UEFA scrapping Away Goals rule

for extra TV/advertising/sponsorship revenue.

what are they changing

away goals count after 180 minutes but not 210?

silly rule change

logically flawed and will also lead to more penalty shootouts

much better for a team to progress on away goals than penalties

the head to head ttiebreaker in the group stages in mad too (leads to more dead rubbers in the final round of matches)

They won’t count all I think.

Silly rule, at least 20, if not 30, years out of date. May well suit English teams a bit more as never been good at sitting on slim leads as a rule. Now both teams have to try and win if all square and may as well attack in both legs equally.

you think it will lead to more attacking?

away teams will just bunker down for a 0-0 in the first leg, and try and and hold on for penalties in the second leg

"Now both teams have to try and win if all square"

the away team isn't going to try and win the first leg

and the away team in the second leg, if ahead or level, will just hold on for penalties

only the home side will attack in both legs

head to head tiebreakers, VAR and now this

After 90 minutes in and a all tied leg... swap the men goalies with the lady goalies


It would fit in with the woke and all inclusive agenda

I know you're joking but I don't think that would even be legal or safe

are there any contact sports where men and women compete against each other?

an Italian team tried to field a top female international in the 90s and it was stopped by FIFA

It's a bad idea and I can see it being reversed after a few years. You'll get teams level on aggregate after 150 mins playing for penalties and it'll make first legs even more boring too with away teams more incentivised to park the bus than to try to score. Bin the AGR during ET if it's considered unfair. Playing the  home leg first is an advantage as you have a better chance of getting ahead on aggregate and playing on the counter in the away leg where there's the AGR. Having it in ET as well is unfair and should be binned.

ET without the AGR is normally boring and getting rid of the rule will make the end of a lot of ties as boring as ET. Anything which increases the chances of ET should be avoided. History shows it's the most boring 30 mins of football there is and it'll be more like an hour in a lot of ties if the AGR is scrapped.

I've always been a bit against away goals (gambling sense that is) but nah I think its good

In the EFL they scrapped the away goals for the playoffs because it was an advantage for the team finishing 6th (Playing 3rd) and I was all for that because the team finishing 3rd should have no disadvantage when it comes to their 2 legged playoff. But this stuff is just getting ridiculous ffs, away goals add something to the game

But we're wasting our time voicing our opinions... To coin a Brian Clough phrase, "we talk about it for 15 minutes and then decide I was right" except this is a bunch of suits deciding to dictate the game from their office. Our opinions mean jack s*it.

Giuseppe

are there any contact sports where men and women compete against each other?


Yes, remember who won the Grand National?

not a contact sport

That's right Rachel punched a few blokes on her way through the field.

"it was an advantage for the team finishing 6th (Playing 3rd) "

how was it an advantage?

women also have an advantage in all equestrian events due to average lower body weight

What they should really do away with is extra-time.  We just accept it because it is "in with the bricks" and it is what we are used to but nowadays serves no purpose whatsoever.  Go straight to pens because it is long odds on the game is going there anyway.

they do this is South America

even single legged cup ties like the Copa Argentina

straight to pens after 90 minutes

I don't like away goals, for the simple reason that it's artificial. I'd also do away with ET, as it's just pointless, it's not entertaining if anything it's a drama killer, straight to pens, save 40 minutes plus of everyone's time.

Penalties are awful. As we saw the other night anyone can score them, may as well have a throw in comp if skill is not gonna matter.

Six a side extra time would be best IMO, first to 3 wins. Allow unlimited subs.

Also should do away with 2 legged ties anyway. If you finish lower in the group stage should not get a home leg.

agreed, anything is better than penalties

penalty shootouts aren't football, it's almost a different sport

Something has to be put in the game to take away the incentive of draws and endless penalty shootouts

Yes, Im all in favour of good defending but not just endless 'parking the bus'  just to get to the peno's

maybe taking a player off after every ten minute period ...  a reverse Royal Rumble if you will

Extra time was originally designed to avoid the dreaded replay.  Back in the sixties and early seventies it was not unknown for some European ties to need replays, sometimes two, and then incredibly, after all the stalemate, to decide the winner they tossed a coin.  This utter madness was stopped and we ended up with both - extra time and penalties - to ensure a result on the night.  Nothing intrinsically wrong with that thinking in an age where the fixture list is choc full and time is very precious.
In my view extra time needs abolished because it doesn't achieve any more than what follows it.
We have stats. coming out of our ears nowadays, about the detail of matches, and as it happens - in real time, so why not keep a running total, under observation, of shots on target, and give the result to the side who has tried most to score?!  That at least rewards football and enterprise and might even get rid of buses!

we should have more two legged ties in my opinion, not less, not least because it would help avoid penalty shootouts

more extra time too

maybe a third period of 15 minutes to avoid penalties if necessary

and champions league final would be better home and away two legged tie in my opinion

really sad to see CONMEBOL switch Libertadores final to one leg

No, two legged is often anti climactic. A one off final is a much more anticipated event.

Also two legged knockouts make the group  stage boring..... If you win 6 games you are no better off than a team that got through with 8pts.

So a lot of tumbleweed games in weeks 5 & 6.

If the teams were seeded 1-16 based on group points, with higher seed home in each knockout round, there would be no resting players by City, Bayern....and every game would matter

South Americans are even worse than UEFA/FIFA at organizing competitions.

Argentina has 2 titles I think, and the Brazilian system is an absolute farce.

There was a Copa America with a 3 legged final once!

Penalties adds to the drama of football, football would never be the same without it, 6 a side would be a farce

what's wrong with Brazil?

they have a pretty standard 20 team national championship

the state leagues are played at the start of the year before the national championship starts

they are treated like the FA Cup in England, top players are often rested

i don't like the apertura / clausura system, especially when there are also playoffs after the round robin

single leg ties mean more penalty shootouts / more matches decided by red cards or handballs

two legged ties are fairer

"So a lot of tumbleweed games in weeks 5 & 6."

one reason for this is head to head being the first tiebreaker instead of goal difference

every year you have dead rubbers due to this, when goal difference would mean teh group was still undecided

Penalties are not drama really, because the default assumption is they will be scored. (I suppose there is drama when one is missed, but you know eventually one will be).


It is the opposite of a goal from open plays as that is always unexpected (already up till 3 or 4 seconds before it goes in)

Penalty shootouts are just crap, as seen them all. Not much variation in how they are resolved.... most players score  one or two don't.

I can't see why settling a tie with a 6 a side football match is sillier than with a 6 a side penalty competion which only tests one of the most basic aspects of a complex game.

football results should be decided by 11 v 11 football matches

penalties are farcical

might as well have a goal kick competition, see who can kick further

even 6 v 6 would be better than penalties

If it ends in draw do count back of shots on target over the two legs

*seen one seen them all.

Penalties are just not aesthetically pleasing.

There is drama in that one team wins and one loses but a coin toss or a card game would be dramatic if deciding a country being eliminated from a tournament.

If 0-0 after 210 minutes of bore football, get 11 fans from each side of the stadium.... Next goal the winner.

if you are going to have one leg finals, like champions league or world cup, there should also be provision for a replay, especially for the world cup

play again three days later

Six a side would be very exciting IMO.

Any half decent pass would out someone in on goal.

Also, as the more skilful team would be more likely to win than in normal time, the underdogs would be less likely to park the bus in the 90 minutes.

you can't beat the tension and drama of penalty shootouts, of course someone is going to miss, but who and for which team, 6 a side is not football

I think replays of finals are an anti climax generally. Though were some good FA Cup ones back in the day.

The occasion is diminished somewhat though if it might not be decisive.

So a six a side game with passing, shooting, tackling, heading, free kicks, goal kicks, throw ins (and maybe even the odd penalty) is 'not football' but a six a side only taking penalties is ?

Not logical.

I think replays of finals are an anti climax generally

sure, but i am talking only as last resort, instead of penalties

and only for really important stuff like champions league or world cup

not FA Cup or league cup or coppa italia

nobody wants to watch 12 players on a pitch, that's not football

90 minutes plus an extra 30 is enough, penalties is the only option

The 30 minutes walking pace, zero chances extra time, is dreadful.

Six a side would be very exciting IMO.

Any half decent pass would out someone in on goal.

Also, as the more skilful team would be more likely to win than in normal time, the underdogs would be less likely to park the bus in the 90 minutes.


We're drifitng into the realms of fantasy and farce now...what's next blindfold the goalkeepers if it's 1-1 on 80 minutes?

You rarely get draws in american football, rugby and in basketball

So..... make it....

0.5 point for an offside goal
1 point for an onside goal,
2 pts for a goal from outside the box
and extra points for total possession, shots on target and corners won.

there's not going to be any satisfaction in winning a Champions League final with against 6 players, I don't think anyone is going to want to watch 6 v 6 in a major final, penalties is not perfect but I've never heard of a better solution, one they tried a few years ago was to have penalties, but run ups with the ball from the half way line, never caught on

just have a replay, will reduce number of penalty shootouts

Why is there satisfaction in winning on penalties?

I hate penalties even in normal time, as they are the most disproportionate thing in all sport.... Basically awarding a goal, often for situations where there was a 2% chance of a goal. And there is no excitement when it is scored, as it is so easy to score; the default assumption when a 0-0 game has a pen awarded is (before it is taken)that the score is now 1-0.

I would like to see 12 yard pens awarded only for stopping a probable goal. Other than that should take the kick from 20 yards ( which would make shootouts more interesting too, if we have to have them)

the handball rule is crazy

90% of those should not be penalties

this is why I dislike single leg ties, there is more chance of something like that deciding the tie

I hate penalties even in normal time, as they are the most disproportionate thing in all sport....


exactly right, and it's a point you virtually never hear made (dont get me started on handballs)

there would be no satisfaction in beating 6 selected players, 1 keeper, 2x defenders, 1x midfielder, 1x striker, who wants to watch that!

there's no perfect solution but the climax is in the winning penalty scored or saved a la Jerzy Dudek in 2005, of Grosso World cup 2006

can't count, 1x keeper, 2x defender, 2x mids, 1x forward

it'd be amateurish viewing

It would be great

Imagine a team with a corner in a six a side, hit the bar, other team have a 2 on one breakaway.....

what happens after 30 mins when it's level, take 1 player each off? this could go on forever

No, I think it wouldn't take long for first to three, less than it took the other night with the pens.

If there was any negativity we could penalize teams. Maybe a 'shot clock' like the NBA...

If a team didn't have a shot on target in 5 mins award a pen against them ( a 20 yard pen perhaps!)

this is complete americanised nonsense, I'm sure you're having a laugh

American sport does quite a few things better.

Certainly don't have anything as awful and skilless as a penalty shootout.

like pom poms and adverts every 3 minutes?

pens is the only way without making a mockery of the game, 6 a side ffs

I think the NHL has something like a penalty shoot out

they use it in regular season games too

no draws in NHL

SH, people will see you lost the argument when you first said 'six a side is not proper football' without first thinking whether penalties are. So now you have to pretend that 6 a side penalties more closely resembles an eleven a side football match than a six a side football match does.

Fatal logic error.

not sure where that's come from tober, not like you to be so forthright bordering aggressive.

it's not an argument it's a viewpoint, 6 a side is laughable, I also said penalties is not the perfect solution so not advocating them but stating there is no better alternative especially the laughable suggestion you've come up with, watching 5 outfield players running around for 30 minutes per team is schoolboy stuff.

Not really a fan, just means more games get decided on a coinflip aka a penalty shootout. Away goal rule actually encourages sides to go out and attack away from home too.

Sorry lol I was joking with the serious tone.

I do favour the 6 a side but I get what people think it's mad. I think if it happened it would be popular.

I used to love shootouts in the 1980s but have just grown tired of them over the decades and think it's time to move on.

fair enough

I'd say, up till about maybe the 1994 WC Final, or perhaps Euro 1996, teams really did try and win the game and hardly thought about penalties.

But since then there has been an attitude of just making sure to get to pens. Golden Goal made no difference, seemed to make it worse.