| adriansfc |
| (member) |
| 28/04/2008 12:48 |
Away goals
|
Am I the only person to think this rule should be removed?
FIFA gave up on the ridiculous golden and silver goal rules because rather than add excitement as planned, it increased fear, leading to defensive play and very few examples of these decisive goals they craved.
How is away goals different? There are no extra rewards for it in the group stage either. So frequently we just see the home team afraid to really attack as they normally would at home for fear of conceding the all important away goal. How is that more exciting? It becomes more tactical but always more defensive, rather than seeing the elite of European football trying to get through by outscoring their opponents.
Take this ridiculous rule away and immediately you'll have less fear, more creative and attacking play, more goals, and probably more draws requiring extra time and penalties.
Is it really fair that when games go to extra time currently, the away team has 30 minutes longer to score an away goal purely because of the order the ties were played in? This rule favours teams that can defend their way through and sneak an away goal. It does not favour football.
| thrall |
| (member) |
| 28/04/2008 14:34 |
Re: Away goals
|
I totally agree with you, in fact i thought about the same thing a couple of weeks ago. Away goal rule simply push teams to defend, attack cautiously. It`s been discussed very often in the past: how to make the game more entertaining? How to reward teams that play good football ? Away-goal rule is one of the rules that prevent good football. I mean for ex i am an A team and i beat B team 1-0 , i lose 2-1 at B`s home and i qualify. What`s the difference? Scoring 1 goal away is soooo hard? I qualified because i scored an away goal. Maybe that goal was from a spot-kick in a game that only tried to defend. Is this fair? Is this good football?
I think away-goal should be removed and if the aggregate is equal, extra time shall be played without new Golden , Silver goal rules. ( With the silver goal , golden goal system we wouldn`t have seen Bayern through in The Uefa CUP as they conceeded 2 goals in 1st part in the extra time already. But they managed to score 2 more in the second extra time , and so qualified. )
| Rogorn |
| (member) |
| 28/04/2008 21:42 |
|
Re: Away goals
|
Without the away goals rule you would have more ties going into extra time and penalties (it happens a lot in South America, where they don't have it), which is the ultimate thing nobody wants to see in football. Yes, penalty shoot-outs are exciting, but everyone agrees (let's say almost everyone, just in case) that they are not proper football, and if there are ways of sorting the tie out without them, I'm for them. The golden and silver goals were just an additional way of trying to reduce even further the number of penalty shoot-outs. I wasn't unhappy with them. I thought they were fair, if only because of the simple fact that it was the same rule for both teams. They both know the stakes and it is up to them how they react.
Besides, doing away with this rule won't remove the fear factor or the shut-up-shop-and-defend-the-slenderest-of-leads factor. If you remove the rule and one team goes 1-0 ahead, the temptations will be exactly the same as if you got a 0-0 draw at home and are currently 1-1 away: it is a small lead, and it's up to you what you do with it.
| badgerboy |
| (member) |
| 29/04/2008 10:15 |
|
Re: Away goals
|
I like the away goals rule. They use it now in South America too by the way.
Is it fair? Well the rules are the same for both teams at the start of the two legs & the team playing away in the first leg knows that they might be disadvantaged in the second leg if they don't score in the first one. And this should surely encourage them to attack a bit - rather than playing for a 0-0?
For me it also adds to the thrill of the knockout competition. If it's 1-0 to Team A in the first leg and then 2-0 to Team B in the second leg with 20 minutes left it's somehow more exciting that one goal for Team A will turn the game completely - rather than just meaning extra-time.
And I think it's down to the mentality of coaches & players, which is mostly defensive these days, whether the above situation leads to Team B choosing to carry on attacking - to make it 3-0 & be sure of qualifying or to sit back & defend because they are afraid of conceding.
I do have a few doubts about the away goals rule after extra time. Perhaps if both teams score in extra time then the game should still go to penalties. But then it has been pointed out to me before that - although the away team has the extra half an hour to score an away goal then the home team also has the advantage of - well - being at home. For the penalties too.