I'm in the U.S. I know the rules of soccer from when I was a kid and follow the World Cup, but no, I'm not a huge fan. Here's my problem. I can accept that pre-final matches end in shootouts (though it would be better if they didn't), but what value is there in a shootout for the final match? You've just whittled a team sport played over several weeks down to 5 guys versus a goaltender to decide who's the best in the world. The team no longer matters.
In the Super Bowl, a tie gets decided in overtime, no matter how long. In baseball, extra innings. In hockey playoffs, extra periods. In most Grand Slam tennis matches, you don't have a tiebreaker for the final set, except for the lame U.S. Open fifth set. At least in tennis, it's always been a 1-on-1 event, so a tiebreaker does not take anyone out of the match.
Does anyone here agree that a final soccer match (including the U.S. NCAA finals) should not be decided in a shootout?
2006-07-14
02:58:18
·
6 answers
·
asked by
Stuck in the Middle Ages
4