Heated debate

[Simster]

The away goals rule. What a load of bollocks that is. If two teams have scored the same number of goals over 180 or 210 minutes of football, surely penalties are a fairer way to decide a result than when the goals are scored? At least then the result is still decided by the number of goals that are scored.

And also, I think the away goals rule is counter productive. On Wednesday, where is the incentive for Wales to push forward looking for a winner, knowing that a single goal from space left at the back could put them out if the tie is a tight one.

As I say, it's time UEFA got rid of this rubbish rule.

 

[CHAPPERS]

I'm not a big fan of it either Simster, it doesn't seem to make sense to me.

 

[Marshy]

agreed.

 

[BrightonBird]

Good call Simster. However, it is obviously harder for the away playing team to score due to atmosphere, etc (take Turkey v England for example).

But I do think penalties are the right way to go,

 

[DTES]

Definately agree. Not much heated debate here.

 

[Simster]

In fact, is there an argument in favour of it at all these days? In the days when back passes were allowed and slowed the game down, I could see the incentive for the away team to get the ball in play and try to score. But nowadays the back pass rule has eliminated most of the scope for blatent time wasting. It just seems the away goals rule is out of step with the way the game is played.

 

[Willow]

It's to encourage away teams to attack. Can't see too much wrong with it myself.

 

[Lush]

Let's have a midly tepid if not lukewarm debate!

 

[Simster]

It's to encourage away teams to attack. Can't see too much wrong with it myself.

But the same thing as saying it encourages the home team to defend. So what?

 

[Easy 10]

I guess the thinking behind it is that it encourages the away team to go more attacking, as the away goal can prove to be absolutely priceless in deciding the tie. Otherwise, the away team can just string players across the back, shut up shop for 90 minutes, and do their damndest to tough it out for a 0-0 to take back home for the 2nd leg. Which is fine if you're confident of keeping a clean sheet in the home leg, but very risky when away goals are involved.

Personally, I don't have a problem with it.

 

[ditchy]

I think away goal rule is fairest method ..it promotes teams to search for that "priceless goal when things are tight" It also changes the balance of a game especially when it goes against the run of play . Whats worse ..two teams playing out final 10 mins of 1-1 draw knowing pens is the outcome or the home team having to attck more to get winner becuase the away team has got that goal..

 

[Albion Rob]

I always think a 0-0 away from home is a dreadful result in Europe because you are screwed in the second leg.

How about just maiking it the the team that scored the first goal in the tie wins if it is level after 210 minutes. That way if they tried to defend they could easily screw up by letting in one goal rather than two.

 

[zefarelly]

I think away goals are good . . . . .take Arsenal for example . . . go to an away game and sit back and defend . . . .fortunately it doesnt work because they loose at home !

 

[Willow]

But the same thing as saying it encourages the home team to defend. So what?

But you could say the same thing if a team was playing for penalties. At least the away goals rules means managers need to display some sort of tactical nous.

Unlucky Simster, seems the away goal rule will not be going into Room 101.