Jump to content

Tennis-Style Penalty Shoot-outs


HibeeJibee

Recommended Posts

It's claimed whoever goes first win more than half the time: maybe 10% more.

While the order copies tennis they aren't saying you'll need to win by 2; plus reverts to usual after 10 (so 'Team A' takes #8, #9 & #11).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GingerSaint said:

Why is this fairer and what is wrong with the current protocol?

If you go first (ie. win the coin toss), statistically speaking you have a higher chance of winning.

 

22 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said:

It's claimed whoever goes first win more than half the time: maybe 10% more.

While the order copies tennis they aren't saying you'll need to win by 2; plus reverts to usual after 10 (so 'Team A' takes #8, #9 & #11).

See, now that would make it a pointless change, imo. If they made it consistent throughout, with winning by 2 factored in, then that's a fair way of doing things as it gives a totally equal shot. By changing to the alternating system, but only for the first part of penalties, seems totally pointless if you're reverting back to the current system for sudden death. Then you're back in the exact same situation where one team is always going first and has the slight advantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No "win by 2" is also dubious. In tennis you've to win by 2 and reach a threshold (7 points).

Could see it messing with some people's heads. 'Team A' go first, but miss the opening pen... then both teams keep scoring... yet 'Team A' find themself 4-2 down and face a must-score with 2 of 5 left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, HibeeJibee said:

No "win by 2" is also dubious. In tennis you've to win by 2 and reach a threshold (7 points).
 

Not just dubious, but pointless.

The "win by 2" in tennis is to guarantee at least one break of serve. The only remotely analogous thing in football would be to add saves/misses to the tallies. To win by two would then require the winning team to have made at least one save (or the losing team to have had at least one miss). 

Which would be ridiculous. So retaining the current wining criteria should suffice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/03/2017 at 23:55, HibeeJibee said:

No "win by 2" is also dubious. In tennis you've to win by 2 and reach a threshold (7 points).

Could see it messing with some people's heads. 'Team A' go first, but miss the opening pen... then both teams keep scoring... yet 'Team A' find themself 4-2 down and face a must-score with 2 of 5 left.

I don't see the issue with just copying Tennis. There is no need to go back to ABAB after ten penalties. And actually doing so makes the whole change pointless since surely the point of the change is to switch what team kicks first with the game on the line.

If penalties were counted like in tennis, eg a save counts as a point,  then the game is first to 6 and win by two clear points

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rationale for the potential change appears to be that the team who goes first wins slightly more often. 

Is it just me, or is it not extraordinarily likely that there's going to be a statistical variation between who wins most often out of the team who goes first, and the team who goes second? There's almost no way it's going to split 50/50.

Are there similar stats for a home/away split? At neutral venues, are there correlations between winning and shooting at your own 'end'? What about if a team has had ten men during the match and thus expended more energy?

It seems to me there'll always be statistical splits. Penalty shootouts aren't 50/50, as much as people try to pretend they are. Maybe each team should take five penalties simultaneously at each end of an echo chamber. And even then I'm willing to bet there would be a statistical variation between the side who took the penalties at the bottom end of the park, vs the top. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 second countdown, run with the ball from the centre spot, player v goalie. Far more entertaining and more skill involved than a penalty shoot out. Problem solved.

thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Rugster said:

10 second countdown, run with the ball from the centre spot, player v goalie. Far more entertaining and more skill involved than a penalty shoot out. Problem solved.

thank you.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rationale for the potential change appears to be that the team who goes first wins slightly more often. 
Is it just me, or is it not extraordinarily likely that there's going to be a statistical variation between who wins most often out of the team who goes first, and the team who goes second? There's almost no way it's going to split 50/50.
Are there similar stats for a home/away split? At neutral venues, are there correlations between winning and shooting at your own 'end'? What about if a team has had ten men during the match and thus expended more energy?
It seems to me there'll always be statistical splits. Penalty shootouts aren't 50/50, as much as people try to pretend they are. Maybe each team should take five penalties simultaneously at each end of an echo chamber. And even then I'm willing to bet there would be a statistical variation between the side who took the penalties at the bottom end of the park, vs the top. 

Absolutely spot on. Never understand why fifa waste time trying to fix stuff that isn't broken whilst ignoring a myriad other things which are far more important
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let them both take at the same time, one at each end.  Job done.

Seriously though, not really seeing what would be demonstrably better about this.  It'd be different, but not necessarily better.  Wouldn't we end up finding that the team that goes first (or second possibly) ends up winning more often than not with this new system?  Seems a pretty weak argument to make just to change things when it's likely that whatever you do there'll be some side favoured.

I just want American style hockey penalties instead.  Much more fun.

EDIT: Just realised that I'm pretty much saying exactly what Paco said but slightly worse.  Och well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/03/2017 at 09:33, Paco said:

The rationale for the potential change appears to be that the team who goes first wins slightly more often. 

Is it just me, or is it not extraordinarily likely that there's going to be a statistical variation between who wins most often out of the team who goes first, and the team who goes second? There's almost no way it's going to split 50/50.

Are there similar stats for a home/away split? At neutral venues, are there correlations between winning and shooting at your own 'end'? What about if a team has had ten men during the match and thus expended more energy?

It seems to me there'll always be statistical splits. Penalty shootouts aren't 50/50, as much as people try to pretend they are. Maybe each team should take five penalties simultaneously at each end of an echo chamber. And even then I'm willing to bet there would be a statistical variation between the side who took the penalties at the bottom end of the park, vs the top. 


The split is apparently 60:40 according to this paper
http://www.soccermetrics.net/paper-discussions/penalty-kick-shootout-paper-apesteguia-palacios-huerta

Which isn't "slightly". Statistically a 2% swing would be significant

They also found that it has far more impact on Penalties missed than it does on Penalties saved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...