Jump to content

Extra Time is shite


Recommended Posts

Vast majority of games I see that go to extra time go to penalties without a goal or clear cut chance and is a borefest. Teams just play far too defensive. Either scrap it and go straight to pens or change it up a bit. The golden goal was quite good but I guess it would mean teams would still be uber defensive to not risk losing. They should try reducing the amount of players on the pitch in extra time perhaps making teams play a player less. So down to 10 men in first half then 9 men in the second half of ET and open play up a bit more. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vast majority of games I see that go to extra time go to penalties without a goal or clear cut chance and is a borefest. Teams just play far too defensive. Either scrap it and go straight to pens or change it up a bit. The golden goal was quite good but I guess it would mean teams would still be uber defensive to not risk losing. They should try reducing the amount of players on the pitch in extra time perhaps making teams play a player less. So down to 10 men in first half then 9 men in the second half of ET and open play up a bit more. 

 

Shite idea.

 

What they should do is let all of the subs play in extra time making it 22(?) a side and next goal is the winner. Utter carnage and entertaining as f**k.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vast majority of games I see that go to extra time go to penalties without a goal or clear cut chance and is a borefest. Teams just play far too defensive. Either scrap it and go straight to pens or change it up a bit. The golden goal was quite good but I guess it would mean teams would still be uber defensive to not risk losing. They should try reducing the amount of players on the pitch in extra time perhaps making teams play a player less. So down to 10 men in first half then 9 men in the second half of ET and open play up a bit more.

The golden goal and its brief successor, the silver goal, sounded like good ideas, but were counter intuitive. Instead of encouraging attacking play to seal victory, the height of the stakes created a terror of losing that led to more defensive play.

I agree though that extra time in most cases, just seems to be a stalling exercise before penalties. The idea of reducing numbers on the field for it has been touted before. I like the sound of it, but I'm not sure how it would pan out in practice.

I'd also like the penalties to be replaced by shots from the eighteen yard line. Scoring would therefore be notable in such shoot out, as opposed to missing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
Straight to penalties after 90 minutes.

I like the idea of going straight to pens after 90mins but then playing extra time after that.

Basically one team knows they have to win in extra time as they lost the shootout. The other team know that a draw is good enough. It means you'd have a 30 minute period where one team is always needing to score. It also takes away some of the lottery of penalties as you still have the chance to win using more conventional methods. And for any poor c**t that missed they have the ultimate chance to make amends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 21/8/2016 at 20:03, pandarilla said:

I like the idea of going straight to pens after 90mins but then playing extra time after that.

Basically one team knows they have to win in extra time as they lost the shootout. The other team know that a draw is good enough. It means you'd have a 30 minute period where one team is always needing to score. It also takes away some of the lottery of penalties as you still have the chance to win using more conventional methods. And for any poor c**t that missed they have the ultimate chance to make amends.

Like this idea. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/21/2016 at 20:03, pandarilla said:

I like the idea of going straight to pens after 90mins but then playing extra time after that.

Basically one team knows they have to win in extra time as they lost the shootout. The other team know that a draw is good enough. It means you'd have a 30 minute period where one team is always needing to score. It also takes away some of the lottery of penalties as you still have the chance to win using more conventional methods. And for any poor c**t that missed they have the ultimate chance to make amends.

+1. And it gives the players a bit more of a break after playing another 45 minutes of football. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree extra time is shite. I have stood on the terraces a few years back watching my local team SRFC on a freezing night. 90 minutes level then extra time, in the last minute the away team missed a sitter which resulted in booing from the home fans because it meant penalties we just wanted to get home and out of the freezing conditions, but the fans stayed and endured penalties and the away team won. No grumbling from the home fans just a swift exit to get out of the freezing conditions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 5 weeks later...

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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