Incentives to increase attacking football?

[Guest Brummiemag]

Yes Cameroon v Denmark and Slovenia v USA were decent games but

 

Its been a shocking world cup so far, the worst I can remember

 

In my opinion its the same with football in general - whether its World Cup, Newcastle or the Premier League generally, far too many games are boring and dull. Its such a shame because a great game of football beats anything but I reckon only one in 20 games I watch would be described as a good or great game and thats far too small a percentage.

 

Football as a sport does not realise its potential in my opinion, just imagine if 75% of games were exciting and full of attacking football. I honestly think the time has come for FIFA to experiment with incentives to increase attacking football and that should involve some of sort of reward in the form of bonus points for scoring goals.

 

What do other people think?

[Dave]

Worth a thread of its own I thought.

[madras]

bonus point for winning on aggregate.

 

 

 

so we play a team in august and win 2-0, then in february lose 3-0, they win on aggregate and get the bonus point. it would give teams the incentive to keep going for more when 3 up etc and also to try and sneak one even when 3down.

[Dave]

One interesting idea I read elsewhere earlier was to do away with goal difference and just go on goals scored as the primary tiebreaker. Then again how often is goal difference actually required to separate teams in final standings?

[Village Idiot]

http://ussoccerplayers.typepad.com/ussoccerplayers/nasl-arrogant-americans.html

 

On October 21, 1980, the NASL adopted a new points system that awarded goals scored as well as actually winning the match. The result was the possibility of a side earning fifteen points for a league victory, nine for the win, one for the first goal, two for the second, and three points for the third. But the NASL didn’t stop there.

 

In a move to curry favor with FIFA and further the United States’ chances to host the 1986 World Cup, the league submitted a list of four proposed rule changes for official adoption by the football world’s governing body. The rules were typically American, including widening the goal to promote scoring, outlawing the backpass to the keeper, assessing penalty time for yellow cards, and shortening the match to 70 minutes with time outs when the ball was out of play.

 

 

 

[madras]

One interesting idea I read elsewhere earlier was to do away with goal difference and just go on goals scored as the primary tiebreaker. Then again how often is goal difference actually required to separate teams in final standings?

that was the old fashioned way wasn't it. goal average instead of goal difference ?

[madras]

Split the field in 3 zones, and make it a rule that the three parts of the team can't run outside them (Def, Mid, Att).

 

then have a ref for each zone making sure they do it.

that would stifle the game even more imo.

[Dave]

http://ussoccerplayers.typepad.com/ussoccerplayers/nasl-arrogant-americans.html

 

On October 21, 1980, the NASL adopted a new points system that awarded goals scored as well as actually winning the match. The result was the possibility of a side earning fifteen points for a league victory, nine for the win, one for the first goal, two for the second, and three points for the third. But the NASL didn’t stop there.

 

In a move to curry favor with FIFA and further the United States’ chances to host the 1986 World Cup, the league submitted a list of four proposed rule changes for official adoption by the football world’s governing body. The rules were typically American, including widening the goal to promote scoring, outlawing the backpass to the keeper, assessing penalty time for yellow cards, and shortening the match to 70 minutes with time outs when the ball was out of play.

 

 

 

 

Arrogant indeed.

[Interpolic]

Split the field in 3 zones, and make it a rule that the three parts of the team can't run outside them (Def, Mid, Att).

 

then have a ref for each zone making sure they do it.

 

That would be horrible.

[Guest Haris Vuckic]

Extra time multi ball and 15 points per goal, 5 points for hitting the bar and a Stars N' Stripes with your bud.

[Disco]

Free BJs for each scorer off a fan of their choice in the stadium.

[midds]

Split the field in 3 zones, and make it a rule that the three parts of the team can't run outside them (Def, Mid, Att).

 

then have a ref for each zone making sure they do it.

 

Wouldn't that mean 2 strikers were constantly up against 4 defenders and a goalkeeper? Not exactly a recipe for a goalfest is it? 

[Dave]

Could attempt to address the current financial state of the clubs by enforcing strict salary caps but allowing inflated goal-scoring and win bonuses instead.

[Village Idiot]

Teams on equal points is too rare an ocurrance in a long league tournament that a change in it tie-breaker rules would influence team's strategies, in my opinion.

 

We could give 2 points to the team with most shots on goal in case of a tie. Dunno about knockout tournaments however.

[Mick]

Make the goals bigger, that way teams will attack more as they have a better chance of scoring and will not want to sit back as they will be in more danger.

[Guest Brummiemag]

Make the goals bigger, that way teams will attack more as they have a better chance of scoring and will not want to sit back as they will be in more danger.

 

Not as daft as it sounds Mick, especially when you think that when the rules of football were made in the 1860's (are whenever) the average height of goalkeepers (and people in general) was at least 6 inches shorter than now  - actually I'm amazed the Mexican goalie is only 5 foot 7 inches tall!!

[Interpolic]

I think you have to fiddle with the points system a bit, no doubt about it.

 

If you did something like 5 points for a win, 2 for a draw, 1 for a goal then it might do the trick.  I get the feeling you'd have to test it for a season somewhere to ascertain what the actual effect would be.  Using a system like that would mean you'd get more points for a 4-3 loss than a 0-0 draw, which doesn't really sit well but I can't think of anything other than giving points for goals.

 

Unless you award a UEFA cup spot based on positive play or something, but it seems a bit naff.

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

Make the ball more volatile and unpredictable when in the air

[Village Idiot]

Or award zero points for a 0-0 draw. This way teams can't go out and play for it hoping to nick one goal, since they risk getting fuck all.

[Guest Brummiemag]

I think you have to fiddle with the points system a bit, no doubt about it.

 

If you did something like 5 points for a win, 2 for a draw, 1 for a goal then it might do the trick.  I get the feeling you'd have to test it for a season somewhere to ascertain what the actual effect would be.  Using a system like that would mean you'd get more points for a 4-3 loss than a 0-0 draw, which doesn't really sit well but I can't think of anything other than giving points for goals.

 

Unless you award a UEFA cup spot based on positive play or something, but it seems a bit naff.

 

I'm not suggesting anything drastic should be introduced straight away but surely some of these ideas to make more football games more entertaining should be tested and experimented with at a lower level around the world to see what happens? Other sports, including Rugby League, Union and Ice hockey have changed the rules or scoring system to progress the game

 

[jdckelly]

perhaps the bonus point system like in rugby? score 3 or more goals in a game get a bonus point regardless of final result, best I can think of atm anyway

[ponsaelius]

Or award zero points for a 0-0 draw. This way teams can't go out and play for it hoping to nick one goal, since they risk getting f*** all.

 

Was just about to post this. Would have solved most of the s*** games in this tournament so far.

 

For example the Japan - Netherlands game today. Japan spent the entire match until the goal playing for the 0-0, then Sneijder scores a bit of a fluke and bam the game bursts into life. Japan actually genuinely looked like creating chances and scoring, as did the Dutch due to the new space created. I'm left thinking why the boring twats didn't just go for it from the off.

[Guest Brummiemag]

Or award zero points for a 0-0 draw. This way teams can't go out and play for it hoping to nick one goal, since they risk getting fuck all.

 

Yep this would be good for starters, cannot see any disadvantage with this idea

[Colocho]

Make a ball that causes problems for goalkeepers.

[mozy]

Leave it the same. Switzerland beating Spain was a good thing. Unpredictability is what makes sport so interesting, I would rather see that result than Spain 8-3 Switzerland. The attacking team should be good enough to break down the clogging team.