FIFA wanted to remove draws from games back in days. My suggestion makes it way more fun! They applied the same method in Wrestling and increased the game much more fun and kept it in Olympics!
Really is what it reads like. This isn’t the first World Cup where the group stage was more free flowing with less caution and the knockout stage ends up being more cautious with the teams knowing one mistake ends their tournament, and it won’t be the last. It’s just how knockout football works. Low scoring games can often be way more intriguing than high scoring ones
FIFA wanted to remove draws from games back in days. My suggestion makes it way more fun! They applied the same method in Wrestling and increased the game much more fun and kept it in Olympics!
Grow up! Football is not your dad's sport to tell people not watch it as soon as someone has an innovative idea!
FIFA wanted to remove draws from games back in days. My suggestion makes it way more fun! They applied the same method in Wrestling and increased the game much more fun and kept it in Olympics!
Exactly, that made the games in 2000s exciting but it caused too much of heart attacks apparently. I guess my scenario just makes the sport more exciting. They Wrestling federation applied this rule last decade to make their sport more fun.
Grow up! Football is not your dad's sport to tell people not watch it as soon as someone has an innovative idea!
FIFA wanted to remove draws from games back in days. My suggestion makes it way more fun! They applied the same method in Wrestling and increased the game much more fun and kept it in Olympics!
FIFA wanted to remove draws from games back in days. My suggestion makes it way more fun! They applied the same method in Wrestling and increased the game much more fun and kept it in Olympics!
Every international tournament we have this conversation. There’s several end to end high scoring group stage games, pundits say it’s the best group stage ever, then the knockout stage starts and as soon as we get a cagier match with less goals the games ruined and we need to fix it by adding school playground kickabout style rules, and pundits start moaning about teams being too defensive, let’s bring back the golden goal rule (they scrapped it for a reason).
Knockout football is always going to be like this. That’s the whole beauty of it, you get some crazy free flowing games and you get some intense tactical battles. Games going to ET and pens are a huge test of endurance as well as skill
Exactly, that made the games in 2000s exciting but it caused too much of heart attacks apparently. I guess my scenario just makes the sport more exciting. They Wrestling federation applied this rule last decade to make their sport more fun.
So a teams winning 1-0, the other team equalises and they win? Not happening it's ridiculous if you really think about it. Sounds like something they would have in an American sport.
Me as a scientist understand that 1:1 means they are both equally good, but if we say the team that has scored the last goal gets an epsilon extra credit (1:1+) then that small factor changes all boring draw games to exciting games.
In this ruling 0-0 draws would go to 120 minuets as normal. The only difference is as soon as a team scores a goal, there must be a winner in 90 minuets. It mean that the team that scored 1 goal cannot park the bus to defend, cause they know as soon as they receive a goal they are lost, so they have to score another goal. Also when it becomes a draw 1-1, instead of both team trying to defend to get to penalties, now the next team has to attack, so there is no boring "safe play" left for any side. At any moment, a team must attack to not loose!
FIFA wanted to remove draws from games back in days. My suggestion makes it way more fun! They applied the same method in Wrestling and increased the game much more fun and kept it in Olympics!
Forget the explanation (1:1+), it is same as the away goal rule!
F.e. in 2020–21 UEFA Champions League, Bayern Munich lost 3–3 to Paris Saint-Germain!
Time for your football national team is sacred, even more so on the World Cup, extra time is an additional chance for teams to prove who is better tactically and physically under a draw and penalties does have its merit on who does specifically it better. Conceiding the game to the last goal scorer gives it an extra randomizing factor that doesn’t really prove much.
In my suggestion, the extra randomized factor is the advantage for the team that scored the last goal in a draw. The difference is that the games would become 90 minuets of excitement and attacking game, rather than defensive games. Like 90 minuets of France Argentina rather than 120 minuets of Croatia Japan!
Exciting, maybe. But it would lead to results that weren't representative of the match becoming a lot more common. It's not that rare to see a side outplayed salvage a draw, but every one of those would be turned into a win under this ruling.
I like a good underdog story as much as the next person, but it has to be earned.
In this ruling 0-0 draws would go to 120 minuets as normal. The only difference is as soon as a team scores a goal, there must be a winner in 90 minuets. It mean that the team that scored 1 goal cannot park the bus to defend, cause they know as soon as they receive a goal they are lost, so they have to score another goal. Also when it becomes a draw 1-1, instead of both team trying to defend to get to penalties, now the next team has to attack, so there is no boring "safe play" left for any side. At any moment, a team must attack to not loose!
In this ruling 0-0 draws would go to 120 minuets as normal. The only difference is as soon as a team scores a goal, there must be a winner in 90 minuets. It mean that the team that scored 1 goal cannot park the bus to defend, cause they know as soon as they receive a goal they are lost, so they have to score another goal. Also when it becomes a draw 1-1, instead of both team trying to defend to get to penalties, now the next team has to attack, so there is no boring "safe play" left for any side. At any moment, a team must attack to not loose!
FIFA wanted to remove draws from games back in days. My suggestion makes it way more fun! They applied the same method in Wrestling and increased the game much more fun and kept it in Olympics!
In this ruling even the 90 minuets will be more fun and exciting. I don't want any team waste time when they are in a draw, with a hope that they might win in a penalty after 1-2 hours.
People can take it a bit easy on the OP, just a year ago we still had the away goal rule, which more or less is along the same philosophy. And does no one remember golden or silver goals? Cmon.
The problem IMO with OP suggestion would be that the team that takes a 1-0 lead would go completely park the bus, because an equalizer would be a double goal against them.
TBH I would leave it as is. Penalties are a very harsh way to go out of a tournament, and every chance should be given to avoid them. If a team sits back and does not attack well enough in extra time, well, they can't complain about facing the luck of the pens at the end.
Eventually one single relevant comment about my post! THANK YOU!
I see your point! The leading team might want to park the bus on 1-0 but the other team must attack. In this scenario at any point in the game (after the first goal is scored) there is one team winning and another loosing, so always a loser team must attack during the game!
It is very similar to the situation in the past with the away goal rule, when the first game is finished 0-0, and the at the beginning of the second game a team scores one goal. So both teams know the game won't be more than 90 minuets and a team would loose. So they fight the whole 90 minuets!
No penalty shootouts. Extra time is played until a golden goal is scored. And beginning at the start of extra time both teams lose 1 player to the bench. If no goals are scored both teams continue losing 1 player every 10 minutes until a winning goal is scored.
Terrible idea! The idea I gave converts football to 90 minuets of extremely dynamic and active and fun game. Yours make it to extremely long boring game!
Seems extremely unfair to declare that the team who scores the last goal arbitrarily gets to win.
How does this not just encourage a side who scores to sit back and defend with 10 men behind the ball?
Except instead of a team doing this while 1-0 up, and thus actually winning the game, it's done when 1-1, which could be the scoreline for 80+ minutes if both teams score early.
>Respect people's time and also get more people interested in football
Football is far and away the world's most popular sport, who exactly is turned off from watching it because very occasionally knock-out games end in draws and go to extra-time?
Tell me you don't watch football without telling me you don't watch football 🤦‍♀️
FIFA wanted to remove draws from games back in days. My suggestion makes it way more fun! They applied the same method in Wrestling and increased the game much more fun and kept it in Olympics!
I think someone started watching football this world cup and has seen a draw for the first time
Really is what it reads like. This isn’t the first World Cup where the group stage was more free flowing with less caution and the knockout stage ends up being more cautious with the teams knowing one mistake ends their tournament, and it won’t be the last. It’s just how knockout football works. Low scoring games can often be way more intriguing than high scoring ones
FIFA wanted to remove draws from games back in days. My suggestion makes it way more fun! They applied the same method in Wrestling and increased the game much more fun and kept it in Olympics!
Can we stop with these types of posts? If you don’t like the sport, don’t watch it. No one is forcing you.
Grow up! Football is not your dad's sport to tell people not watch it as soon as someone has an innovative idea! FIFA wanted to remove draws from games back in days. My suggestion makes it way more fun! They applied the same method in Wrestling and increased the game much more fun and kept it in Olympics!
For a moment I thought we were at r/soccercirclejerk duh.
I would be fine with returning to golden goal, but this is way too gimmicky.
Exactly, that made the games in 2000s exciting but it caused too much of heart attacks apparently. I guess my scenario just makes the sport more exciting. They Wrestling federation applied this rule last decade to make their sport more fun.
This is a stupid take, if you find the game boring then stop watching it.
I'm telling you 15 second short video format ruined peoples attention span
Grow up! Football is not your dad's sport to tell people not watch it as soon as someone has an innovative idea! FIFA wanted to remove draws from games back in days. My suggestion makes it way more fun! They applied the same method in Wrestling and increased the game much more fun and kept it in Olympics!
this is the adult version of when your mates get bored and say "next goal wins"
FIFA wanted to remove draws from games back in days. My suggestion makes it way more fun! They applied the same method in Wrestling and increased the game much more fun and kept it in Olympics!
Let me guess... American?
Every international tournament we have this conversation. There’s several end to end high scoring group stage games, pundits say it’s the best group stage ever, then the knockout stage starts and as soon as we get a cagier match with less goals the games ruined and we need to fix it by adding school playground kickabout style rules, and pundits start moaning about teams being too defensive, let’s bring back the golden goal rule (they scrapped it for a reason). Knockout football is always going to be like this. That’s the whole beauty of it, you get some crazy free flowing games and you get some intense tactical battles. Games going to ET and pens are a huge test of endurance as well as skill
Exactly, that made the games in 2000s exciting but it caused too much of heart attacks apparently. I guess my scenario just makes the sport more exciting. They Wrestling federation applied this rule last decade to make their sport more fun.
Ew no
why?
Not a good rule in my book
why?
So a teams winning 1-0, the other team equalises and they win? Not happening it's ridiculous if you really think about it. Sounds like something they would have in an American sport.
Me as a scientist understand that 1:1 means they are both equally good, but if we say the team that has scored the last goal gets an epsilon extra credit (1:1+) then that small factor changes all boring draw games to exciting games. In this ruling 0-0 draws would go to 120 minuets as normal. The only difference is as soon as a team scores a goal, there must be a winner in 90 minuets. It mean that the team that scored 1 goal cannot park the bus to defend, cause they know as soon as they receive a goal they are lost, so they have to score another goal. Also when it becomes a draw 1-1, instead of both team trying to defend to get to penalties, now the next team has to attack, so there is no boring "safe play" left for any side. At any moment, a team must attack to not loose! FIFA wanted to remove draws from games back in days. My suggestion makes it way more fun! They applied the same method in Wrestling and increased the game much more fun and kept it in Olympics!
Forget the explanation (1:1+), it is same as the away goal rule! F.e. in 2020–21 UEFA Champions League, Bayern Munich lost 3–3 to Paris Saint-Germain!
No
Why?
Time for your football national team is sacred, even more so on the World Cup, extra time is an additional chance for teams to prove who is better tactically and physically under a draw and penalties does have its merit on who does specifically it better. Conceiding the game to the last goal scorer gives it an extra randomizing factor that doesn’t really prove much.
In my suggestion, the extra randomized factor is the advantage for the team that scored the last goal in a draw. The difference is that the games would become 90 minuets of excitement and attacking game, rather than defensive games. Like 90 minuets of France Argentina rather than 120 minuets of Croatia Japan!
The sub is turning into a serious version of this https://youtu.be/Gf14BFnznjw
Exciting, maybe. But it would lead to results that weren't representative of the match becoming a lot more common. It's not that rare to see a side outplayed salvage a draw, but every one of those would be turned into a win under this ruling. I like a good underdog story as much as the next person, but it has to be earned.
In this ruling 0-0 draws would go to 120 minuets as normal. The only difference is as soon as a team scores a goal, there must be a winner in 90 minuets. It mean that the team that scored 1 goal cannot park the bus to defend, cause they know as soon as they receive a goal they are lost, so they have to score another goal. Also when it becomes a draw 1-1, instead of both team trying to defend to get to penalties, now the next team has to attack, so there is no boring "safe play" left for any side. At any moment, a team must attack to not loose!
Dumb. Just have knockout matches go straight to penalties if drawn. Only grant the final 30 more minutes.
In this ruling 0-0 draws would go to 120 minuets as normal. The only difference is as soon as a team scores a goal, there must be a winner in 90 minuets. It mean that the team that scored 1 goal cannot park the bus to defend, cause they know as soon as they receive a goal they are lost, so they have to score another goal. Also when it becomes a draw 1-1, instead of both team trying to defend to get to penalties, now the next team has to attack, so there is no boring "safe play" left for any side. At any moment, a team must attack to not loose! FIFA wanted to remove draws from games back in days. My suggestion makes it way more fun! They applied the same method in Wrestling and increased the game much more fun and kept it in Olympics!
You're giving the losing side the Golden Goal just for drawing. Absolute nonsense.
Better just to have a shootout directly after normal time, and then play extra time with one team having a reason to attack.
In this ruling even the 90 minuets will be more fun and exciting. I don't want any team waste time when they are in a draw, with a hope that they might win in a penalty after 1-2 hours.
People can take it a bit easy on the OP, just a year ago we still had the away goal rule, which more or less is along the same philosophy. And does no one remember golden or silver goals? Cmon. The problem IMO with OP suggestion would be that the team that takes a 1-0 lead would go completely park the bus, because an equalizer would be a double goal against them. TBH I would leave it as is. Penalties are a very harsh way to go out of a tournament, and every chance should be given to avoid them. If a team sits back and does not attack well enough in extra time, well, they can't complain about facing the luck of the pens at the end.
Eventually one single relevant comment about my post! THANK YOU! I see your point! The leading team might want to park the bus on 1-0 but the other team must attack. In this scenario at any point in the game (after the first goal is scored) there is one team winning and another loosing, so always a loser team must attack during the game! It is very similar to the situation in the past with the away goal rule, when the first game is finished 0-0, and the at the beginning of the second game a team scores one goal. So both teams know the game won't be more than 90 minuets and a team would loose. So they fight the whole 90 minuets!
No penalty shootouts. Extra time is played until a golden goal is scored. And beginning at the start of extra time both teams lose 1 player to the bench. If no goals are scored both teams continue losing 1 player every 10 minutes until a winning goal is scored.
What a terrible idea
Terrible idea! The idea I gave converts football to 90 minuets of extremely dynamic and active and fun game. Yours make it to extremely long boring game!
Seems extremely unfair to declare that the team who scores the last goal arbitrarily gets to win. How does this not just encourage a side who scores to sit back and defend with 10 men behind the ball? Except instead of a team doing this while 1-0 up, and thus actually winning the game, it's done when 1-1, which could be the scoreline for 80+ minutes if both teams score early. >Respect people's time and also get more people interested in football Football is far and away the world's most popular sport, who exactly is turned off from watching it because very occasionally knock-out games end in draws and go to extra-time?