All things Football (soccer) related

[gamer78]

I think the problem here this 'Euro Champ 2020' should be better called 'Euro Champ 2020 England' as the England was mostly likely the host nation for this tournament. Even Wales travel to Baku but England didn't play even single match outside London. They dominate the match against Danmark (Danes have 0.25 Expected goals stat) but still no one knows what will happen in penalties if that weak penalty has not been given. And what about VAR? Imagine Danes have given that penalty in Wembley. It is impossible. Final still in Wembley but one must ask Ceferin...

I believe in football it is no right thing to say 'we've so many clear chances and we deserve winning'. Goal is goal referee should not intervene, bad sides should still win.

[ernieschwitz]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

My my, what a lot of classless individuals appear to be making themselves heard from all over. I don't know the Danish publications and whether they are mainstream or what, but wow.....

CNN is not a Danish publication. It would be fitting if you at least read the URL of the link, before denying or disdaining them.

England actually get the rub of the green for once and people seem to coming over all unnecessary [8|]

Playing for the gallery there Warspite1. I reported a fact, don't get your precious nationalism caught up in that.

Denmark get beaten with a dodgy penalty that VAR didn't overrule (how many times does that happen in football?) and all hell breaks loose.

I never once said the penalty was unfair, nor that its result wasn't going to be what it was. All hell? You playing the victim, eh. Nice.

Let's hope Denmark never lose to a goal which is, in full view of everyone, punched into the goal eh?.....

... and this is where I say, that you can't stand being cheated, but you like cheating. (Or something much milder actually).

I think certain people need to calm down:

Certain people. That would be me, since I am the only one saying anything. Good of you not to mention me. I've tried that before in the General Forum, which seems to be only for a select few that have very select opinions, that cannot stand to have them in conflict with others. Speak if you will of people (not naming them) but it really only points back at you. You are trying to come off looking better by not pointing fingers directly. Shame on you, not me.

a) The Danish free kick that led to their goal was debateable at best
b) The Danish players were standing too close to the English wall when the Danish free kick was taken
c) Harry Kane had a very good shout for a penalty before the disputed one

The English hospitality, and fair play is the only thing I am calling into question. The game stands. I haven't called for it to be ruled an English loss, so again, misrepresenting the facts there Warspite1. I do think that in ALL games where the fans interfere that there should be some sort of penalty impossed. Alas, it will probably just be a fine, which the culprits will never pay, and that will surely teach them a lesson! Instead a possible punishment would be no fans from the perpetrating side, for the next game. That surely would keep laser pens in people's pockets.
[/quote]

Wow.... sorry we actually won a game of football for a change [8|]

Once again misrepresentating my view. Nice one though, try and deflect your misfortune of being in a semi-finale by declaring you don't win.

[ernieschwitz]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: ernieschwitz

How different the tune is, when you are the one benefitting from the unfairness, than when you have the unfairness happen to you. I thought that you were a guy I could respect Warspite. I guess I am going to have to be disappointed.

warspite1

I beg your pardon?

You as well?

You as well? Sounds like you are talking in plural of someone that is only one present of. Oh well, once again misrepresentation, to make it seem you are under fire from all sides.

So come of the commentary coming out of Denmark about Covid and the English is acceptable?

I have not commented one bit about "Covid and the English". If there is such commentary, why are you putting it on MY shoulders. I guess once again you are misrepresenting the truth. Not good for you to get this pointed out so often is it?

Yes, as has been admitted by at least two Englishmen on this forum, the penalty was lucky. But let's have some perspective. The match didn't hinge just on one dodgy decision did it? Or are you saying the Danish free kick was legal? Are you ignoring the rules of the game when it suits you?

Another misrepresentation of my opinions. Did I ANYWHERE write that the penalty was no good, that it was lucky, that the game hinged on it? You seem to be ignoring the rules of good debatemanship. Pushing statements onto me that are in no way verifiable. Grow up!

And if you want to talk about respect, then how about the fact that at least two English on this forum have been full of praise for the Danes (and various other nationalities) during this tournament.

Sure there has been praise, and I am sure some of it was heartfelt. Some of it was just going through the motions though. Like saying how much you are sorry for Eric, or Erikson, and various other misspellings and misnamings of Christian Eriksen. Really show you are caring, get the name right seems a first.

I'm still waiting for you to say well done England on reaching the final.

Well done on reaching the final. To me there will always be a small asterics on any title you might win though, thanks to that laser pointer. And let me be clear, I know that you did not personally do it!

But it seems that is beyond you. Classless - seems you are not the only one disappointed.

There I got more class than you now. If you are disappointed, you probably should look yourself in the mirror and ask yourself, how many times you have assumed things that were not true, or misrepresented my view, all in the hope of getting some pitty... Like you need it? You won!



[/quote]

[ernieschwitz]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: ernieschwitz

How different the tune is, when you are the one benefitting from the unfairness, than when you have the unfairness happen to you. I thought that you were a guy I could respect Warspite. I guess I am going to have to be disappointed.

I totally think that this was uncalled for. If just one play in an entire game makes it or breaks it for one team, then that TEAM has a problem. Warspite1 has been a gentleman from what I have read on this thread and has never been rooting just for England.

Your notion is and opinion is noted.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: ernieschwitz

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: ernieschwitz

How different the tune is, when you are the one benefitting from the unfairness, than when you have the unfairness happen to you. I thought that you were a guy I could respect Warspite. I guess I am going to have to be disappointed.

warspite1

I beg your pardon?

You as well?

You as well? Sounds like you are talking in plural of someone that is only one present of. Oh well, once again misrepresentation, to make it seem you are under fire from all sides.

So come of the commentary coming out of Denmark about Covid and the English is acceptable?

I have not commented one bit about "Covid and the English". If there is such commentary, why are you putting it on MY shoulders. I guess once again you are misrepresenting the truth. Not good for you to get this pointed out so often is it?

Yes, as has been admitted by at least two Englishmen on this forum, the penalty was lucky. But let's have some perspective. The match didn't hinge just on one dodgy decision did it? Or are you saying the Danish free kick was legal? Are you ignoring the rules of the game when it suits you?

Another misrepresentation of my opinions. Did I ANYWHERE write that the penalty was no good, that it was lucky, that the game hinged on it? You seem to be ignoring the rules of good debatemanship. Pushing statements onto me that are in no way verifiable. Grow up!

And if you want to talk about respect, then how about the fact that at least two English on this forum have been full of praise for the Danes (and various other nationalities) during this tournament.

Sure there has been praise, and I am sure some of it was heartfelt. Some of it was just going through the motions though. Like saying how much you are sorry for Eric, or Erikson, and various other misspellings and misnamings of Christian Eriksen. Really show you are caring, get the name right seems a first.

I'm still waiting for you to say well done England on reaching the final.

Well done on reaching the final. To me there will always be a small asterics on any title you might win though, thanks to that laser pointer. And let me be clear, I know that you did not personally do it!

But it seems that is beyond you. Classless - seems you are not the only one disappointed.

There I got more class than you now. If you are disappointed, you probably should look yourself in the mirror and ask yourself, how many times you have assumed things that were not true, or misrepresented my view, all in the hope of getting some pitty... Like you need it? You won!

[/quote]

If someone in the stands used a laser pointer on a person, if that person could be found, then criminal charges should be brought as well as a civil action where that individual is never allowed as a spectator into any game again.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: gamer78

I think the problem here this 'Euro Champ 2020' should be better called 'Euro Champ 2020 England' as the England was mostly likely the host nation for this tournament. Even Wales travel to Baku but England didn't play even single match outside London. They dominate the match against Danmark (Danes have 0.25 Expected goals stat) but still no one knows what will happen in penalties if that weak penalty has not been given. And what about VAR? Imagine Danes have given that penalty in Wembley. It is impossible. Final still in Wembley but one must ask Ceferin...

I believe in football it is no right thing to say 'we've so many clear chances and we deserve winning'. Goal is goal referee should not intervene, bad sides should still win.

warspite1

Why is there a 'problem' here? Was Euro 2016 called 'Euro Champ 2016 France'? Was Euro 2012 called 'Euro Champ 2012 Poland and Ukraine'?

For reasons mentioned in an earlier post, there was no one single host nation for this tournament, but for whatever reason, England hosted the majority of games. Well if the finals were in England then they would host all the games - like France did five years ago. Why is that a problem?

Funny you moan that England didn't play a single match outside London. I thought Rome was in Italy.....maybe they moved it.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Frido1207

Congratulations England. A well deserved final participation after 55 long years.

warspite1

Thanks Frido1207 [:)]. I think Germany's change of manager has come at the right time. The German football team don't stay down for long.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

If someone in the stands used a laser pointer on a person, if that person could be found, then criminal charges should be brought as well as a civil action where that individual is never allowed as a spectator into any game again.

warspite1

Sadly it seems the moron was not found. UEFA need to come down hard on this and apply tough sanctions. The Danish FA apparently didn't want to take the matter any further so presumably Schmeichel didn't actually notice it. But that is not the point.

As for the booing of the national anthem, as said in earlier posts, this has always been a feature of England games. Its so astoundingly ignorant more than anything else and just makes me sad to hear it. But then, when you look at certain other things that go on in football grounds then its clear that there are a lot of very ignorant people that watch football.

[warspite1]

Wow. Someone seems to have got entirely the wrong end of the stick, insulted me, got picked up on it, then got hysterical and gone back to a previous post to claim things that weren’t said…..

So first things first. In post 4756 I wasn’t talking about you. I was talking about what was being reported as written in certain Danish publications. The clue was where I referenced the Danish publications.

I wasn’t talking about CNN being a Danish publication. Why would I even be referring to the CNN article that was correctly raising the subject of the marker?? I was talking about Danish publications – and I said they may not be mainstream Danish publications – going off on one about England.

It appears you thought I was talking about you. NO. I only brought you into it in post 4758 because of your totally uncalled for attack on me in post 4757.

I want England to do well. You want Denmark to do well. But according to you I want England to do well because I suffer from ‘precious nationalism’. Nationalism always has unpleasant undertones – so thank-you for that. How wonderful that you can support your country's national football team without feelings of 'Nationalism' whereas you make out my support for my country clearly has another meaning [8|]

You then go on about my post 4756 as though I was having a go at you – when, as said, I specifically referred to Danish publications. You said it was good of me not to mention you. Yes, there was a reason for that – because I wasn’t referring to you. You simply assumed I was for reasons I can't imagine. When you bleat on about you not saying the penalty was unfair etc. Yes I know, I didn't say you did – unless of course you are the editor of the Danish publications I was referring to????

So your whole post 4762 is simply a pathetic whine at something you believe was directed at you and never was.

Post 4763 you respond to my comments from 4758 and yes, they WERE directed at you, but only as a result of your totally unwarranted attack on me in post 4757.

Yes, I said 'you as well' because, thanks to your post 4763, I was NOW adding you to those bizarre Danish publications I was referring to earlier because you didn't give them any sanction. No, YOU did not comment about Covid and the English – that was the Danish publications I referred to earlier. Do you start to see a theme running here? Quite simply you had no reason to think I was referring to you.

And thanks for deciding that some of the praise for other nations was ‘just going through the motions’ – yes, thanks for that. I have the ability to appreciate football generally and love the world's game (its why I started this thread). I also have the good grace to applaud great football and footballers, so don’t you dare say that is fake. Who do you think you are telling me what I think? Oh and please, show me where I have misspelt Christian Eriksen.

And IF (massive IF) we win on Sunday, you are going to put an * against the win??????? Wow, I mean wow… So you put an * against Denmark in 1992, yes? I mean they didn’t even QUALIFY for the finals. They were allowed in because of Yugoslavian issues but they didn’t actually qualify. So presumably that's a huge * right there.

You think Argentina and the hand of god deserves an *? You think Argentina in 1978 deserves an * because of the 6-0 win vs Peru? You think Germany reaching the World Cup final deserves an * because of the Algerian stitch up? How many more * are you going to place in your imaginary football stats book?

Thankfully – mercifully – there is nothing to say Schmeichel was affected by the laser pen – indeed I am sure he would have halted proceedings if he had - any professional in that position would have. Sadly it seems the stewards could not find the culprit. Let’s hope UEFA come down hard on England – certainly they should not consider England hosting a tournament for a LONG time. But regardless of the actual effect on the night (which would appear to be nil as the Danish FA do not want any further action), you place your little * against England even reaching the final and insert Denmark instead.

You ended your post with saying that ' assumed things that were not true, or misrepresented [your] view'. Now. Re-read post 4756, look at my reference to Danish publications and tell me who is guilty of assuming and misrepresenting.

This whole unpleasant exchange has come about because YOU have done just that. Well done.

[warspite1]

And now back to our scheduled programing.....

It seems there is no 3rd/4th place play off this time around. Not surprised - its always been known as the game no one wants to play for obvious reasons.

So we have two days of build up to the final. In the red corner we have England, the inventors of the world's game, whose pioneers spread it far and wide across the globe, but who sadly are not very good at it. The home team, desperate for the success that has alluded them both before and since the one exception in 1966.

In the blue corner we have the Italians, the Azzurri, one of THE genuine power houses of the game - four times winners of the World Cup, once winners of the European Championships - who, under Roberto Mancini, are emerging from an unusual period of poor form - actually failing to qualify for the last World Cup.

Who will win? Well the favourites have to be Italy but the best bit? Both teams should be wearing their proper kits White - blue - white and blue - white - blue. Are you listening UEFA? [:)]

Beers are in the fridge.... can't wait.

[RFalvo69]

I watched the laser pointer scene and I don't think that it is a question of deserved/undeserved penalties (the Danish Federation already said that they will not pursue the matter). The problem is that laser beams are dangerous and UEFA is right to crack down on them.

Ten years ago (maybe more) there was a "epidemic" of laser beams here in Italy with some players being hit in the eyes and suffering pain (nothing permanent, but still...) This went on for months, afflicting all the teams, before a coordinated effort of increased surveillance cameras and observers nailed some culprits. Once these idiots understood that being amid a crowd on the stands didn't protect them the "great laser beam show" abated. UEFA is right to try to nip this idiocy in the bud.

[shunwick]

Copa America 2021

3rd/4th Place match

Colombia v Peru

Technically this game is tomorrow but it's in the early hours of morning UK time. So I list it here.

I fancy the Colombians to pick up 3rd place but I am not sure how 3rd/4th place games are approached in South America. I am going to assume that both teams are committed to winning it.

Best wishes,
Steve

[shunwick]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Wow. Someone seems to have got entirely the wrong end of the stick, insulted me, got picked up on it, then got hysterical and gone back to a previous post to claim things that weren’t said…..

So first things first. In post 4756 I wasn’t talking about you. I was talking about what was being reported as written in certain Danish publications. The clue was where I referenced the Danish publications.

I wasn’t talking about CNN being a Danish publication. Why would I even be referring to the CNN article that was correctly raising the subject of the marker?? I was talking about Danish publications – and I said they may not be mainstream Danish publications – going off on one about England.

It appears you thought I was talking about you. NO. I only brought you into it in post 4758 because of your totally uncalled for attack on me in post 4757.

I want England to do well. You want Denmark to do well. But according to you I want England to do well because I suffer from ‘precious nationalism’. Nationalism always has unpleasant undertones – so thank-you for that. How wonderful that you can support your country's national football team without feelings of 'Nationalism' whereas you make out my support for my country clearly has another meaning [8|]

You then go on about my post 4756 as though I was having a go at you – when, as said, I specifically referred to Danish publications. You said it was good of me not to mention you. Yes, there was a reason for that – because I wasn’t referring to you. You simply assumed I was for reasons I can't imagine. When you bleat on about you not saying the penalty was unfair etc. Yes I know, I didn't say you did – unless of course you are the editor of the Danish publications I was referring to????

So your whole post 4762 is simply a pathetic whine at something you believe was directed at you and never was.

Post 4763 you respond to my comments from 4758 and yes, they WERE directed at you, but only as a result of your totally unwarranted attack on me in post 4757.

Yes, I said 'you as well' because, thanks to your post 4763, I was NOW adding you to those bizarre Danish publications I was referring to earlier because you didn't give them any sanction. No, YOU did not comment about Covid and the English – that was the Danish publications I referred to earlier. Do you start to see a theme running here? Quite simply you had no reason to think I was referring to you.

And thanks for deciding that some of the praise for other nations was ‘just going through the motions’ – yes, thanks for that. I have the ability to appreciate football generally and love the world's game (its why I started this thread). I also have the good grace to applaud great football and footballers, so don’t you dare say that is fake. Who do you think you are telling me what I think? Oh and please, show me where I have misspelt Christian Eriksen.

And IF (massive IF) we win on Sunday, you are going to put an * against the win??????? Wow, I mean wow… So you put an * against Denmark in 1992, yes? I mean they didn’t even QUALIFY for the finals. They were allowed in because of Yugoslavian issues but they didn’t actually qualify. So presumably that's a huge * right there.

You think Argentina and the hand of god deserves an *? You think Argentina in 1978 deserves an * because of the 6-0 win vs Peru? You think Germany reaching the World Cup final deserves an * because of the Algerian stitch up? How many more * are you going to place in your imaginary football stats book?

Thankfully – mercifully – there is nothing to say Schmeichel was affected by the laser pen – indeed I am sure he would have halted proceedings if he had - any professional in that position would have. Sadly it seems the stewards could not find the culprit. Let’s hope UEFA come down hard on England – certainly they should not consider England hosting a tournament for a LONG time. But regardless of the actual effect on the night (which would appear to be nil as the Danish FA do not want any further action), you place your little * against England even reaching the final and insert Denmark instead.

You ended your post with saying that ' assumed things that were not true, or misrepresented [your] view'. Now. Re-read post 4756, look at my reference to Danish publications and tell me who is guilty of assuming and misrepresenting.

This whole unpleasant exchange has come about because YOU have done just that. Well done.

The problem is the forum software that Matrix uses. It is only possible to quote or reply. If anyone wants to create a standalone post that has no relationship at all to the post immediately above it then they cannot. And the forum software even even puts "(in reply to xxx)" even if it is not a direct reply. Sadly, it leads to misunderstandings.

Best wishes,
Steve

[shunwick]

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

I watched the laser pointer scene and I don't think that it is a question of deserved/undeserved penalties (the Danish Federation already said that they will not pursue the matter). The problem is that laser beams are dangerous and UEFA is right to crack down on them.

Ten years ago (maybe more) there was a "epidemic" of laser beams here in Italy with some players being hit in the eyes and suffering pain (nothing permanent, but still...) This went on for months, afflicting all the teams, before a coordinated effort of increased surveillance cameras and observers nailed some culprits. Once these idiots understood that being amid a crowd on the stands didn't protect them the "great laser beam show" abated. UEFA is right to try to nip this idiocy in the bud.

Agreed. There is no place in football for the idiots who do this kind of thing. It is unfortunate that the FA and UEFA were unable to identify the culprit. It needs to be stamped out hard.

I love watching football. I don't want it spoiled by idiots who show no respect for opposing teams or the braindead who think that shining a laser into a goalkeeper's eyes is acceptable or funny.

Best wishes,
Steve

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: gamer78

I think the problem here this 'Euro Champ 2020' should be better called 'Euro Champ 2020 England' as the England was mostly likely the host nation for this tournament. Even Wales travel to Baku but England didn't play even single match outside London. They dominate the match against Danmark (Danes have 0.25 Expected goals stat) but still no one knows what will happen in penalties if that weak penalty has not been given. And what about VAR? Imagine Danes have given that penalty in Wembley. It is impossible. Final still in Wembley but one must ask Ceferin...

I believe in football it is no right thing to say 'we've so many clear chances and we deserve winning'. Goal is goal referee should not intervene, bad sides should still win.

warspite1

Why is there a 'problem' here? Was Euro 2016 called 'Euro Champ 2016 France'? Was Euro 2012 called 'Euro Champ 2012 Poland and Ukraine'?

For reasons mentioned in an earlier post, there was no one single host nation for this tournament, but for whatever reason, England hosted the majority of games. Well if the finals were in England then they would host all the games - like France did five years ago. Why is that a problem?

Funny you moan that England didn't play a single match outside London. I thought Rome was in Italy.....maybe they moved it.

Don't you know? Rome is in the state of GEORGIA, in the USA!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome,_Georgia

[Zorch]

Just a dumb American question...why not have soccer teams play a best of 3 games match? 3 games would would be a better test than deciding on penalty kicks.

[gamer78]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: gamer78

I think the problem here this 'Euro Champ 2020' should be better called 'Euro Champ 2020 England' as the England was mostly likely the host nation for this tournament. Even Wales travel to Baku but England didn't play even single match outside London. They dominate the match against Danmark (Danes have 0.25 Expected goals stat) but still no one knows what will happen in penalties if that weak penalty has not been given. And what about VAR? Imagine Danes have given that penalty in Wembley. It is impossible. Final still in Wembley but one must ask Ceferin...

I believe in football it is no right thing to say 'we've so many clear chances and we deserve winning'. Goal is goal referee should not intervene, bad sides should still win.

warspite1

Why is there a 'problem' here? Was Euro 2016 called 'Euro Champ 2016 France'? Was Euro 2012 called 'Euro Champ 2012 Poland and Ukraine'?

For reasons mentioned in an earlier post, there was no one single host nation for this tournament, but for whatever reason, England hosted the majority of games. Well if the finals were in England then they would host all the games - like France did five years ago. Why is that a problem?

Funny you moan that England didn't play a single match outside London. I thought Rome was in Italy.....maybe they moved it.

Don't you know? Rome is in the state of GEORGIA, in the USA!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome,_Georgia

See there is another Rome. No longer Byzantium and Kayser-i Rûm. USA is the new successor of The Roman Empire. [;)]

warspite1, UEFA Euro 2016 France was called UEFA Euro 2016 France and UEFA Euro 2012 Poland-Ukraine was called UEFA Euro 2012 Poland-Ukraine.. UEFA Euro 2020 is only called UEFA Euro 2020. No main host.

Italian PM said finals should be played in Rome and Merkel seemed to be agreement in late June. Not my 'moan'

2 months ago https://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleagu ... -portugal/ from Istanbul for UK's suddenly red list. UEFA accepted immediately. It's ok.

But now there is 65000 supporters in Wembley. UK Govt forgot about Covid regulations and UEFA says final stadium won't change. Well..

And https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... at-wembley. Still England is very solid team hope the best.

[shunwick]

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Just a dumb American question...why not have soccer teams play a best of 3 games match? 3 games would would be a better test than deciding on penalty kicks.

The primary reason is that football already has a congested fixture list. Too many players are already playing two games a week with a very short summer or winter break. An international player can easily be playing 65-70 matches a season. Regular players will (providing they have no injuries) will play 45-50 games a season.

Imagine playing American football where instead of offensive, defensive, and special teams, only one team is ever allowed on the field. They have to play for 90 minutes with one half-time break of fifteen minutes and no stops for adverts or breaks of any kind. Now get them to play 65 matches a season with a 6 week break in between seasons. You will then understand why even more matches are not really possible.

Penalty shootouts are a necessary evil. But they also make for some good drama.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: shunwick

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Just a dumb American question...why not have soccer teams play a best of 3 games match? 3 games would would be a better test than deciding on penalty kicks.

The primary reason is that football already has a congested fixture list. Too many players are already playing two games a week with a very short summer or winter break. An international player can easily be playing 65-70 matches a season. Regular players will (providing they have no injuries) will play 45-50 games a season.

Imagine playing American football where instead of offensive, defensive, and special teams, only one team is ever allowed on the field. They have to play for 90 minutes with one half-time break of fifteen minutes and no stops for adverts or breaks of any kind. Now get them to play 65 matches a season with a 6 week break in between seasons. You will then understand why even more matches are not really possible.

Penalty shootouts are a necessary evil. But they also make for some good drama.

Best wishes,
Steve.

"Ironman Football" is what is that is called and that used to be the way that it was played or some players would come off and others go on but most played offense and defense. In one way, it was cleaner as far as hits and such would go.

[Zorch]

ORIGINAL: shunwick

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Just a dumb American question...why not have soccer teams play a best of 3 games match? 3 games would would be a better test than deciding on penalty kicks.

The primary reason is that football already has a congested fixture list. Too many players are already playing two games a week with a very short summer or winter break. An international player can easily be playing 65-70 matches a season. Regular players will (providing they have no injuries) will play 45-50 games a season.

Imagine playing American football where instead of offensive, defensive, and special teams, only one team is ever allowed on the field. They have to play for 90 minutes with one half-time break of fifteen minutes and no stops for adverts or breaks of any kind. Now get them to play 65 matches a season with a 6 week break in between seasons. You will then understand why even more matches are not really possible.

Penalty shootouts are a necessary evil. But they also make for some good drama.

Best wishes,
Steve.

Thank you for taking my proposal seriously.

I believe that American football is not the best comparison for soccer; because American football is a COLLISON sport. Every play involves deliberate, violent collisions. Many NFL players are physically unable to play the next day. I don't think the NFL has ever played a game with less than 3 days of rest (Sunday to Thursday). Basketball is a better comparison, and is often played on consecutive days. NBA players play as many 100 games a year (counting playoffs but not pre-season). True, NBA players don't play 90 minutes but that's what a bench is for. Using your bench is a truer test of a team's depth than just the starters and a few late substitutions (maybe soccer should make substitutions more flexible).

What did soccer do before penalty shots? Have a rematch the next day?