Troy.McClure
06/05/2003, 6:21 PM
Its something that has always annoyed me, as I dont think that its very fair and can kill off games, I'll give some examples.
The return leg of the Man U V Real match. It died after Ronaldo scored straight away. You knew that Utd would need to get 5 goals, and that was never going to happen while taking propper care of your defence, fair enough it helped create a goal feast, but you knew that there was only going to be 1 winner..... unlike Inter V Valencia where all inter had to do was score 1 in Spain, after having a 1-0 home win, and not colapse at the back. What happens? inter get an early goal and we get 85 min of Italian defending :rolleyes: The formation is basically 1-8-0-2. way to kill off a match! And the celtic V Boavista 2nd leg?? :eek: A 1 all draw followed by 100% defence until Celtic manage to get an away goal, followed my a 10 min attack by Boavista. I HATE NEGATIVE FOOTBALL!!!!!
but here's the really stupid thing. Inter Milan and AC are drawn together in the semifinal of the 2nd biggest football competitian there is, they both play in the same ground, but if the scores are 1-1 and 0-0, then one team is deemed better than the other! Why???? They play in the same ground and they have that stupid away goals rule? Crazy!
IMO if a tie is level on aggregate, the team that has scored more goals in one of the legs should be alowed through. I think that it is harder to score more goals over 90 min rather than score away, so if that was applied to the Inter V Valencia tie (2-2 agr 1-0 Inter & 2-1 Val) Valencia would have gone through as they scored 2 goals in just the 1 match, while Inter could do no better than 1 a match. Also Man U wouldnt have needed to put 6 past Real when they scored 3 in OT, 5 (which would be hard enough anyway) would have done (thats still an average of 1 goal every 18 min! but it would have kept the tie alive). If the scores were the same (say 2-1 to both home sides), extra time and then penos.
PS I think that the Silver goal rule is better than the Golden goal.
The return leg of the Man U V Real match. It died after Ronaldo scored straight away. You knew that Utd would need to get 5 goals, and that was never going to happen while taking propper care of your defence, fair enough it helped create a goal feast, but you knew that there was only going to be 1 winner..... unlike Inter V Valencia where all inter had to do was score 1 in Spain, after having a 1-0 home win, and not colapse at the back. What happens? inter get an early goal and we get 85 min of Italian defending :rolleyes: The formation is basically 1-8-0-2. way to kill off a match! And the celtic V Boavista 2nd leg?? :eek: A 1 all draw followed by 100% defence until Celtic manage to get an away goal, followed my a 10 min attack by Boavista. I HATE NEGATIVE FOOTBALL!!!!!
but here's the really stupid thing. Inter Milan and AC are drawn together in the semifinal of the 2nd biggest football competitian there is, they both play in the same ground, but if the scores are 1-1 and 0-0, then one team is deemed better than the other! Why???? They play in the same ground and they have that stupid away goals rule? Crazy!
IMO if a tie is level on aggregate, the team that has scored more goals in one of the legs should be alowed through. I think that it is harder to score more goals over 90 min rather than score away, so if that was applied to the Inter V Valencia tie (2-2 agr 1-0 Inter & 2-1 Val) Valencia would have gone through as they scored 2 goals in just the 1 match, while Inter could do no better than 1 a match. Also Man U wouldnt have needed to put 6 past Real when they scored 3 in OT, 5 (which would be hard enough anyway) would have done (thats still an average of 1 goal every 18 min! but it would have kept the tie alive). If the scores were the same (say 2-1 to both home sides), extra time and then penos.
PS I think that the Silver goal rule is better than the Golden goal.