Are penalty shoot-outs the best solution for ending a match? If not, what other solutions would you suggest?

Answer 1

Being English, I obviously don't like penalty shootouts, but not for the obvious reason.

Yes, we tend to lose more than our fair share of penalty shootouts, but more importantly, we tend to demonise the players who are "responsible" for missing the vital penalties.

This culpability for losing us the match on the basis of one kick seems very unfair to me, especially when only the chosen five probably have to take the penalties on behalf of the rest of the team.

And this is where the crux of my change to the system lies.

Why not have every member of the team, including the goalkeeper, take a penalty in the penalty shootout?

This way you have none of the problems of picking the five best penalty takers, you live or die as a team.

Also if either team has had a man sent off, they are a penalty taker down for the shoot out. This is the best way, in my opinion, of penalising unfair play. Genuine consequence for foul play.

Every player selected for the side that night would be responsible throughout the course of the match for the result.

What do you think of that then?

Answer 2

Penalties can't be the best solution. It gives a side who feel they have little chance playing football an incentive to play negatively and have a 50% chance of qualifying (if you believe penalties are a lottery rather than a real test of skill). I have read about the platinum goal where the first goal in normal time is worth 1 and a 1/2 goals but again this could put a team through who were just lucky to score first rather than who played the best football or who actually played attacking football.
I like the idea of reducing players from a team. Start with 10 men in extra time and reduce by 1 every 10 minutes. You could end up with 8 a side after 20 mins of extra time for the last ten minutes. Not only does this open up the pitch but it adds a bit to the skil lfor the manager, remove a defender, midfielder or attacker, especially when both managers will be doing the same thing at the same moment, a bit of second guessing may be required and we can all see who is going for it.
If at the end of 120mins we are still all level go to the American shootout system. Players run at the keeper from 35 metres or so and have 30 seconds to score. This is a truer test of skill of both the player and the keeper than penalties. Also this should be only utilising the players still on the pitch at the end of the game, best of five, so the managers will have had an incentive during extra time to keep players on that are capable of beating a keeper with skill as opposed to luck.
All sounds simple enough???

Answer 3

As a englishman I'm going to say no they are not the best solution to end a match.

The problem is though that the silver or golden goal doesn't really work because the teams seem to play negative football because they are scared of losing that goal and also when somebody does score its a bit of a anti-climax.

For shear entertainment the Penalty shoot-out is the best solution and for the supporter you seem to get all the emotions in that 10 minute phase.

Is it the best way to win a competition then the answer is no, but apart from replaying the game there really isn't another solution that is better than the penalty shootout.

In my own personal view if the game is still drawn after extra-time then there should be a replay, I feel in a lot of cases that teams go for a penalty shoot-out because its a lottery and the inferior team would have a chance to beat the better team and sometimes that is not what we want but hey Shoot-outs do make for great entertainment for everybody..

Answer 4

From a TV perspective maybe they are. Players can't run around for ever and TV companies have to provide reasonably accurate scheduling so you can't simply have a match that could go on for hours. They are often quite exciting but I always feel a bit of an anticlimax once it is all over. A bit of a disappointing end to what may have been a great match.

Extra time seems to be a good way to try and resolve it over 30 minutes but this also often leads to a draw and back to penalties. The Golden goal seems to have a lot of fans here but it is such an abrupt end to a game I am really not sure I like it that much. The catastrophc consequences of conceeding lead to dreary, overly defensive tactics with both sides preferring penalties to the risks of conceding a certain loser. I think that everyone wants to see attacking football and this is often played by the losing team so with the golden goal you also deny the fans an opportunity to watch their team fight to get the goal back.

I would like to see extra time played for a maximum of 30 minutes without breaks but when either team scored the remaining time would be adjusted to 10 minutes. If the losing team failed to score during this period the game ends, if they did score the time would again be reset to 10 minutes. If the winning team go 2 goals up the game ends and they win.

It doesn't get rid of penalties but do you think it might reduce the number of times they are needed. At the same time it may provide for more attacking football which the Golden goal rules seem to stifle because of the sudden death nature of conceding.

Another suggestion, as an arsenal fan - We could do it alphatabetically!

Answer 5

The best way would be to replay the match. BUT in this day and age teams play so many matches this is not a viable solution, so penalty shoot outs is probably the best way to decide a result.

Maybe teams/clubs/countries should not be so money oriented and play less matches etc which may enable another game to be played to ensure a fair result over a 90/120 minute period.

If you go back a few years (god im an oldie) the European Cup as it was known was play by the top team in the top division of whatever country on a straight knock out basis. Will someone tell me what was wrong with this ? Now we have the top 3 or 4 teams competing, this is just plain greed from the teams concerned, if any teams have a valied complainty against the penatly shoot out system, maybe they should look at themselves and their accountants !

Answer 6

Yes a penalty shoot-out is the best solution, however I would change the amount of penalties so that everyone remaining on the park at the end of extra time would have to take one for each side.

My reasons for this are:

A side that has 1 or 2 players sent off would only be able to score a maximum of 9 or 10 penalties, so if the other side converts all theirs they would win.

This would mean if a game was looking like it was heading to penalties the team with less men wouldn't be able to 'sit back' and defend with 9/10 men behind the ball, but would have to go and try to win the game.

This would of course create more opportunity for the opposing side to also score a goal as more space would be created by them coming forward, making the end of the normal 90 minutes and extra-time more entertaining.

Every player in the shoot out would be able to stand up for their club or country and be counted.

And lastly fair play would ultimately be rewarded as players would have to think of the consequences before committing that 'rash' or professional foul that could ultimately give their team a 'handicap' in the penalty shoot-out.

Answer 7

Whats the problem with a penalty shoot out? So its not always the best team that wins them- that can happen in regular time as well. I'm a Celtic fan and there has been more than a few games where we have been played off the park and still managed to win it. Infinite playing time until there is a winner isn't feasible and removing players from already tired teams is ridiculous. I also disagree with the concept of a "golden goal" as its even more unfair than penalties. And at least penalties leave the game in the teams' own hands, unlike the old method of tossing a coin.

I think people forget that penalties are as much a skill as any other part of the game and the winner is the team who hold their nerve. Isn't that worthy of the win?

Answer 8

No - it is not football. A football solution would be to do away with "normal" extra time and gradually take off 1 player every 5 minutes or less disruptively 2 players every 10 minutes starting at full time. Within 30 minutes you would be playing 5 a side football on a full side pitch and a quick goal would be certain (you could stop at 5 aside or carry on?). The great benefit from this solution is that it is a real team solution not an individual solution like penalties.

Answer 9

What about a training ground solution like a sudden death contest, lets say the attacking side has 5 players and the defenders have 3 plus the goalie. It starts with a free kick from a designated area and basically the attacking team has to play their way into scoring from that free kick position, if the ball goes out of play the other team then gets a go. At least this would be a footballing way to end a match rather than penalties and has a bit more skill involved, with more team members.

Answer 10

Firstly can I say Mr Voller you are a legend. and im an englishmen!

I do not like pens but at the end of a game everyone is in the same boat and so i would say they are "fair" but I do have a better solution.

I surgest that each team has 2 corners 2 freekicks and 1 pen after extra time

For each freekick the defence can have 4 outfield players and a keeper and the atack 4 playes (including the kick taker)and after the ball is kicked there is a 60 second advantage played untll the ball goes dead or crosses the half way line So if a shoot is taken and put over or wide thats advantage over.

For the corner the same would apply 60secs untill the ball goes dead.

and the pen would be a straght forward pen.

if all is square after this the situation is repeated.

I feel that this would then alow the game to be wone or lost by a team and not just one man and one kick.

Answer 11

A penalty shoot-out is not in my opinion a good way to win a game. In fact neither side has won a football match, they have just won a penalty competition. I think there should be replays when a game has ended in a draw. The last World cup showed that there were a lot of teams who we could see had settled for a penalty shootout quite early in the game. Even if the replays have to be played the next day with just a handful of spectators at least the end result will be decided by playing football instead of a different game entirely,which is called, who can score the most penalties.