Away Goal Rule Scrapped by UEFA for European Competitions

[Barrington Womble]

11 hours ago, No2 said:

You make some good points I hadn't considered before but those 2 ties ended because the Manchester clubs failed to score an away goal themselves. It wasn't the AGR fault City were now 3 actual goals behind again or Utd 2 behind. With or without AGR both them ties were essentially dead anyway once we scored. My admittedly hazy memory has Utd barely leaving their own half at Anfield and City setting up defensively before changing when it was too late. If they done that when away goals carried significance what are the chances they will attack at all in the away leg?

And you pick the real point about this whole thing. The object of the away goals rule was not to help decide a result (they used to do a coin toss I believe), but it was to encourage sides when away from home to try and come out and play some football. It was to stop what city and United did in those examples and even Munich did in 19. That was a gamble they were prepared to take. And then as they took that gamble, it means in the 2nd legs we can also play dead, but we also know if we try to score a goal we can drag the match away from them. But there'll be many more teams who'll go away and just shut up shop without away goals imo. 

 

I know I will miss the drama of the away goal, but I also think it's possible it will be just fine as in the examples we're talking about here, it didn't encourage city, united or Munich to come and play. This is one of those things I actually don't mind them experimenting with as long as they're open minded enough that if it's not working, they'll reintroduce it. It's a bit like all that silver and golden goal we had in the early 2000s. They tried some things, they brought some drama, but ultimately they were not helpful. But everyone was grown up about it to be willing to go back. My worry is it'll be a bit like VAR and it won't matter if it's good or its bad, pen shoot outs are great for sound bite social media and that's the audience they're interested in. 

[No2]

First time we will see this in action and I expect it will be far inferior as a spectacle. 

 

I think I'm right in saying that Klopp has never  lost over 2 legs without the intervention of away goals*, the only one Pep has lost at City was to us. It clearly favors the best teams, under the old format you could beat a better team without actually beating them. Now the odds are already heavily stacked in favour of the wealthy it's makes it next to impossible to beat these sides.

 

*empty stadia doesn't count.

[Babb'sBurstNad]

I'm not sure it'll make that much difference. Whoever's at home second will still have the advantage, and you could still go through without winning a game. It's just you'd have to go through extra time and win a penalty shoot out to do so.

[Barnesey]

2 hours ago, No2 said:

 

I think I'm right in saying that Klopp has never  lost over 2 legs without the intervention of away goals*, the only one Pep has lost at City was to us.

Atletico just before covid

[No2]

49 minutes ago, Barnesey said:

Atletico just before covid

That's the one I was referring too, although we did lose the game it was only because of away goals we had no defenders defending. 

[Barnesey]

Thought you meant on aggregate 

[No2]

2 hours ago, Barnesey said:

Thought you meant on aggregate 

I did mean that and I'm technically I'm wrong but the point still stands, without away goals nobody would have beaten us.

[Aventus]

6 minutes ago, No2 said:

I did mean that and I'm technically I'm wrong but the point still stands, without away goals nobody would have beaten us.

Away goals is a funny way of spelling Adrián

[Butch]

Away goals made it more exciting. Would be nice if they stopped trying to reinvent the wheel. 

[JohnnyH]

On 25/06/2021 at 16:59, JohnnyH said:

I’d have been fine with it staying, but I don’t think we’ll miss it.  It killed as many games as it made.  
 

I see someone above mentioning the Barca game 2 seasons ago as a vote for away goals.  But had Barca scored at the start of the 2nd half then the game is done. Our heads drop and we meekly go out. 
 

Look at the city game the season before.  When we scored that away goal the game was done and it petered out.  Same against Man Utd in the UEFA Cup. It killed those games dead in an instant. When that’s happened in games where Liverpool aren’t playing I immediately turn channel to a different game. Ditching the away goal prevents that. 
 

I think we’ll have forgotten about away goals in no time. And I actually think in 10 years time we’ll look back and think it was a bit weird that we allowed some goals count more than others. 

I still think this, although Real Madrid last night did make me question my views.  But Madrid probably would have played like that regardless. 

[joe_fishfish]

Madrid's entire gameplan last night was to keep a clean sheet for the second leg. Only a brilliant goal from Mbappe stopped that happening. No incentive for them to attack so we got 10 men behind the ball for 90 minutes.

 

Having no away goals rule will lead to more ties like that in future. Getting rid of it was a ludicrous decision.

[VladimirIlyich]

Just now, joe_fishfish said:

Madrid's entire gameplan last night was to keep a clean sheet for the second leg. Only a brilliant goal from Mbappe stopped that happening. No incentive for them to attack so we got 10 men behind the ball for 90 minutes.

 

Having no away goals rule will lead to more ties like that in future. Getting rid of it was a ludicrous decision.

Agree. 

[JohnnyH]

1 minute ago, joe_fishfish said:

Madrid's entire gameplan last night was to keep a clean sheet for the second leg. Only a brilliant goal from Mbappe stopped that happening. No incentive for them to attack so we got 10 men behind the ball for 90 minutes.

 

Having no away goals rule will lead to more ties like that in future. Getting rid of it was a ludicrous decision.

 

Just now, VladimirIlyich said:

Agree. 

Do you think Madrid would have had a different game plan if their away goals?  I don't.

 

They played incredibly defensively and hoped to nick one on the break.  I think they'd have done that anyway.

 

Anyway, judging it from one game is daft.  City weren't defensive.  We won't play any different tonight. 

 

Also, as I said in my previous post, away goals kill second legs.  Judge the impact on the whole tie.  I think away goals kill more games then they make.

[VladimirIlyich]

14 minutes ago, JohnnyH said:

 

Do you think Madrid would have had a different game plan if their away goals?  I don't.

 

They played incredibly defensively and hoped to nick one on the break.  I think they'd have done that anyway.

 

Anyway, judging it from one game is daft.  City weren't defensive.  We won't play any different tonight. 

 

Also, as I said in my previous post, away goals kill second legs.  Judge the impact on the whole tie.  I think away goals kill more games then they make.

The 'killing legs' is why it has been changed as UEFA dont want the chance of as many dead rubbers and to lose money.

As for Madrid,I dont even know the score but top teams will play negatively at times because they can as they have the players to do it. A lot of teams can't as they wont have those quality of players. It wont change much apart from making it even harder for underdogs who might nick a shock win and have a better chance of going through with an away goal. This is why it has been scrapped,so as to guarantee the usual suspects in all competitions,year in year out.

[Scott_M]

1 hour ago, joe_fishfish said:

Madrid's entire gameplan last night was to keep a clean sheet for the second leg. Only a brilliant goal from Mbappe stopped that happening. No incentive for them to attack so we got 10 men behind the ball for 90 minutes.

 

Having no away goals rule will lead to more ties like that in future. Getting rid of it was a ludicrous decision.

I don’t think it’s right to write off the rule change after 1 game given Real Madrids recent results…

 

[No2]

I didn’t Madrid were particularly negative last night, they attacked when they could. They  just aren't that good at football anymore.

[JohnnyH]

1 hour ago, VladimirIlyich said:

The 'killing legs' is why it has been changed as UEFA dont want the chance of as many dead rubbers and to lose money.

As for Madrid,I dont even know the score but top teams will play negatively at times because they can as they have the players to do it. A lot of teams can't as they wont have those quality of players. It wont change much apart from making it even harder for underdogs who might nick a shock win and have a better chance of going through with an away goal. This is why it has been scrapped,so as to guarantee the usual suspects in all competitions,year in year out.

 

I don't necessarily disagree with you.  I'd have been fine with it staying too.  I just don't think it's a big issue in reality as I still believe we'll have as many exciting/dull games as we did pre removal.

[deiseach]

I don't think the removal of the away goals rule will change how teams approach a game. Draw the first leg and win the second leg at home is a perfectly reasonable strategy, with or without the away goals rule. Liverpool's woes against Atletico were not because they hadn't an away goal. 0-0 would have been great. Away goals kill plenty of second legs, and I understand people who object to them on that basis, but I think the tension laced through those games, allied to those did-that-just-happen last minute goals, makes them more than worth it.

[Code]

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

[TD_LFC]

12 minutes ago, deiseach said:

I don't think the removal of the away goals rule will change how teams approach a game. Draw the first leg and win the second leg at home is a perfectly reasonable strategy, with or without the away goals rule. Liverpool's woes against Atletico were not because they hadn't an away goal. 0-0 would have been great. Away goals kill plenty of second legs, and I understand people who object to them on that basis, but I think the tension laced through those games, allied to those did-that-just-happen last minute goals, makes them more than worth it.

The approach was always to get a goal in the away leg though not just to draw it. That goal in turn forced the home team to push out more to try and get at least one back.

 

The emphasis now will be on 0-0 for the away side, get it back to the home leg and use the home advantage.

[deiseach]

2 minutes ago, TD_LFC said:

The approach was always to get a goal in the away leg though not just to draw it. That goal in turn forced the home team to push out more to try and get at least one back.

 

The emphasis now will be on 0-0 for the away side, get it back to the home leg and use the home advantage.

Would you be of the opinion that an away goal in the first leg is (was) better than a clean sheet? 

[TD_LFC]

1 hour ago, deiseach said:

Would you be of the opinion that an away goal in the first leg is (was) better than a clean sheet? 

Yeah.

 

I think outside of flat out defeats 0-0 was the riskiest away result.

[deiseach]

22 minutes ago, TD_LFC said:

Yeah.

 

I think outside of flat out defeats 0-0 was the riskiest away result.

Fair enough. Another thing I'll miss about the away goals rule - the opportunities for game theory that came with it.

[TheHowieLama]

Bummer

[Jose Jones]

27 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Bummer

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.