Official UEFA Champions League Thread: Manchestr Utd. Champs

[fc_dinamo]

I don't think so. Penalties only seem unfair when you lose. If you can't convert from the spot kick you got no right to complain against anyone. Ferguson took over a United team that was almost relegated and he built it to a glorious future. Very few managers have proved they have the longevity and desire to do that (only Arsene Wenger is the other manager than comes to my mind).

Not really. PKs come down to luck. Lucky ManU that Terry slipped and couldn't convert in an open goal, since Van Der Saar went the other way.

Basically, you pick a corner and the goalie picks a corner and you hope the goalie is going the other way or you are fast enough and he hopes you're going his way.

I think what would be better, is after 120 minutes are up, to play 10 minute halves with a golden rule and allow 3 more substitutions to be made to counter fatigue. It would be MUCH more dramatic when someone finally scores.

[kromoszoma]

You can't have games going on all night. It would get boring, people would fall asleep because it's late and in big tournaments you can't get totally exhausted because you have to play again in a few days. And it would be impossible to schedule them for tv broadcasts. Luck is a major factor in penalties and it's sometimes unfair, but you have to decide somehow.

[El Turco]

^good post. completely agree.

i am no fan of deciding a game by PKs but until someone comes up with a better idea that ends the game in a reasonable amount of time, PKs are the only option.

Extending the game is not an option because even if you allow 3 more subs, game is played with 11 players and most players would be cramped up so badly that you would have to start negating players as time goes which means more area rest of the players would have to cover. which in turn would cause more fatigue. it s a vicious cycle. even if you ignore all this there is no guarantee that tie would be broken anytime soon given how very well final teams matchup

And, no, luck is not the only factor when it comes to penalty kicks. teams are well aware that there is a chance of penalty kick shootouts and need to prepare for that possibility. that s why you see lot of world cup teams spending good amount of time practicing PKs.

[Slava]

Pks come down to luck but you have to understand that most teams, especially before coming to the CL finals spend hours analyzing the PK styles of the opposition players. Van Der Sar did the same thing and I'm pretty sure Cech would have done it. Its a vital part of your preparation before a big tournament.

[BlackMamba]

while i agree PK are part luck you have to be prepared and have the technique to shoot them.

terry made a mistake, he didn't really get the field was wet and he tried a very hard shot when everybody knew van der sar was going to go either side, so why not just go be the secure way and make a strong shot thorugh the middle, like anderson's PK.

[5DOM]

i like mourinho, but winning the champions is sometimes faaaaaaar better than winning any domestic cup/championship.

and of course everyone knows what he and porto did against manchester utd. 4 years ago

[Slava]

Well I'd be the first to admit that Manchester United have under achievd in Europe until last season. its better late than never and Sir. Alex deserves to reap the benifits of his hardwork for so long.

[fc_dinamo]

You can't have games going on all night. It would get boring, people would fall asleep because it's late and in big tournaments you can't get totally exhausted because you have to play again in a few days. And it would be impossible to schedule them for tv broadcasts. Luck is a major factor in penalties and it's sometimes unfair, but you have to decide somehow.

I don't think it's fair to decide it on PKs just because time runs out. That's like say...hey, recess is over, everyone back inside...ok next point wins!! Works on the playgrounds but not this playground.

Everyone is a professional athlete. How many players usually play on a team 23-26? Are there injuries? Sure, part of any game. But with that many professional athletes, I don't see why the game couldn't keep going. Teams like Chelsea and ManU could field a 2nd team with their subs that would finish at the top of their league.

Let me put it this way, was anyone bored after 120 minutes?

In the NBA, games go on as long as needed. Sometimes they've gone to 5 OTs. In the NFL I know they end after 2 OTs because then it's like playing 2 games in a row and the NFL takes more out of you than all team sports (rugby included).

I doubt the players wanted to stop either way, besides a goal could have come at any time. It almost did a couple of times only Chelsea hit the bar and Terry saved Giggs shot. It looked like they were close...and with fatigue, even closer.

But don't insult two evenly matched teams by forcing a winner...let the game decide