Not much to add to the pandemonium surrounding the Socceroos’ well-deserved win over Uruguay, and Australia’s qualification for the 2006 World Cup (it’s already in Wikipedia, so it must be true). John Quiggin questions the use of penalty shootouts as a tie-breaker, and suggests taking the goalkeepers off. I’d prefer to go back to the old idea of widening (or heightening) the goals. If the rules keep the scores very low, there’s a greater chance that the worse team will win by luck. Fortunately, I don’t think that’s what happened last night – we pretty clearly dominated, even if they weren’t as tuckered out at the start of extra time as the SBS commentators predicted.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Roooooooooossssssss

  1. Guy says:

    I prefer the unlimited extra time / golden goal option to penalty shootouts. Spread the final liability for the win/loss amongst the whole team a bit more.

    Viduka would have had a heavy cross to bear for missing his penalty shot if Scwharzer didn’t pull off a magnificent save from the subsequent shot.

  2. Sacha Blumen says:

    Andrew, I thought something similar last night – that it’s a shame in any soccer game if a penalty shoot-out decided it as penalty shoot-outs seem to be much more random – and especially as soccer games are usually fairly low scoring.

Comments are closed.