Skip to main content

Quiero el gol de oro!

For those of you who don't 'habla espanol,' "I want the Golden Goal!" If you are familiar with the NHL playoff rules, you are aware that in Overtime (now referred to as OT), the rule is 'sudden death.' In other words, next goal wins. Well in soccer (football, futbol, voetbol, calcio, etc., et al), FIFA (Int'l soccer's governing body) had been using Golden Goal for the Extra Time in knockout matches (a match where one team must be the victor or ganador). In the 2006 FIFA World Cup, FIFA switched to a different OT alignment where the game is played for 30 extra minutes regardless of any scoring in the OT period. The first goal does not win it, in other words. If the game remains deadlocked at the end of the two 15-minute halves, penalty kicks ensue (by now, the phrase 'penalty kick' in Switzerland and Argentina may be synonymous with 'Barry Bonds' across America.)

I see many flaws with this OT set-up:
  1. It takes away (in great measure) the suspense and excitement of the aura that surrounds "next goal wins." I cannot recount the times in which I have put my head to the floor in desperation as a ball shot by the other team glanced off the woodwork. Also, OT goals are not rewarded as highly as they ought be, because play simply resumes until the 30 minutes has expired.
  2. It causes players to not play the regular 90 minutes the way they should be played. If I were a center midfielder, in the 80th minute, knowing that 30 minutes awaits regardless of the score, I would not kill myself the last 5-10 minutes. It gives the game downtime. Players seem to be punished for playing 90 minutes strong, because they either get hurt, subbed, red-carded (in this World Cup) or they are simply ineffective for the last 20 minutes of the game. FIFA should take a hint when they see 4-6 players in OT have to be stretchered off the field because of injury and fatigue. Extra Time isn't supposed to be an IronMan match, it's suppose to be a physical chess match.

I do see one advantage, and it is somewhat crucial:

  1. FIFA does not want to see an World Cup match end on a penalty kick in OT. Face it (with a good attitude), sometimes refs make mistakes. I know, I am one. (not a mistake, a ref!) What a shame it would be to see the World Cup Final end on a Extra-Time PK resulting from a bad call.

My response to the one advantage is: "Don't give out PK's like you did in the Italy match. People that dive over a man lying on the ground after a tackle don't deserve goals, they deserve the "get up!" signal.

Leave a comment if you must debate!

Popular posts from this blog

No Zion, No Problem? Not So Fast.

Everyone in the media has wanted their piece of the pie with Zion this year. Each highlight reel dunk and spectacular block has only increased the media fervor and number of followers. As Duke looks to face Syracuse, and presumably Virginia Tech as well, without Zion, let's consider what Duke looks like without Zion, and what it must do against Syracuse to leave the Carrier Dome with a W. DUKE WITHOUT ZION Duke without Zion is not a cart without a horse. But it might be a sports car without its turbo. Or maybe a chef without her secret sauce. Here are the main points to consider: MAIN POINTS - A Five Spot 1. Without Zion, Duke can’t play “position-less basketball” since all bench players have limitations. Not only is Zion our best two-way player (offense and defense), but he also allows the greatest roster flexibility in terms of building around him. He wreaks havoc wherever he is on the floor. We don't have another player like that, certainly not from the bench
Read more

Processing US Women's World Cup Final loss

Without a doubt, this year's Women's World Cup was the most entertaining (on this side of the pond, as they say) since the 1999 edition of the global tournament. The USA's performance and "never say die" attitude endeared this team to many American fans rather quickly, which was no more apparent than when the team stormed back to tie Brasil in 120+ minute, before going to win in penalties. Unfortunately, the dream ended in penalty kicks to a resilient Japanese side who was more fit for the task. Here's my attempt to process and set expectations on yesterday's US loss: 1. The best team doesn't always win in soccer. Sometimes, even the most dominant team in a particular game doesn't win that game. (HT: Grant Wahl , Sports Illustrated) 2. Here are some notes on penalties ending this game: (a) Tough on USA, since Japan had data on US shooters, since they had just seen them against Brasil. There are players that take their penalties the same direction
Read more

BCS Postseason Analysis

If the controversy surrounding the BCS System and college football bowl format, it certainly is the most complex and misunderstood controversy. The morning after the BCS championship game, here are three talking points: 1 - We're closer than ever to seeing a change in the traditional bowl format. The 2011 bowl season again proved how difficult it is to sell out every bowl game. This usually results in the participating schools having to eat the cost of those tickets. That trend can't continue. Playing in a meaningless bowl game actually costs some schools more money than they make by participating in the game. You can read about one instance of this happening here , involving the 2011 Virginia Tech football team, which made it to the Orange Bowl. The school had to eat 9,500 tickets it couldn't sell. They lost a total of $421,000, and it could've been a lot worse. 2 - The BCS isn't the enemy of the playoff system. In fact, they could actually be really good friends
Read more