Sepp wants to get rid of penalty shoot outs after seeing chelski lift the european cup (in munich lol),He seems to have forgotten how well it has hurt engish teams in the past They had it right with golden goals imo , What do you guys think and how would you settle drawn game in a cup competition?
From the genius who not only wanted to scrap offsides but also considered making the goals bigger. Don't be alarmed his 'creative' thinking isn't over yet, as he wants an alternative to penalties, http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18205513 . All I'd like is a FIFA chief who hasn't got a lot of screws loose and isn't concerned about where their marbles are !! DISCUSS !!
Sorry Norway just posted a new thread on the same thing. Delete mine and we'll use this one !! The guy is mad he also wanted to get rid of the offside rule and make goals bigger. Not to mention some very sexist comments about women's football. Penalties are fine, if the game is tied after extratime. The golden goal rule is also good in my opinion as it stops a stalemate extratime period where teams play for pens.
talk about great minds , seriously the guy is dangerous and imo has cost football a lot of money in the long run by putting the WC in Qatar! He has lost the plot a long time ago and has turned Fifa into a joke !
I must agree with Blatter on the matter of settling matches by penalty shoot-outs. Having watched (endured) Chelsea's staggering lack of ambition over 120 minutes in the "Champions" League Final, I turned channels before the shoot-out started. I have even walked out on a penalty shoot-out at the Vic in the League Cup. A penalty shoot-out has nothing to do with the game that preceded it and is a very debased way of settling matches. If Blatter or Beckenbauer can some up with a better way of settling matches, then more power to their elbows. Of course, in the old, pre-TV and fixture congestion, days there would have been a replay, then a second replay, then perhaps (like Watford - Newcastle in the FA Cup in the early 90s) a third replay. But such a method does not now suit the "instant gratification" mentality of the game (or the TV schedules). Of course we had the "golden goal" approach of the mid 90s (both Germany & France won Euro Championships by this method). But this was dropped on the grounds of "fairness" to both sides. Or we could look at totting up the statistics of a game (who had more possession, field position, corners, free-kicks etc.). Or instead of penalties, dribbling from the half-way line before shooting. Or starting a second tranche of extra time and gradually withdrawing one player from each side after every 5 minutes played, until a goal is scored. This is a question that has stumped better men than Messrs Blat & Beck. I do not have an answer or even a rational suggestion. Sorry - but penalties have to stay for the moment.
I must agree with Blatter on the matter of settling matches by penalty shoot-outs. Having watched (endured) Chelsea's staggering lack of ambition over 120 minutes in the "Champions" League Final, I turned channels before the shoot-out started. I have even walked out on a penalty shoot-out at the Vic in the League Cup. A penalty shoot-out has nothing to do with the game that preceded it and is a very debased way of settling matches. If Blatter or Beckenbauer can some up with a better way of settling matches, then more power to their elbows. Of course, in the old, pre-TV and fixture congestion, days there would have been a replay, then a second replay, then perhaps (like Watford - Newcastle in the FA Cup in the early 90s) a third replay. But such a method does not now suit the "instant gratification" mentality of the game (or the TV schedules). Of course we had the "golden goal" approach of the mid 90s (both Germany & France won Euro Championships by this method). But this was dropped on the grounds of "fairness" to both sides. Or we could look at totting up the statistics of a game (who had more possession, field position, corners, free-kicks etc.). Or instead of penalties, dribbling from the half-way line before shooting. Or starting a second tranche of extra time and gradually withdrawing one player from each side after every 5 minutes played, until a goal is scored. This is a question that has stumped better men than Messrs Blat & Beck. I do not have an answer or even a rational suggestion. Sorry - but penalties have to stay for the moment.
PENALTIES MUST STAY. Sorry, but I can't see any alternative without taking the game into Blatter madness !!
The MLS had a good alternative to penalty shootouts a decade or so ago (start at the half way line, ten seconds to score a goal), and I can't understand for the life of me why it didn't catch on.
OK NNW - that seems the only plausable alternative, would you want it though? Pens are fine as the are, in my humble opinion...
It's amazing he waited until now before being vocal about changing this. I guess his face was as strained as Platini's when he handed over the winning medals to Chelsea. I'm no fan of chelsea and their methods were not particularly attractive but had bayern won on penalties I wonder if sepp would be so for finding an alternative.
Was it not Sepp Blatter who was championing penalty kicks to decide matched in the World Cup finals group stages that had finished all square? Now his toy has backfired he doesn't like it. The man has no penis.
Penalties are preferable to what was previously used in the European Championships - a toss of a coin - but there must be better alternatives. One suggestion has been to continue extra time but to remove players from each side as time passes. For example every 5 minutes both sides lose two players and the first side to score wins.
I am ashamed and very worried to say that i am not surprised by this comment. He has made a lot of similar comments and seems to be the German Jeremy Clarkson in that most everyone hates him, he makes lots of offensive comments and often fails to think before he opens his mouth. I seriously think that penalties is the best way to go. Imo golden goal has a lot of potential to go wrong, if the officials get a decision like a free kick wrong and the goal is scored from that. Also, the game could have been 1-0 for 93mins, but in the 4th min of injury time the other team equalises. They then have the momentum on their side, and therefore have an advantage if its GG. I think silver goal would be better, who ever leads at HT in ET or at FT in ET wins.
Like others, I don't really see a plausible alternative than to end a game in such a way! Reducing players is one, but then think both teams would just go even more defensive as there is too much to lose by going attacking (like they did when Golden Goal was introduced). I like the idea of a shoot out, with the attacking player starting from the halfway line, and having a one on one with the keeper - like we used to do with the local schools at half time! Maybe have a shoot out before the match, then one side knows that a draw won't be good enough - but then the 'winner' of the shoot-out will just play defensive Not sure how you can make other teams go more attacking. Maybe go on shots on target - but then you will just get teams shooting from everywhere (halfway line) just to get the stat up! I think penalties, or something similar, is the only way to go at the moment!
