A lot of people are complaining about games being decided on penalty kicks. How about this?
At the end of regulation play, there are a series of 5 minute overtime periods. At the end of each overtime, each team must remove one player from the field. Any goal in overtime is a Golden Goal. This method would guarantee an eventual winner, be more in the spirit of the game, and would generally not take any longer than a full overtime plus penalty kicks that they have now.
2006-07-10 07:25:36 · 11 answers · asked by cmsb705 5 in Sports ➔ Football ➔ FIFA World Cup (TM)
It is a bad idea, just imagine after half an hour, each team would have go down to 5 players (assuming nobody was out at that time), imagine the agony of having to see 10 people (more like 8 people if you do not count the goal keepers) running around a big field with little tactics other than running with the ball. Football is also a game played in team, there would be hardly any game left if half of your team members are out (who to throw out is also going to be problematic), it is just two disfunctional team chasing the ball.
To counter propose, I will say the better choice is to add in the reserves each 5 minutes (or 10 minutes, actual time would need to be studied I suppose), in that way, there will be more actions, more fun and the reserve players are indeed have a role to play!
2006-07-10 07:45:27 · answer #1 · answered by elvis 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I see what you're saying. Still, keep the additional 15 minute halves. If nobody scores the winning goal, then add additional 10 minute overtime periods with a Golden Goal.
Or instead of the additional 10 minute overtime periods with a Golden Goal, how about alternating corner kicks? First to score off of one wins.
2006-07-10 07:35:46 · answer #2 · answered by El Teke 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It sounds like a good idea, but i still don't think it would work....whether you remove a player or not they could go into hours of overtime before someone actually won....even if it came down to one player from each team, it could still go on forever....some of the goalies are just awesome and when you have less people playing on the field the goalies will be able to see every move and be able to block so much easier than having all the players on the field.....its a good idea, but I just don't think it would work.
2006-07-10 07:31:55 · answer #3 · answered by 1981 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
how about this then:
the substitute TEAM plays for 15mins each extra half and then see who wins if no one scores just play another 15mins each half with golden goal it might take a while and i mean a while but at lest it's better than penlties because penleties are so nerve racking and people panick and it makes half of the players miss
2006-07-10 07:54:36 · answer #4 · answered by kirsty 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have a better idea.
Why don't they let the subs play the overtime(s), until one team scores.
2006-07-10 07:33:57 · answer #5 · answered by envi v 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"There was not cheating or diving in the world cup, the results would of been the same" - someone who didn't watch the WC carefully enough. France. The head ref did not even see the headbutting incident. The shady 4th official informed the main ref somehow...
2016-03-26 23:54:50 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, do not remove the players, that is a bad idea, just have it golden goal and five minute halfs.
2006-07-10 07:27:47 · answer #7 · answered by porky 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
different.. but it would be a lot better than loosing on penalties!
2006-07-10 07:35:05 · answer #8 · answered by englishbabe93 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
good idea but it will not work
2006-07-10 07:36:15 · answer #9 · answered by matt 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
actually it is thoughtfull but it would be different but it is surely better than the lottery penalties
donno wat fifa can do about it
2006-07-10 07:30:21 · answer #10 · answered by Sid 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋