About time it was reviewed to be honest. I've always thought it's been more of a negative thing than a positive one, in that teams either play for a 0-0 at home, hoping to get an away goal. Or the away team can suddenly be given an unassailable advantage if they score an away goal in the second leg. It can kill games when that happens. I'd much rather see penalties decide a tie if there is a draw after 2 legs. Thoughts ? https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/45413648
Pens are fun but a lottery but if you can't sort it after playing 2 games then fine, as long as it's not extra time and pens.
I'd still have ET and penalties if the aggregate score is the same, I'd just do away with the away goal rule. I think it kills too many 2nd leg ties.
Quite like away goals to be honest. Think it encourages the away side to not be so standoff-ish in games and can help create better viewing for fans. Without away goals, it could cause a side to just sit back for both games and then nick a win on pens. At least with away goals, it should in theory somewhat encourage a side to at least be attack minded in one of the legs - whether home or away - at least that's how I'd view it anyway. Suppose there's pros and cons to having it and not having it. I just personally don't have an issue with the rule.
Keep away goals, but they kick in (pun intended) after extra time only. Just gives more time to resolve it properly.
Always thought it was daft - meant that the home team in the first leg always was defensive. Just have penalties - the new extra time rule which allows an additional substitution means that the last 5 odd min of a game has become defensive as well to bring on a fresh player.
