Is Blatter off his head?

Noelie

here

Blatter wants to end shoot-outs
Fifa president Sepp Blatter
Blatter is unhappy at the use of penalty shoot-outs
Fifa president Sepp Blatter says future World Cup finals should not be decided by penalty shoot-outs.

Italy beat France in the 2006 final on penalties and Blatter hinted changes may be made in South Africa in 2010.

He said: "When it comes to the World Cup final it is passion, and when it goes to extra time it is a drama.

"But when it comes to penalty kicks it is a tragedy. Football is a team sport and penalties is not a team, it is the individual."

He said a replay or gradually deducting players in extra time would be a better solution.


So rare is it for Blatter to come up with such a good suggestion that Uefa would do well to heed his words also

BBC Sport chief football writer Phil McNulty

"We have four years or so, so I think we have time," Blatter told a Swiss Chamber of Commerce event in Zurich.

"Maybe to replay the match if it's the final, you can't do that through the tournament because of lack of time. Maybe to take players away and play golden goal," Blatter said, adding that discussions would start soon.

West Germany won the first penalty shoot-out in the tournament, beating France in the 1982 semi-final.

Blatter also criticised the high salaries paid to footballers, calling them immoral, and said Fifa would take on the issue as clubs in some countries price spectators out of stadiums in order to pay huge wage bills.

"It is not moral, it is definitely not good for our sport," he said. "They pay too much money to the players. There is an imbalance in their finances and they try to get money by all means."

I can't see a replay or taking players off during extra time working at all

Töpher

Added-time-multi-ball!

MrJoeSoap

I agree that something other than penalties should be introduced, but I'm stumped as to what exactly!

Noelie

Thats the thing i don't think a replay will work and taking players off is more like taking the piss.
but how about they use the whole squad, after 90 minutes let the coach make as many changes as he see's fit and then play for another 30 minutes straight no break, still no score another 30 minutes. still no score give up and shoot the useless *****

Pepe LeFrits

Taking off players is a better solution than penalties. Reminds me of the shrinking map in Bomberman!

Call Me Jimmy

what's so bad about taking off players? I think it is the fairest way to do it. I think it would be fascinating, and at least that way the cup is still won by playing football and not taking penalties.

futuredeath

yea this idea of taking off players is brilliant, would be genius.

MrJoeSoap

Pepe LeFrits wrote:

Taking off players is a better solution than penalties. Reminds me of the shrinking map in Bomberman!

Haha, they could have a big siren and everything!

Chucky the tree

Taking players off would be a diaster. Its tiring enough playing 120 minutes of football, having to do it with a couple of less players would be a killer. As soon as you start taking players off, both teams will have no interest in attacking and just sit back.

Blatter is a complete clown.

Royale with Cheese

I really don't see why a replay wouldn't work. It's not like there's a hectic playing schedule after the world cup final, or any other major final. It was a shame to see the biggest game on football settled on penalties. Even more of a shame because France didn't win it.

ullu

Some sort of 5 a side situation might work.

Before you laugh out loud, it would be a case of something like five attackers versus four defenders and a goalkeeper (though these numbers could be modified) limited to one half of the pitch. Toss a coin to see who goes first and each team takes turns attacking for five/ten/fifteen minutes.

Having said that, I'm happy enough with penalties to remain as the method of settling games.

The_B_Man

or...

start adding more players after!! imagine that, 40 man royal rumble! someones bound to score!

wheres me jumpa

A replay would ruin the spectacle of a final. It brings in the aspect of teams holding out for a replay. Take a team with a player sent off, a player injured, a played suspended, suddenly they will be glad to bore everyone and hld out for the replay.

Taking players off is a joke. It would be terrible to play and terrible to watch. Long balls all the way, Chelsea would love it.

Penalties are a cruel way of ending a tournament/game but if two teams cant break eachother down over 120 mins of football, cruelty it is.

Noelie

The_B_Man wrote:

or...

start adding more players after!! imagine that, 40 man royal rumble! someones bound to score!

Brilliant, i spat out what i was eating i laughed so hard

Rikand

The_B_Man wrote:

or...

start adding more players after!! imagine that, 40 man royal rumble! someones bound to score!

haha, that would be funny!

but tbh, penalties is the best way to end a game, imo. I hate golden goal and removing players would be just stupid. Penalites arent tragedy, they are great excitement and entertainment and at least we're getting to see lots of goals

Xavi6

Penalties are the business, especially for the neutral. The worst thing in football is when someone nicks it in the 119th minute and spoils the fun of penos. It's great fun predicting who's gonna miss too!

kinaldo

I love penalty shootouts and whatever about the issue of being unable to replicate the pressure of a big game situation I don't think it's a lottery and do believe there's plently of skill involved - more than enough to settle a stalemate after 120 minutes. So what if it's an individual that decides it. Personally I love practicing penalties and it annoys me when certain coaches come out saying they don't bother. Why then do golfers practice putting? It's the same sort of pressure / skill combination and u need a German like winning mentality to come out on top. Why shouldn't that be the deciding factor?

Royale with Cheese

wheres me jumpa wrote:

A replay would ruin the spectacle of a final. It brings in the aspect of teams holding out for a replay. Take a team with a player sent off, a player injured, a played suspended, suddenly they will be glad to bore everyone and hld out for the replay.

And teams in the same situation don't ever hold out for penalties?

LostinBlanch

Two things

First of all the problem with the golden goal was the fact that it had the opposite effect, making both teams defensive in extra time rather than going out to win the game. the simplest solution would have been to make the first goal in regulation time have a similar weighting to an away goal in European competition so that the team that scored the first goal would go through if there was no score in extra time. This means that the other team would be forced to attack and the game would open up and become the spectacle it was meant to be.

Second I have to laugh at him giving out about players having too much money, when he's responsible for stopping genuine attempts at weeding out corruption at the game from the very top. So leaving the likes of Jack Warner to cream off $3million from the last world cup selling black market tickets.

Bloody self important hypocrite

wheres me jumpa

Royale with Cheese wrote:

And teams in the same situation don't ever hold out for penalties?

If they hold out for penalties then they can have no complaints about the cruelty of penalties, can they? My point above being a final, is a final. No second chance.

Nalz

drop the offside rule with 5mins to go...what great tv that would b!!!!!!!!!

loyatemu

don't take off some players - takes them all off and force the manager to bring on 5/6 previously unused players

this would test the depth of the squad, would bring on fresh legs, would test the tactical skills of the manager and would mean squads couldn't carry passengers like Walcott, Jenas etc

at least it would see matches being decided by playing football rather than just penalties

redspider

Blatter may be a fool and allegedly corrupt in some instances, but in terms of penalties and deciding titles he does have a point.

I would suggest to instead use 5 free-kicks from the edge of the penalty box, which at least give the keeper a chance. So one at each corner, one at each end of the D, and one on the outermost point of the D, if you know what I mean. That way, there is more variation and managers would have left and right foot aspects in terms of selection as well.

Another way to decide is to use one-on-ones, where a player gets the ball in the centre circle and has to attack and score a goal against the keeper. Once the keeper touches the ball and it doesnt go in, the ball is dead. ie: no rebounds.

Another way to split the difference is to use a statistic, such as the number of shots that a goalkeeper had to save from inside the box, or the no. of times shots hit the woodwork. That will promote attacking football at least say in the event of a 1-1 match where neither team want to lose.

Redspider

Royale with Cheese

wheres me jumpa wrote:

If they hold out for penalties then they can have no complaints about the cruelty of penalties, can they? My point above being a final, is a final. No second chance.

And if they hold out for penalties and then win do you think there's justice there? As an Arsenal fan I loved the team winning the FA cup in 2005... but that was the least deserved cup final victory in history. At least if it had gone to a replay and Arsenal had won that they would have gotten away with the first time and then earned the victory the second time instead of Scholes missing one penalty and Arsenal going home with the cup.

patmac

What about widening the goals in extra time! Also you couldn't reduce players for extra time as they would be fecked for the next game.
The answer to the OP's original queston is Yes.

ullu

patmac wrote:

What about widening the goals in extra time! Also you couldn't reduce players for extra time as they would be fecked for the next game.

If you'd read the OP fully, you'd see Blatter is only considering a change to the way the final is decided, not any of the other knockout games.

DerekD Goldfish

as Far as the Peno Shootout in the last WC goes I was happy with it for 3 reasons

1)I Had a penos decided final backed

2) I had Italy to win the WC backed

3) I love peno shootouts

Playing on for longer and longer would bore fans to death teams with the pressure of the bigist game in thier carears would be overly cautious and very few would have the guts to attack the game.
Replays would take away from the occasion
as for sujections of other decieders like free kicks, one on ones ets I dont see how any of these are better than penaltys.
Why fix what isnt broke penaltys are great TV/Live Expereinces and the best way to decide a match that 120 mins of football couldnt

wheres me jumpa

Royale with Cheese wrote:

And if they hold out for penalties and then win do you think there's justice there? As an Arsenal fan I loved the team winning the FA cup in 2005... but that was the least deserved cup final victory in history. At least if it had gone to a replay and Arsenal had won that they would have gotten away with the first time and then earned the victory the second time instead of Scholes missing one penalty and Arsenal going home with the cup.

As a United fan I was fuming when we didnt win the cup. But I didnt blame it on the penalties, I blamed it on us not finishing off Arsenal when we dominated the game throughout.

Chardee MacDennis

penalties are great unles you lose on them...

although i do like the "lose the offside rule"!!!

Attractive Nun

After the 90 minutes has passed, just throw another ball onto the pitch every 10 minutes! Then, if that doesn't work, throw another few sets of goals on. Take away the offside rule and of course erect a wall around the pitch to eliminate throw-ins - then the linesmen can be used as extra referees to keep track. It goes without saying, then, that all the subs would be allowed come on and a few booby traps would have to be laid just to keep things interesting. Maybe if a player steps inside the centre circle Sepp Blatter could pop out in his underwear and tackle him.

If this hasn't produced a goal after half an hour, simply remove all rules against fouling and the last man standing can simply run the ball into the net. Seems fair to me.


Alternatively, just keep penalty shoot-outs, they're deadly!

Corben Dallas

Absolutely love penatly shoot outs, great for teh fans/Tv audience not great for Players/managers who have faught hard to get to the later stages of Football's big competitions.

Replays are utter stupidity, u cant beat the tension of elimination on the night. Taking off players might actually be the way to go.

~Rebel~

i actually love the idea of having a second ball. would be class, would keep the game open cause if one team sits back the other could come at them from both wings and throw in crosses from either side, and would be cool if each team had possession of one ball so would both be attacking either end leaving the teams more stretched and therefore more chance of a goal and less defensive play. Would be a nightmare for the TV cameras though!!

Pigman II

Penos are a crazy way to decide the world cup. The crossbar game is clearly the way to go (even if it takes all night).

eirebhoy

People say that penos are just pot luck but I disagree. The best set of penos I can remember seeing was Arsenal's 5 against Man U in the FA cup a couple of years ago. Every one of them were high in the top corner so unless the keeper went high he had no chance. Wenger said they didn't practice them but they clearly did.

redspider

Attractive Nun wrote:

After the 90 minutes has passed, just throw another ball onto the pitch every 10 minutes! Then, if that doesn't work, throw another few sets of goals on. Take away the offside rule and of course erect a wall around the pitch to eliminate throw-ins - then the linesmen can be used as extra referees to keep track. It goes without saying, then, that all the subs would be allowed come on and a few booby traps would have to be laid just to keep things interesting. Maybe if a player steps inside the centre circle Sepp Blatter could pop out in his underwear and tackle him. If this hasn't produced a goal after half an hour, simply remove all rules against fouling and the last man standing can simply run the ball into the net. Seems fair to me.

Pigman II wrote:

The crossbar game is clearly the way to go (even if it takes all night).

Thanks for the LOL lads .... !
Good humour.

I agree 1000% ;-)

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Free kicks from varying distances outside the box compelte with defensivwall and goalkeeper. 5 each, shoot, pass, cross or whatever you like.

Oh, and stick a live hand grenade insidethe football.

Necronomicon

Pigman II wrote:

Penos are a crazy way to decide the world cup. The crossbar game is clearly the way to go (even if it takes all night).

That would be hilarious.

I remember an Allister McGowen sketch where they were debating what alternatives to use to a penalty shoot-out. One was a sports quiz
Imagine, they bring two tables onto the pitch with a few buzzers and the ref asks the questions

Pepe LeFrits

eirebhoy wrote:

People say that penos are just pot luck but I disagree. The best set of penos I can remember seeing was Arsenal's 5 against Man U in the FA cup a couple of years ago. Every one of them were high in the top corner so unless the keeper went high he had no chance. Wenger said they didn't practice them but they clearly did.

Nah I doubt they did tbh. They beat Sheffield United in an earlier round that season with 5 perfect penalties too. Vieira, Lauren, Van Persie, Cole and Ljungberg are usually excellent penalty takers, they always seem to score them (and score them well) for club and country.

I don't like penalties as a way of deciding games (especially the WC final), but I suppose there is merit in the view that isn't a lottery. If a player belts the ball into the top corner, it's a goal, no matter what the keeper does. Whether they can do that ultimately comes down to talent and bottle. I guess football is basically about who is better at putting the ball in the back of the net, so penalties are as apt a way of deciding a game as any.