CHANGE OF RULING - away goals in extra-time

Going a little further off topic now, but just been browsing through the TVbroadcast rights for 2010 as at April 2009. Most of them have been done already. The only two zones with more than a few gaps are Central America and Oceania - including NZ.

Perhaps SBS - the company with the distribution rights for NZ - feel TVNZ will bid if  NZ qualify, so don't want to commit to a Sky bid until NZ's outcome is known. It would make sense, I guess, given TVNZ will probably not get involved if the All Whites don't qualify - like in 2002 and 2006. I'd just arrived in NZ for 1998 and recall TVNZ having the rights and then missing out some of the games.... talk about a culture shock for me, being new in the country!

BiH being at the World Cup for the first time would be a huge human interest story, FIFA would certainly be more than happy to have them there.

Slovenia have made it to the World Cup before (at the same tournament that the Netherland had missed out on) so don't think FIFA would be too concerned about them.

Didnt sky show every game of the 2006 world cup??

BlattersBalls2009-10-30 11:17:11

You really should follow El G's postings. He is one of the voices of reason on the forum. Sometimes such voices seem depressingly short in supply.

''remove doubt from casual observers '' BlattersBalls2009-10-30 11:34:41

trust me we all want sky to show it. i dont have sky but i'll buy it (did for the euro08).

I don't mean to be hurtful. However, you are a casual observer *of FIFA* (not of football) if you did not realise that the same process is being used as before and FIFA aren't doing anything different.

Done, but not without one last hint that there was deception, when there was not

Do agree that earlier postings by Fifa would take away the conjecture of possible changes, hope they are observing




hepatitis2009-10-30 12:46:51

It's up to IFAB not FIFA as to whether they like the extra-time away goals to be a part of the LotG. The IFAB recommendations for the extra time away goal is not official part of the LotG.

However looking at how they operated the Golden Goals and the Silver Goals prior to it being part of the LotG for two years. The Golden Goal was an IFAB recommendation (i.e. they are an acceptable method of resolving ties) prior it became an Official LotG for two years. The Silver Goal was not even a recommendation but was the official amendment after the Golden Goals. After having the Golden and Silver Goals in the game for two years, IFAB removed them from LotG and somehow the extra time away goals was the next "an acceptable method of resolving ties" but not part of the LotG. Recommendations can be an official part of the tournament if the committee are in agreement but they are there as a semi-trial for the LotG. (In other words, they don't have to go to FIFA for approval because approval is given already).

The LotG are the rules which all levels of the game has to abide with, whereas the recommendations are not. So historically prior to the Golden Goal being a LotG, the Golden Goal was an IFAB recommendation which only used when organisers decided that it was OK to use. But being a recommendation, not everyone wanted to use it. After having success with those who trial the recommendations, then the Golden Goal was part of the LotG and everyone for two years across all levels of the game used it as part of the official method of determining a winner alongside with PSO. After the two years, the Golden Goal became the opposite result to when it was only an IFAB recommendation, when teams were hanging out for the PSO and being too defensive.

To be honest, I personally think that they made a mistake and should include the dropping players off rule in the extra time to create space with less men to increase the chance of scoring along with Silver Goal rule. Teams practice these 6v6 (howbeit in a smaller space) every week in training so it is not hard to adjust the preparations to adapt and go aggressive attack in extra time.

FIFA and confederation and consequent committees take that IFAB recommendation and chose whether they follow it or not. They are not allow to make their own rules outside of either going with the extra time away recommendation or not going with the extra time recommendation until it is OK with the IFAB and they only meet every two years.

For an example, they can't specifically go back and do a golden goal rule because it is 1.) has been removed 2.) not on the recommendation list for various practical bias reasons 3.) They are given an alternative recommendation with extra time away rule.

People outside of top level football can make a submission to FIFA for approval for games with another alternative way to determine a tie but it cannot used for a top national premier league tier, international game or for FIFA/confederation Tournament. They would not need to follow IFAB recommendation then.

BTW, I agree with you that the extra time away goals rule is very unlikely to be part of the LotG and would either stay as a recommendation or they would be scraped altogether.

So if you wanted a school tournament to trial the Silver Goal with players dropping off in extra time as a method of determining a winner, then you along with the association can make a submission to FIFA for approval and it would not be inline to be part of the LotG unless it took up IFAB notice if FIFA sees positive results from the tournament to bring it to the table for a recommendation.AllWhitebelievr2009-10-30 23:38:59

Don't like the Silver goal rule as it can become a lottery at the coin toss in moderate to extreme weather conditions - if you playing into a howling southerly for the 1st period of extra time it gives the other side a huge advantage.