penalty shoot out after extra time!! crazy!

pipsqueak

cardiff blues vs leicester was decided after 20 mins extra time, It was decided by a penalty shoot out. Now surely there should be a better way of breaking the impasse other than a penalty shoot out??

Most teams have max 4 fairly allright place kickers who actually can kick a ball betweeen the sticks but apart fron that very few can.

any ideas how to sort this out??

Robbo

Aside from an expensive and logistically tricky replay, all you're left with if you discount place kicking is paper/scissors/rock.

pipsqueak

all down to tight tv scheduling i guess, but even if they had 3 mins sudden death and the first side to concede a penalty (no conversion) would be a bit fairer. asking the bull hayes or paul o connell to covert from 40 yds out is akin to putting stringer in at number 2 and getting him to jump!!!!

budhabob

outta curiosity, anyone know where this game can be downloaded? I know its a bit off topic so apologies for that

The Insider

They should just do what they do in American football (AFAK) the first score in extra time wins (be it penalty, drop goal, try), toss of a coin to decide who restarts.

The Insider

budhabob wrote: »

outta curiosity, anyone know where this game can be downloaded? I know its a bit off topic so apologies for that

You can see the penalty kicks here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HeSUscHIHg

pipsqueak

The Insider wrote: »

They should just do what they do in American football (AFAK) the first score in extra time wins (be it penalty, drop goal, try), toss of a coin to decide who restarts.

But that didnt work in the first 20 min period of extra time and due to tv schedules, tired players etc i think something like a knock on or, not releasing or a multiude of other things should be considered. And not have the resulting penalty would just end the game

Pshan

I'm not sure there is a "better way", a replay is out due to the amount of matches scheduled at the business end of the year.

Golden score puts pressure on the officials not to award a penalty - on a side note I thought AR did very well on Sunday.

Toss of a coint takes the decision away from the team and coaching staff, at least with a penalty kick, the team decide who kicks and when.

Gambler

Just an FYI

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/5273324/European-Rugby-Cup-to-review-unpopular-penalty-shoot-out-system.html

romah

ther is always TUG OF WAR ...now who brought the rope

The Saint

I heard an interesting suggestion yesterday on TV. They said that after certain perion of extra time each team could take off a number of players therefore creating more space on the pitch and increasing the likelihood of scores.

Penalties could also be done but with one designated kicker with each penalty being taken progressively further from the centre. I thought there was some sort of system like this in place before but apparently I was wrong. They seem like much fairer alternatives to the present system.

Crash

It seems from something I read on scrum or planetRugby that the ERC uses that system, while the RWC uses the different spots for the kick, as well as rotating players. Under that system, I don't see it going past 5 kicks each, and at least there's a challenge to it.

murphym7

The Saint wrote: »

I heard an interesting suggestion yesterday on TV. They said that after certain perion of extra time each team could take off a number of players therefore creating more space on the pitch and increasing the likelihood of scores.

Penalties could also be done but with one designated kicker with each penalty being taken progressively further from the centre. I thought there was some sort of system like this in place before but apparently I was wrong. They seem like much fairer alternatives to the present system.

I like the sound of taking off players to create more room on the pitch.

Stealdo

There does seem to be a few different methods of place kicking comps out there. I am almost certain that there was a system where by each team would nominate one player to take five kicks from the 22, one from the centre, one from each touch line and one from the half way points between the two. If you're going to have a penalty shoot out, this should be the way it's done, then move back to the 10 metre line for sudden death. Asking forwards to take penalty kicks is a insult to all the training and conditioning they've gone through. You wouldn't ask outside backs to participate in a lineout contest to decide a game.

I absolutely hated this. I felt cheated and angered at the end of it, and very sorry for Martyn Williams. Seriously just imagine it coming down to Stan Wright or CJVDL against Castrogiovanni in the last kicks for the final - it's ridiculous. I would rather see a coin tossed than players humiliated.

I think the removal of players after the normal extra time, say 1 from each side every 2 mins would be much more satisfactory and at least rugby would decide the outcome in some measure.

Try count is used before this by the way, so maybe other layers should be added such as penalties conceded, yellow cards, territory, possession stats etc. Anything but that farce, you might as well have had a dance off as far as I'm concerned.

Aidric

Paul Wallace was suggesting on sky that he thinks they should take 5 players off of each side and play for a further ten minutes aside spell, or even further play a sevens game for ten minutes aside.

bleg

nah i like the kick off. they should keep it. adds to the spectacle and its not as if it happens often.

stephen_n

First try scored in the game proper or in the case of there being no try's the first team to score in the game proper wins if it goes through extra time level. Encourage teams to attack and reward try scoring, although draws don't really happen that often in rugby.

Repolho

When I was playing underage rugby, our No 8 took most of the kicks, but our left footed hooker took those that suited a leftie. We also had a prop who could kick reasonably well.

I think that in this situation it is all about mental toughness and not your ability to take penalties. Its the same in soccer and its often the players you would think are a certainty to score who miss!

I'm sure Martyn Williams would make that kick 99/100 in training.

TBH I think its a better system than counting back yellow cards, penalties etc etc. In such a situation, there is no incentive for the team who would win in such a countback to try and score but merely defend.

Seifer

There's a method that's used in some sports and has been discussed for others:
Flip a coin at the start of extra time, the winner of the toss gets half a point.
If the extra time ends in a draw then the coin toss winner wins, otherwise whoever has the higher score wins.
It encourages at least one team to really go for it as they have to and it is much more likely the result of the match will be decided by the end of extra time.

Podge_irl

Stealdo wrote: »

There does seem to be a few different methods of place kicking comps out there. I am almost certain that there was a system where by each team would nominate one player to take five kicks from the 22, one from the centre, one from each touch line and one from the half way points between the two. If you're going to have a penalty shoot out, this should be the way it's done

Don't like the idea of having one person take all the kicks either. It massively disadvantages a team whose first-choice kicker is injured.

Paul Wallace was suggesting on sky that he thinks they should take 5 players off of each side and play for a further ten minutes aside spell, or even further play a sevens game for ten minutes aside.

7s ain't rugby and I don't see what relevance a team's ability to play a different sport is to the outcome of a game.

It's not a great system, but I'm struggling to think of a better. You can't go on possession stats etc. Hell, Munster had more possession in the semi I think, and you wouldn't find anyone claiming they should have won.

Stealdo

Podge_irl wrote: »

Don't like the idea of having one person take all the kicks either. It massively disadvantages a team whose first-choice kicker is injured.

Very true - probably to the point of it being completely unfair.

Podge_irl wrote: »

It's not a great system, but I'm struggling to think of a better. You can't go on possession stats etc. Hell, Munster had more possession in the semi I think, and you wouldn't find anyone claiming they should have won.

True also - but had they got over 3 times and converted twice, it'd be a completely different story.

What I don't like about what happened last week is nothing to do with the spectacle it's fairness to the players. There was a huge amount on the line on Sunday, and guys who've spent the previous 2 hours putting their bodies and minds through hell in order to get there and then they're subjected to having to attempt a skill they never practise, and that they've conditioned their bodies away from all their professional lives. I am not exaggerating at all when I say I think they may as well have a dance off it's just as relevant for these guys as place kicking. It doesn't test these guys skills at all. If it's going to be a lottery then just toss a coin after the game and there's no need to humiliate anyone.

The concept is obviously taken from soccer, but in soccer all players at some point or another are expected to kick the ball at the goal. Rugby is much more team based than soccer and place kicking is just one skill. You could randomly pick several other things to decide it, such as lineout throwing, passing accuracy, jumping, lifting, scrummaging.

Here's an idea - give each team 5, 3 on 3 attacking opportunities. Each with a 1 minute, 5 tackle limit. Any dead ball other than a penalty is a no-score. They either score a try or not, no player can be used twice. At least some general rugby skills are involved, you could match up the players against eachother if you want 1-3 v 1-3 and so on.

Xavi6

The Insider wrote: »

You can see the penalty kicks here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HeSUscHIHg

Just watched that without knowing the result and it was bloody fantastic. An epic way to end a game. Massive thumbs up.

Sport is cruel sometimes and that's just the way it goes. Don't think there's a better method for solving any team sports in knockout competition.

dub_skav

Stealdo wrote: »

Here's an idea - give each team 5, 3 on 3 attacking opportunities. Each with a 1 minute, 5 tackle limit. Any dead ball other than a penalty is a no-score. They either score a try or not, no player can be used twice. At least some general rugby skills are involved, you could match up the players against eachother if you want 1-3 v 1-3 and so on.

I was actually thinking something similar, except I'd say no to the tackles bit. You get 1 chance to score and that's it, if you're tackled in possession it's all over for that attempt

Webbs

Xavi6 wrote: »

Just watched that without knowing the result and it was bloody fantastic. An epic way to end a game. Massive thumbs up.

Sport is cruel sometimes and that's just the way it goes. Don't think there's a better method for solving any team sports in knockout competition.

But dont you agree that rugby far more than most (if not all) other team sports is the most unsuited to this outcome.
Football, basketball, ice hockey etc if it comes down to a penalty shoot out you are talking about players who are skilled in the method of the penalty, in rugby after a few players it no longer applies.
As someone else said why not have a series of one on one scrummage contest to sort it out it is equally as ridiculous as the kicking contest

Danakin

To be honest I think a shoot-out is the best way of deciding games after extra time compared to other options being put forward.

Countbacks of tries and cards isn't really the way a sporting events should be decided as there are all kinds of problems with its relevance to that particular game and the possibility of all these countbacks being equal.

Personally I've always wondered why a replay isn't possible after extra-time and sudden-death extra time. The pedantic might say that you could have infinite draws but lets be realistic there will be a winner in the second game in 99 per cent likelihood. A replay is always the best option particularly in a tournament such as the Heineken Cup where congestion of fixtures isn't half the problem it would be in a World Cup situation.

Podge_irl

The HEC is played around other competitions though. There are league games on this weekend. There is simply no time to organise a replay.

Marshy

"Golden score" idea would seem to be the best. Unlike soccer where a goal may never come in certain matches, a score of some sort would come in the vast proportion of rugby games within 30-40 mins especially as defences tire etc.

I wouldn't be a fan of the reduced number of players idea. The game involves 15 players so let it stay that way throughout.

Stev_o

Marshy wrote: »

"Golden score" idea would seem to be the best. Unlike soccer where a goal may never come in certain matches, a score of some sort would come in the vast proportion of rugby games within 30-40 mins especially as defences tire etc.

I wouldn't be a fan of the reduced number of players idea. The game involves 15 players so let it stay that way throughout.

I wouldn't like the idea of a golden score, considering that you'd have gone through 20 minutes of extra time the players would be absolutely spent and chances of a high end injury imo would be too great. That and no ref would risk their reputation to give any sort of penalty that could resort in a scoreable chance and possibly ruin them.

NickNolte

Scrap the penalty kicks and go straight to sudden death IMO. The teams keep playing until someone scores. At the very worst, by the time the fatigue kicks in, the last man standing is likely to be able to walk over the try line. Hopefully there'd be no corpses on the pitch. Anything's fairer than penalty kicks though.

Marshy

Stev_o wrote: »

I wouldn't like the idea of a golden score, considering that you'd have gone through 20 minutes of extra time the players would be absolutely spent and chances of a high end injury imo would be too great. That and no ref would risk their reputation to give any sort of penalty that could resort in a scoreable chance and possibly ruin them.

Well I'd suggest scrapping ET altogether, we saw on Sunday that both sides were just content keeping the other side out as opposed to going for the win. Play for sudden death after the 80 minutes.

The issue about the refs is true enough but I'd imagine if there's any sort of serious infringment they'd give the penalty. Just ask Wayne Barnes or Paddy Wallace...:p

Blisterman

I think, if they're gonna keep the penalty shoot out system, they should allow teams to nominate the same kicker more than once, same as they would in penalties during a match.
So in practice, the fly half would most likely take all the kicks.