Alternatives to Penalty Shootout (PSO)

[Sagy]

In tournaments, during the elimination round, each game must end with one and only one team advancing. If the game ends in a tie, there is normally a 30 (2x15) min Extra Time period. If the game is still tied, we go to PSO. Some options are (alphabetical order):

1. Ball in attacking third/penalty area - Measure time the ball is in the given area (regardless of possession), team with higher time advances.
2. Coin flip/Drawing of lots - Team winning the "lottery" advances.
3. Corner kicks - Team with more corner kicks advances.
4. Discipline points - Team with least discipline points advances (can be cards or a combination of cards and fouls committed).
5. ET + PSO - Today's system.
6. GK touches - Team whose GK touched the ball in the box least number of times advances.
7. Higher seeded - Team with better record in group stage/higher ranking pre-tournament.
8. Kicks before ET - PSO takes place before the start of ET (used only if ET ends in a tie).
9. PSO (no ET) - Skip ET and go straight to PSO.
10. Time of possession - Team with greater time of possession in attacking half advances.

Please keep in mind, this is a tiebreaker, the teams are tied. Whatever, we use to determine which team advances is going to be a weaker indicator than goals as to which team "deserves" to advance.

My picks are 6, 1, 10. All of them reward a team for attacking and punish teams that keep playing the ball back to the keeper or hold it without an attempt to push forward. I really don't like 2 & 9. The others are tiebreakers but don't really help the game.

[EarlofBug]

I like 8, 9 and 6.
Also interesting are 4 (but it needs another tie breaker) and also 1.

[Todor]

I like 8, 9 and 6.
Also interesting are 4 (but it needs another tie breaker) and also 1.

8 would be great, but I think is difficult to implement, because PSOs together with all the procedures involved take plenty of time, so there will be something like 30' between the end of the regular time and the start of the ET and probably the players will have to warm up again, which will increase the interval even further.

[DumoKing]

I seem to be of an opposite opinion. 1, 3, 4, 6 and 10 are out as they favor a specific type of play, and not always the most attacking, as possession is not equal to attacking and disciplinary is not the same as destructive.
Worst though is 7 as it would effectively force the underdog to win the match while the "better" team can play for a draw.

You are missing two options here though, one is replay and the other one is unlimited extra time (would require the return of 'golden goal' rule). First one is still used to some extent and the other was common in other sports like ice hockey not that long ago.

[BurningStorm]

We will see so many PSO's in CL and EL now. In general, I was a fan of kicking out the away goal rule, but the PSO lottery is not a fair way to decide things. I would prefer -> first normal 2x 15 minutes of extra-time and if it's still a draw I would add 2x 5 minutes with 7 vs 7 field players. If it's still a draw after the 10 minutes: next goal decides. It would be spectacular, exciting and extremely interesting tactically .

[SimonB]

We will see so many PSO's in CL and EL now. In general, I was a fan of kicking out the away goal rule, but the PSO lottery is not a fair way to decide things. I would prefer -> first normal 2x 15 minutes of extra-time and if it's still a draw I would add 2x 5 minutes with 7 vs 7 field players. If it's still a draw after the 10 minutes: next goal decides. It would be spectacular, exciting and extremely interesting tactically .

Yes, or perhaps the first part of your suggestion, reducing the team size to make a goal more likely, and then after a given amount of time to stop it going on forever and exhausting the players, to have a contest where the 5 initially selected players on each team start at the half-way line instead of taking penalties aa this would involve more football skills.

[rpo.castro]

Other 3 suggestions similar to most above:
-more twitter followers
-best looking coach
-teams who ate least calories at lunch

[EarlofBug]

Other 3 suggestions similar to most above:
-more twitter followers
-best looking coach
-teams who ate least calories at lunch

[Witkop1983]

I seem to be of an opposite opinion. 1, 3, 4, 6 and 10 are out as they favor a specific type of play, and not always the most attacking, as possession is not equal to attacking and disciplinary is not the same as destructive.
Worst though is 7 as it would effectively force the underdog to win the match while the "better" team can play for a draw.

You are missing two options here though, one is replay and the other one is unlimited extra time (would require the return of 'golden goal' rule). First one is still used to some extent and the other was common in other sports like ice hockey not that long ago.

I like 7 in cases two teams from the same competition play eachoter after the season (i.e. promotion playoffs or ECL qualification playoffs). In case of a tie in the playoff the team finishing in the better position in the regular season should advance.

In tournaments the only real alternative to ET+PSO or PSO (without ET) is a shootout like they used to do in the MLS. I think it would involve a little more skill for the player and a little better save chances for the goalkeeper.

[Sagy]

I like 8, 9 and 6.
Also interesting are 4 (but it needs another tie breaker) and also 1.

8 would be great, but I think is difficult to implement, because PSOs together with all the procedures involved take plenty of time, so there will be something like 30' between the end of the regular time and the start of the ET and probably the players will have to warm up again, which will increase the interval even further.

Fair, on the other side, players will have time to rest so they are going to be "fresher" in ET.

[Sagy]

I seem to be of an opposite opinion. 1, 3, 4, 6 and 10 are out as they favor a specific type of play, and not always the most attacking, as possession is not equal to attacking and disciplinary is not the same as destructive.
Worst though is 7 as it would effectively force the underdog to win the match while the "better" team can play for a draw.

Yes, 1, 3, 6, & 10 reward teams that push the ball forward (correlated to attacking style). The only one that involves possession is 10 and it only rewards it if you are in the attacking half. This basically pushes the defensive team to press teams that are holding the ball in the attacking half without attempting to attack. The net results will be a more open game (both teams will have more opportunities).

I agree that "disciplinary is not the same as destructive". However, since we are looking for a tiebreaker, it is something to be considered.

You are missing two options here though, one is replay and the other one is unlimited extra time (would require the return of 'golden goal' rule). First one is still used to some extent and the other was common in other sports like ice hockey not that long ago.

I totally agree that replay i the best option. I also believe that t should be used for all finals.

Having said that, the question was about tournaments in which there is no time for replays (other than the final). Unlimited ET, without unlimited substitutions and larger squads, might impact player safety as well have a negative impact of the ability of the team that advances to compete.

[berten]

Start the first ET with 2 players per team less. If tied after the first ET, start the second ET with another player less.

[hertolo]

I dislike any tiebreaker that is known while the Extra-Time is running. It influences the way you play. If one team knows it will advance (1,3,4,6,7,10), it can play differently, meaning just defend. That's not the intention right, as you want to reward attacking teams? Sure, it's a tie, so the numbers may be close and if they get to defensively, they might lose it.

But still, what it basically means is that the better team, the one with more market value, will advance. They will have more possesion, more passes, more chances, less GK touches, and so on. Now that might make the underdog try to play differently, but not really, no? Parking the bus is their only option after all.

So what's the idea behind the change? Helping the underdog or the favourite?

I'm on the underdog side and would just prefer to cut the extra time. Straight to Penalties. The ET just exhausts the players, and prolongs the game (not ideal for viewers), they tend to get more boring too, especially in tournament settings where the stakes get higher and higher. So, if the teams were okay with PSO during normal time, let them get to it. It also helps the underdog who now only has to defend 90 minutes to reach his goal.

Now I could see a thing where a goal in ET automatically adds 5 additional minutes to the clock.

And ideally, we would find some other alternative to penalties (not the American half-field one though )

[rpo.castro]

I like 8, 9 and 6.
Also interesting are 4 (but it needs another tie breaker) and also 1.

8 would be great, but I think is difficult to implement, because PSOs together with all the procedures involved take plenty of time, so there will be something like 30' between the end of the regular time and the start of the ET and probably the players will have to warm up again, which will increase the interval even further.

Fair, on the other side, players will have time to rest so they are going to be "fresher" in ET.

No they wont.
Their body will get out of competitive mode and entering recovery mode just to be stopped and restarted.
High competition is not like we playing among friends. Small rests are good,big aren't.

[Sagy]

8 would be great, but I think is difficult to implement, because PSOs together with all the procedures involved take plenty of time, so there will be something like 30' between the end of the regular time and the start of the ET and probably the players will have to warm up again, which will increase the interval even further.

Fair, on the other side, players will have time to rest so they are going to be "fresher" in ET.

No they wont.
Their body will get out of competitive mode and entering recovery mode just to be stopped and restarted.
High competition is not like we playing among friends. Small rests are good,big aren't.

Sorry, facts don’t support your assertion.

There is at least a 15min break at half time that doesn’t have a negative impact on players. In other highly competitive sports (e.g., basketball) players have multiple breaks of 15+ min when they seat on the bench or halftime. The best example might be Ice Hockey in which you have at least two 15+ min breaks and most players have a longer break since the are not on the ice at the end of one period and start of the next.