World Cup Blog
World
World Cup Blog
Blatter wants to Scrap Penalties for World Cup Finals
Comments(31)
FIFA head honcho Sepp Blatter has come out today with public statements in favor of getting rid of penalty shootouts in the World Cup final. Blatter said that decidinf final matches by penalties is a “tragedy”.
“Maybe to replay the match if it’s the final, you can’t do that through the tournament because of lack of time. Maybe to take players away and play golden goal,” Blatter said, adding that high-level discussions would start soon.
While we wouldn’t label anything in sports a true “tragedy”, we do happen to agree that having the World Cup champion decided on penalty kicks is not the ideal way to go. Replaying the match is an interesting idea, but one that logistically just doesn’t make too much sense. The world really doesn’t need two World Cup finals.
The idea of taking players off the pitch also runs counter to the spirit of football in our opinion. Instead, we’d like to see the same two, 15-minute extra time periods as are currently in place. If the game is still tied after 120 minutes, it could go to a golden goal rule. Prevent the teams from making any subs after the 120 minute mark and let them play until the players can’t walk or a winner is decided.
What do you think? Should penalties be scrapped and, if so, what should take their place?
Displaying the most recent 25 comments from a total of 31 comments.
Read the rest of the comments
I think the final being replayed a few days later if it is still tied after 120 minutes is a great idea. Why would anyone object to having another final to watch on TV? It also gives FIFA officials, like Jack Warner, one more game to enrich themselves by selling tickets illegally.
I favor the other games in the knockout phase being decided in extra time. Still tied after 120 minutes then play another 15 minutes or so. I think adding an additional 30 minutes would leave the winner too whiped out for the next game. Golden Goal sucks because the teams get so defensive because they are afraid of allowing the winning goal.
Posted from 
United States
I agree with Bruce, do away with the offside rule in OT that would open up the game immensely but no golden goal, just play out the 30 mins.
Posted from 
Canada
heres what they should do:
After 90 minutes NO subs should be allowed. So in injury time in both halves espectially the second half teams should not be allowed to sub. (The time wasting is rediculous in this department)
When/if overtime/extra-time is needed this is the format:
If teams have subs then they should use them from this point on. Not allowed to sub during injury times.
2 – 15 minute halves silver goal (as it currently is)
- if tie persists
2 – 10 minute golden goal halves
- if tie persists
Penalty shootout.
this way the game isnt continuous and you get the drama of golden goal. Which I also like. Also Penalties are not that bad, they actually are a good testiment to the depth of a team and are earth shattering and full of tension even if you are mutual to both teams participating. DO NOT do away with them, cause you cant!
I do not see why people dont enjoy pk’s. True, sometimes it is more about luck than technique, but hey.. sometimes thats also what happens during the 90 mins, and i do believe they are the most exciting phase of a game. Even though i am italian, and of course we all know we are not the best pk shooters.. i think blatter should just leave everything as it is and go find another job. Stop trying so hard, FIFA needs a new president.
Posted from United States
“FIFA needs a new president. ”
On that, the whole footballing world of can agree.
Posted from United States
Agreed Lazaro, you are absolutely right!
Posted from Canada
They should definately allow more subs in OT. It makes the team as a whole more important. I don’t mind PK’s but I am fairly new to this sport. Why couldn’t they move the PK further back to give the goalkeeper a better chance? If it were 5 yrds further back, Buffon would have made a few saves and there’d be no complaining because Barthez blows and he’d never stop anything.
Posted from United States
THE BEST OUT OF THREE?
Posted from United States
Sepp is just angry cause his crappy country could not score 1 penalty when it went 2 penaltys. i hate him and he is a racist. lets hope he gets shot before he can change anything.
Posted from 
United Kingdom
After reading these posts I got to ask “Is there anybody more hated in sports than Herr Blatter?” Suggestions anyone?
Posted from United States
Sepp is just upset that Italy won the world cup.. where was the talk about ending penalties back when brazil won their fourth????
So we seem to have a consensus here: Before we scrap penalties we should first scrap Blatter.
I do agree with Marco though, I believe if France won the shootout Blatter wouldn’t have even considered this. He does tend to chose favorites and that’s something that a supposed impartial governing body such as FIFA shouldn’t do. He seems to be digging his own grave little by little.
Posted from Canada
Best of three would be interesting, but that still wouldn’t solve the issue of settling each game. I like the idea of first goal in OT wins. That way players won’t just sit back and rest for the shootout. To me, it seemed like a lot of teams in this cup didn’t try hard enough in OT to deserve anything but a shootout.
Posted from United States
It should be more like hockey. Shoutout just for the qualifying rounds. (Playoffs)The quarter, semi’s and finals should be won in OT (sudden death). France should of won WC 2006 if it were in
for OT. We missed Zidane in that game…We will miss zidane forever! And will not forget! Don’t want to let it go.
http://www.respectzidane.com
Posted from Canada
In the old days, when I was a child, they would play a deciding match, if after 120 minutes nobody had won. I remember some fantastic matches in Mexico, notably Germany-Italy, when Beckenbauer played with a dislocated shoulder. Those were the days………
Penalties deciding a major game is insane, and unfair to both teams.
Posted from United States
the last time a final of any kind was played before PK’s were or golden goals were introduced was in 1975 Euro champion final Bayern Munich vs.Atletico madrid…the organzitional problems were so big (hotels.ticketing,meals ..people in the streets..) that it was decided by then that there would have been no more repetition of final..PK”s are far better than flipping the coin used for a while until 1968 !!…after all they still bring some thrill to the game and they are not totally easy since teams like italy and england lost a great deal of chances on PK’s…i don’t know where to is Blatter aiming to ,i only know that for the good sake of DEMOCRACY and REAL COMPETION in the game somebody should sack the fat bastard but i believe he is holding almost everyone by the balls since he is the one who has got the code to the huge FIFA safe..
Posted from United States
any championship won by penalties is worth crap!! that includes the one brazil one and I am a big brazil fan!! if italians feel pride in winning by a lucky strike so be it, they can afford winning by being mediocre but brazil should never fall to that level. if the game ends up with no score then declare the championship vacant period. on second thought why not follow the maya example and have the losing team sacrificed 
just kiddin’ but I still believe that a win by penalty kicks is not a true win.
Posted from United States
I somewhat agree with you al. Penalties are not the best way to decide a game by any means but don’t think for a moment that Italians are proud of winning this way I’m sure they wished Toni had gotten what could have been the deciding goal instead of hitting the post or getting the offside call but that’s the way it is. Italy have been very unlucky with Penalty shoot-outs so it was only fitting they won this way, to break the curse. France beat Italy in the exact same fashion in 1998 so let’s just say what goes around comes around and leave it at that.
Posted from Canada
I DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT EVERYONE IS SO SOUR ABOUT ITALY IS ONE OF THE BIGGEST VICTIM OF THE PENALTIES SITUATION SINCE WE LOST A GREAT DEAL ON PK’S..NOW IF WE SAY THAT 1994 WAS RIGHT ,1998 WAS RIGHT AND FOREMOST 1990 WAS RIGHT WHY ON HEARTH SHOULD NOT BE 2006 RIGHT ??YOU GUYS ARE INDEED SORE LOSERS AND SEE ONLY WHAT IS CONVENIENT ? THE REALITY IS THAT UNLESS YOU DON’T KNOW MUCH ABOUT HISTORY OF SOCCER THERE IS AT THE MOMENT NO MUCH OF AN ALTERNATIVE TO PK’S..SO MANY CUPS ARE GIVEN AWAWY ON PK’S..COPA LIBERTADORES CHAMPIONS LEAGUE ,TOYOTA CUP,AND..WHY NOT WORLD CUP..I WITNESSED WHEN THERE WAS REPETIIONS OF GAME AND COIN FLIPPING .. REPETION WAS CALLED OFF BECAUSE OF SERIOUS ORGANIZATIONAL PROBLEM AND COIN FLIPPIG WELL IT WAS PATHETIC ..I DID LIKE GOLDEN GOALS AND I WOULD PLAY THE GAME AS LONG AS NEEDED UNTIL THERE IS A WINNER LIKE IT HAPPENS IN BASKETBALL..BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY THERE HAS TO BE A WINNER NO MATTER WHAT …
Posted from United States
Alright here is my 2 cents on the PKs. While i hate the fact that they make me so god damn nervous i still find them very entertaining. Theres more of a thrill of suspense when your waiting for someone to shoot and hoping he’ll score or the goalie will save it. During the world cup (Italy fan) final I was silent for the shootout just hoping we would win and you know what, it was there i realized the brilliance of PKs.
Pks do require some skill, there is no denying it. Perhaps a little luck. But what it really comes down to is mental focus and concentration. In a shootout, the kicker knows he needs to score. PKs demonstrate a players (possibly even a teams) ability to think in high pressure situations. And i can tell you that in a world cup final, there is no bigger pressure situation. If one team can keep there cool and just focus on putting it past the goalie and not on the consequences, then he will most likely score. Even the goalie needs to focus on making the save. PKs are truly a way of demonstarting which team wants the trophy more and keep there eye on the prize to achieve despite the pressure they may endure.
Forza Azzurri.. i agree; leave everything as it is, its fine.. the only change needed is the president.. how come no body in Fifa sees that? weirddd
Posted from United States
The idea of playing a series of games at the end of the world cup to decide the champion would be better. For example, play three games and the winner is declared after that. The TV ratings would be super and the governing body of soccer would rake in tons of money that could probably be used to help support the less fortunate countries that may have been awarded the World Cup as in the case of South Africa. There are going to be some issues that come up with South Africa hosting the WC. Financial assistance could be provided to these developing countries to aid them in hosting the tournament. It is a win/win situation for all concerned.
Posted from United States
solomon your idea is to energy-consuming on both the body and the mind, besides it would take a lot more money to organize and i quite don’t like the idea that if a team plays the best game in the world, they can still lose a cup. Things are fine the way they are. If a team doesnt want PK’s then they should work hard to win before them
Have 3 – 15 minute extra times.
First is a normal extra time.
Second is Extra time with 2 Player removed (Making it 9)
Third – Extra time with No offside Rule.
Posted from United States
Comments are closed
COUNTRY HEADLINES
CATEGORIES & ARCHIVES
always hated penalty shootouts – we all have an alternative solutions and this is mine:
after 90 mins do away with the offside rule and each team has to play with only 8 players and the first to score is declared the winner – there’ll be a goal within five minutes, trust me.
Posted from
Australia