• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Two soccer questions

What was the argument for going away from the format that permitted for the golden goal? I am entranced by overtime playoff hockey, and it seems like soccer could be the same way.
 
DeacinBama said:
What was the argument for going away from the format that permitted for the golden goal? I am entranced by overtime playoff hockey, and it seems like soccer could be the same way.
Click to expand...

sounds good in theory, but they tried it for about ten years or so and found that there was an abnormal amount of scoreless overtime periods and teams went too defensive to not give up a goal.
 
DeacinBama said:
What was the argument for going away from the format that permitted for the golden goal? I am entranced by overtime playoff hockey, and it seems like soccer could be the same way.
Click to expand...
Also, conditions. What if wind or blinding sun is an issue?
 
JDawg said:
sounds good in theory, but they tried it for about ten years or so and found that there was an abnormal amount of scoreless overtime periods and teams went too defensive to not give up a goal.
Click to expand...

I see. I guess this is a by-product of having penalty kicks serve as a "back stop". In hockey, they just keep playing, but that's not realistic in soccer without wholesale changes to the substitution rules

siff said:
Also, conditions. What if wind or blinding sun is an issue?
Click to expand...

Don't they flip a coin for kick-off, side of field, etc.? I mean, it wouldn't be unique in sports for a team to gain an advantage because of field conditions, no?
 
I always liked the Silver Goal rule myself, but I am in a big time minority on that one.


Silver goal means that if one team scores in the first ET that the other team has until the 105th minute to equalize or the match is over. Kind of like a delayed death that abruptly becomes sudden.
 
deacvision7 said:
I always liked the Silver Goal rule myself, but I am in a big time minority on that one.


Silver goal means that if one team scores in the first ET that the other team has until the 105th minute to equalize or the match is over. Kind of like a delayed death that abruptly becomes sudden.
Click to expand...

So similar to extra innings, college football overtime, and the new NFL overtime rules.
 
The way I view it... penalties are a necessary evil after 120 minutes, but trying to prevent them is a good thing.

However, Golden goal killed off good football, just destroyed it, even with France's Euro 2000 Final golden goal win -- people don't remember that both semi-finals went to ET as well. Italy/Netherlands in ET was worse than dour and France/Portugal wasn't much better, and ended on a GG...but by penalty with 3 minutes left of game anyway.


I always felt like Silver Goal still rewarded teams for attacking without making them terrified of the dire consequences of being caught on the break. Because, at worst, you still had the rest of that time to get the goal back.
 
DeacinBama said:
I see. I guess this is a by-product of having penalty kicks serve as a "back stop". In hockey, they just keep playing, but that's not realistic in soccer without wholesale changes to the substitution rules



Don't they flip a coin for kick-off, side of field, etc.? I mean, it wouldn't be unique in sports for a team to gain an advantage because of field conditions, no?
Click to expand...

They play two 15 minute halves in part to have both teams defend each goal. I mean, sure, conditions can change giving a team an advantage, but switch sides during 15 minute halves lessens that.
 
deacvision7 said:
The way I view it... penalties are a necessary evil after 120 minutes, but trying to prevent them is a good thing.

However, Golden goal killed off good football, just destroyed it, even with France's Euro 2000 Final golden goal win -- people don't remember that both semi-finals went to ET as well. Italy/Netherlands in ET was worse than dour and France/Portugal wasn't much better, and ended on a GG...but by penalty with 3 minutes left of game anyway.


I always felt like Silver Goal still rewarded teams for attacking without making them terrified of the dire consequences of being caught on the break. Because, at worst, you still had the rest of that time to get the goal back.
Click to expand...

Without the promise of penalties, wouldn't teams open up play more?
 
siff said:
So you'll like this, then...

Click to expand...


Hahaha! Those shootouts were something. I don't know what. But something.

Playoff hockey doesn't use those types of shootouts. OT forever
 
siff said:
So you'll like this, then...

Click to expand...


Meh. I'm not sure why you thought I'd like that considering there are no shootouts in playoff hockey. I understand the practicality of the shootout, especially - as I mentioned earlier - given the substitution rules in soccer.

Also, that high school soccer game had amazing production value.
 
SDeacz said:
Without the promise of penalties, wouldn't teams open up play more?
Click to expand...

Doubtful, if they think they are out-manned they are just going to try and sit and counter no matter what, IMO.
 
Hah, the one and only time I've ever read an ann coulter article and found myself shaking my head saying YES!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top