Since it would appear that FIFA may be "persuadable" in certain circumstances, what rule change would you like to bring in? Personally, I would like to bring in the new technology for goal-line stuff and I would like to see a 3 match automatic ban if the tv replay shows a player to be diving. If we reach a consensus, we could have a whip-round and see if we could get enough dosh to organise it.
Hated golden goal...made everyone, especially the fans, nervous as hell. They hoped it would increase attacking play but it actually made teams defensive. It didn't improve the game so they abandoned it. Some dives are obvious, but often you can watch a replay twenty times and still never be sure. Football is too fast for technology to play a major role. I wouldn't want extra stoppages introduced, but if goal line technology could be almost instantaneous that would be the one exception. I would vote for an instant yellow card for any player who starts waving a pretend card around or who rolls more than once when 'injured'. Also no team should be allowed to wear blue..it's offensive
Who could you possibly be referring to? Please consider the difference between a rival in love and someone you just cannot stand. My rival for the love of a woman could be my best mate. Our local rivals are Brighton and Reading and no doubt they will give us a run for our money. We Saints fans just don't like Pompey and we confuse dislike with rivalry. I repeat we have ambition they have none. Take a serious look at their predicament and our circumstances. It is no competition. No competition no rivalry. All you are left with is the fact that in the main we don't like them very much. So don't call it rivalry.
I have to say that until Reading got their promotions I had never wished them anything but well. But once they were on par with us or above, I felt it was against the rules of nature. So yes, there is some rivalry there.
What? And replace it with a netballing skill?? Penalties is a football skill. I get annoyed that an away goal in extra time counts as an away goal. This is wrong, as the away team in the second leg gets and extra half hour to score an away goal in a game that has obviously been clsoe if it's gone to extra time.
1) any club that goes into administration loses its league status. That would sort out club finances pretty quickly. 2) Anybody who has been involved in a club that went into administration (chairman, manager in previous 12 months, directors) banned from any further involvement in football. 3) Clubs fined points for making a loss (depending on division, eg, one point per million lost in premier league, one point per 100,000 lost in fourth division) 4) Maximum ticket price imposed on all clubs so fans don't end up picking up the cost of three previous points (once again tailored to division) 5) All clubs to be 51% owned by fans. Works in Germany. 6) Any player who acts as if they are injured (eg rolling around holding leg) has to leave the field for the rest of the game or be booked, because if you do that you are either pretty badly injured or you are cheating. I know its six not one, but whatever, sue me.
But it is also a game of luck. The best side wont always win a penalty shoot-out, and it can be quite a negative tactic from a weaker side in extra-time to simply play for penalties (as they believe they have a better chance of winnning that, than beating the opposition in the actual match). It is also something which is very individualistic, where as football is actually a team game. There are also some quite brilliant extra-times, and to suddenly cut it after 30 minutes and take the game to penalties is always a bit unfortunate, especially for the neutral. Just let them both continue, and find a winning goal between them.
Wages shouldn't be more than 50% of turnover in all of the leagues. Points deductions for teams that flaunt this. Teams that do business responsibly are the ones that deserve success.
Football matches on Saturday afternoons, 3.00 pm kick off so more supporters can travel and 5.00pm becomes exciting again. Thanks, Sky, you ruined the people's game, turning it from sport for the masses into a hobby for the rich few and a business.
Ah, but then the you could argue that less skillful "footballing" teams would focus on fitness, and then defend for 2 hours and wait til the "better" team tires before using superior fitness to win. I still don't think a penalty shoot out is wrong. For every exciting extra tiome you can name, I'll come up with a dull boring one. It's a bit like saying drop the play-offs and make the team finishing 3rd promoted. Play offs are exciting and nerve wracking if involved. Everyone knows the rules before the start of a season or game. Play-offs and extra time are at the end if you don't win enough games or score more goals before extra time is up. I do agree it is a bit of luck... but that is why the game is so wonderful. Bobby Charlton used to say when asked how he scored so many long range screamers, how he did it; he replied that he aimed roughly at the goaly and hoped he got lucky!!
Penalty shoot outs are not about luck. That is the attitude that is partly responsible for England always losing on Penalties. If they are about luck, why have the Germans only ever lost one penalty shoot out? They are about nerve. A professional footballer should never miss a penalty, because if you place the ball in the top corner the keeper physically cannot save it (unless he moves off his line early). Nerve and composure have always been a part of football (eg when you make that last ditch tackle or go through one on one). Plus, as Winston Churchill said, penalties are the worst way of settling a football match, except for all those other ways which have been tried from time to time.
Widescummer Wondered if you had read the book "Why England lose" which has a really interesting chapter about penalty taking and the laws of probablity. Although it does deal with mathematics, it is an entertaining debate and the author's conclusions are that a penalty taker will score most penalties when he goes 2/3rds to his "natural" side and 1/3rd to the other. It is not a given that peanlties should not be missed. Interestingly, teams like Chelsea have employed statistics to improve the chances of improving the probability of scoring and the debate is much more interesting and less clear cut than you have suggested. Wonder whether Le Tiss had ever read this book? I would like to see managers held more accountable for unacceptable comments and referees given more backing. I don't agree with goal line technology as I think this would take away one of the most interesting points of discussion / debate in football.
Le Tiss scored penalties because he was an excellent placer of the ball and, as he said, the goal doesn't move. By putting the ball in one of the corners he beat keepers every time (-1).
I don't know why there isn't so much analysis of penalty conversion rate compared to time played in the game. A penalty 2 minutes in is surely much more likely to be scored than one by a tired player after 88 minutes...or 120 minutes in the penalty shootout.
Hit the ball hard enough to either side and the keeper won't save it even if he does go the right way. Trying to outthink the keeper or showboating makes you look pretty silly when the keeper is one step ahead.
I like the penalties the have in the US. Start at the halfway line, dribble it up and beat the keeper 1 on 1.
