http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18205513 wonder if he would be saying that if bayern had of won
Only now that we win does the whole idea of abolishing penalties become a talking point. Funny how our ONLY ever cup win on penalties and it comes up for debate. It was FIFA who first proposed the idea of penalties in the first place and implemented them into the game. If it wasn't fair and a so called "tragedy" then why introduce them at all? Also, how is an absolute non-entity like Sepp Blatter president of FIFA? Was he ever a player? A manager? A coach? Did he ever have any affiliation at all to football? Was he even ever a fan of the game? A complete joke that this man could become more or less President to the sport. And every single change he has made to the game has been a harmful one. There has never been a more appropriate time for the use of the phrase "anti-football" than when mentioning Sepp Blatter as he is the exact thing personified. To put it in layman's terms, he is a corrupt, old, ugly bastard.
They didn't get the two scenarios they wanted. 1) Barca v Real final 2) Bayern winning it in Munich They didn't mind sending us to Moscow when half the fans didn't have visas and our captain slipped on a plastic pitch selected by them so why now? Why just because we get our hands on the trophy theyve spent 8 years trying to stop us getting. If/when we go out of the CL next year City and United have my full support as nothing would piss them off more than an All English Final in England
Imagine an all English final at Wembley. It would absolutely destroy them. And on the FA's 150th anniversary (along with Wembley's 90th). You know I still have hope that we will win it next year two. Champions League might turn out to be like a bus for us. You wait so long for one and then two come along together.
Couldnt write it could you? I dont recall penalties every being referred to as a tragedy in italia 90, euro 96, or france 98, or portugal 2004, or germany 2006, or in any of the other 3.5 million games where penalties have decided the outcome. Now, on the one occasion in a blue moon when the english team beats the germans in penalties, a german (Beckanbaur) is asked to look into changing the 'tragedy.' Correct me if im wrong, but I believe the real tragedies in football are when players punch the ball into the net and its allowed to stand. or when players control the ball with their hand and square it for an opponent to finish. or when players get a football kicked at their leg, roll over holding their face and get their opponent sent off... what do you think about those, seppy boy? Penalties are fine. They are intense. And they are a test of metal, steel, and of course a bit of luck at the end of 120 minutes which couldnt seperate two teams. Deal with the real tragedies fifa, penalties are just fine.
If we got to the semi I'd fancy our chances. United got to two finals in a row so you never know but we'd be screwed without Drogba. All depends on the luck of the draw, we couldn't have been unluckier with the draw this year, even the final was on the home turf of our opponents and we got no help from our own FA Same here. I wouldn't bat an eyelid
I'm sure if 'they' were really trying to stop you winning the CL 'they' would have succeeded. Penalty shoot-outs are an inherently bad thing as they lead to the match being decided by a small sub-set of footballing skill. The most corners, or the fewest fouls or yellow cards would lead to the more attacking side winning. Can't disagree that it is an odd time for this to be raised though - but any change isn't likely to benefit the Germans long run
Penalty shoot outs are a great thing. Can you imagine getting to the end of the 120 minutes and then a stato comes out and goes ok team A here is your world cup/champions league/fa cup etc because you won 4 corners to the othersides 3. Are you serious?!?!? Pens have great drama and are bloody great (and equally hard) to watch. It is a long way down the list of things Fifa should be worrying about. Goal line tech, diving, players missing finals over yellow cards etc are much more important issues to sort out.
If I want drama I can watch a play. Surely the point of a football match is to decide who is best at football. Not who is best at taking penalties. The way teams play would change if the number of fouls or corners mattered. It would make it less easy to defend so more likely for goals to be scored. I agree with your last point though.
Then you'd just have teams playing for corners especially in extra time. It'd become a farce. Essentially you have 120 minutes to work out who is best at football and pens is as good a system of any of settling it thereafter. If there was an alternative, I like the golden goal system with no time limit and perhaps have a player removed from each side every 5 minutes to guarantee a goal at some point. But personally, I have no probs with pens despite England and Chelsea's poor record.
Sorry but I totally disagree. The minute you start introducing stats in as a way of seperating teams in the minute that tactics change in knockout games. Teams will be 'playing' for corners, taking ridiculous pot shots to improve their 'shots on goal' figures, taking even more dives to get more opponents booked. Whether we like it or not, defending is part of football. It is a skill. You get luck to help you along the way in the same way attacking teams get deflected goals and own goals to help them. But ultimately defending is as big a part of the game as football as attacking. The only way to win a game of football outright has got to be scoring more goals than the opponent and that can never change, stats or no stats. Make an argument for it being fairer to replay the match by all means. Keep playing til somebody scores however long it takes, Or stick with penalties. Or any other idea that doesnt change the fundamental law of football - sticking it in the net wins games. I accept that the away goals rule is the anomaly, but even that is entirely dependent on goals as its only stat - and thats the way it should stay.
Can you imagine that? Stockport away to United in the FA Cup. Losing 2-0 in extra time. They score a very late goal in 115+ minutes and another in the final minute of stoppage time to make it 2-2. Their fans go absolutely wild, shirts come off and a few run on to the pitch. Then the final whistle goes and they are told "No sorry, you had 2 corners to United's 5. You're out."
Bloody bollocks! Penalties is the most fair way if the game is level after 120 minutes, fact. Blatter can **** himself.
There is one proposal which I heard the other day which sounded the most sensible of the lot. If the scores are level at the end of the 90 minutes there is a penalty shoot out. The winner of the penalty shoot-out then goes a goal up. After this there is extra time and all goals scored in extra time count for double, ensuring a winner in the extra 30 minutes. For example: 90 mins Team A 1-1 Team B Team A wins the penalty shoot-out and makes it 2-1 Extra time then begins Team B scores a goal in extra time and makes it 2-2 (now Team B are leading as extra time goals count for double) Team A scores a goal in extra time and makes it 3-2 (now Team A are leading) Team B scores a goal again in extra time to make it 3-3 (Team B are leading once again due to the extra time goal double rule) The match ends 3-3 and Team B wins due to the double goal rule. My only issue with that is who to attribute Team A's goal to for winning the penalty shoot-out as I do not like having a goal without a goalscorer to claim it. What could happen is that the official score could remain 1-1 with the team who won the shoot-out having the advantage of winning the match if no more goals are scored.
