England - The best in the world already!

[NicFrenchy]

As tough and ungrateful as the Penalty shoutouts can be, they are among the fairest way to end a game Quickly.

Allowing the players to play until one score is not going to help things.... :if they were not able to score after 120 mn, chances are they won't score for another 100mn resulting in the game becoming one Boring Brawl to watch.... drop in TV attendance and Loss of $$$$$ (which is what Football is about nowadays).

[Guess]

.........Penalty shoutouts can be, they are among the fairest way to end a game Quickly.........

What are you saying, stop extra time altogether. That might be a good idea. Penalty shoot outs with just five attempts must the the most unfair method and ranks in a list of options directly above the toss of a coin.

Direct free kicks would at least involve a degree of skill in a much higher proportion to luck.

In any best of n attempts in any sport the less you have the more the chance of the inferior player/side has of winning. Five is just not enough.

One idea without much great thought is using eleven spot kicks maybe not from the regular penalty spot but further out. A team without a full team on the pitch at the final whistle would have to forfeit one penalty per player off. That would be fairer without radical change.

Special crash course classes for Rooney and Beckham over a period of six months would all that would be required to explain the changes.

[NicFrenchy]

One idea without much great thought is using eleven spot kicks maybe not from the regular penalty spot but further out. A team without a full team on the pitch at the final whistle would have to forfeit one penalty per player off. That would be fairer without radical change.

Interesting idea..... I like it... but then you have to make it difficult for the Goalie.. : 11 (or so) players in Position (outside the Box) wherever they want, and they start to shoot in no particular order and without the Goalie knowing who will shoot... as soon as the ball crosses the Line (inside or outside the Goal) or the goalie touches it, then the other player can shoot...
The Goalies would go Bananas

[Jaime]

I agree with Pete (aka prcsscct). TEAMS work years to get to this point, & THEY play for the championship. Then it comes down to one person (the goalie). I say just flip a coin; either that or keep playing until someone scores a goal.

But games also turn on moments of individual brilliance and even luck over 90 minutes. In fact, the brilliance of individual performances is often cited as the difference between teams winning and losing. The penalty shoot out is simply an extension of this notion, taking it to its logical conclusion.

Don't forget, we did have the Golden Goal concept, which was even more controversial and was ultimately abandoned.

Using things like fouls conceded, corners won etc. as someone else posted, in order to determine the outcome simply puts things back in the realm of the referee's judgement call and would be just as controversial a way to conclude a game.

[Guess]

Don't forget, we did have the Golden Goal concept, which was even more controversial and was ultimately abandoned.

Using things like fouls conceded, corners won etc. as someone else posted, in order to determine the outcome simply puts things back in the realm of the referee's judgement call and would be just as controversial a way to conclude a game.

There was also the Silver Goal. I am not sure of the rationale behind their abandonment however it only saloves the problem if someone scores. I believe in most cases in this world cup there were no goals score in extra time.

As for the second sugestion. It does not need to be in the hands of the referee. It could be done by a remote panel with access to technology.

Don't forget that in many sports that is the only method used to decide a winner.

[Jaime]

Post duplicated below for some reason.

[Jaime]

It does not need to be in the hands of the referee. It could be done by a remote panel with access to technology.

Don't forget that in many sports that is the only method used to decide a winner.

Hmmmm... why not go the whole hog, take the ball away, add some music and an ice rink and call it ice dancing? Sorry, not convinced. Penalties does at least rely on the skill of the players to a greater extent, however heartbreaking it is for the losers. It makes great TV too. Just look at all the discussion it has generated here. I also don't remember any complaints about penalties when England actually won a penalty shoot out against Spain in Bore-o 96 and I was living in England at that time.

[HansMartin]

Jamie wrote:

But games also turn on moments of individual brilliance and even luck over 90 minutes. In fact, the brilliance of individual performances is often cited as the difference between teams winning and losing. The penalty shoot out is simply an extension of this notion, taking it to its logical conclusion.

But it is still a BORING way to end such an important game!!

[Jaime]

But it is still a BORING way to end such an important game!!

Now that is where we have to disagree - excruciating it may be but boring it isn't, as the TV ratings have demonstrated down the years. It is high sporting drama that generates discussion and argument for years afterwards. That is not the hallmark of a boring event.

[Big Boy]

Well, maybe not quite the best, but after playing so well in the World Cup, England have moved up to 5th place in the World Rankings.

http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/ ... eid=118178

[Guess]

Well, maybe not quite the best, but after playing so well in the World Cup, England have moved up to 5th place in the World Rankings.

http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/ ... eid=118178

Looks a bit more true to life than the rankings that came out just before the world cup. I would put France ahead of Argentia though and reckon order should be Spain, England, Netherlands below that with Portugal down alongside Thailand.