UEFA CCC decides to scrap away goals rule

[Polak]

The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of getting rid of the away goal rule. At first I wasn't so sure, because I wasn't used to it, but to be honest, it's weird seeing teams draw over two games, and then one getting knocked out because the other scored more goals away from home.

I mean, why are we only rewarding attacking play away from home? PSG beat Bayern away 3-2, then lost at home 0-1. Sure, they scored 3 goals away, but Bayern also prevented PSG from scoring any goals in France. Why shouldn't defence also not be rewarded? Bayern went to Paris and didn't concede. That deserves praise to.

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but by getting rid of the away goal rule though, they now also need to scrap extra time, otherwise it won't be fair that the team playing at home in the 2nd leg has half an hour more time playing at home. With the away goal rule it was evened out with away goals counting double, but now it won't be.

[Lorric]

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but by getting rid of the away goal rule though, they now also need to scrap extra time, otherwise it won't be fair that the team playing at home in the 2nd leg has half an hour more time playing at home. With the away goal rule it was evened out with away goals counting double, but now it won't be.

Yeah, I said it, and I also said the home team should have to go second in the penalties. Going second is a disadvantage but home crowd is an advantage. That would be the absolute fairest way.

[rpo.castro]

Getting rid of ET? Next I will hear that crowd have influence on the PSO so we should rid of PSO and just go for coin toss

[SimonB]

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but by getting rid of the away goal rule though, they now also need to scrap extra time, otherwise it won't be fair that the team playing at home in the 2nd leg has half an hour more time playing at home. With the away goal rule it was evened out with away goals counting double, but now it won't be.

Yeah, I said it, and I also said the home team should have to go second in the penalties. Going second is a disadvantage but home crowd is an advantage. That would be the absolute fairest way.

I agree about abolishing extra time if we abolish away goals, why should the team playing at home second get an unfair advantage just because of luck of the draw?

I don't really disagree about your point on penalties Lorric, but does there exist proof anywhere that home advantage actually does help with the penalties? There is increased pressure on the home team, I am not so sure it is as helpful as it is during normal play.

[Forza AZ]

I agree about abolishing extra time if we abolish away goals, why should the team playing at home second get an unfair advantage just because of luck of the draw?

In most national Cups matches are played in 1 leg, so teams get 90 (or 120 minutes) advantage of playing at home. That is just part of knock-out matches. I would not take away ET. It is better to still have a shot to get a winner with normal play then going directly to penalties.

[nogomet]

Now that we've had dozens of ties with the AGR abolished, what I find is that watching games without worrying about away goals is now much easier on the nerves when I care about the result because teams I support are involved (which is good). But it's less exciting to watch games I'm not emotionally invested in (which is bad). So it kind of flattened the emotional curve of watching football.

[greenbay]

What about having the last goal scored in a two-legged match as the tiebreaker instead of extra time? No boring extra times that are usually just the built-up for the penalty lottery. And way lesser PSOs of course too.

[Lorric]

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but by getting rid of the away goal rule though, they now also need to scrap extra time, otherwise it won't be fair that the team playing at home in the 2nd leg has half an hour more time playing at home. With the away goal rule it was evened out with away goals counting double, but now it won't be.

Yeah, I said it, and I also said the home team should have to go second in the penalties. Going second is a disadvantage but home crowd is an advantage. That would be the absolute fairest way.

I agree about abolishing extra time if we abolish away goals, why should the team playing at home second get an unfair advantage just because of luck of the draw?

I don't really disagree about your point on penalties Lorric, but does there exist proof anywhere that home advantage actually does help with the penalties? There is increased pressure on the home team, I am not so sure it is as helpful as it is during normal play.

This is one of those things I think I've seen in the past but can't produce proof. The home fans will put pressure on the away team and support the home team.

[Forza AZ]

What about having the last goal scored in a two-legged match as the tiebreaker instead of extra time? No boring extra times that are usually just the built-up for the penalty lottery. And way lesser PSOs of course too.

Why not have penalties first and then extra time. So the loser of the penalties will have to score in extra time. Also this would give less pressure on the players that have to take a penalty, since they can still make up in extra time.

[rpo.castro]

Is this football we are talking about or some fancy sport from North America?
Only one match of this week went to PSO so ET wasn't boring. Why its boring? Because there is a tie? So once a leg reaches a tie we go to some PK's then go back to field?
What will be next? Taking a player off field every 5 minutes? Inverted grid with GK in the ofense and putting a striker on goal line? What about a fanboost by internet voting?

This topic makes ESL looking like a great idea

[JPV]

I don't really disagree about your point on penalties Lorric, but does there exist proof anywhere that home advantage actually does help with the penalties? There is increased pressure on the home team, I am not so sure it is as helpful as it is during normal play.

In 248 games which ended with penalties (games from the start in the fifties till 2018/2019, last games in my database (need to update it), the home team in the second leg won 144 times (58%), lost 104 times.

However, sometimes the best team gets the return leg advantage, so if i try to take only the games where teams with relative equal strength face each other (based on UEFA ranking to be as objective as possible), the difference is even stronger (80 wins (67%), 40 losses).

Taking only the modern era-games between teams with "suffician" equal ranking, still gives a 51/28 (65%) advantage to teams who take penalties while playing at home.

So i guess that's conclusive: you have a considerate advantage by playing at home in the second leg IF you need to take penalties.

[SimonB]

I don't really disagree about your point on penalties Lorric, but does there exist proof anywhere that home advantage actually does help with the penalties? There is increased pressure on the home team, I am not so sure it is as helpful as it is during normal play.

In 248 games which ended with penalties (games from the start in the fifties till 2018/2019, last games in my database (need to update it), the home team in the second leg won 144 times (58%), lost 104 times.

However, sometimes the best team gets the return leg advantage, so if i try to take only the games where teams with relative equal strength face each other (based on UEFA ranking to be as objective as possible), the difference is even stronger (80 wins (67%), 40 losses).

Taking only the modern era-games between teams with "suffician" equal ranking, still gives a 51/28 (65%) advantage to teams who take penalties while playing at home.

So i guess that's conclusive: you have a considerate advantage by playing at home in the second leg IF you need to take penalties.

Thanks, good to know the actual numbers.

[Polak]

Getting rid of ET? Next I will hear that crowd have influence on the PSO so we should rid of PSO and just go for coin toss

So are you saying there is no advantage to playing at home?

What about having the last goal scored in a two-legged match as the tiebreaker instead of extra time?

Both teams win 1-0, but the team who won the 2nd 1-0 leg goes through. Why should they have this privilege?

[rpo.castro]

Getting rid of ET? Next I will hear that crowd have influence on the PSO so we should rid of PSO and just go for coin toss

So are you saying there is no advantage to playing at home?

Where did I say that?

[Polak]

Getting rid of ET? Next I will hear that crowd have influence on the PSO so we should rid of PSO and just go for coin toss

So are you saying there is no advantage to playing at home?

Where did I say that?

You said next we'll hear the crowd has an influence in penalty shoot outs, so that would imply you think they don't have an influence in ET either, and therefore playing 30 minutes more home or away doesn't make a difference.

By the way, another suggestion, how about instead of penalties we have 1 on 1s? This has been trialled briefly in the past, although not really used. Personally I liked it whenever it was used. It seems it takes a bit more skill to score a 1 on 1 than a penalty. Perhaps with this people would not be as upset as they are with teams who go through on penalties.