1. Save 40-80% on great soccer jerseys. Shop today at BigSoccer Shop!

Sepp Blatter (and FIFA?) cal for end of Kicks From The Mark

Discussion in 'Referee' started by campbed, May 25, 2012.

?

Should KFTM be replaced?

Poll closed Jun 1, 2012.
  1. No.

    35.9%
  2. Yes. With running shootout.

    15.4%
  3. Yes. With more/longer overtime periods.

    15.4%
  4. Yes. With golden goal.

    15.4%
  5. Yes. With SOMETHING else.

    17.9%
Moderators: IASocFan, MassachusettsRef
  1. campbed

    campbed Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2006
    Location:
    New Hampshire, USA
    Article says it all.
    http://goo.gl/moCbw
    I guess Sepp Blatter had his bet on Bayern for the Champions League final?
     


  2. NC Soccer United

    NC Soccer United BigSoccer Yellow Card

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Club:
    Flamengo Rio Janeiro
    No shit. Everyone is piling on him for that suggestion. The perception is he hates it when an English team wins the CL. Sepp Blatter is a buffoon and the buffoons are insulted that he is lumped in with them.
     
  3. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Well it's a Daily Mail article, so rather than saying it all--it says it all and includes hysterical conjecture, with its possible alternatives.

    That said, even a broken clock is right twice a day and such. Blatter is correct here. Penalties are a lottery. They have nearly nothing to do with the sport as it is meant to be played as a team game. It is a travesty that two World Cup titles have been directly decided by them. Same goes for having 10 European Cups decided by them--imagine if 10 Super Bowls had been decided by field goal kicking contests? And then there are dozens of other continental and national-level competitions that have ended this way.

    I understand why they were invented and implemented. And they will still serve a purpose at lower-level events. But they should be gone from the international game and top professional-level matches.

    EDIT: I cannot disagree with the criticism of the timing. The real time to propose this is in January, heading into the spring IFAB meeting. Doing it now clouds the merits of the proposal, quite obviously.
     
  4. MrPerfectNot

    MrPerfectNot Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2011
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Club:
    Everton FC
    Country:
    United States
    I do worry about Sepp - hope he hadn't bet the rent money on Bayern....

    If I were King of the Forest and KFTPM were to be eliminated, I'd implement a hybrid over-time process:
    - 1st period is 15 minutes, fixed length
    - If necessary, 2nd and any following periods are 15 mins each, GOLDEN GOAL
    - each side is allowed ONLY one substitution per overtime period, regardless of whether they used their 3 subs during regular time or not.

    Advantages: Gives each team a fixed reasonable time period to get the ball in the net, provides for the excitement of a team win and in the run of play which is the most exciting, eliminates that pesky reduce to equate concept.....
     


  5. soccerman771

    soccerman771 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2011
    Location:
    Dallas, Texas area
    Club:
    FC Schalke 04
    Country:
    United States
    I voted for retain the KFTM because I don't believe a decent alternative hasn't been presented to date, but I like what you've presented. Golden goal stinks IMO, but is the next best alternative. If I were given the reigns so to speak I'd do something like this:

    regular two 15 min OT's.
    two 10 minute OTs, 9v9
    two 10 minute OTs, 8v8
    one 10 minute OT , 7v7 no keepers

    If after 2.5 hours of playing, it's still tied after that, the game is considered tied and the game is replayed the next day. Players that were ineligible to play in the game continue to be ineligible.

    Or something like this, there'd need to be trials and tests and such. There'd be unforeseen outcomes like the experiment with no offside, but something is better than KFTM and golden goal.
     
  6. JasonMa

    JasonMa Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    Arvada, CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Country:
    United States
    I always thought the NASL/MLS shootout was stupid for regular season games but it was better than KFTM for games that had to have a inner.
     
  7. akindc

    akindc Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    I'm curious, what's the argument against the golden goal?
    Anyone that's watched overtime hockey, especially in a big game, knows how exciting that is. Why complicate things?
     
  8. oldreferee

    oldreferee Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Location:
    Tampa
    Doesn't hockey also do the thing where you take players off to increase the odds of scoring???

    As fan, purely personal opinion, I don't like KFTM.
    As a ref, I'd hate to see them change it. I'm just getting to the point where I can do reduce to equate without looking at my notes!
     
  9. malackym

    malackym Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Location:
    Warren Ohio
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Country:
    United States
    I with this too. I hate watching two 15 minute OT when all the teams do is not try to give up a goal so they can get to KFTM. Hockey OT is the first thing I thought of too.

    I would give them one 15 minute OT then from there on - golden goal.

    Mark.
     
  10. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Because in hockey, for the playoffs--where it's exciting--there has to be a winner. So you have an incentive to attack. There is no light at the end of the tunnel, so to speak--a goal is needed.

    In soccer, golden goal is coupled with penalty kicks. Some teams--more defensive or counterattacking in nature--would prefer to roll the dice in the lottery of penalties rather than attack too much in extra time and open themselves up to a counter.

    Studies showed this. Golden goal was introduced because it was supposed to be more exciting than normal extra time. It wasn't, which is why FIFA smartly reverted back.

    Now, golden goal with absolutely no penalties or other tiebreaker? Yeah, that would work from an on-field competition standpoint. But advertisers and broadcasters might not like it and I bet the Medical Committee is opposed.
     
  11. CanadaFTW

    CanadaFTW Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2007
    The NHL does 4-4 (instead of 5-5) in the regular season. In the playoffs (where it really matters) it's still 5-5. However, the Olympics and World Championships do a 4-4 OT.

    As for the question at hand, I believe the reduced players approach is the best, with "changing on the fly" from the original 11 (so players can sub off and on to regain energy). It is clear that teams run basically completely out of gas by the end of OT, so more OT won't solve the issue.

    As for a direct replacement to KFTM, things like moving the kicks further back (perhaps from in the D instead of from the spot) would make it a more even competition and not put all the pressure on the shooters. Another possibility to preserve a more team aspect is a series of corner kicks (so each team starts with a corner and play continues until the other team gets the ball over half or something).
     
  12. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Only in the regular season. And even that is--relatively--new (last decade). Plus, that got coupled with regular season shootouts.

    Playoff hockey is the standard we should be comparing to, since both playoff hockey games and knockout soccer games need a winner (regular season hockey only needs a winner now because they just decided to change the rules last decade).
     
  13. CanadaFTW

    CanadaFTW Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2007
    I never get the TV network argument (this comes up in hockey as well). Your telling me that the broadcasters of say the World Cup Final will be annoyed that there is too much OT?

    Now, the player safety argument is much more sound. If they want to play more OT, they need to get new players in the match and or give the players more opportunity to rest. Under the current substitution rules, 30 minutes of OT is clearly the max.
     
  14. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Preempting other broadcasts is the argument, I believe. Repaying advertisers who might have bought for the next block of time, for example. Or charging advertisers who get the benefit of advertising during an extended extra time. It just gets really tricky from a financial perspective. And it gets compounded a bit when you're broadcasting an event in 190+ countries.

    Agreed. One possibility--that I don't think has ever been proposed or discussed--is to truly treat it like hockey. Each extra time period is an additional period, with a full break in between. So if the game ends tied, everyone gets 15 minutes rest. Then you come out for 45 more minutes (golden goal). Still tied? 15 minute rest and then 45 more minutes. Can't see how that wouldn't work. Seems like everything is based on the 30 min (two 15 min halves) standard for no real reason.
     
  15. oldreferee

    oldreferee Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Location:
    Tampa
    At one time weren't some games decided by who had accumulated the most corners during regular time?
     
  16. oldreferee

    oldreferee Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Location:
    Tampa
    I always thought the reason we insisted on 2 halves was that we played outside, and the direction of play is sometimes a big advantage. ???
     
  17. RichM

    RichM Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Country:
    United States
    Personally, I want to see the whole team involved in deciding the outcome.

    Alternating corner kick plays. Line about 25-30yds out. Kick is taken, play continues until goal scored, ball out of play or upfield past the 25-30yd line (trailing AR comes down to watch this line). Fouls against defense result in continuing the play with proper restart (FK or PK). Fouls against offense end the play. Sudden death - one scores, one doesn't, game over.

    Just my thought..
     
    iron81 repped this.
  18. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    At least HS or college did that many, many years ago - say the 50s? I'd hardly think of it as a serious proposal now.
     
  19. La Rikardo

    La Rikardo Member+

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    Country:
    United States
    I once heard someone suggest (perhaps on this board?) that after a certain amount of extra time has been played we limit the 'keepers to handling the ball legally inside the goal area. Any handling by the 'keeper inside the penalty area would be punished by an IFK. I don't necessarily like the idea, but I think it could be interesting.
     
  20. La Rikardo

    La Rikardo Member+

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    Country:
    United States
    Also, I'm in full support of the Rock, Paper, Scissors method to deciding the match. :ROFLMAO:
     
    SA14mars repped this.
  21. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Yes, but I think that direction is less random than KFTPM are, so I'd be ready to part with that.

    My vote would be to go to pure OT, golden goal until scored, 10 minute periods, removing a player at before each 10 min period (so first period is 10 v. 10 [assuming no red cards during the game]). Give each team a pair of extra subs for OT. (I don't think teams should lose their unusued subs -- if they've saved them, so be it, they still get them.) And maybe lose the GK in the 5th OT -- and I'd be really surprised if many games ever reached that 5th OT with high level players.

    I also think the traded CK scenario could be interesting, though that equally seems gimicky to KFTPM. While I like the old NASL shootout better than KFTPM, I don't see that ever happening because it isn't sufficiently different from KFTPM to alleviate a lot of the concerns and break tradition, and, perhaps most damning, it was created by Americans. :eek:
     
    threeputzzz repped this.
  22. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    I think that is the reason, but it pre-dated golden goal. Once you had golden (and then silver) goal, it sort of undermined that reasoning. So in my proposal, since we're going back to golden goal, that shouldn't be an issue.
     
  23. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    I'm pretty sure our minor league professional system used it at one point--during the USISL era, I believe.
     
  24. Wahoos1

    Wahoos1 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Couple of thoughts. The reduction of players would be a killer. Players, already tired and beat would be having to run even more. Its not like hockey where they have tons of subs and do so on the fly. Same with more than an extra 30 minutes, or a second game the following day.
     
  25. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Agreed on the reduction of player aspect. At least it would still be decided on the field, rather than through penalties, but there would reach a certain point (8 v 8) where it would just start to look like a shell of a game. Don't understand the entertainment or sporting value by doing player reductions.

    Not so sure about the more than extra 30 minutes. If you give real rest in between periods, yes, players will still be tired, but they should be able to still function well.

    And disagree on coming back the next day. If players could do it right up to the 70s and 80s, there's no reason they can't do it now. But, it's a nonstarter in tournament settings so it wouldn't be a serious discussion.
     
Moderators: IASocFan, MassachusettsRef

Share This Page