Best ways to decide games

The subs thing would be fine, but how would any of those suggestions be less of a bastardization of the game than PKs?

 

Here's another thought: Why do game-ending PKs have to come from the 11-yard spot? How about they come from 25 yards when a game comes down to them? Gives the goalie a much better chance, makes it much more of a challenge to the kicker.

The problem with the current system is that the PK is so close to automatic that when one does get stopped, it's much more of a fluke (or lucky guess by the keeper) than anything. One-man free kicks from 25 yards would be a lot less of a fluke to be saved and would put more of the onus on the kicker than the keeper. Both scoring and saving would be much more interesting.

 

At the end of each overtime period, the goalie will have an arm or a leg shackled to the goalpost. After the fourth overtime, they will play rock-paper-scissors to determine the World Cup winner.

 

Would taking players off the field make a difference?

Make them go 7-on-7 and see what happens. You have more space.

 

Grantland actually published a piece on that today. (Well, it's about all PKs, but bear with me.)

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/crime-and-punishment-should-the-penalty-kick-spot-be-moved-back/

 

It would be different, but does that mean it would be a "bastardization?" I don't think so. The NBA added the 3-point shot and that made the game better. Hockey made changes to its two-line pass rule and opened up the game and made it more interesting. Soccer could use some updates, too, to open the game up. It it's left as is, we'll continue to have the biggest games on the game's biggest stage decided by penalty kicks.

 

Continue to have the PKs from 12 yards out. But the shooter has to EITHER shoot the goal blindfolded. Or turn around, and heel-kick it in.

 

Somebody should tell the players it's automatic. Through two matches the conversion rate in shootouts is 68 percent.

It's pretty rare that a side nails all five.

 

Does anybody else in the world care except grumpy American message boarders?

 

Much as I think this idea has merit, the problem I have with it is it's much more taxing on the players, most of whom have already played 90 minutes. If it makes the play become sloppy because of fatigue, does it make the game better?

 

No.

 

I like that in the new rules, the onus would be more on the kicker.

Like there isn't now.