BroadstairsR 2,093 Posted July 13, 2014 Glenn Hoddle''s idea, just put forward on television, that the penalty shoot-out should take place after ninety minutes and before extra time is played out. If a team scores one more penalty it will begin extra time with a one goal advantage. Hoddle feels that this would potentially take the tension out of extra time making for a more open finale and also take the pressure off the penalty takers. Although penalties are widely considered too much of a lottery to decide World Cup matches, they do mean that the team with the best shot-makers has an advantage, the team with the best goalkeeper has an advantage and the team with the best collective composure does as well. Even so, the spotlight upon the players involved can be seen as somewhat unfair. The idea of Hoddle''s does bear thinking about and the thought of never ever again having to feel for the agonised player whose miss has cost the game is pleasing, even though the English players in the pizza advert seemed to wear their ignominious moments as a badge of honour. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
A Load of Squit 5,066 Posted July 13, 2014 So you''re the person who watches the ITV coverage! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted July 13, 2014 [quote user="A Load of Squit"]So you''re the person who watches the ITV coverage![/quote][:D] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chicken 0 Posted July 13, 2014 It''s great.Until you remember that penalties were designed as a way of deciding a fixture that was less based on luck than flipping a coin.If you had the penalties before extra time, what happens if the teams a drawing at the end of extra time?Personally I think they should just get the captains to fight to exhaustion using nothing but wet fish - perhaps of their nations preference. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BroadstairsR 2,093 Posted July 13, 2014 [quote user="A Load of Squit"]So you''re the person who watches the ITV coverage![/quote] Ha. I like the adverts ..... as long as they''re not for pizza. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gainer the Gopher 0 Posted July 13, 2014 So if they play the added 30 minutes after the penalty kicks and it''s a draw because Team A scored one more penalty but Team B scored in overtime, then what?And if I was Team B, I''d be furious at not being the winner because the penalties came first. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted July 13, 2014 Yeah, I think you''re right Bor... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Branston Pickle 3,598 Posted July 13, 2014 Pretty sure this idea was put forward and binned when they went for the ''golden goal'' option that didn''t work out. Pens aren''t perhaps a great way of sorting a winner, but still the best we have, and you can''t do them before the event. I personally reckon a ''crossbar challenge'' or similar would do the trick nicely. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paul101 91 Posted July 13, 2014 at times the bbc coverage has been dire in this worldcup but.. you get a better picture on the bbc even in HD Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BroadstairsR 2,093 Posted July 13, 2014 "If you had the penalties before extra time, what happens if the teams a drawing at the end of extra time?" Better ask Glenn that. More penalties? Golden Goal? corner count? toss of a coin? fish fight? The more you think about it the more complicated it gets. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marchant 5 Posted July 13, 2014 Why not get the zorbs out? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr Jenkins 0 Posted July 13, 2014 I wonder what fun is in store for next seasons'' half time entertainment. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted July 14, 2014 Not such a great idea after all. Explains why the rest of us were watching the beeb. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Christian 0 Posted July 14, 2014 Completely nonsense. Hoddle has always been a little odd. Excellent midfielder in his days but a little odd. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SwindonCanary 455 Posted July 14, 2014 "Take the tension out of extra time making for a more open finale"Don''t think it will be open, more defending and time wasting by the penalty winners. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lake district canary 4,520 Posted July 14, 2014 [quote user="swindoncanary"]"Take the tension out of extra time making for a more open finale"Don''t think it will be open, more defending and time wasting by the penalty winners. [/quote]Maybe, but at least you would ensure that at least one team is attacking to try and get back in it. At the moment extra time is too tight - and added to the fact that it seems that extra time just becomes almost certain if a game is 0-0 after about 70 minutes, so the tension creeps in too early. Penalties would then be important and relevant to the match, but not the lottery they are atm. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Great Drinkell 50 Posted July 14, 2014 How about the 5 nominated penalty takers take the pre extra time penalties, if after extra time the game score is still the same then it''s straight to sudden death for the non nominated takers.This way we can still have the pizza adverts too? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Syteanric 1 Posted July 14, 2014 and thats why Glenn Hoddle has been out of work for the best part of 15 years....some people even wanted him as our manager.. dear god! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gainer the Gopher 0 Posted July 14, 2014 [quote user="morty"]Yeah, I think you''re right Bor...[/quote]Obsess much? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Google Bot 3,230 Posted July 14, 2014 Penalties are a perfect way of settling it, both teams have had 120 minutes to prove they''re better than their opponent and not managed it, it''s just so simple and obvious?!Think people like penises... I''M SO SORRY! I mean, people like CHANGE for the sake of penises... SORRY AGAIN! I mean for the sake of IT. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted July 14, 2014 This idea was first suggested by the bloke who used to play Curly in Eastenders in the 80''s. He then went onto some football show on the radio and came up with this idea.In the 1958 WC, play offs took place to determine who qualified out of the groups when level on points, England famously losing to Russia.But of course, there were only 16 teams at the tournament and clubs didn''t rule their FA''s and TV was in its infancy.I am not suggesting replays etc but surely these games can keep going until there is a goal scored.Wouldn''t we rather have played on in the play off final of 2002? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lake district canary 4,520 Posted July 14, 2014 [quote user="Google Bot"]Penalties are a perfect way of settling it, both teams have had 120 minutes to prove they''re better than their opponent and not managed it, it''s just so simple and obvious?!Think people like penises... I''M SO SORRY! I mean, people like CHANGE for the sake of penises... SORRY AGAIN! I mean for the sake of IT.[/quote]Norty, norty...... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dubai Mark 0 Posted July 14, 2014 Whilst hard to agree with the suggestion itself, I am puzzled that anyone would be happy with the current situation, so Hoddle is right to at least make a suggestion for change.It was clear in several games that some teams were "playing for penalties", notably the Swiss and I feel that''s why, other than in a couple of cases the knockout stage was actually not that great in terms of quality and exciting football.The penalty shoot-out is no way to decide a winner in a top tournament and FIFA need to think harder about it, get some of the games experts and thinkers together and come up with a better solution.Oh, wait a minute....it only took them something like 14 years to start using the magic spray since it was first invented....and how long to introduce goal line technology.I actually think that even a free kick shoot out from a longer distance would be a better option, particularly if the opposition could use a wall, at least there is much more skill and technique required to score than a basic penalty.....you could mark out five different positions around the penalty are and take a kick from each, much more entertaining and even more magic spray required. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reggie Strayshun 0 Posted July 14, 2014 Talking of ex-player pundits, some years ago dear old Jimmy Hill suggested after extra time to base the decision of winner on who has accrued the least yellow cards during the 120 mins. It always sounded an interesting idea; one that might have drawbacks (eg what happens if both teams have the same number of cards ?), but it might just cut out the sort of things that we saw in the Colombia v Brazil game and any game that Honduras were involved in ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gainer the Gopher 0 Posted July 14, 2014 Refs can be counted on to be even-handed when issuing cards, can they? Argentina should have gotten a red when they got a yellow yesterday, and the first issued against Germany was a joke. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reggie Strayshun 0 Posted July 14, 2014 [quote user="Ice Cold Pineapple Soda"]Refs can be counted on to be even-handed when issuing cards, can they? Argentina should have gotten a red when they got a yellow yesterday, and the first issued against Germany was a joke.[/quote]I know. I said that there are drawbacks . There are to any system. But not a reason to dismiss it out of hand....... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr D 0 Posted July 14, 2014 Agreed. The last thirty minutes would be so slow Share this post Link to post Share on other sites