions

:p

The touch system is the best one as the best team is more likely to win under that scenario than any other.

If you drop players they're just gonna get more and more defensive with each player as each team knows that one mistake and that could be it. They would drop their attacking players first, although some teams might try to retain a couple of star attackers until it got down to the last few. Touch and soccer are different games so I doubt it would work, in touch you need to run a ball over a line not kick a ball into a goal.

The only thing I don't like about Golden Goal is that we dcan't have four goal flurries in Extra Time anymore. How about ten minutes each way extra time, ten minutes each way golden goal, and then shootouts. Or advantage extra time, 15 each way but a two goal lead golden goal. Where if you score once in extra time the game continues, but if you get a two goal lead game over... If extra time elapses and you're one goal ahead you win anyway.

In extra time teams often go defensive anyway. The other way of looking at it is that with only a few players on the pitch you have to attack as the team with the ball will find it much easier to find gaps. As the number of players decreases the chance of scoring a goal increases.

i would have thought that reducing the number of players on a soccer field would necessitate keeping the most skillful players on the field?

and also, making a rule and assuming that the teams will take the most negative or defensive stance is a bit wierd i think...