Sydney FC and Melbourne Victory at the weekend played out a tension filled A-League Grand Final, ending up 1-1 at full time. The final should be regarded as a classic in years to come, but the final result is a travesty of justice.
One one hand, I am quite pleased that Sydney did win the title, but on the other hand, to win because of a penalty shoot-out is a hollow way to win anything. Both sides on the park have just played their guts out for 120 minutes, and the best they can come up with is a system akin to a lottery.
My opinion is shared at least by one other prominent person in the world of football:
"When it comes to the World Cup final it is passion, and when it goes to extra time it is a drama,but when it comes to penalty kicks it is a tragedy."
- Sepp Blatter, President of FIFA
How then can such a thing be allowed to continue? Penalty kicks as a way to end a match really are quite a horrid thing.
Before the World Cup in 1970 in Mexico, matches that had been drawn at the end of regulation time were either replayed, or extra time was played, or as in the case of the Euro '68 Semi Final between the USSR and Italy, decided by coin toss.
Now I'm not saying that a coin toss is fairer than a penalty shoot-out, in fact a coin toss is just as abhorrent. Surely there has to be a better method though.
In the "bad old days" when television didn't decide when fixtures were to be played, the most common method of deciding who would progress to the next stage of a knockout tournament was a full replay. Now I admit that for international fixtures, this poses a problem, but for a domestic competition it provides another potential chance for extra ticket sales.
The most protracted FA Cup tie of all time happened in 1955 between Stoke City and Bury, which wasn't decided until four replays later, being 1-1, 1-1, 3-3, 2-2 and finally Bury 2 Stoke City 3. The last FA Cup Final to be decided by replay was the 1993 final in which after 4 hours, Arsenal beat Sheffield Wednesday 1-1, then 2-1.
Admittedly the situation is a little bit different in Australia considering that we don't actually have a Cup, so they tack a cup competition onto the end of the league. Now I would have thought that the obvious thing to do would either be ditch the finals series and playout the rest of the league (since for some odd reason, everyone plays everyone else thrice), or in the event of a draw in finals series, simply force another replay at a neutral venue.
Or perhaps if that wasn't to everyone's liking, then why not simply award joint winners of the title. If two teams in a final have both played well (or even badly) and both of them deserve their name in the record books, then is there anything wrong with that?
If prize money is an issue, and if that truly is the driving the cause, then it stands to reason that neither side maximised a win, and therefore the total money on offer for the fixture should be split.
If you absolutely must decide a winner, then look at corners conceded and goal kicks forced. At least then you'd have an idea of who was attacking. For a supposed team sport to end as a battle of individuals in my opinion is stupid; it detracts from the game of football. For this reason above any other, the idea of penalty shoot-outs is wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment