Away Goals Counting Double

[Man Friday]

Burnley had 90 minutes to score their away goals. Spurs had 120 minutes to score theirs. If away goals were to count (as they are in this competition), the match should have been decided at the end of 90 minutes and thereby awarded to Burnley.

Same thing happended to us against Middlesbrough in the quarter-finals of the League Cup in 1996/97.

Isn't it 90 minutes in European competitions and extra-time played only if the number of away goals are the same?

[Ian Royal]

Burnley had 90 minutes to score their away goals. Spurs had 120 minutes to score theirs. If away goals were to count (as they are in this competition), the match should have been decided at the end of 90 minutes and thereby awarded to Burnley.

Same thing happended to us against Middlesbrough in the quarter-finals of the League Cup in 1996/97.

Isn't it 90 minutes in European competitions and extra-time played only if the number of away goals are the same?

You're right, it should be.

[rg6royal]

Pathetic rule imo.

[chilipepper91]

Can understand them counting after 90 minutes of the 2nd leg, but if it's all even, surely they can't be used AFTER full time, in extra time, as that's an unfair advantage?

Stupid rule.

[Alan Partridge]

How would the sponsors and Tv companies feel if they lost a big fish for the final and replaced it with Burnley?

Or they could give the big fish more time to get throughthus making more money. That's what it comes down to, not fairness.

[Tony Le Mesmer]

Burnley had 90 minutes to score their away goals. Spurs had 120 minutes to score theirs. If away goals were to count (as they are in this competition), the match should have been decided at the end of 90 minutes and thereby awarded to Burnley.

Same thing happended to us against Middlesbrough in the quarter-finals of the League Cup in 1996/97.

Isn't it 90 minutes in European competitions and extra-time played only if the number of away goals are the same?

Firstly, Away goals dont count double in any competition. If thats so Spurs won 8-5 on agg.

2. We didnt play Boro in the League Cup in 1996/97.

3. Boro knocked us out 1-0 in 1998. It was a normal cup tie at EP, im not quite sure how the away goals rule can affect that.

4. Burnley had the advantage of playing Extra Time at Home. Spurs didnt. Unfair advantage to Burnley?

5. Its not a European Competition, different rules for different competitions.

For What its worth, i think the Away goals rule is cack full stop.

[soggy biscuit]

Burnley had 90 minutes to score their away goals. Spurs had 120 minutes to score theirs. If away goals were to count (as they are in this competition), the match should have been decided at the end of 90 minutes and thereby awarded to Burnley.

Same thing happended to us against Middlesbrough in the quarter-finals of the League Cup in 1996/97.

Isn't it 90 minutes in European competitions and extra-time played only if the number of away goals are the same?

Firstly, Away goals dont count double in any competition. If thats so Spurs won 8-5 on agg.

Just what I was going to say, never understood people that claim they count as double.

[Tony Le Mesmer]

The Football League have done away with this rule in the Play Offs so im a bit surprised its still used in a Football League competition.

For me the whole point in playing games over 2 legs in to nullify any home advantage. So to then decide it on who scores most away seems a bit pointless and unfair. Penalties are a far more just way of deciding a tie. You score more you win, and its skill not luck as the illeducated might point out.

[Compo's Hat]

How would the sponsors and Tv companies feel if they lost a big fish for the final and replaced it with Burnley?

Or they could give the big fish more time to get throughthus making more money. That's what it comes down to, not fairness.

They shouldn't be blowing 3 goal leads to be fair.

[Bill Oddie's Beard]

I seem to recall Milan beating Inter on away goals in the Champs League a few years ago, even though they both play at the same ground

[Thaumagurist*]

And what about when Bradford beat us on away goals in 1999? We had drawn 1-1 at their place and they drew 1-1 at our place in NORMAL time. Then that game ended up 2-2. Away goals shouldn't count in extra time. We should have had penalties. Still, at least, I saw Keith Scott score a wonder goal.

[Tony Le Mesmer]

I seem to recall Milan beating Inter on away goals in the Champs League a few years ago, even though they both play at the same ground

They did indeed, in Semi Final as well, having gone 30 years since their last final. Talk about unjust! And you wonder why Inter kicked off when they were losing again to them in that competition 2 years on.

[AlexY25]

The rule is very annoying.
I'd like to see the Carling Cup get a few different rules in to be honest.
I'd like to see them only have 90 minutes, and if its a draw, go straight to penalties because teams already complain about the cup games, so extra time just adds to the problem.

[Baines]

After 90 minutes we need a big black mushroom as per bar biliards on the centre spot. If either team knocks it over they lose all their goals.

>>>>>

away goals/penalties

[Ian Royal]

How would the sponsors and Tv companies feel if they lost a big fish for the final and replaced it with Burnley?

Or they could give the big fish more time to get throughthus making more money. That's what it comes down to, not fairness.

Surely that assumes that the bigger team ALWAYS gets an away leg second, which surely isn't the case?

[Toon Toon Blue army]

I thought the whole idea of away goals was to encourage teams to attack and score away from home and to not sit back and defend hoping for a 0-0?

[Four Of Clubs]

I seem to recall Milan beating Inter on away goals in the Champs League a few years ago, even though they both play at the same ground

They did indeed, in Semi Final as well, having gone 30 years since their last final. Talk about unjust! And you wonder why Inter kicked off when they were losing again to them in that competition 2 years on.

... maybe I'm old and losing my mind but wasn't there a weirder example still .... back in the 70s/80s involving (I think) a Snordish Team (Atvidabergs or Djuurgarden) who had to play both legs of a Euro tie - against a big name too - in Spain or Portugal cos Scandanavia was under 300' of snow that winter?

True to the Law of Sod - they went out on away goals!

[Tony Le Mesmer]

I thought the whole idea of away goals was to encourage teams to attack and score away from home and to not sit back and defend hoping for a 0-0?

I think that was the idea, but it was a rule brought in a long time ago the game has totally changed since. Playing at Home used to be a much bigger advantage, especially in Europe. I was wawtching Man U v Juventus from the late 70s early 80s on ESPN a while back. The commentator said Man U were as good as out despite winning the Home leg 1-0!

I think now all it does it make the home team too cautious in the 1st Leg and plays into the hands of negative teams like Liverpool. In the Cl in particular, where teams have a lot to lose, the 1st Leg in statistically very low scoring on average.

[Ian Royal]

I'm seeing more sense in it now I think about it.

It balances the side with home advantage in the second leg getting extra time with a home advantage if it goes to extra time.

If you've had a bigger advantage by having played more time at home and still couldn't find yourself better placed, then the team with the better away goals going through is the only way to balance that extra home advantage.

[AthleticoSpizz]

Crazy League Cup rulings

The "away goal " ruling should apply at 90 minutes of the second leg ....ie.@ 4-4 Burnley go through


Burnley (at 3-0 up!) were hindered at the 90 minute mark, by not having the finance to provide the squad (paid the big bucks) to go that extra 30 minutes I guess.



Took a bit of working out...and defies most other ways of qualifications