The away goals rule

[rhroyal]

Is it me, or is this rule a shocking one? It leads to defensive, dull football which nobody wants. Home teams are always too scared to commit forward and take the game for fear of conceding an away goal, which makes the match more dull. Then consider how unfair it can be. Barcelona needed one goal to go through tonight. Had Man Utd been trailing they would have needed 2 goals. Does that sound fair to you? I think not. It's a ridiculous rule and should not exist, yet even more ridiculous is that I appear to be the only one who can see this.

[Dirk Gently]

It's only ridiculous if you look at it in the context of one single match.

Let's not forget that if Utd or Barca had scored last week then today would have been a different game.

[cmonurz]

Had Man Utd been trailing they would have needed 2 goals. Does that sound fair to you? I think not.

I agree with your general point, but as the rule stands, it wouldn't be 'unfair' on United in your example, as they failed to score at the Nou Camp.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the away goals rule to separate teams in two-legged ties - it certainly beats penalties. What I don't like, however, is that the away goals rule stands into extra-time in this competition, effectively giving the away side in the second leg an additional 30 minutes to score a crucial away goal.

[Whore Jackie]

Agree with cmonurz. Away goals should only be worth more, during the first 180 minutes in a two-legged match.

[PlasticRoyale]

Away games used to be dull as feck before the away goal rule was introduced. Think of Liverpool but 10 times duller. Effective tactics that produce results but boring to watch.

Agree with comments about extra time. However, i can't see the Dictator of football (Sepp Blatter) altering the rule.

[The whole year inn]

Is it me, or is this rule a shocking one? It leads to defensive, dull football which nobody wants. Home teams are always too scared to commit forward and take the game for fear of conceding an away goal, which makes the match more dull. Then consider how unfair it can be. Barcelona needed one goal to go through tonight. Had Man Utd been trailing they would have needed 2 goals. Does that sound fair to you? I think not. It's a ridiculous rule and should not exist, yet even more ridiculous is that I appear to be the only one who can see this.

You do realise that this game was the 2nd half of a two-legged tie, dont you?

Manchester United were the away team last week; they failed to get the away goal so tonight was bound to be cagey. As DG says, if Either team had scored last week it would have been totally different tonight.

[Tony Le Mesmer]

Ive raised this before. I think its a stupid rule that just creates a fear factor.

When it was introduced, the tactics of the game were far different, partularly with Inter have great success with their 'Cattanacio' style of play.

the game is totally different now and i think it is a pointless and unfair rule that produces low scoring matches, particularly in the 1st Leg.

Besides, the whole point of playing games over 2 legs is to nullify any home advantage, so where is the logic in deciding a tie because one team scored more goals away? And teams winning on away goals in extra time is even more unfair. Getafe fell foul of this with Bayern scoring decicive away goals in extra time, something that Getafe didn't have the opportunity to do.

And why do the commentators feel the need to explain the rule again & again like the viewer is some kind of retard? Does my head in.

[1960]

We fell foul of the same extra time thing in the League Cup against Bradford when they were a big club and we were still little in September 99. Drew the away game 1-1 and it was 1-1 at home at full time. In extra time we took the lead but Bradford scored again, making 2-2 on the night and 3-3 on aggregate. Bradford went through by reason of the second away goal in extra time.

[Platypuss]

A little pet peeve I have is when commentators wax about a "precious" away goal in a 1-0 first leg win.

Why does the fact that it was an away goal make any difference to who ultimately goes through?

[Tony Le Mesmer]

A little pet peeve I have is when commentators wax about a "precious" away goal in a 1-0 first leg win.

Why does the fact that it was an away goal make any difference to who ultimately goes through?

exactly, you cant possibly win on away goals if you win the 1st leg 1-0 away.

During my lunch break today i over heard someone in the street saying that Barca would have won 2-1 if they'd scored because "AWAY GOALS COUNT DOUBLE"

[TBM]

Had Man Utd been trailing they would have needed 2 goals. Does that sound fair to you? I think not.

I agree with your general point, but as the rule stands, it wouldn't be 'unfair' on United in your example, as they failed to score at the Nou Camp.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the away goals rule to separate teams in two-legged ties - it certainly beats penalties. What I don't like, however, is that the away goals rule stands into extra-time in this competition, effectively giving the away side in the second leg an additional 30 minutes to score a crucial away goal.

Yup - i said the very same thing when Arsenal lost to Wigan in the Carling Cup Semi Final a few seasons back!

[RoyalChicagoFC]

I don't think there is anything wrong with the away goals rule to separate teams in two-legged ties - it certainly beats penalties. What I don't like, however, is that the away goals rule stands into extra-time in this competition, effectively giving the away side in the second leg an additional 30 minutes to score a crucial away goal.

I made precisely the same point in a thread on this very subject a year ago.

For my trouble, I was brought up on a charge of being "not logical."

[TheMaraudingDog]

Had Man Utd been trailing they would have needed 2 goals. Does that sound fair to you? I think not.

I agree with your general point, but as the rule stands, it wouldn't be 'unfair' on United in your example, as they failed to score at the Nou Camp.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the away goals rule to separate teams in two-legged ties - it certainly beats penalties. What I don't like, however, is that the away goals rule stands into extra-time in this competition, effectively giving the away side in the second leg an additional 30 minutes to score a crucial away goal.

Yes, but on the flip side the home side get 30 mins extra home advantage.

[Skyline]

What I don't like, however, is that the away goals rule stands into extra-time in this competition, effectively giving the away side in the second leg an additional 30 minutes to score a crucial away goal.

I'm pretty sure the playoffs used to use the away goal rule, which made it even more ridiculous, because the team that finished lower in the division (and so should be at a disadvantage) got the extra 30 minutes to score an away goal.

[sheshnu]

A little pet peeve I have is when commentators wax about a "precious" away goal in a 1-0 first leg win.

Why does the fact that it was an away goal make any difference to who ultimately goes through?

Because a 0-0 away means the team can't afford to concede any at home because then they'd have to score 2. It's just a cushion against your opponent scoring an away goal next week.


Out of interest is playing at home second actually an advantage historically or is this purely invented? Doubt anybody knows where to find info like that or indeed cares enough to do so but surely there must be something in it otherwise it'd be the other way around...

[Tony Le Mesmer]

A little pet peeve I have is when commentators wax about a "precious" away goal in a 1-0 first leg win.

Why does the fact that it was an away goal make any difference to who ultimately goes through?

Because a 0-0 away means the team can't afford to concede any at home because then they'd have to score 2. It's just a cushion against your opponent scoring an away goal next week.


Out of interest is playing at home second actually an advantage historically or is this purely invented? Doubt anybody knows where to find info like that or indeed cares enough to do so but surely there must be something in it otherwise it'd be the other way around...

I read an article in the Racing Post a while back. IIRC it concluded that, statistically, being at home in the 2nd leg was only a slight advantage. and you also have to consider some games are seeded, with the theoretical better team at home in the 2nd leg, which would effect the stats.