Latest great idea from FIFA

[Barry the bird boggler]

From Reuters..

FIFA is to consider abolishing extra time at the World Cup and going straight to penalties if knockout matches are drawn, the federation's president Sepp Blatter has said.

Blatter said in an interview with FIFA's website that too many teams had played defensively at the World Cup in South Africa and football's governing body would look at ways of encouraging more attacking tactics.

"We plan to take the opportunity to look at the concept of extra time," said Blatter, whose remarks differed slightly from an interview he gave to the German magazine Focus last month when he said penalty shootouts could even be used after drawn group matches.

"Often we see teams set themselves up even more defensively in extra time, in an attempt to avoid conceding a goal at all costs.

"To prevent this, we could go directly to a penalty shootout at full time, or reintroduce the golden goal rule. We'll see what emerges from the committee meetings."

Blatter did not discuss penalty shootouts themselves, which many feel are a lottery and devalue the sport, leaving a lasting stigma on the player who misses the decisive kick.

FIFA has so far declined to consider alternatives to shootouts, such as using the corner count to decide drawn matches and reducing the number of players on the field in extra time to open up the game.

The golden goal rule, in which the first goal to be scored in extra time won the match, was used at the 1996 and 2000 European championships and the 1998 and 2002 World Cups.

Intended to encourage attacking play, it turned out to be counter-productive as the fear of conceding a decisive goal prompted teams to use blanket defence.

At Euro 2004, the silver goal was used in which, if a team was leading at end of the first period of extra time, they would win the game. Otherwise the match would continue until the end of the second period.

It was used when a Traianos Dellas header in the first-half of extra time gave Greece a 1-0 win over Czech Republic in the semi-final.

Since then, football has reverted to using the traditional extra-time system in all major international championships, although in South America's Copa Libertadores and Copa America, it is generally not played.

In those tournaments, the possibility of having to play only 90 minutes rather than 120 to get to penalties results in even more defensive tactics.

Blatter said he was not impressed with the opening games in South Africa where the first 16 matches produced only 25 goals and included six draws, two of them goalless.

"In the first few matches of the group stage in South Africa, we witnessed some teams that went out to avoid defeat, that were playing for a draw from the outset," he said.

"This is a topic that I would like to discuss at upcoming football and technical committee meetings. We have to try to find a way to encourage free-flowing football in tournaments like the World Cup, with teams playing to win."

[cmonurz]

Getting rid of extra time would serve only to see teams 'parking the bus' earlier in the game.

Have to admit I always liked golden goal, the hypothetical (or in the Greece example, real) situation where one kick/header can win the match or tournament. Real 'hero' moment.

[handbags_harris]

Quite frankly, whatever happens you are going to get teams that "park the bus". Tampering with things like this only serve to show that FIFA are trying to do something. to encourage attacking play when in reality nothing will alter on the pitch. My own opinion is that I really like the Silver Goal rule, it is the best way of deciding matches in extra time if we really have to do that.

And anyway, isn't defensive play one of the many facets of football? There are, after all, many ways to skin a cat.

[11.30 from paddington]

I wouldn't really want to see any tampering with the rules. As Handbags says, defensive play is just as important as attacking play.

Anyway, if FIFA were serious about encouraging attacking play, they'd introduce a rule were a 0-0 is the same as a loss. No point for either side. You only get a point if it's a score-draw.

Obviously, this will punish teams like New Zealand, for example, who may play out of their skins to obtain a 0-0 against Brazil. Games like this can be just as exciting as a straightforward 3-0 victory to the 'bigger' side.

[prostak]

This goal fetishism is completely contrary to the true nature of football. If you want end-to-end action and high points scoring, watch basketball. Case in point would be Chelsea's recent spate of 6-0 victories and the like, which have been deathly dull almost without exception. True appreciation of the sport acknowledges that a 0-0 can be thrilling. It may be snobbish attitude, but the desire for endless goals seems a bit... Lovejoy.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

This goal fetishism is completely contrary to the true nature of football. If you want end-to-end action and high points scoring, watch basketball. Case in point would be Chelsea's recent spate of 6-0 victories and the like, which have been deathly dull almost without exception. True appreciation of the sport acknowledges that a 0-0 can be thrilling. It may be snobbish attitude, but the desire for endless goals seems a bit... Lovejoy.

0-0 draws can be great. I remember one v West Ham 9 years ago to the day which was fantastic.

The truth is though, there are far more crap ones than great ones, and nearly all of the world cup 0-0s tend to be the crap variety.

Defence certainly is part of football, but very few world cup 0-0s are the result of a valiant rear-guard action, heroically repelling attacks. Most are grinding stalemates where neither team is willing to risk attack, or where one team "spoils" all the way through the match to prevent the game having any flow.

I can't for the life of me think how scrapping extra time or bringing back the golden/silver goal would help any though. Scrapping extra time would just make teams settle for penalties earlier, and make their objective of going to penalties easier to achieve.

[Barry the bird boggler]

It's not broke so why try to fix it, teams will set out their stall to get the best they can from the game they have to play. For some teams this means sitting deep and trying the odd break for others it means all out attack.

As has been stated above, defensive organisation is as much part of the game as anything else and should not be sidelined in an attempt to make football more like the heap of crap Basketball is.

[Silver Fox]

0-0 draws can be great. I remember one v West Ham 9 years ago to the day which was fantastic.

To the day? I'm fairly sure that game wasn't on 9/10

[Big Foot]

0-0 away at United first day of the season was a pretty good game

[rhroyal]

Defensive football will always be part of the game whatever small rules are introduced. The only way FIFA can get rid of defensive play is to score teams on ambition and the football they play; that's not our sport and I assume it will never happen - rightfully so.

[Hoop Blah]

Anyway, if FIFA were serious about encouraging attacking play, they'd introduce a rule were a 0-0 is the same as a loss. No point for either side. You only get a point if it's a score-draw.

All that would do is see the two sides letting each other score so that the game effectively starts as 1-1 instead of 0-0.

Totally agree with all the other comments about keeping a clean sheet being something to be rewarded and not looked down on, and how the rarity of goals makes them all the more special when they come along.

FIFA just need to stop trying to fix something that isn't really broken.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

0-0 draws can be great. I remember one v West Ham 9 years ago to the day which was fantastic.

To the day? I'm fairly sure that game wasn't on 9/10

don't know why I though it was the 11th yesterday.