Away Goal Rule Scrapped by UEFA for European Competitions

[m0e]

18 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

Nah, it's probably better for us that the away goal rule is scrapped.

Now we can lose 3-1 at home and still go through. 

On penalties?

[Jose Jones]

9 minutes ago, m0e said:

On penalties?

Yeah

[TheHowieLama]

If they score 3 at Anfield they will deserve to go through.

[an tha]

Scrapping away goals was right call IMO.

 

I am pasting from articles here as too tired to properly type out my points - but these are broadly them.

 

For example.

 

Last March, Paris Saint-Germain beat Chelsea 3-1 in the first leg of a Champions League quarter-final at Parc des Princes. Chelsea, however, managed fight their way back into the tie thanks to goals from Andre Schurrle and Demba Ba at Stamford Bridge.

 

After 180 minutes of football, the aggregate scoreline was a quite representative 3-3. But Chelsea, by virtue of Eden Hazard’s consolation marker in Paris, advanced to the next round on away goals

.

It’s a scenario that plays out every season, and it’s wildly unfair—never mind insultingly illogical.

To paraphrase Gertrude Stein, “a draw is a draw is a draw is a draw.”

 

One goal is just as valuable as another, regardless of when it is scored. And if a split decision is the result after two legs, there other ways to determine a winner.

 

The away-goals rule is especially ridiculous in extra time, as whenever a tie exceeds 180 minutes the visiting team always has the advantage.

 

Take the Napoli-Chelsea quarter-final from 2012 as an example.

 

Following a 3-1 defeat in Italy, Chelsea stormed back to level terms with a 4-1 win at Stamford Bridge. Eventually, Branislav Ivanovic won the contest for the Blues in the 105th minute.

 

But what if Napoli had potted a goal in, say, the 110th minute?

 

They would have created a 5-5 aggregate draw but gone ahead on away goals. Their goal would have been worth more than Ivanovic's. 

Should UEFA persist in enforcing the away-goals rule, the least they can do is abolish it for extra time—or go straight to penalties.

In what world does it make sense that one team plays 120 minutes with the away-goals advantage while the other gets only 90 minutes with it?

 

☰

  Mike Hewitt/Getty Images

5 Reasons Why UEFA's Away-Goals Rule Should Be Scrapped

JERRAD PETERS
SEPTEMBER 04, 2014

So the away-goals rule—implemented by UEFA in 1965—could well be done away with.

Praise be.

As the regulation’s many critics have pointed out in recent years, it is both illogical and counterproductive to persist with away goals as a tie-breaker, and while the rule may have served a purpose at one time, its usefulness has long since expired.

On Thursday, at a gathering of internationally renowned coaches in Nyon, Switzerland, former Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson confirmed that away goals had been discussed at length.

“There was a bit of a debate about whether it has any significance today,” he remarked, as per The Guardian. “Some think it is not as important as it used to be.”

Count Arsene Wenger among that set.

“The weight of the away goal is too heavy, too big and is not justifiable anymore,” the Arsenal boss said last December, according to The Telegraph. “I think it is a problem in the modern game.”

He’s right, and over the next few slides we’ll examine why.

Here are five reasons why UEFA’s away-goals rule should be scrapped—ASAP.

5. It’s Antiquated

Harold Cunningham/Getty Images

The away goals rule was introduced in 1965, following a European Cup quarter-final between Liverpool and Cologne that was settled by flipping a coin after a pair of scoreless draws.

The thinking was that the flipped-coin method of breaking ties and the tentative nature of European away matches could be dealt with by a single measure—two birds with one stone, if you will.

Remember, a cross-continent trip in the 1960s wasn’t quite as comfortable as it is now, nor were the matchday experiences for either the visiting team or its set of supporters.

But those days are long gone, and, says Sir Alex Ferguson, the majority of his peers wish the away-goals rule was, as well.

“If we go back, say, 30 years,” he remarked, as per Reuters, “counter-attacking consisted of one, or maybe two, players. Today, counter-attacks have players flooding forward in fives or sixes and really positive, quick passing.”

He added: “What is helping is that the state of pitches, pitches are fantastic nowadays, so coming out of defense with passes is much easier than it was 30 years ago, and you get a better attitude to counter-attack today than you did 30 years ago.”

4. It’s Counterproductive

Shaun Botterill/Getty Images

Another downside of the away-goals rule is that, by its very nature, it coaxes the home team to think about a clean sheet first and goalscoring second.

“Sometimes I think there is a counter-effect as teams play at home not to concede goals,” stated Arsene Wenger, according to The Telegraph. “At home the first thing managers say is, 'let’s not concede a goal.’”

Sir Alex Ferguson concurs.

“From a personal point of view, when I was playing at home, I used to say to myself, ‘don’t lose a goal,’” he said on Thursday, as per The Guardian.

If the away-goals rule was intended to draw the visiting team out of its half of the pitch, it has since enticed the home side to sit back and defend.

 

 

2. It Makes a Mockery of Extra Time

Michael Regan/Getty Images

The away-goals rule is especially ridiculous in extra time, as whenever a tie exceeds 180 minutes the visiting team always has the advantage.

Take the Napoli-Chelsea quarter-final from 2012 as an example.

Following a 3-1 defeat in Italy, Chelsea stormed back to level terms with a 4-1 win at Stamford Bridge. Eventually, Branislav Ivanovic won the contest for the Blues in the 105th minute.

But what if Napoli had potted a goal in, say, the 110th minute?

They would have created a 5-5 aggregate draw but gone ahead on away goals. Their goal would have been worth more than Ivanovic's. 

Should UEFA persist in enforcing the away-goals rule, the least they can do is abolish it for extra time—or go straight to penalties.

In what world does it make sense that one team plays 120 minutes with the away-goals advantage while the other gets only 90 minutes with it?

 

[Bjornebye]

It was a load of bollocks. More drama? yeah if you're a neutral. For sides that compete in these games it's a lottery if it fucks you or fucks you (whichever way you look at fuck)

 

 

[VladimirIlyich]

7 hours ago, Bjornebye said:

It was a load of bollocks. More drama? yeah if you're a neutral. For sides that compete in these games it's a lottery if it fucks you or fucks you (whichever way you look at fuck)

 

 

A lottery by scoring a goal,or goals,away from home? I don't agree. If I thought UEFA had done it for the benefit of the game I'd say 'fair enough' but it's just to appease big clubs having an off night and allow the same faces to appear in the later stages of the Euro competitions. 

[Barnesey]

Jeopardy is required to enhance atmosphere. Scoring one goal can move you from winning to losing or vice versa with the away goal rule. All the truly great games we’ve enjoyed at anfield have benefitted from this and it will be interesting to see if we can replicate the atmosphere without it. 
 

I get how extra time affects matters but extra time to score an away goal is balanced by extra time a home. 

[TheHowieLama]

Would suggest that a goal during the game is less of a lottery than a penalty shootout.

[Pete]

Fuck Uefa. 

[an tha]

4 hours ago, Barnesey said:

Jeopardy is required to enhance atmosphere. Scoring one goal can move you from winning to losing or vice versa with the away goal rule. All the truly great games we’ve enjoyed at anfield have benefitted from this and it will be interesting to see if we can replicate the atmosphere without it. 
 

I get how extra time affects matters but extra time to score an away goal is balanced by extra time a home. 

Surely two 0-0 draws in 90 mins for example is then unfairly decided by a goal each in extra time in 2nd leg and that goal scored away being decisive....

[magicrat]

For me there is no compelling argument to change the system . We were all familiar with the way it worked and I can't ever recall much in the way at protest to get the away goal rule scrapped. Tinkering at the margins imo. 

[an tha]

It is a relic from a bygone era where different teams used different balls, where travel was awkward, pitches were shite and everything was set up for home advantage.

 

None of that exists now - everything has been pretty much standardised at this top level and for my money valuing goals scored away from home over ones scored at home was wrong.

 

You could argue quite reasonably that in many ways it may be easier to score away now top as sitting back in a shape and allowing the home team to come onto you and then countering at pace is easier these days given the players increased speed and athleticism, lighter balls that can be played long to runners etc...

[SasaS]

On 16/02/2022 at 12:12, Code said:

The only thing this achieve is to give the team with the second game at home an even bigger advantage. 

It will probably also create more games going to extra time and penalties.