Topic: Eliminate shootouts? (Read 1818 times)

2leftfeet · « **on:** February 21, 2007, 10:44:46 AM »

Fox Sports listed their top ten useless sports traditions. No. 7 is shootouts:

Soccer is a game of skill that tests endurance, finesse and teamwork, and shootouts are a cheap way to come to a decision. In games that need to crown a winner, the shoot-out system is used if added time hasn't settled the match. This is simply a system of chance. With such a wide net, goalkeepers have only two prayers to stop a penalty kick: guess the right direction or hope that the ball misses the net completely. Furthermore, the shoot-out format eliminates defensive play, passing and coaching — all of which are key elements of the game.

Solution: The first step is to remove the silver goal method and return to the golden goal system, which means the first team to score in overtime wins. Next, each team will remove two players from the field, creating more space and therefore more goal-scoring opportunities. Lastly, grant each team two substitutions; fresh players are likely to create an offensive spark.

Squash · « **Reply #1 on:** February 21, 2007, 10:50:07 AM »

I agree with the going back to golden goal. PK's are painful to end a game on.

yote19 · « **Reply #2 on:** February 21, 2007, 10:58:25 AM »

Trust me...I know this year :?

sockemgirlz · « **Reply #3 on:** February 21, 2007, 12:15:37 PM »

I agree on this too!!
Thanks for the info 2LeftFeet.... nice change of topic on the forum.

live for the game · « **Reply #4 on:** February 21, 2007, 12:49:54 PM »

Sorry but being an ex GK I loved it coming down to shootout, it was my time to shine.

Brian McBride · « **Reply #5 on:** February 21, 2007, 01:07:34 PM »

I too like the golden goal. But think about some of the matches that have been played where field position matters. Whether it is a Sun angle or wind. The field can create an advantage. So it really is fair to give both teams a shot at the same conditions. I know you can argue the Sun angle changes or the wind quits. But most coaches I know would take a field advantage over kickoff possession on the coin flip.
Besides, If the silver goal followed ba a shoot out is good enough for the World Cup, It is good enough fo me. BM

cheese · « **Reply #6 on:** February 21, 2007, 01:12:35 PM »

Have the CP's play the 2nd OT period if no one can score in the first.

Just see how bad the CP's want their kids to win.

yote19 · « **Reply #7 on:** February 21, 2007, 01:27:43 PM »

Cheese -- you must be running again or are you a free agent this time of year?

cheese · « **Reply #8 on:** February 21, 2007, 01:30:05 PM »

The only thing I'm running is AMUCK :roll:

hefe · « **Reply #9 on:** February 21, 2007, 01:35:27 PM »

Gotta love the golden goal great way to end it.

Refdad · « **Reply #10 on:** February 21, 2007, 01:44:20 PM »

Quote from: "hefe"

Gotta love the golden goal great way to end it.

Even if the ref calls a questionable foul resulting in a PK in the first golden goal period?

I too hate to see games decided by KFTPM. I agree it’s only a couple of steps above flipping a coin to decide a winner. As a player or a fan, it’s anti-climatic and leaves me feeling cheated after a hard fought game.

I’m not a fan of the golden goal either. As BM wrote, unless you get to switch ends, it’s not equitable play for both teams. But even with that method and reducing players, there’s still no guarantee that you’ll end up with a winner.

Given that this is a sport of endurance, I’d like to see important finals (World Cup) go for as long as the players can. Let’s see which team can play for 8, 10, 12 or more hours. Continue playing additional periods until there’s a winner. Reduce each side by 2 for each OT period beyond the 4 hours (until it’s 1v1). Last man standing wins.

Of course this is an impractical and unsafe solution for youth competition. And golden goal leaves open more opportunities for unfair field conditions (including the ref) to decide the game.

So, short of settling for co-champions, I can’t come up with anything better than KFTPM. For me, this is just going to remain a necessary evil of the sport.

hefe · « **Reply #11 on:** February 21, 2007, 02:06:10 PM »

Let em play tell someone scores. After 5 min or ten min over time switch ends and go again. That way no one can cry about the wind or sunshine etc. If a ref makes a bad call and it ends on that note part of the game. it would not be the first time basketball, hockey, football etc bad calls are part of the game. Seems to me that the game should be decided on the field play hard till someone scores not on pk's.

Homer · « **Reply #12 on:** February 21, 2007, 02:13:56 PM »

Great topic!

I absolutely hate games ending with PKs/shootouts, especially late in state cups. It's akin to settling a baseball game with a home run derby. It's a different sport entirely and, as was articulated previously, just above a coin toss. It's not like anyone thinks the winner of PKs is the best, most-deserving team.

I understand the world cup argument -- if it's good enough for them, who are we to use a different system. But I understood part of this is pure exhaustion. WC have limited subs and no re-entry, I thought, so playing lots of overtimes might be difficult.

I don't know what the answer is, but I have criteria in mind. In other sports, the best systems are those that: 1) require the as close to the same skills as the game they are trying to resolve; and 2) where both teams get an equal crack it. For example in football, NFL is good on 1 lousy on 2 because one team might not even get the ball so the coin toss often has too great a bearing on the outcome. College football, I think, has it right: both teams get an equal shot on offense on a shortened field and after 2 sessions they must go for a 2 point conversion to reduce the odss of a tie. Baseball plays until someone is ahead after both teams have equal chances. The NHL does shootouts in leass meaningful regular season games, but plays OT in golden goal until someone scores, even it it takes the equivalent of another 2 full games. i think that is pretty good.

Using the above criteria, I would think a good system for soccer would: 1) still play soccer vs another sport; 2) play until someone scores; 3) give both teams at least one chance at the same direction; and 4) if possible, does something to decrease the chances of the thing going on forever.

I feel stronger about the criteria and that others will come up with something better than I could, but if you forced me to invent a system:

I would then favor 2 10 minute silver goal periods, then as many 10 min golden goal periods as needed, switching ends. I would favor dropping 2 players (or other ideas) that would increase the chances of scoring begining with the 3rd OT because we have to face the reality that there is usually someone waiting to use the field so you can't have a 5 hour match.

Just my 2c

Refdad · « **Reply #13 on:** February 21, 2007, 02:39:50 PM »

Quote from: "Homer"

...
I would then favor 2 10 minute silver goal periods, then as many 10 min golden goal periods as needed, switching ends. I would favor dropping 2 players (or other ideas) that would increase the chances of scoring begining with the 3rd OT because we have to face the reality that there is usually someone waiting to use the field so you can't have a 5 hour match.
...

I like this!! I think it's a good compromise, better than Kicks, and I think it's workable for State Cup finals and semi's.

Write it up and send it to the WSYSA Board!!

Identity Crisis · « **Reply #14 on:** February 21, 2007, 03:07:32 PM »

Quote from: "Refdad"

Quote from: "Homer"
...
I would then favor 2 10 minute silver goal periods, then as many 10 min golden goal periods as needed, switching ends. I would favor dropping 2 players (or other ideas) that would increase the chances of scoring begining with the 3rd OT because we have to face the reality that there is usually someone waiting to use the field so you can't have a 5 hour match.
...

I like this!! I think it's a good compromise, better than Kicks, and I think it's workable for State Cup finals and semi's.

Write it up and send it to the WSYSA Board!!

That is great until you have a mid summer tourney with 95+ degree weather and a child is critically hurt from dehydration or heat stroke because they just played 100, 120, 140+ minutes of soccer......

I agree, I don’t care for KFTM, but in today’s society, when people sue for passing gas upwind, you must consider these things......

I don't know a solution, but I also don’t think sanctioning body is considering changing it, but I could be wrong!!!!

skagitcoach · « **Reply #15 on:** February 21, 2007, 03:15:54 PM »

As a coach, I've been on both ends of PK shootouts...my teams have won their share and lost their share on kicks from the mark.

While I in theory like the idea of playing until there's a winner, changing to such a system will alter match strategy significantly. For example, one of the things that frequently happens under the current system is that an inferior team can make the strategic decision to pack it in defensively and force a match to be decided by a shootout. Requiring a winner through the run of play would force the team that packs it in to attempt to score.

Some would say that's a good thing, but I kind of have mixed feelings when the rules to determine a winner are such that they impose strategy on the game. The current system -- overtimes followed by kicks from the mark -- still leaves strategic and tactical decisions to the coaches. But requiring teams to play until there is a winner potentially eliminates strategic decisions, especially in the case of a team that intentionally chooses to assume a defensive posture in order to force a shootout!

I agree with Brian McBride! If the system is good enough for FIFA, it's good enough for me.

lugnut · « **Reply #16 on:** February 21, 2007, 04:06:59 PM »

Quote from: "Squash"

I agree with the going back to golden goal. PK's are painful to end a game on.

Let's try this, which is modeled after college football: After 2 OTs with no resolution, Team A puts five players on the field, and team B also puts 5 players plus a keeper. Team A places the ball on one of the corners of the 18 yard box for a direct kick (or a corner kick or an indirect--I'm not too picky). Play continues until either a goal is scored by Team A, the ball goes OB or the ball is cleared by the defense (referree judgement). Then the teams switch roles with a new set of players, and Team B has a go at it. Best of 5 and then win by 2, just like PKs.

For added fun, every non-injured player has to play offense once and defense at least once, and no one can stay on the field for all 10 tries (unless the team has no subs).

Weird, yes, but it would be fun to watch!

hefe · « **Reply #17 on:** February 21, 2007, 04:39:14 PM »

Lets try this bring captains out to the middle and do rock, paper, scissors. :lol: :lol: Kids would love it

Brian McBride · « **Reply #18 on:** February 21, 2007, 04:42:57 PM »

Quote from: "hefe"

Lets try this bring captains out to the middle and do rock, paper, scissors. :lol: :lol: Kids would love it

Hefe, you just saw the new Bud Light R P S TV ad didn't you? :lol: :lol: :lol:

I like Lugnut's option. If you don't have a winner on the first round go to 5 on 3 defenders. BM

yote19 · « **Reply #19 on:** February 21, 2007, 05:14:56 PM »

Thats why i always make sure to let r rip downwind :shock:

hefe · « **Reply #20 on:** February 21, 2007, 06:08:26 PM »

"hefe"]Lets try this bring captains out to the middle and do rock, paper, scissors. :lol: :lol: Kids would love it

[/quote]

Hefe, you just saw the new Bud Light R P S TV ad didn't you? :lol: :lol: :lol:

No thats how we decide who is captain before games :lol: :lol: :lol:

PrideNJoy · « **Reply #21 on:** February 21, 2007, 07:26:05 PM »

I too like BM's take on this.

Short of following the FA Cups example (among others) of replaying the game if it's a draw (boy wouldn't that be a scheduling fiasco), it is what it is.

socrtaxi · « **Reply #22 on:** February 21, 2007, 09:19:28 PM »

Personaly I use to hate KFTM. but now after watching two goalie kids go through them several times, it has been enjoyable. ITs time for the goaile to shine. I do like the reduce the amount of players concept too though. But, if the weather is hot, snowy etc... that doesnt bode well. If you end with golden goal it isnt fair to the other team that has maybe the sunny or windy end etc. Soooo. go two full over times, then KFTM. Time to watch the goalies do their thing, since they usualy only get noticed when they dont get the save, now they will get noticed when they do! goooooo Goalies!! P.s. I have seen wins and losses from this situation. Five minutes after the game... its... "whats for dinner, or lunch"" man that was a fun game". Because its a game and they get over it much faster then us crazy parents :O) :shock:

Walt Disney · « **Reply #23 on:** February 21, 2007, 10:07:22 PM »

Eliminate overtime and go straight to shootout!!!!!!

For Keeps · « **Reply #24 on:** February 21, 2007, 10:09:12 PM »

"Shoot Out! Shoot Out! Shoot Out!" :lol: :lol: :lol:

Or...the golden goal...either way, it's good soccer and fun to watch!8)

Great post TLF!!! :mrgreen:

Black Knight · « **Reply #25 on:** February 22, 2007, 12:14:03 AM »

There are two things you need to look at, first the pro level and then the youth level. This is a rediculus idea to eliminate pk shootouts from the pro's becuase they are limited to only a few subs a game. In a normal game they are already running 8 plus miles so its just wrong to expect them to keep going for hours and hours. Plus it takes away from the game, if both teams are dead tired there touches will be garbage and make it an ugly game. Now to the youth level, once again these are kids expecting them to keep there concentration for hours isn't fair to the kids either. Plus its an exciting way to end a game, 90% of players LOVE pk shootouts becuase they rarely are involved in one and it is only in very serious situations. So if the kids love them, and they dont mind a game ending like that then why should the parents?

Washington-OregonPremierSoccer.Com Forum

Author Topic: Eliminate shootouts? (Read 1818 times)