PK's to decide "knockout" games

[kickingandscreaming]

Parent of a college keeper here:

I can’t stand golden goal - to me, the worst of all ways of determining a winner and I’m glad the trend is away from it. I have no problem with the system of normal OT and then PKs if still tied. PKs are a gimmick but you can’t have the players play forever or the game will slow down to a painful pace OR the risk fo injury rises. I do think that sub rules should reset in OT (not as applicable in college as in the pro/international settings). Changing the rules so that it is less like soccer - bigger goal, different scoring - seems off to me.

I never thought I'd see a keeper parent prefer PKs to Golden Goal (and am reminded how little I really "know"). I don't like PKs to end the game because the game doesn't end with the full team competing. Why do you prefer PKs?

I like the idea of resetting the subs in OT - if it comes to that - but I prefer no OT.

 

[kickingandscreaming]

How about a shootout to start every game, or before the start of the second half, purely as an exhibition unless needed? Both teams will know what they are playing for.

Agree - that was my "If you still like PKs" option at the very end of the original post. Where I really like this option is in youth tournament knockout play. While it may not be as exciting as it is if it was at the end of the game, it does give more "live" PK experience to players than they currently get. In a players club experience, it will easily increase the live PKs taken by a team by a multiple of more than 2 - my guess is close to 4 times as many assuming about 1 in 4 knockout games end in a tie.

 

[Grace T.]

Agree - that was my "If you still like PKs" option at the very end of the original post. Where I really like this option is in youth tournament knockout play. While it may not be as exciting as it is if it was at the end of the game, it does give more "live" PK experience to players than they currently get. In a players club experience, it will easily increase the live PKs taken by a team by a multiple of more than 2 - my guess is close to 4 times as many assuming about 1 in 4 knockout games end in a tie.

In the youth context it may take a long time. Two scenarios: when they are very little kids don’t know how to shoot the pk well which means at least 1 or 2 will miss. It may take several go around or you may be in a golden goal scenario anyways.

second at least among the boys that age from 13-15 at the higher levels. The keepers still can’t cover the whole goal and there Is really no excuse for a top level boy to miss the pk. Both teams can end up 5-5or 4-4 routinely. I assume the same problem exists for the girls all the way up but haven’t seen enough shoot outs to know.

 

[whatithink]

I don't really have any issue with extra time or a penalty shootout, but if I was going to suggest "improvements", I'd go with

• No substitutions in extra time, so coaches will need to figure that out in the last few minutes of a game
• Each team starts extra time down 1 player, and loses another at the start of the second period of extra time, so more space etc.
  • You could take out a player every 5 minutes which would probably guarantee someone scores.
• GKs can move on the whistle in a penalty shootout as it should be an equal opportunity to score/save
  • As an aside, imv, GKs should have to stay on the line for an "in game" PK. It's a penalty against the defending team, and not meant to be an "equal" opportunity score/save, i.e. it's meant to be weighted to the offensive side.

 

[espola]

I don't really have any issue with extra time or a penalty shootout, but if I was going to suggest "improvements", I'd go with

• No substitutions in extra time, so coaches will need to figure that out in the last few minutes of a game
• Each team starts extra time down 1 player, and loses another at the start of the second period of extra time, so more space etc.
  • You could take out a player every 5 minutes which would probably guarantee someone scores.
• GKs can move on the whistle in a penalty shootout as it should be an equal opportunity to score/save
  • As an aside, imv, GKs should have to stay on the line for an "in game" PK. It's a penalty against the defending team, and not meant to be an "equal" opportunity score/save, i.e. it's meant to be weighted to the offensive side.

Many many years ago in a game in San Diego County Cup (post-season rec team tournament), the score was 0-0 after regular time, and the overtime rules were that after two short OT periods the keepers could no longer use their hands. A goal quickly ensued in the third OT.

 

[focomoso]

Or give each team three corner kick tries, with each try ending when a goal is scored or the ball leaves the field of play or crosses the midfield line.

Actually, this one isn't bad. Back and forth corner kicks. Or maybe back and forth free kicks from somewhere outside the 18. At least this way, the entire team is involved and you don't run the players into the ground...

 

[dk_b]

I never thought I'd see a keeper parent prefer PKs to Golden Goal (and am reminded how little I really "know"). I don't like PKs to end the game because the game doesn't end with the full team competing. Why do you prefer PKs?

I like the idea of resetting the subs in OT - if it comes to that - but I prefer no OT.

I have seen really fluky goals result in a sudden win - one still haunts me (scored by a player who just celebrated her senior day at Cal) - and that is far harder to take than playing hard for two OTs and then going to PKs. I always want the game to be decided in run of play but I also think the quality of soccer would disintegrate (at every level) if they took a Stanley Cup Playoff approach and that can result in injury. So, of the options available, a proper 2-part OT followed by PKs is my preference.

(My kid has had some fun PK battles in her time. She and the SDSU keeper (who won in like 23 rounds last week in the conference tourney) had a couple of good ones in their youth days - one in a tourney final and one in NorCal's state cup final at U13. Her freshman year in HS, they went 11 rounds to upset the #4 seed in the first round of sectional and in her senior year, she went 7 rounds (I think it was) to upset the #3 seed in the quarters of section (and ended up in their first finals in school history (not a power against those great suburban teams in our area so that was memorable). In both those HS shootouts, the other team THOUGHT it had won after scoring in the top of a round while forgetting that the other team (our team) had to kick)

 

[kickingandscreaming]

In the youth context it may take a long time. Two scenarios: when they are very little kids don’t know how to shoot the pk well which means at least 1 or 2 will miss. It may take several go around or you may be in a golden goal scenario anyways.

second at least among the boys that age from 13-15 at the higher levels. The keepers still can’t cover the whole goal and there Is really no excuse for a top level boy to miss the pk. Both teams can end up 5-5or 4-4 routinely. I assume the same problem exists for the girls all the way up but haven’t seen enough shoot outs to know.

I do remember PKs at a girls State Cup game when they were younger. IIRC, they were far from automatic. Assuming you want the game to end sooner, a "PK" should be a 50-50 proposition. Whatever we can do to get there will be an improvement in itself. As you point out, that may require somewhat different requirements based on age and skill.

 

[kickingandscreaming]

• GKs can move on the whistle in a penalty shootout as it should be an equal opportunity to score/save
  • As an aside, imv, GKs should have to stay on the line for an "in game" PK. It's a penalty against the defending team, and not meant to be an "equal" opportunity score/save, i.e. it's meant to be weighted to the offensive side.

This is an interesting thought.

 

[Grace T.]

GKs can move on the whistle in a penalty shootout as it should be an equal opportunity to score/save

• • As an aside, imv, GKs should have to stay on the line for an "in game" PK. It's a penalty against the defending team, and not meant to be an "equal" opportunity score/save, i.e. it's meant to be weighted to the offensive side.

The issue with a pk being a penalty is that not all fouls are created equal. A hard dogso leading to injury is very different than an unintentional handball that doesn’t stop a goal scoring opportunity. If you throw a header rule on top of that you have even more issues. One way the refs differentiate now is to ignore quite a bit of it such as the shenanigans that go on now with corners (such as shirt pulling, pushing, impeding the gk, gk making contact with a player). I’ve even seen refs take fouls they whistle for that occurred in the box and move them out for a dfk. Differentiation of these fouls would require something more drastic than just allowing the gk to move: now we are talking either point differentiations or something like the idea of treating some of these like dfks.

 

[Eagle33]

PK's adds drama and everyone loves drama.

 

[whatithink]

The issue with a pk being a penalty is that not all fouls are created equal. A hard dogso leading to injury is very different than an unintentional handball that doesn’t stop a goal scoring opportunity. If you throw a header rule on top of that you have even more issues. One way the refs differentiate now is to ignore quite a bit of it such as the shenanigans that go on now with corners (such as shirt pulling, pushing, impeding the gk, gk making contact with a player). I’ve even seen refs take fouls they whistle for that occurred in the box and move them out for a dfk. Differentiation of these fouls would require something more drastic than just allowing the gk to move: now we are talking either point differentiations or something like the idea of treating some of these like dfks.

There isn't really an issue, if the ref calls the PK, then it's a PK. What the offense was doesn't matter. It's meant to be weighted to the offense, that's the point, so the GK can't move.

A shootout is diff though and I'd be fine with the GK moving. It would make it way more interesting and, frankly, exciting, and mess up every normal PK takers routines! Whistle goes, the taker has one touch/shot and the GK can storm them flat out ... what's not to like!