Footie Question. Isnt it time we had.....

Discussion in 'Sports, Adventure Training and Events' started by MrShanklysboots, Oct 20, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. ....... a new system of points scoring in the football leagues?

    I was thinking (thats what the smell was) whilst driving back to camp last night that attacking football should be rewarded.

    The way forward has been shown by the egg chasers. They have bonus points for tries scored - they reward success. Result? Teams go for it and rack up cricket scores. Bags of entertainment for the viewing public and teams play fast attacking rugby.

    So my proposal would be.

    No Score Draw - One point

    Score Draw - Two Points

    Win - Three points

    Win by two clear Goals - Four Points.

    I wouldn't do it any other way than results (like goals scored and the like) because it allows for abuse of the system and the italians have had all too recent experience of match fixing - hence just keeping it results orientated.

    IMHO Chelski are (choke choke) playing the best football in the league this season, Liverpool (my team) are staging Grandstand comebacks. We are both on the same points yet one of those teams is playing infinitely better football.

    I just think that if all things were fair and just Chelsea should have a reward for their football.

    Also it would keep relegation at bay that bit longer - mathematical impossibility would be staved off by three big wins on bounce etc.

    Just my thoughts - over to the panel....
     
  2. Football's for homos.
     
  3. It's a nice idea but I'm not convinced this would work in kiss sorry football.

    Firstly, teams are rewarded for scoring more goals. Goal difference. That's why Chelsea are top and Liverpool are second despite them being level on points. Until next weekend.

    Secondly, the bonus point system was brought into Rugby because the other 'easier' ways of scoring were becoming too common. That is to say teams were making more of an effort to score the three points from a drop goal or kick the penalty rather than go all out for the line.

    Thirdly, I don't think it would do much for the development of younger players. Currently if a manager is 2-0 up with 20 to go he might decide to bring some youth on, experience gained and all that. If he knows he can get another point for a third goal is he really going to risk taking off one of his first team players?
     
  4. Another original and dead funny response from smudge - how do you think of them all?

    It wouldn't work. Rather than encourage teams to be more attacking, the "smaller" clubs would become ultra defensive, and you would not see the kind of result that Hull made against Arsenal. Also, as codename says above, teams are rewarded with goal difference
     
  5. I don't......I have a book called "usefull things to say" ;)

    Tis true though......kissball is for homos.
     
  6. Nice thought MSB, however, Blatter and his cronies would never have that.

    They would rather have you play 4 hours with 6 registared disabled players to enhance the worldwide appeal of the game.

    Oh, sorry thats Spurs at the minute :twisted:
     
  7. Points above taken - I don't see how though.

    Rewards. You have played ace football for eight matches and are rewarded by being on the same points as a team that has hauled its nuts out of the fire playing badly on four occasions.

    Said team (God Willing :D ) comes down and beats you moving three points clear. Wrong in my opinion - you have nothing to show for playing football the right way. I don't know what the points would stack up like using my two clear goals system but I'll bet that Chelsea would still be top even if they did lose. And rightly so.

    I disagree that it would lead to ultra defensive performances given that the option to get more points for scoring goals exists - Hull play the same system home and away to answer the analogy given.

    I just want to see good football rewarded, and put an end to scrappy wall up defending as an option for success.
     
  8. Its certainly a good way of ensuring the complete dominance of the big four forever, as the teams who can afford the £20million+ strikers will p1ss all over those who rely on teamwork, organisation and effort to cover for not being able to afford enough quality. And as a Chelsea supporter, thats fine by me!
     
  9. But as some clever bastard said, the mark of a good side is that it can play badly and win. If Liverpool win this weekend they go top. And that's fair enough. If as seems more likely, Chelsea play the better football and win they will be three points clear. And deservedly so.

    The point is that if Liverpool continue to play badly sooner or later they'll get caught out. It's a long old season and everything balances out in the end. And if it still comes down to it there's always goal difference.
     
  10. Did I mention......football's for homos? ;)
     
  11. Were you the fat wheezy kid with a note from Matron?
     
  12. While we're at it, let's set that old hare off and running - the differential penalty to be introduced in kevball!
     
  13. errmm.....yes :(

    Why do people that play disabled basketball wear trainers???
     
  14. Hmm, not sure. If a match was sat at 1-1 going into the last 5 minutes there would be less incentive to push for the win to turn 2 points into 3 rather than 1 into 3 therefore leading to teams happily playing out the last part of a match content with the draw.

    Wasn't this the argument for changing from 2 points for a win to 3 in the first place to lessen the likelihood of the mutually agreeable draw and reward the team pushing for a win?
     
  15. For the same reason the Int Corps and AGC (SPS) wear uniform.

    We all lnow they're 'speshul' it just makes them feel part of the gang.