Has anybody EVER enjoyed the away goal rule apart from the team and fans that win because of it ? Surely professional sports stars should be able to perform away from home equally as well as at home if not then you are not psychologically solid as a player. It is a weakness. It has ended many great games too soon when we could have enjoyed great periods of extra time or penalties.
Would you support abolishing the away goal rule ?
Unfamiliar ground, jet lag, climate differences and whatever problems arise from being sedentary for however long a flight may be.
But no I don't like it.
Football pitches are different sizes and grass length and moisture also changes a lot.
home advantage is a fact, the away goal rule makes sense and it's a good incentive.
both teams play home and away you stupid fuck
When did I claim they didn't ?
I enjoy it when it screws over teams that I don't like
Keep it, but if a 2 legged tie is level, go to ET, then if it's still level, away goals come into play.
Lol, this.
Jet lag will be minscule around Europe and travel time is a minor too flights are like 2 hours most places and some teams use coaches for national games with similar journey times.
so team that plays at home first gets 90 mins home advantage, team that plays at home in the second game gets 120 mins home advantage.
Yeah, that sounds fair.
>Not wanting to see penalties
Perfect solution is keeping the away rule but if it goes into ET then it shouldn't count anymore because the team that was away in the 1st leg is clearly at a disadvantage.
home advantage is just a meme
Each leg should have to go to extra time and penalties in the event of a draw. There should be no draws allowed in the knockout stages
Your just a meme
all cup matches should be played at neutral grounds, then you eliminate this bullshit.
All of the grounds from teams in the draw are available. each tie you draw two teams plus a ground. If it's either team in that tie, you redraw. Everyone draws at a neutral ground, Noone gets home advantage. No need for 2 legs or gay rules about away goals.
Your welcome UEFA
If you keep away goals, you should at least remove it for extra time.
Field goals should be allowed in extra time forced by a draw score. If you get a free kick and ping it over the bar, that's 3 points and you win overtime, like in NFL
so your solution is play one game instead of two, which means less games, and less money. yeah ok thats gonna happen
so your solution is to play 18 games for every round, 9 home, 9 away, away goals count double because it would raise more money?
>Surely professional sports stars should be able to perform away from home equally as well as at home
well demonstrably not
>Would you support abolishing the away goal rule ?
Of course I wouldn't. It's what makes knock out games fun. Besides that it makes sense
i think away goals rule is stupid, but thinking uefa will change to a new system where they lose money is even dumber than the away goal rule
correlation does not = causation lad.
Even I know that.
And have the stadiums half empty while you sit at home satisfied? Fuck off cunt the system is fine as it is.
A goal should be a goal given that both teams play on even playing fields for the same amount of time.
There is no debate. 180+ minutes are played between both teams and both games should be seen as one long game.
>professional sports stars
There's your problem. Sports are played by real men, not a bunch of dancing cuck fairy faggots.
There's simply no way you're not gay if you like much less play soccer
i think you get a huge push when you have fans cheering for you all the time
still i dont really like the rule
>play away
>have to travel for hours and stay away from home
>play in a pitch you're not as familiar as your own
>people boo you every time you touch the ball
>expected to have the same performance or you're "not psychologically solid"
It makes even more sense when you're against teams from other countries, have to fly in a plane and play in a different weather than when it's two teams from the same city, but it's natural to have advantage playing home.
In addition...game should go immediately to pks so that one team may not get more home playing time than the other.
One could argue that PKs at home are also an advantage.
>Fuck off cunt
pretty uncalled tbqh
i have no idea what that's supposed to mean in this context
nah. tnx for your advice but we'll keep it this way
>Penalty shoot outs aren't fun
i mean maybe i'm missing one of the great nuances of football but isn't it stupid to coddle teams if their players can't adjust to road games
i mean it's not like 3 pointers count for 4 when you're on the road in the NBA
this
>Your welcome UEFA
>it's another episode of sportspeople should be extrahuman because they're famous and well-moneyed 'n' shit
both teams play each other home and away, so it's not really comparable to the nba
the rule is there to encourage the away team to attack when they're away from home rather than just parking the bus, which is traditionally how european games were always played
Who gives a shit? The other team will be under the same conditions when they head to your stadium. So it evens out.
Unless you guys can find empirical data that proves that the away goal theory...you lack logic.
And if you don't understand it. I'm sorry. You have a small baby brain and you lack critical thinking skills.
proves what theory? that teams perform better at home than away from home?
>pretty uncalled
actually not at all
Exactly this
Away goals is fine so long as it's limited to only counting after 90 minutes in the second leg. Away goals after extra time is fucking retarded, and counting at both 90 and 120 minutes is extra retarded.
both play home and away
away goal rules makes sure youre consistent over the 2 legs
good rule very good
Then wouldn't the other team park the bus when they are away??? Thus equalizing the playing field???
Logically speaking it doesn't make sense.
Just admit this is some "for the fans" bullshit. It favors attacking teams over defending teams. Despite how many goals the attacking team gives up.
>we could have enjoyed great periods of extra time or penalties
>penalties
Implying the coinflip that is penalties is more ejoyable
I prefer a vivid game
>The other team will be under the same conditions when they head to your stadium
Yeah thats the whole point. If I perform at your home better than you at mine, I win.
>travel perhaps an hour or two extra than normal in unbelievable luxury to a city where everything is prepared to perfection for you, so you can play in a world class stadium with perfect pitch conditions
When you think about it the away goals rule isn't enough. How do they cope!?
The World Cup doesn't have away goals for every team that travels so why should any other competition?
>Just admit this is some "for the fans" bullshit
yes, that's exactly what it is. who's claiming otherwise?
the rule is there to encourage attacking play; end of story.
>after 90 minutes
So from 90 to 120?
>after extra time
During penalties?
>Unfamiliar ground, jet lag, climate differences and whatever problems arise from being sedentary for however long a flight may be.
doesnt mater because both teams have to do it
It should only be removed if the game goes into ET since the away team has a 30 min advantage of getting that away goal.
Otherwise i think its a good rule that motivates teams to attack if away in the first match and it negates some of the advantage of having the 2nd leg at your home ground knowing exactly how many goals you need to score to win.
Why doesn't the away goals rules apply in shoot outs?
because you only have one shootout genius
The away team would almost always win. Most shootouts are decided by one.
Lol I'm a data scientist at Palantir...and I can already see flaws in your logic.
No....the theory that a team that scores more on the road is better than a team that scores less on the road. Despite their defense.
For example...
Team A scores 10 away but gives up 10 because it's all attack and no defense.
Team B scores 1 and gives up 1 because they played more conservatively...yet they still managed to score.
Why is team A better than team B??
Using away goals is some for the fans bullshit. Because you faggots love 10 to 10. You're the reason the NFL, NBA, and every other professional league plays it up for points because OMG POINTS ARE EXCITING. You might as well make the ball glow in the dark and play at night. Cheerleaders. Get hype men out there.
you're aware that sports are entertainment yes?
Perform??? So perform involves you scoring more AND giving up more goals than me???
Wrong logic. Wouldn't expect anything less of someone south of the equator
Are you suggesting the home team is favoured in the shootout? Or that since shootouts go ahead, home advantage doesn't matter? Penalty shootouts are unfair to the away team, for sure. But whatcha gon' do?
If the game is tied at the end of both 90 minutes the ref should consult a monitor to see if any of the goals were due to incorrect officiating or cheating.
If it's still tied then it's cross bar challenge.
They are a competition...
One could argue that this is exploitable too.
It might encourage the away team to attack more...
But it would also encourage the home team to play more conservatively.
If I keep you to 0-0 at home..
I automatically get a goal advantage if I score once away. I essentially get 2 for 1.
they should make it so that the person representing your team in the crossbar challenge is a random supporter from the stand
I love the away rule. Makes games far more interesting
I completely agree...only way to combat that is to have a PK at the end of the first game no matter what...if it goes to PKs...total score between the two.
If it's still tied after that...flip a coin. I'm not kidding..that's the most fair thing I fan think of.
>tfw it's the Sunderland kid with terminal cancer vs Robbie Keane
Both teams still have to endure the away goals rule though. Given the rule, one team did better. It's only unfair after 90 minutes of the second leg.
>I'm a data scientist at Palantir
didnt stop you from making an unbelievably stupid point though
Its harder to score goals than to defend.
it's a competition that exists to entertain fans
you're right; home teams do play more conservatively than they otherwise do, and the away goal rule has the additional quirk that a lot more goals are scored in the second leg than the first, so it's beneficial to play at home in the first leg.
but there's no perfect solution of tiebreakers in the two-leg match and the away goal rule essentially works from a competitive and entertainment standpoint (apart from the extra time in the second leg that some other anons have alluded to; that is bullshit)
Again..wrong. one team did not do better by scoring and giving up more goals.
Theoretically. No it isnt. Teams just play more defensive.
A 4 4 2 could be a 2 2 6 and score more.
I would keep the away rule but remove the extra time.
Prove me wrong then. I have a degree in creating test cases...and I can tell you...without a doubt in my mind...
That this rule favors teams with better attackers. Than defenders by giving them a goal advantage.
The away game tests scoring goals and the home game tests not conceding goals. Both teams have to go though this and the team which concedes less at home and scores more away does better.
That's literally the point of the rule though.
75 posts in and you're still not getting it.
So you're ok with it creating an uneven playing field???
the away team has literally no incentive to play attacking football otherwise
Is what I said before wrong? This Palintir motherfucker is getting inside my head, homeses.
It's an arbitrary rule. Why not use "who had more fans in the stands?"
And don't respond with "that's not fair for smaller clubs/smaller stadium's"...because who gives a shit about creating a fair playing field amirite?
How do you mean uneven? Because it rewards attacking play more than defensive play?
Yes, I'm fine with that.
Sure they do. They want to win...so they should play their most effective combination of offense and defense.
Is scoring a goal any less arbitrary? Why not use possession or dribbles stats? All sports' rules seem arbitrary. But since every team has to suffer them, they're fair.
The rule is to prevent Bus Parking after the first game.
Think of it in terms of some fifa shit.
You got two teams with a 90 rating. One has better defnses the other has better attackers. But they even out to a 90 rating.
The team with the better attackers wins more often than the team with the defenders..
A 50/50 split would be appropriate.
Thus...the playing field is uneven.
Bunch of fucking spooks that amount to nothing. Give me a real reason
>away goal in extra time
I can't remember who beat Arsenal like this when I was in primary school but o my fucking god did I rage
inter vs AC millan
>technically both "home ties"
Goals are how they measure the game.
Goals away rule is a measure of WHEN those goals we're scored. Which is the arbitrary bullshit.
It doesn't make any sense in real life, it's just a thing that theoretically kinda makes sense but in reality it's fucked up.
>technically
no technically they aren't both home ties, they just are both home ties
which is why you have away goals rule. If one team has managed to score away ad the other hasnt then the away scoring team is better and should pass
If the field is uneven in the favour of more attacking teams, maybe the defensive teams should play more attacking football
Were you against the change of wins from 2 points to 1 as well you boring cunt
No I like that rule. Unfortunately FIFA is ruled by retards nowadays... so I wouldn't be surprised if there was a new rule that teams that score away are punished.
just google statistics of games won by home team and games won by away team
at any league, over longer term, at least few years
somehow it is much harder to score/win when not home
Players are humans, you know.
Would have expected a stupid burger to make such a stupid question but I guess brits are almots as stupid as them.
MUH MUH MUH MULTIBAAAAALL
Stupid burger, everyone knows goals are never the result of good attacking but always of a defensive mistake.