File :-(, x, )
Deciding a match by penalty kicks Anonymous
Y/N?
>> Anonymous
From a neutral spectator point of view, very Y

I would feel bad if my team lost by them though
>> Anonymous
Its the most exciting thing in the world of sports
>> Heynonnynonnymous
As long as it isn't done in Hockey.
>> Anonymous
>>113220

Definite N, but that's just because I come from an ice hockey background, where you don't stop until you score in the playoffs.

I couldn't imagine deciding the Stanley cup via shootout--there'd be riots.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
NO!
>> Anonymous
Y

so fun to watch. thank god I didn't have a rooting interest in that champions league final. I would have lost like 30 pounds in sweat
>> Anonymous
A golden goal extended extra time tbh.
>> Anonymous
Hell yes. Penalties are awesome to watch if you're neutral. On the other hand, if your team is involved, there's a big chance you'll have a heart attack. Mega heart attack when your captain slips and fucks up in the biggest game in the history of your club.
>> Anonymous
No, we need to go back to coin tosses. Oh wait, that's pretty much the same thing.
>> Anonymous
Penalty kicks = best fucking drama
Gives more chances to goalkeepers to be an hero.

Y
>> Anonymous
>>113228
Hockey> soccer
>> Anonymous
Y

It's either that or a replay, and replay for the replay after that.

On hockey the play-offs in England have been decided on a play-off. Manchester verses Sheffield, so did the B&H cup Manchester verses London.
>> Anonymous
It's not the best option, but it's the only really feasible one AET.

Y.
>> Anonymous
Y If you fuck up there, it's still fucking up.
>> Anonymous
N
It's good drama, but it's a fairly shit way to win/lose a big game. I think a better option is the one where the player dribbles from the halfway line and has 30 secs to shoot (or whatever the time limit is), i think this is the way it's done in the MLS (or maybe back in the 70s US soccer league). it's not perfect but it requires a bit more skill for both player and keeper than a spot kick.
>> Anonymous
>>113461
Oh gawd, that's the most retarded thing ever. Keep your hockey shit to yourself.
>> Anonymous
>>113469
It's not for hockey, it works perfect for hockey because of the size of the rink/net plus the speed of the player.. But it's because of those reasons it would be retarded in football.

Only people who disagree with the current way are Chelsea fans, and English who actually really, really care about the national team.
>> Anonymous
>>113474
The English don't need to hate penalties anymore. They don't have them in friendlies and qualifications for major tournaments.
>> Anonymous
>>113476
Oh lawl
>> Anonymous
>>113476
Well at least all the penalty shootouts are gonna be awesome for me to watch this summer.
>> Anonymous
Yes. Simply because, if the match reaches a stalemate, playing on won't give a fair result of who can score more goals, given the opportunity. If you give BOTH sides the opportunity of scoring 5 goals from a spot, then it indicates who would be the better team.

It's the same reason why there are two halves of extra time and no more golden goal scenario.
>> Anonymous
>>114547
>If you give BOTH sides the opportunity of scoring 5 goals from a spot, then it indicates who would be the better team.

/thread

In b4 luckfags