New Penalty System Trialled at WU17's Euros

Mars Bar

So last nights game between Norway and Germany went to penalties.

The order of the penalties was
- Germany
- Norway x2
- Germany x2
- Norway x2
- Germany x2
- Norway

Research has shown that the team to take the first penalty is 60% more likely to win on penalties. This is to stop the team going second having a psychological disadvantage.

So what do ye think?

I think it's a decent idea.

I tend to use the same system for the children I coach when they are picking teams. The first player to pick always picks the best player so the second player to pick will be allowed to pick two players.

NIMAN

The Germans won, didn't they!

GavRedKing

Ya, I heard about that, theyre calling it the ABBA system.

Mars Bar

NIMAN wrote: »

The Germans won, didn't they!

Yeah on sudden death after missing their first three!

Obviously it will take a lot of shootouts to see some patterns.

keano_afc

GavRedKing wrote: »

Ya, I heard about that, theyre calling it the ABBA system.

And the winner takes it all.

NIMAN

Mars Bar wrote: »

Yeah on sudden death after missing their first three!

Obviously it will take a lot of shootouts to see some patterns.

The Germans always win the pens.

Seriously though, do they? Or was that just against England?

Mars Bar

NIMAN wrote: »

The Germans always win the pens.

Seriously though, do they? Or was that just against England?

From a quick google their men's senior team have won approximately 71% of their shootouts. England have won 17%.

tvercetti

Mars Bar wrote: »

Research has shown that the team to take the first penalty is 60% more likely to win on penalties.

Is that really enough of an advantage to try change the system. Would have thought 60/40 are fair enough odds. I like it as it is and can't see changes like this sticking.

gramar

Rather than looking for alternative ways to take penalties how about alternative ways to decide games for example you get the ball in the centre circle and have 10 seconds to score against the keeper.

WinnyThePoo

Isn't that a similar system to a tie break in tennis?.

ArmaniJeanss

tvercetti wrote: »

Is that really enough of an advantage to try change the system. Would have thought 60/40 are fair enough odds. I like it as it is and can't see changes like this sticking.

Ideally it would be ~50/50 over a long term sample of data?
Hence the new experiment/trial.

Mars Bar

tvercetti wrote: »

Is that really enough of an advantage to try change the system. Would have thought 60/40 are fair enough odds. I like it as it is and can't see changes like this sticking.

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Ideally it would be ~50/50 over a long term sample of data?
Hence the new experiment/trial.

What Armani said.

gramar wrote: »

Rather than looking for alternative ways to take penalties how about alternative ways to decide games for example you get the ball in the centre circle and have 10 seconds to score against the keeper.

You an ice hockey fan?

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

Isn't that a similar system to a tie break in tennis?.

Yeah, very similar.

citytillidie

gramar wrote: »

Rather than looking for alternative ways to take penalties how about alternative ways to decide games for example you get the ball in the centre circle and have 10 seconds to score against the keeper.

Already been tried by the MLS

GavRedKing

gramar wrote: »

Rather than looking for alternative ways to take penalties how about alternative ways to decide games for example you get the ball in the centre circle and have 10 seconds to score against the keeper.

They trialled that somewhere and it was sh*te.

Imagine trying run half the length of the pitch after doing 120mins and having to then beat the GK in a one on one.

I think Robbie Keane was invovled in a shootout like that in his Inter Milan pre-season days.

Dirty Dingus McGee

GavRedKing wrote: »

They trialled that somewhere and it was sh*te.

Imagine trying run half the length of the pitch after doing 120mins and having to then beat the GK in a one on one.

I think Robbie Keane was invovled in a shootout like that in his Inter Milan pre-season days.

He was.

Osmosis Jones

gramar wrote: »

Rather than looking for alternative ways to take penalties how about alternative ways to decide games for example you get the ball in the centre circle and have 10 seconds to score against the keeper.

It's hilarious but it's also an absolute mess.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxhAg9BIPO8

NIMAN

For some reason in that clip everytime a player went round the keeper, they appealed?

Why?

Not fair, scoring!

Osmosis Jones

NIMAN wrote: »

For some reason in that clip everytime a player went round the keeper, they appealed?

Why?

Not fair, scoring!

The player only had a certain amount of time to take the shot (or for the ball to cross the line maybe?) so the keepers were basically appealing they'd run out of time.

dfx-

Mars Bar wrote: »

Research has shown that the team to take the first penalty is 60% more likely to win on penalties. This is to stop the team going second having a psychological disadvantage.

So what do ye think?

I think it's a decent idea.

I tend to use the same system for the children I coach when they are picking teams. The first player to pick always picks the best player so the second player to pick will be allowed to pick two players.

I don't really see how the order makes any difference to that stat, moreso it's trying to find a relationship in going first and winning but it being completely unrelated to the outcome.

What might provide a psychological advantage is what percentage win when scoring or missing the first penalty.

The better team at penalties and managing the pressure of the situation will win, whatever order they go in. To me, it's another needless attempt to reinvent the wheel.

ArmaniJeanss

dfx- wrote: »

The better team at penalties and managing the pressure of the situation will win, whatever order they go in.

This clearly can't be true, otherwise after 100s of shootouts the data would be veering to 50/50 for winning when going first.
(Unless theres been some statistically unlikely bias of the better team being also superior at winning coin tosses).