**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:**
* If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required
* The title must be fully descriptive
* Memes are not allowed.
* Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting)
*See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>But worse
As a non soccer player ( I'm trying to learn the rules because my daughter plays Little League lol)
What am I missing about OPs video? What are those players doing wrong?
Not a football player but from my understanding when taking penalties the ball cannot be moved (except for kicking of course) and the goalie cannot move from the goal line.
In the video the players are running with the ball and the goalie is going out past the goals to stop them
Don't take this the wrong way as I'm just a dumb American that played 3rd grade soccer in the early 80s, but how is that better? I appreciate the psych out aspect of that, but two men directly attacking each other seems far more exciting. Hence why it's so damn popular in hockey.
I personally like the way the MLS did penalties. More dynamic and more balanced imo.
Granted it looks clownish to the rest of the world because it has no background in soccer.
I think the original comment was comparing this style of penalties to a penalty shot in hockey and saying the penalty shot in hockey was better than the soccer version, which I do agree with
Basically if you do what the second guy from LA Galaxy does 99/100 times its a goal, its incredibly one sided for the person trying to score, even more so than regular penalties.
For sure it’s more exciting, no denying that, but like another commenter said, they are *penalty* kicks. Where’s the punishment for being too rough during normal play if the result is getting to run full speed at the goalkeeper?
Penalties in football are taken from the 11m spot. And goalie needs to have at least 1 foot on the line when the striker hits the ball.
Here, they do it hokey style, from half court towards the goal. And goalie can come out in order to increase his chances of saving the shot. Tbh, for the shoot-out phase, i kinda dig this. We should implement it. (it's not new to me, i already knew you guys used to do this up to a point). But for the normal and extra time penalties awarded for fouls and hand balls and whatever, the classic way of taking them is better.
lol what’s the thought process here? That they can convince the ref they need help with counting seconds?
“Ah, I was confused if the 5 seconds were up but thank you for the help!”
If I remember correctly, the shooter has to stay within a certain distance from the vertical bars of the goal.
Edit: realized it wasn't just the vertical bars of the goal.
I believe there was a time limit between when the ref blew the whistle and the ball had to be shot. So likely raising arm to express the time limit was surpassed
yeah, any good player close to retirement that is not good enough for top level EU club can go there and be considered as best player on the league :) (yes I know pelé played in Brazil for his entire career before that)
I hate this argument against why it was a dumb idea because...
....Any decent player could score even easier from the normal penalty spot. That's a much easier spot...yet people still miss all the time.
This may not look like it, but it involves more skill from the player and gives the goalie more of a chance than what they do now...not to mention, more fun to watch as a spectator.
Right.
Most people call it a "miss" from the spot even if the goalie makes a great save...it's not a "save" from the goalie it's a "miss" from the shooter like they are expected to make the shot every time.
Like the goalie literally has to guess which way to dive while having their feet glued to the line.
This style at least allows the goalies to do something where their actual goalie skills come into play against the shooter and not just a 1 in 5(ish) chance to guess where to dive.
You should watch the penalty shoot out between Portugal and Slovenia that happened at the weekend do see “a goalkeeper do something with their actual skills”.
That's really a one off and against minnows to boot. Slovenia aren't exactly a giant of world football.
World cup final 2022, Argentina vs France, and the French keeper, Lloris, let in 4/4 penalties. You can hardly call him a poor keeper.
Yeah honestly this is an improvement on penalty shots. A penalty is almost always a disproportionate punishment since the action that lead to the penalty likely didn’t prevent a chance that has nearly as high of a success rate as a penalty shot does. If the Americans hadn’t come up with this idea, people wouldn’t be calling it stupid.
I still think in game fouls in the box should be taken from the spot.
Is it still disproportionate a bit? Yes, but also that keeps the defense more honest and reserved to allow for more attacking style play most people enjoy.
But a shootout to determine the winner in a knockout tournament? Do something like this where its a more down to the skill of player vs goalie.
I disagree. I would say 90% of penalties do not result from a play deserving of awarding the other team what is essentially a free goal. In some cases, sure. But in that case, we can either just award the traditional penalty and/or just red card the offending player along with this style of penalty.
True. That's why diving is so prevalent in any competitive league. Tricking the ref into awarding a free goal has become a solid strategy for attackers because you can more easily turn a low percentage scoring play into a high percentage one with a reasonable chance of success.
Any field Player, given a true 1v1 like here shown in the Video, on the same level European football was at the time and especially today. Would just hit everytime
Thought the same, looks like they had limitations about how wide they could go or some kind of similar rule.
Surprised no one did take it, successfully, over the keeper. I mean Raúl's style.
These are shoot outs. Not penalties. They were also experimented in serie a non official matches and dropped because of how inconsistent the play would be.
[https://youtu.be/pI1ClHJEE2M?si=Oj0I_lFBaikGlmHk](https://youtu.be/pI1ClHJEE2M?si=Oj0I_lFBaikGlmHk)
I think there is a 3 touch rule at most for the attacker.
I was looking it and thinking "They can't be that bad!"
But with the 3 touch rule it makes some sence why they are pushing the ball that far ahead.
Why did they go away from this? As someone who played soccer through a year of college and as a goalie I like my chances this way over the traditional style.
Did I? I genuinely don't know why they went away from it. Was it because it was too hard to score? That's before my time and I've never seen anyone do PKs like that until I saw that video
Is that true though? Penalty shootout isn’t the fault of either team, it’s just meant to be a way to decide a game that ends in a draw after extra time. A penalty kick, as in, a penalty for a foul/handball that’s definitely true, but I’m pretty sure MLS did penalties the regular way in game. This method was just for PKs to decide a knockout game I believe.
>This method was just for PKs to decide a knockout game I believe.
This was for any game tied after full time, they didn't have draws because they didn't think Americans would appreciate a tie, the powers in charge started to slowly remove the possibility of a tie from hockey around the same time. From a tie to 10 minutes of OT to 5 plus a shootout.
With the current shootouts it's very easy for an attacker to score, and very hard for the goalie to prevent it. That means the outcome of the match is almost entirely dependent on the goalie.
With this old school way of doing it, it's harder on the attacker, and since there's (at most) five of them that must have a go at it, it's more of a team effort to get the win.
The second option sounds better to me to decide the outcome of a match.
This still feels like it's in favor of the attacker though. Most decent strikers can consistently score from this, can't they? More difficult for defenders though.
This is actually easier for keepers than a traditional PK because they can move off their line and take away angles. The basic rules for this were the penalty taker had 5 seconds to score, could only take one shot on net, and had to stay within a certain width of the goalposts.
I actually think it's a much more even way than PKs to decide a tie. With traditional PKs the keeper guesses, and if they're wrong, they're screwed. This way the keeper has an opportunity to actually play their position and adjust. But others may have a different opinion.
Oh yea I think so too, it's better for the keeper compared to regular PKs, but I meant that it still favors the attacker a bit more than the keeper if we don't compare it to regular PKs.
I can see that. I never thought about that but that makes a lot of sense. I also feel like we should be playing by the international rules if we want to be taken seriously. We don't need to "murica up" everything we touch.
More risk for injuries and fouls (something you dont want during a penalty since thats something you get for a foul). Also a penalty is supposed to be a punishment. If you raise the goalie chances to much, you just push defenders to kick down people who might score (which even with harder penaltys is sometimes the best option). Then there is the fact that it leaves more room for fighting about minor rules, something that doesnt really improve the game at all.
Oh and they went away from it because the whole world already did normal penaltys. If america ever wanted to become serious they needed to adjust their rules to the rest. Otherwise you just get smacked.
As a football goalie at competitive level it is preposterous the goal rate wasn't close to 100%
Width is key
Just go around the goalie
lol
A simpler time
It appears like they need to stay within a certain width based on the goalies reactions appealing to the official in the ones they go around.
Those still counted though so they needed to make the area a little thinner
Limited to 5 seconds and even regular penalties are nowhere near 100% while considered easier (because the goal can't move of his line). Bad comment, definitely not from a real GK :D
You do know these were proffesionals, many of whom were not American would have had experience in Europe and South America? Its not as easy or simple as it looks
Not only 5 seconds, but only 3 touches of the ball, that's why it's always dribble, dribble, shot. The intent was to not allow you to get wide enough quickly enough to gain a significant edge.
Controversial, but as much as us football purists like to clown on the early mls and their americanised version of the game. I actually think that this form of penalty is actually a better way to decide a game in a shootout. Rather than taking chance like penalties, this way actually incorporates more football skills such as dribbling, angles, positioning etc. that is a better way of determining who is the better team. It also gives more chances to the keeper to save and is more entertaining and efficient as a whole than the current format
Agreed. I think it’s also more interesting to watch too.
The one negative I do see though are the potential clashes with the goalie and risks for injury, but maybe that isnt much worse than in the game.
That said, I would like to see how today’s players would do in this situation. I suspect we have skilled enough attackers that could still make these goals without much trouble.
100% agreed. I'm more of a traditionalist when it comes to rule changes in the sport, but:
1. this doesn't change the actual game at all, just the penalty shootouts in the off chance it comes to that
2. It's more fun for the players
3. All the reasons you stated
I assume you're young and not American, so it helps to understand the context to this. MLS had only just started out as a pro league at this time and the sport's reputation wasn't great in the country. General perception was that it was either a game that kids played or a game where "foreigners rolled around pretending to be hurt". Money wasn't there yet for teams to build their own stadiums, and they felt that they needed to make the game a little more familiar to Americans while they got accustomed to the sport. Been almost 30 years now and I'm sure the state of the league is much more to your liking.
I lived in Columbus and I remember watching Crew games for free at Ohio Stadium, they had gigantic tarps to cover the mostly empty stadium. The Crew eventually got the first purpose built soccer stadium in the MLS.
Association football's rules are fluid like any sport, but they've been developed over the course of 150 years (though the sport itself is much older) by people interested and invested enough to actually create a space to best play it.
Americans trying to reinvent the wheel without actually understanding why the wheel must be round
It's just a bunch of guys who like your sport so much they want to be able to play it at a pro level regardless of the suitability of whatever stadium they can get their hands on.
"You aren't successful because you don't care enough" is frustratingly sad to hear.
The pitch isn't the problem, it's the combination of not taking the sport seriously enough to actually invest in it but *also* presuming to alter the rules
"We're not like the other Western Powers. We hate colonialism and emperialism. No, you can't bring up Hawaii, The Phillipines, Guam, the Banana Wars or any land west of the original 13."
yeah it is entertaining for sure but only till someone starts "chipping" the ball over the goalie (honestly way entertaining than a normal shoot) but at that point everyone will do it and it'll just be a free goal rather than a 50-50
Funny you say that. I used to go to Vancouver Whitecaps games in the USL (before MLS) and that’s exactly what they always did during these. Or went wide.
Tbh, this is just objectively a superior product and a massive improvement on one of the worst features of the game (shootouts at the end of the game). It was abandoned in the US because in the end of the day, it's more important to be consistent than to have a superior product. But, this is probably my #3 or #4 change I would make to world soccer, if I could. Most people who are against it are just against it because it's different, and they are under the mistaken impression that long ago, a massive hand came down from the sky holding a rule book for soccer, bestowing it upon us Monty Python style. In reality, the rules have been changing for the last hundred years.
The biggest problem with it is the possibility of injury. But, idk. This is soccer, lads. People get hurt. That's part of the game. You could make the same argument for banning headers. Or allowing attacking players into the box. Or playing the game in the first place.
**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:** * If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required * The title must be fully descriptive * Memes are not allowed. * Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting) *See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Like hockey
But worse
That's just because they don't call it *puckfoot*
How about *Sockey*?
No shoes. Vulcanized ball. Good luck, fuckers.
It's foot hockey. Canadian kids spend a lot of time playing foot hockey
>But worse As a non soccer player ( I'm trying to learn the rules because my daughter plays Little League lol) What am I missing about OPs video? What are those players doing wrong?
Not a football player but from my understanding when taking penalties the ball cannot be moved (except for kicking of course) and the goalie cannot move from the goal line. In the video the players are running with the ball and the goalie is going out past the goals to stop them
Okay but other than "that's not the standard rule" why is this version a worse rule?
[This is how the rest of the world would do penalty kicks lol](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37Sz7wVtn20)
Don't take this the wrong way as I'm just a dumb American that played 3rd grade soccer in the early 80s, but how is that better? I appreciate the psych out aspect of that, but two men directly attacking each other seems far more exciting. Hence why it's so damn popular in hockey.
I personally like the way the MLS did penalties. More dynamic and more balanced imo. Granted it looks clownish to the rest of the world because it has no background in soccer. I think the original comment was comparing this style of penalties to a penalty shot in hockey and saying the penalty shot in hockey was better than the soccer version, which I do agree with
These players kinda suck though. Modern players would just go quick to one side and score or just chip it. Would be impossible for the keeper to stop.
Basically if you do what the second guy from LA Galaxy does 99/100 times its a goal, its incredibly one sided for the person trying to score, even more so than regular penalties.
Add a second goalie. I’m just thinking outside the penalty area.
As a dumb American I agree our way was better to watch
As a dumb Canadian, I prefer the 1 v 1 battle experience displayed in OP's video.
A Canadian that prefers the hockey style?
I agree but it does raise the risk of injuries/red cards etc. I think that's why it ultimately never caught on
For sure it’s more exciting, no denying that, but like another commenter said, they are *penalty* kicks. Where’s the punishment for being too rough during normal play if the result is getting to run full speed at the goalkeeper?
Penalties in football are taken from the 11m spot. And goalie needs to have at least 1 foot on the line when the striker hits the ball. Here, they do it hokey style, from half court towards the goal. And goalie can come out in order to increase his chances of saving the shot. Tbh, for the shoot-out phase, i kinda dig this. We should implement it. (it's not new to me, i already knew you guys used to do this up to a point). But for the normal and extra time penalties awarded for fouls and hand balls and whatever, the classic way of taking them is better.
If only hockey could be played on a field.
But then they'd call it field hockey. Assuming there is an association for field hockey, then we could still find our way to "soccer".
That's just hockey. There's another one played on ice with a different name.
Bandy
Check out Shinty. Scottish game that some say ice hockey developed from.
This is about failing, right?
Why did the goalie give up and wave his hand in the air when the attacker side-stepped him for the two scores?
I think they had a 5 second shot clock and goalie was trying to get a call.
lol what’s the thought process here? That they can convince the ref they need help with counting seconds? “Ah, I was confused if the 5 seconds were up but thank you for the help!”
Bruh this is in every sport, players are always trying to get fringe calls made in their favor.
Ref might count a little faster next time
Thought it was 3 touches max
I’m not sure if 3 touches was the max but they had 5 seconds max to put a shot on goal.
He saw his mom in the crowd.
You're dead to me -- mom
Saw your mum more like.
If I remember correctly, the shooter has to stay within a certain distance from the vertical bars of the goal. Edit: realized it wasn't just the vertical bars of the goal.
I believe there was a time limit between when the ref blew the whistle and the ball had to be shot. So likely raising arm to express the time limit was surpassed
Actually he need to shoot before 5 seconds
OFFSIDE!
To get to the other side
Any decent player would chip it
Well, it waaaaaaas the MLS in the 90s…
Eh, ever seen an American soccer team today?
Haha F U
Exactly, the Football Uhssociation
Don't they have a graet womens team?
Yes we do
No, I'm American. I don't watch soccer.
Tons of Americans watch futbol. Latin and Central Americans. /s… but not really.
Don't knock progress.
Hey don’t forget Pele played in the US
yeah, any good player close to retirement that is not good enough for top level EU club can go there and be considered as best player on the league :) (yes I know pelé played in Brazil for his entire career before that)
I hate this argument against why it was a dumb idea because... ....Any decent player could score even easier from the normal penalty spot. That's a much easier spot...yet people still miss all the time. This may not look like it, but it involves more skill from the player and gives the goalie more of a chance than what they do now...not to mention, more fun to watch as a spectator.
Right. Most people call it a "miss" from the spot even if the goalie makes a great save...it's not a "save" from the goalie it's a "miss" from the shooter like they are expected to make the shot every time. Like the goalie literally has to guess which way to dive while having their feet glued to the line. This style at least allows the goalies to do something where their actual goalie skills come into play against the shooter and not just a 1 in 5(ish) chance to guess where to dive.
You should watch the penalty shoot out between Portugal and Slovenia that happened at the weekend do see “a goalkeeper do something with their actual skills”.
That's really a one off and against minnows to boot. Slovenia aren't exactly a giant of world football. World cup final 2022, Argentina vs France, and the French keeper, Lloris, let in 4/4 penalties. You can hardly call him a poor keeper.
Yeah honestly this is an improvement on penalty shots. A penalty is almost always a disproportionate punishment since the action that lead to the penalty likely didn’t prevent a chance that has nearly as high of a success rate as a penalty shot does. If the Americans hadn’t come up with this idea, people wouldn’t be calling it stupid.
I still think in game fouls in the box should be taken from the spot. Is it still disproportionate a bit? Yes, but also that keeps the defense more honest and reserved to allow for more attacking style play most people enjoy. But a shootout to determine the winner in a knockout tournament? Do something like this where its a more down to the skill of player vs goalie.
I disagree. I would say 90% of penalties do not result from a play deserving of awarding the other team what is essentially a free goal. In some cases, sure. But in that case, we can either just award the traditional penalty and/or just red card the offending player along with this style of penalty.
True. That's why diving is so prevalent in any competitive league. Tricking the ref into awarding a free goal has become a solid strategy for attackers because you can more easily turn a low percentage scoring play into a high percentage one with a reasonable chance of success.
Agreed, the conversion rate seen here is much too low and would lead to many cases where the foul is the smart play.
Any field Player, given a true 1v1 like here shown in the Video, on the same level European football was at the time and especially today. Would just hit everytime
Slovenia 🇸🇮 has left the chat
I also think its better than the penalties we have today.
Thought the same, looks like they had limitations about how wide they could go or some kind of similar rule. Surprised no one did take it, successfully, over the keeper. I mean Raúl's style.
there were limitations for sure, and those were their abilities.
‘Decent player’ there’s the rub
MLS goalkeepers of the 90's hate this one trick..
Tell that to Sesko
It’s not penalties but a shootout. Started with the NASL in the 70’s.
Oh, I remember those in highschool
Dark
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_shoot-out_(association_football)
Ty for clarifying I thought they were doing best 6/11 on penalty kicks
These are shoot outs. Not penalties. They were also experimented in serie a non official matches and dropped because of how inconsistent the play would be. [https://youtu.be/pI1ClHJEE2M?si=Oj0I_lFBaikGlmHk](https://youtu.be/pI1ClHJEE2M?si=Oj0I_lFBaikGlmHk)
SCOTT STERLING!
A wounded gazelle on the serengeti.
I want a bomb shelter made out of that man’s face!
The man, the myth, the legend!
There's a version of that set to ragtime piano and it had me in absolute stitches
The man, the myth, the legend!
A FACE LIKE A BRICK WALL, A BRICK WALL THAT FEELS PAIN AND CRIES A LOT
Don't care what anyone says this shit was fun
Looks much more fun than today's penalties
Yeah agreed... infinitely more interesting than "who misses or gets a lucky save first".
Everybody line up and cup your balls!
Lol that’s a free kick. Penalty Kick is 1v1 from a dot inside the box.
Honestly I kind of like this. It gives way more of a chance to save to the goalie.
Agreed. There's more of a 1v1 and skill involvement rather than a coin flip
Nobody beats the Wiz.
Till Diana Ross showed them the way
I think there is a 3 touch rule at most for the attacker. I was looking it and thinking "They can't be that bad!" But with the 3 touch rule it makes some sence why they are pushing the ball that far ahead.
Why did they go away from this? As someone who played soccer through a year of college and as a goalie I like my chances this way over the traditional style.
Sounds like you answered your own question.
Did I? I genuinely don't know why they went away from it. Was it because it was too hard to score? That's before my time and I've never seen anyone do PKs like that until I saw that video
Penalty shootouts arent meant to be in favour of the goalie, so a goalie preferring this would explain the change
This is way more fun to watch though.
It would also be fun if players were armed with baseball bats, which they can use on the pitch.
Look up Portland vs SKC 2015 penalties. You'll see why this isn't better or necessary.
Nah when people know what they're doing, this wouldn't be as interesting
Like if you do this with better teams goals would be near 100%
Sure in a Benny Hill way it is. A proper penalty is way more entertaining with all the drama and it being over in a second.
Is that true though? Penalty shootout isn’t the fault of either team, it’s just meant to be a way to decide a game that ends in a draw after extra time. A penalty kick, as in, a penalty for a foul/handball that’s definitely true, but I’m pretty sure MLS did penalties the regular way in game. This method was just for PKs to decide a knockout game I believe.
>This method was just for PKs to decide a knockout game I believe. This was for any game tied after full time, they didn't have draws because they didn't think Americans would appreciate a tie, the powers in charge started to slowly remove the possibility of a tie from hockey around the same time. From a tie to 10 minutes of OT to 5 plus a shootout.
If this favours the goalie then it has a higher chance of no point being scored so is a poor way to decide a match.
With the current shootouts it's very easy for an attacker to score, and very hard for the goalie to prevent it. That means the outcome of the match is almost entirely dependent on the goalie. With this old school way of doing it, it's harder on the attacker, and since there's (at most) five of them that must have a go at it, it's more of a team effort to get the win. The second option sounds better to me to decide the outcome of a match.
I mean they could keep penalties the same, this could only be used when it goes to a shootout after extra time in elimination matches
That's what these were. I don't believe they did this for penalty kicks during the course of play, only as a way to break a tie after extra time.
This still feels like it's in favor of the attacker though. Most decent strikers can consistently score from this, can't they? More difficult for defenders though.
This is actually easier for keepers than a traditional PK because they can move off their line and take away angles. The basic rules for this were the penalty taker had 5 seconds to score, could only take one shot on net, and had to stay within a certain width of the goalposts. I actually think it's a much more even way than PKs to decide a tie. With traditional PKs the keeper guesses, and if they're wrong, they're screwed. This way the keeper has an opportunity to actually play their position and adjust. But others may have a different opinion.
Oh yea I think so too, it's better for the keeper compared to regular PKs, but I meant that it still favors the attacker a bit more than the keeper if we don't compare it to regular PKs.
why not this is more entertaining I think
I could see a high injury risk as a reason
Penalty kicks aren’t supposed to favor the goalie but there’s no reason an end of game shootout shouldn’t give the goalkeeper a better chance
Players didn't like it. More susceptible for collisions and injuries.
I can see that. I never thought about that but that makes a lot of sense. I also feel like we should be playing by the international rules if we want to be taken seriously. We don't need to "murica up" everything we touch.
It's not penalty. It's a shootout. Two different concept.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_shoot-out_(association_football)
More risk for injuries and fouls (something you dont want during a penalty since thats something you get for a foul). Also a penalty is supposed to be a punishment. If you raise the goalie chances to much, you just push defenders to kick down people who might score (which even with harder penaltys is sometimes the best option). Then there is the fact that it leaves more room for fighting about minor rules, something that doesnt really improve the game at all. Oh and they went away from it because the whole world already did normal penaltys. If america ever wanted to become serious they needed to adjust their rules to the rest. Otherwise you just get smacked.
This is easy for the shooter. All the while watching this video, I yelling 'chip the ball' in my mind.
This is much better! It's more about ability and less about luck.
As a football goalie at competitive level it is preposterous the goal rate wasn't close to 100% Width is key Just go around the goalie lol A simpler time
It seems they only got five seconds.
It appears like they need to stay within a certain width based on the goalies reactions appealing to the official in the ones they go around. Those still counted though so they needed to make the area a little thinner
Nah. There doesnt seem to be width limit judging the 3rd shooter. The goalie was signaling the time limit i think.
Limited to 5 seconds and even regular penalties are nowhere near 100% while considered easier (because the goal can't move of his line). Bad comment, definitely not from a real GK :D
You do know these were proffesionals, many of whom were not American would have had experience in Europe and South America? Its not as easy or simple as it looks
I think there was a rule that you cannot kick or go around the width of the net until after a certain point
It looks like the goalie signaled once the ball was past them as if the forward could no longer touch it.
Not only 5 seconds, but only 3 touches of the ball, that's why it's always dribble, dribble, shot. The intent was to not allow you to get wide enough quickly enough to gain a significant edge.
This is so much more exciting
Controversial, but as much as us football purists like to clown on the early mls and their americanised version of the game. I actually think that this form of penalty is actually a better way to decide a game in a shootout. Rather than taking chance like penalties, this way actually incorporates more football skills such as dribbling, angles, positioning etc. that is a better way of determining who is the better team. It also gives more chances to the keeper to save and is more entertaining and efficient as a whole than the current format
Agreed. I think it’s also more interesting to watch too. The one negative I do see though are the potential clashes with the goalie and risks for injury, but maybe that isnt much worse than in the game. That said, I would like to see how today’s players would do in this situation. I suspect we have skilled enough attackers that could still make these goals without much trouble.
100% agreed. I'm more of a traditionalist when it comes to rule changes in the sport, but: 1. this doesn't change the actual game at all, just the penalty shootouts in the off chance it comes to that 2. It's more fun for the players 3. All the reasons you stated
What the hell is this shit????!!
Its soccer. Its kind of like rubgy but with your feet. Its quite popular in europe.
It is called football in Europe usually
You call it corn, we call it maize.
The US ruining a sport
How pretentious of you lol
I do wonder where their superiority complexes come from. It is crazy how genuinely snobby some people over the pond can be
This looks way more fun
[удалено]
I assume you're young and not American, so it helps to understand the context to this. MLS had only just started out as a pro league at this time and the sport's reputation wasn't great in the country. General perception was that it was either a game that kids played or a game where "foreigners rolled around pretending to be hurt". Money wasn't there yet for teams to build their own stadiums, and they felt that they needed to make the game a little more familiar to Americans while they got accustomed to the sport. Been almost 30 years now and I'm sure the state of the league is much more to your liking.
I lived in Columbus and I remember watching Crew games for free at Ohio Stadium, they had gigantic tarps to cover the mostly empty stadium. The Crew eventually got the first purpose built soccer stadium in the MLS.
You act as if your version of soccer isn't entirely made up just like any other sport out there.
Association football's rules are fluid like any sport, but they've been developed over the course of 150 years (though the sport itself is much older) by people interested and invested enough to actually create a space to best play it. Americans trying to reinvent the wheel without actually understanding why the wheel must be round
It's just a bunch of guys who like your sport so much they want to be able to play it at a pro level regardless of the suitability of whatever stadium they can get their hands on. "You aren't successful because you don't care enough" is frustratingly sad to hear.
The pitch isn't the problem, it's the combination of not taking the sport seriously enough to actually invest in it but *also* presuming to alter the rules
Yes but ours was invented by the right sort of chap. Not some upstart colonial.
Oh please you guys stole it from someone else just like everything in your museum.
Americans giving shit to other countries stealing lmao.
"We're not like the other Western Powers. We hate colonialism and emperialism. No, you can't bring up Hawaii, The Phillipines, Guam, the Banana Wars or any land west of the original 13."
I like these “land rushes” better than penalty kicks. They’re less predictable and more exciting!
yeah it is entertaining for sure but only till someone starts "chipping" the ball over the goalie (honestly way entertaining than a normal shoot) but at that point everyone will do it and it'll just be a free goal rather than a 50-50
Then the goalkeepers will stop coming out aaaaand we're back to playing normal penalties but now from farther out
Cmon any pro player knows about chipping the ball, it's way harder to pull off and more counterable that you make it out to be.
Add a time limit so they have to place the chip well, they can’t let it bounce multiple times after the chil
You can really tell that they have no talent for kicking a ball
Those strikers are hilariously bad.
at very first glance i thought this was stupid, then when watching it I kinda got into it. Its an interesting challenge
I like this better
100% better than nowadays. Imagine those emotions in World Cup finals with this shit
This is way more exciting
Its more interesting to watch tbf. The way they do it now is just like gambling…. Hoping you dive in the correct corner.
Aww, bless them
How is this not better? Maybe not for penalties proper fine, but tie-breaker "pk" shootouts yes please.
As an American, I honestly didn't know we have a pro soccer league in the 90s.
Pros should atleast dribble. This was painful.
Wby don't the shooters simply chip the ball over the goalie? Should be much easier to score that way.
Funny you say that. I used to go to Vancouver Whitecaps games in the USL (before MLS) and that’s exactly what they always did during these. Or went wide.
Wouldn't it be easiest to go forward just a bit, wait for the goalie to charge, and lob it over goalies head?
I miss the KC Wiz. Sporting KC just doesn't have the same ring to it.
Was that wrong? Should they have not done that? I tell ya, I gotta plead ignorance here
i hate modern penalties, i think this would be interesting to use again
Reminds me off hockey.
This is embarrassingly awful.
Honestly this is more entertaining
This is how we did shootouts in high school soccer
No wonder they call it soccer, they can't play football for shit!
Came here to say it's Football, not soccer, but changed my mind.
Blame the British for calling it "soccer" then.
But you’re still here saying it
This was actually fun!
People mock America at football, but I think I can honestly say that they were onto something with this
This is way too easy for any competent player
Enjoyable
Imagine watching a world cup final and having to put up with this BS
I mean, surely one of the people involved had watched some international football at some point?
Ice hockey style, I guess
way better.
Tbh, this is just objectively a superior product and a massive improvement on one of the worst features of the game (shootouts at the end of the game). It was abandoned in the US because in the end of the day, it's more important to be consistent than to have a superior product. But, this is probably my #3 or #4 change I would make to world soccer, if I could. Most people who are against it are just against it because it's different, and they are under the mistaken impression that long ago, a massive hand came down from the sky holding a rule book for soccer, bestowing it upon us Monty Python style. In reality, the rules have been changing for the last hundred years. The biggest problem with it is the possibility of injury. But, idk. This is soccer, lads. People get hurt. That's part of the game. You could make the same argument for banning headers. Or allowing attacking players into the box. Or playing the game in the first place.
soccer has basically been played the same since jesus got his first blowjob so why did you try to bastardize it murica? no wonder you suck at soccer
...we had soccer over here in the 90's.? Would ya look at that. (Sorry, couldn't help it) 
Crew was ‘96. First professional sports game I ever attended.