"Mr" Blatter's latest idea

[Wes_Howes]

Well it seems because an English team have won the Champions League, Mr Blatter feels as though he's been punched on the nose. So now he wants to rid football of penalty shoot outs
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18205513

Heaven forbid if England were ever to win a major international tournament, I shudder to think what he'll want to do to the game. Even better if it was in a penalty shoot out!

As an aside, did anyone see Platini's face when he was handing out the medals after the final whistle in Munich bog off sour puss!

[swingy]

:

As an aside, did anyone see Platini's face when he was handing out the medals after the final whistle in Munich bog off sour puss!

Totally agree. He could not have been more miserable if he tried sucking lemons. As for Blatter what a joke.

[jingernut]

Not a follower of football myself, but the penalty shoot out does seem like a rubbish way to decide the winners.

[shaggy101]

Time for Blatter too go methinks. If teams cant be separated in 120 mins of football then it has to go to pens. If not we could have 2 or 3 replays of a final. Defeats the object if you ask me.

[ericbee123]

Some Suggestions :

1. Call it a draw and both teams share the trophy for 6 months each.

2. Toss a coin.

3. Get the final 11 men from each team to stand along the goal line at one end, ref blows whistle the first team to get all their 11 men over the other goal line first wins.

4. Extra-Extra time, 5 minutes each way, to consist of a goalie and any 4 outfield players, first team to score wins.

5. Each team selects someone to go into a Zorb Ball, one in each goal, the first to make it up the field and into the opposition net, after ref blows his whistle, wins.

6. New Style Penalties, goal keeper stood on his line and 1 defender stood on penalty spot against a player from the opposition with the ball on the centre circle. These are just starting positions when ref blows, continues until ball goes dead or goal scored. Best of 3 with sudden death, different outfield players and different defenders each time ( could end up with a striker in defence or a goalkeeper dribbling down to score -- but at least it proves footballing skills ).

7. Penalties -- as now -- you have to admit they are exciting.

[Russ]

Time for Blatter too go methinks. If teams cant be separated in 120 mins of football then it has too go too pens. If not we could have 2 or 3 replays of a final. Defeats the object if you ask me.

Completely agree. Penalties are fine and very exciting - as long as the team you support isn't involved in them.

Blatter is a man who would rather shun video technology (or at least drag his feet over the issue), while officials struggle and often get massive decisions wrong as a result. His priorities are questionable to put it mildly. The sooner he is dispensed of one way or another at FIFA, the better.

[Stuka]

Well at least we know Mr Blatter is not taking preformance enhancing drugs. He should.

[DanH]

Me and a friend discussed this a few years ago. We came up with the idea of dividing extra time into 3 periods. The first two would be 10 minutes each and would work like normal extra time, so if the two teams were still level it would of course continue. The 3rd period would be golden goal and teams would switch ends every 5 minutes, and continue as long as it takes. We also agreed that in any case, if a game goes to extra time then both teams should be allowed an extra substitute.

[StevenH]

Me and a friend discussed this a few years ago. We came up with the idea of dividing extra time into 3 periods. The first two would be 10 minutes each and would work like normal extra time, so if the two teams were still level it would of course continue. The 3rd period would be golden goal and teams would switch ends every 5 minutes, and continue as long as it takes. We also agreed that in any case, if a game goes to extra time then both teams should be allowed an extra substitute.

Problem is, teams wil be exhausted by that third period and, as a result, will just fall back into having everyone behind the ball in order to avoid being beaten (heck this can be seen happening in extra-time as we know it now), you could have games going on for much too long. Sometimes you just have games where neither team can break the other down in open play, 120 minutes offers more than a fair amount of time for it to happen, any longer than that could become farcical so teams have to be forcibly split at that point. It's a cruel way to lose, yes, but it's a neccesary one.

[Abingdonman]

The only fair way,is to play untill you have a winner...and yes,I do remember the Leeds v Chelsea saga
How can any final be fairly decided on penalties?
history can be written on a single kick,just imagine if Drogba had missed his penalty recently,he would now be a villain,and Chelsea would have been slagged off for only having 1 shot in the whole game...`
but if it has to be penalties,then the teams should be allowed to let a particular player,or players,take as many penalties as required,in any order ...
IE let their best penalty takers settle it ...lets face it even the best will miss or get saved eventually

[aviodromefriend]

Problem is that football is (or thinks it is) so important that losing is no option for anyone. So teams are not playing with the intention to win, but not to lose. There are a lot of matches I've seen where it was a relieve there were penalties in the end. If they had to play on, they wouldn't have finished by the time they had to play their next game, just because no one dared to cross the middle-line.