Would you scrap the away goals rule?

[mmmmsnouts]

The argument for that though is that it's balanced out by the home side having 30 mins extra home field advantage. And if you take that away and away goals and just do penalties after 90 mins of the second leg the home side still get an advantage and the away side don't.

Wasn't the away goals rule bought in to encourage teams in 2 legged ties to be a bit more adventurous in the away leg rather than just playing for a 0-0?

I think the away goals advantage in extra time is much bigger than the home field advantage, which is overstated in general. Away days aren't as intimidating for the players as they used to be.

 

[Cork Evertonian]

I think it's fine as it is.I think the more away goals you score you should be awarded for it.Having away goals encourages the away team to attack instead of them playing for the draw and hoping to finish the job at home.I think you make it easier for the bigger clubs in these competitions by getting rid of away goals.

 

[toffeejack]

Scrap? No.

Eliminate after 180 minutes? Yes. Away goals shouldn't count double when the other team had 30 fewer minutes to score one in their leg.

i seriously don't understand how the people who brought this rule in could vindicate it. I know their reasoning is "they have an extra 30 mins of the crowd so it evens out", but that's not the case, not all teams are better at home, for example. What if they're playing with 10 men? They're already playing with one less player, nevermind the fact if the away team scores 1 they then need to then score twice as many goals.

It is a crappy rule that bit, i can sort of understand it's merit within 90 mins because it was brought in to encourage more attacking play, but big games are so shady these days, especially 1st legs, because the stakes are ever increasing, that i don't think it really makes much difference any more.

 

[degsy]

I would yes.

It makes no sense if you think about it.

It did at the time, but that was then, we've moved on, time for at least a trial without it to see if teams don't revert to their bad old ways

 

[Allezfan]

I would yes.

It makes no sense if you think about it.

Most games are won by the home side. When that's no longer the case, scrap it.

Until then you need it.

 

[Tubey]

Don't see the point in scrapping it. It, in theory, affects everyone the same.

As people have said though, if it goes to extra time, clearly the rule should go out the window as it offers a ridiculous advantage to the away side in a second leg.

 

[chrismpw]

The away goals rule encourages teams to open up and go for one, rather than parking the bus. I think it's a great rule, but should not be carried into the extra time of the 2nd leg, when all's level.

 

[Khalekan]

I would keep it but not in its present form.

I think the EPL system where it only applies as a tie break after extra time is a better idea.

That way a delicately balanced and exciting game is not stopped dead in its tracks before half time like we saw in Madrid last night.

But if that system is deemed to give an extra advantage to the team playing away second then I would scrap it altogether.

As others have said, it is an anachronistic remnant of the sixties when Helenio Herrera and Cattenachio was stifling the game.

 

[Khalekan]

The away goals rule encourages teams to open up and go for one, rather than parking the bus. I think it's a great rule, but should not be carried into the extra time of the 2nd leg, when all's level.

I think the flip side of that argument is that it encourages the home side to play more conservatively.

Most of them are more concerned with not conceding than they are about scoring.

 

[davids]

I think the flip side of that argument is that it encourages the home side to play more conservatively.

Most of them are more concerned with not conceding than they are about scoring.

I voted No,just because it's become a traditional part of Euro competition,but I see your point lots of teams seem happy to stick with a 1-0 home win rather than push on for a second in case they concede an away goal.

 

[MikeH72]

The argument for that though is that it's balanced out by the home side having 30 mins extra home field advantage. And if you take that away and away goals and just do penalties after 90 mins of the second leg the home side still get an advantage and the away side don't.

Wasn't the away goals rule bought in to encourage teams in 2 legged ties to be a bit more adventurous in the away leg rather than just playing for a 0-0?

If anything it's made things worse, as home teams are now petrified of conceding an away goal. It's an abomination of a rule.

 

[PITA]

Absolutely. Always hated them. They kill matches. Football matches shouldn't be settled by geography.

Most games are though. Only 3 teams (strangely, both Manchester clubs and Palace) have better away records.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

Yeah, I think they're rubbish, get rid

 

[OneTrueLegend]

I think away goals makes it more exciting, I wouldn't want it changed