Changes to penalty shoot-outs

The announcement came at the annual meeting of the International Football Association Board (Ifab) on Friday.

Ifab is also reviewing the order of penalty shootouts, as there is a "clear advantage" to going first.

Tennis-style tie-breakers

Ifab is considering changing penalty shootouts, citing the example of a tennis tie-break to combat the "statistically proven advantage" of the team that goes first.

Teams alternate in shootouts, but Ifab says research shows the first team taking kicks has a 60% chance of winning.

It is seeking trials in the lower levels of football that would see one team take the first penalty, then the teams alternate two kicks at a time.

"We believe that approach could remove that statistical bias and this is something that we will now look to trial," said Scottish FA chief executive Stewart Regan.

Personally I've never really thought about who goes first as more important.  Always had which end you are kicking towards as having more importance.

Opinion on this rule change?

The announcement came at the annual meeting of the International Football Association Board (Ifab) on Friday.

Ifab is also reviewing the order of penalty shootouts, as there is a "clear advantage" to going first.

Tennis-style tie-breakers

Ifab is considering changing penalty shootouts, citing the example of a tennis tie-break to combat the "statistically proven advantage" of the team that goes first.

Teams alternate in shootouts, but Ifab says research shows the first team taking kicks has a 60% chance of winning.

It is seeking trials in the lower levels of football that would see one team take the first penalty, then the teams alternate two kicks at a time.

"We believe that approach could remove that statistical bias and this is something that we will now look to trial," said Scottish FA chief executive Stewart Regan.

Personally I've never really thought about who goes first as more important.  Always had which end you are kicking towards as having more importance.

Opinion on this rule change?

Pretty sure it would make no difference for England!

So the trial is saying it comes down to who ever wins the toss of the coin then it's not anything you can predict.
Which in essence is what most fans want, unless I'm wrong?

Apparently they will be trying out sin-binning players too at lower levels. Load of rubbish, I'd be more concerned about improving the quality (or lack of) officiating.

Regarding the shootouts specifically, it just comes down to who doesn't bottle it.

Who goes first?

Serginho wishes he hadn't.

Penalty,
A B THEN B A, A B, B A, A B
Is that the proposal?

 

Just suits dickin around with rules to justify their worth ,as said above I'd be more concerned with the officials and cheating players now that is worth looking at .Penalty shoot outs are not ruining the game cheating players on the other hand .

What a load of bollocks,just toss the coin and whoever calls it right has first choice.The bigwigs in the different football authorities seem intent on F***ing the game up completely.No wonder they are drumming into kids that winning is not an issue as long as they take part.

Penalty,
A B THEN B A, A B, B A, A B
Is that the proposal?

 

That's exactly it mate.

The first taker only has the advantage if they score though, if they miss it then the advantage lies with the other team. The advantage and momentum continuously changes throughout a penalty shootout so that theory is bollocks IMO. They're making changes for changes sake. 

Istanbul '05, didn't AC go first? Not that proven.

Leave it as it is & stop dicking around with it...

Or just have 1 penalty each...if both score continue till one misses...

Leave it as it is & stop dicking around with it...

Or just have 1 penalty each...if both score continue till one misses...

Exactly,always F***ing about with the rules.

Istanbul '05, didn't AC go first? Not that proven.

I believe they did, think it was a Serginho miss wasn't it?

Whoever scores the most pens wins. It's not that complicated.

I suspect this is a big club moan, as the toss is down to luck, they need a way of 'evening up' their advantage.

But if this is the case, why do the 'better' teams play their home game second?

It's not tennis, it's football.

There aren't that many shoot outs, and when there are nobody says of the winner, "it's because they went first".

I say bollocks.

I say real shoot outs with live ammunition