Football 2011-2012

[Ed209]

Nope. It's completely true.

Regulation 8.01

Away goals and extra time

8.01 For matches played under the knockout system, if the two teams involved in

a tie score the same number of goals over the two legs, the team which

scores more away goals qualifies for the next stage. If this procedure does

not produce a result, i.e. if both teams score the same number of goals at

home and away, two 15-minute periods of extra time are played at the end of

the second leg. If, during extra time, both teams score the same number of

goals, away goals count double (i.e. the visiting club qualifies). If no goals are

scored during extra time, kicks from the penalty mark (Article 17) determine which club qualifies for the next stage.

http://www.uefa.com/...49_DOWNLOAD.pdf

[strummer77]

Well UEFA are tits. Counting them double is a completely arbitrary thing to do. You could just as rightly say every away goal counts as 1+tortoise, if the number of goals is equal at the end then you count who has the most tortoises.

Edited April 18, 2012 by strummer77

[pink_triangle]

In fact I think it makes ties closer generally, quite often one goal can turn the tie on its head. Going out, then going through. It's also better than penalties.

I think it's a fantastic rule that adds another dimension to two legged ties. Really enjoy it.

[Ed209]

I always think in a tied game if you have scored the most away goals, you have also conceded the most home goals. Im not sure why one is given preference over another. At least in a shootout someone has to win the game, to me a draw is a draw and the away rule goal is a pretty illogical way to turn a draw into a result.

[strummer77]

I always think in a tied game if you have scored the most away goals, you have also conceded the most home goals. Im not sure why one is given preference over another. At least in a shootout someone has to win the game, to me a draw is a draw and the away rule goal is a pretty illogical way to turn a draw into a result.

Edited April 18, 2012 by strummer77

[pink_triangle]

Late.night brain fail what I meant to say is if you have scored the most away goals you also scored the least at home, one is a positive and the other a negative, to.me they cancel out.

From my general observations of football the rule doesn't make away teams more attacking, it makes home teams more defensive. The need not to concede is prioritized over the need to attack. I know teams know the rules, I wish they didn't as o think it promotes negativity.

[pink_triangle]

Agreed Barry, I think people get taken in by the name of the rule and think it promotes away teams to attack. You could change the name of the current system to the "home goal rule" and say the side who concedes the least home goals wins, doesn't sound as exciting that way does it.

[Banana Co]

Is there any Reading FC fans on here? 6 years later we are promoted again!!!

[eFestivals]

Is there any Reading FC fans on here? 6 years later we are promoted again!!!

not yet you're not, you've not even passed the Championship's fit & proper owner's test yet, and the Prem's is more stringent.

There's an article in one of today's papers (Guardian or Telegraph, I forget which) which suggests that Reading might have difficulty passing the Prem's test.

[The Nal]

Thought Chelski defended brilliantly last night. The back four played out of their skins. The defending for Chelskis goal on the other hand - you wouldnt see that down in Molineux. Honestly.

So Barca and Madrid - both lost, away granted, but take out Messi and Ronaldo and how good are they? Are we overrating them? I think so.

I personally don't like the media circle jerks around Barca in particular - they never dive, they're so honest, they never play bad, all the players are amazing etc.

Its not true. Half the team who finished yesterday for Barca wouldn't get into a lot of the top 6 teams in the Premiership.

Edited April 19, 2012 by The Nal

[thetime]

not yet you're not, you've not even passed the Championship's fit & proper owner's test yet, and the Prem's is more stringent.

There's an article in one of today's papers (Guardian or Telegraph, I forget which) which suggests that Reading might have difficulty passing the Prem's test.

[eFestivals]

Has there ever been anyone turned down?

Nope, I don't think so - yet.

But the issues at Pompey - twice now - and what's gone on at Rangers despite them having a similar test is likely to mean that the tests will get ever tougher and that passing the test will require more than the current "I'm tell you the truth, honest guv" 'evidence' that it's used up till now.

And given the fact that it looks very much like the ownership at Reading is very similar to how it was at Pompey - a Russian frontman, who is probably fronting for his dad - I reckon there's going to be a lot of digging.

(and funnily enough, as I was writing those words just there straight from the top of my head [with my thoughts on that triggered by the article I read on the Guardian or Telegraph this morning] I've open my latest copy of Private Eye to the back page where they regularly have a 'Planet Football' article, and it's saying pretty much what I've just written ).

That PE piece says that one of the Swiss-based English guys involved in the deal has a very dodgy history, tho it doesn't suggest that Zingarevich's dad is a fake without much money as PE had always said was the case with Gaydamak's dad - which suggests to me that there is perhaps some money behind this deal (despite the fact it's yet to be completed, and should have been completed by now) so it might be more acceptable to the Prem than Gaydamak's deal would be if it was presented today.

[thetime]

Thought Chelski defended brilliantly last night. The back four played out of their skins. The defending for Chelskis goal on the other hand - you wouldnt see that down in Molineux. Honestly.

So Barca and Madrid - both lost, away granted, but take out Messi and Ronaldo and how good are they? Are we overrating them? I think so.

I personally don't like the media circle jerks around Barca in particular - they never dive, they're so honest, they never play bad, all the players are amazing etc.

Its not true. Half the team who finished yesterday for Barca wouldn't get into a lot of the top 6 teams in the Premiership.

[thetime]

Nope, I don't think so - yet.

But the issues at Pompey - twice now - and what's gone on at Rangers despite them having a similar test is likely to mean that the tests will get ever tougher and that passing the test will require more than the current "I'm tell you the truth, honest guv" 'evidence' that it's used up till now.

And given the fact that it looks very much like the ownership at Reading is very similar to how it was at Pompey - a Russian frontman, who is probably fronting for his dad - I reckon there's going to be a lot of digging.

(and funnily enough, as I was writing those words just there straight from the top of my head [with my thoughts on that triggered by the article I read on the Guardian or Telegraph this morning] I've open my latest copy of Private Eye to the back page where they regularly have a 'Planet Football' article, and it's saying pretty much what I've just written ).

That PE piece says that one of the Swiss-based English guys involved in the deal has a very dodgy history, tho it doesn't suggest that Zingarevich's dad is a fake without much money as PE had always said was the case with Gaydamak's dad - which suggests to me that there is perhaps some money behind this deal (despite the fact it's yet to be completed, and should have been completed by now) so it might be more acceptable to the Prem than Gaydamak's deal would be if it was presented today.

[eFestivals]

keane jinxed it by saying hes never seen messi have a bad game.

If that was a bad game, imagine how he'll devastate Chelsea on a good day.

He wasn't at his best last night with his touches - tho Chelsea got lucky off the back of quite a few all the same - and neither was he getting as much of the ball. How much of that was down to Chelsea's gameplan I guess we'll get to see in the 2nd leg.

I thought Chelsea were very good last night, but the gulf between the teams was hugely visible all the same. I reckon Chelsea's only chance in the 2nd leg is to play 11 goalkeepers.

[thetime]

If that was a bad game, imagine how he'll devastate Chelsea on a good day.

He wasn't at his best last night with his touches - tho Chelsea got lucky off the back of quite a few all the same - and neither was he getting as much of the ball. How much of that was down to Chelsea's gameplan I guess we'll get to see in the 2nd leg.

I thought Chelsea were very good last night, but the gulf between the teams was hugely visible all the same. I reckon Chelsea's only chance in the 2nd leg is to play 11 goalkeepers.

[Benj]

Nope, I don't think so - yet.

But the issues at Pompey - twice now - and what's gone on at Rangers despite them having a similar test is likely to mean that the tests will get ever tougher and that passing the test will require more than the current "I'm tell you the truth, honest guv" 'evidence' that it's used up till now.

[eFestivals]

Its not going to happen though is it.

Prem is not going to say your good enough for the championship but we dont want you in the prem.

By the financial tests, as things stand the proposed new owners aren't yet fit for the Champs - that's still being considered. The Prem has a different and tougher test, too (I'm not sure what the differences are tho). The takeover is on hold until at least the Champs test is passed, and I guess it's possible that it'll be held back till the Prem one has been done now.

So it's probably not really a Prem breaker for Reading, as while Madejski wants to sell it doesn't look like there's anything forcing his hand over that. If these proposed new owners aren't acceptable I don't think he'll have huge difficulties finding another buyer and quite probably at a better price (the current deal is a fixed price agreed before they were promoted or even much looking like they would be promoted).

[eFestivals]

How much have you been enjoying Ashley Young's diving by the way? I completely forgot to look on here after the last two events, I think I'll get the popcorn in and will have a search back though, should be fun!

Tom Daley has some serious competition for his Olympics place.

It might surprise you to know, I've not said much. And it might surprise you to know, that I don't comment on things like that sometimes just because I can't be bothered with all the ABU fantasies that some around here are addicted to.

For the record, I was commenting here on Young's diving long before he was at Utd, but that's just my Villa and England hatred coming thru.

[The Nal]

BIt of a over reaction there I think there nal.

both will go through, both lost by a single goal away from home. Any side would take that in a first leg of a semi final, I said a while ago about not having messi and big ron and I got shot down for it.

keane jinxed it by saying hes never seen messi have a bad game.

Edited April 19, 2012 by The Nal

[Benj]

For the record, I was commenting here on Young's diving long before he was at Utd, but that's just my Villa and England hatred coming thru.

[thetime]

He's a horrific cheat, always has been, always will be. Great player mind

[Benj]

Tom Daley has some serious competition for his Olympics place.

[eFestivals]

In fact you used the Tom Daley line then too!

/topic/148869-football-2010-2011/page__view__findpost__p__3616308">http://www.efestival...ost__p__3616308

it's a line I used for him when he was at villa too.

[strummer77]

If think barca are a fantastic side but they are not some unbeatable giant... They are not a perfect side...

Edited April 19, 2012 by strummer77