Getting a result
Love it or hate it - the so-called ‘penalty shoot-out’ (much more graphic than the official phrase ‘kicks from the penalty mark’) never
fails to create passion at the end of what is inevitably an important game. But could we do better?
Referees would be among the first to welcome a simpler system of deciding a result. You only have to look at the book of the Laws to see why.
There are nearly two pages detailing the correct procedure (14 items) and a check-list for referees of no fewer than 20 items (just over two pages). And inevitably it all happens
at the end of a keenly contested match and extra time.
Another option
One of the most popular alternatives suggested seems to be ‘sudden death’ or the ‘golden goal’ - if the scores are still level after
extra time is completed, the first team to score wins.
Most readers will be too young to remember this being tried out more than 50 years ago. As it happens, in 1946 I was a (very young) spectator at
Edgeley Park watching Stockport County v. Doncaster Rovers in the old Division 3 (North) Cup. With a draw after extra time, the result would be decided by ‘sudden death’. Not
exactly ‘sudden’ as it turned out.
A 3-00 p.m. kick-off and the game didn’t finish until about 10 to 7 in the evening! People went home for tea and came back, and others, who
had spent the afternoon elsewhere, came in (free) for the final stages. The official time played was 3 hrs 25 minutes. The players were on their knees by the end, and I guess the
officials must have been pretty tired too, though I don’t remember noticing. It was after that game that the practice was abandoned by the FA.
And more
So what are the other possibilities? The most obvious and fairest is the replay, but with today’s crowded fixtures even in local leagues,
replay after replay is no longer practical and would in fact encourage teams to want to (and even to try to) lose in cup competitions, so as not to damage their league aspirations.
Then there are variations on the ‘run-on-goal’ formula. The one often used in the US involves a single attacker running in on goal from,
say, 25 yards, with just a goalkeeper to beat. Exciting it certainly is, with a variety of tactics used to try to get the advantage. But it’s rather like a medieval battle being
settled by the champion of the two warring factions - a good way to get a decision, but more about the skill of two individuals than which side should have won.
Penalties look here to stay
Anyway, none of these other possibilities has been sanctioned for use here, so penalty shoot-outs may be here to stay, simply because we can’t
find anything better. I have to admit I like watching them, however unfair the final result may seem. As long as I am not the referee that is.
But did you realise that, if the penalty shoot-out cannot be completed because of bad light, the result has to be decided by ‘the tossing of a
coin or the drawing of lots’? I am just grateful I have never had to do it.
Brian Palmer
© B. Palmer 1999
Back To Contents |