Mid-day Ticker: Blatter talks eliminating extra time, Capello to retire and more

Sepp Blatter (Getty)

By TRAVIS CLARK

FIFA president Sepp Blatter has revealed another plan to shake things up at the World Cup, announcing that a study to determine whether or not extra time should be eliminated would take place.

This would be done in an attempt to encourage more of an attacking style during the knockout stages. Another option would be to reintroduce the golden goal rule that was in place during the 1998 and 2002 competitions.

A technical panel will study the options on October 18, and report to FIFA’s executive committee on October 28-29 in Zurich.

Here are a few other stories to get you through the day.

CAPELLO DONE AFTER EURO 2012

England national team boss Fabio Capello confirmed rumors that he would retire after the European Championships in 2012. The 64-year-old Italian took over the England job back in December 2007, after Steve McClaren failed to guide England to Euro 2008. The Three Lions are currently at the top of UEFA Group G after winning their first two matches.

WALCOTT, VAN PERSIE INJURY BLOWS FOR ARSENAL

Arsenal midfielder Theo Walcott will miss four to six weeks, the club confirmed Thursday. Walcott suffered an ankle sprain during England’s 3-1 win over Switzerland on Tuesday. The winger was stretched off and taken to the hospital for X-rays that were negative. Joining Walcott on the sidelines is Robin van Persie, who will miss six weeks with an ankle injury sustained in the club’s 2-1 win over Blackburn.

WALES BOSS QUITS

John Toshack became the second national team manager to step down amidst the Euro 2012 qualifiers, announcing that he would step down from the Wales position, to take effect immediately. Speculation ran rampant about his future after last Friday’s 1-0 loss to Montenegro. Wales is currently third in UEFA Group G.

———

Think Blatter will make rule changes at the World Cup? Who will take over for Capello? Can Arsenal cope without Walcott/van Persie? Will Ryan Giggs take over for Wales?

Share your thoughts below.

This entry was posted in European Soccer. Bookmark the permalink.

74 Responses to Mid-day Ticker: Blatter talks eliminating extra time, Capello to retire and more

  1. Jon in Quakes Country says:

    What was the reason why Golden Ball was withdrawn? From what I recall (given, I was young 2002 and hardly remember 98) NO ONE LIKED IT. Why bring back something that in 4 years time people are probably going to be wanting to get rid of it again

  2. Buy My Book says:

    It would be easier if we just reported when RVP WAS healthy enough to play rather then when he’s injured.

    Direct to PK’s would mean more teams would play for the draw against the big boys and then try their hand at PK’s.

  3. Buy My Book says:

    Fifa has to make it look like they’ve made at least one change, so they can point to that as an accomplishment while NOT putting in goal line technology.

  4. Hopper says:

    Wow, the folks at FIFA are seriously out of touch. They tried the Golden Goal extra time before, it sucked, they dropped it, and now they’re bringing it back?

    They need to get with it. Institute some kind of goal line technology and/or instant replay. That’s soccer biggest issue right now.

  5. Rad says:

    Instead of wasting time on deciding rules. Maybe find a way to officiate better.

  6. Toumba says:

    I agree with both of your points.

    The first thing I thought of when I read about the proposal eliminating extra time was that now the small team would have 30 less minutes to have to defend.

    I think we would see teams putting out lineups without attackers.

  7. David says:

    Do the Arsenal players do any kind of fitness training or do they only work with the ball because it seems they are more fragile then players from other clubs. Perhaps they need to invest a bit more in their sports medicine department.

  8. F. Adu ado to you says:

    what is next, limiting the number of players that can be in the defensive half of the pitch? Seriously, goal line technology and additional refs on the pitch would help but golden goals, silver goals, no extra time have all been epic FAILS

  9. diro says:

    eliminate offsides completely.

  10. Toumba says:

    FIFA is always trying to make the World Cup as fair as possible but it is a flawed system to begin with that will never be fair.

    It can never be fair when you have participants from countries with a population of less than 10 million competing against countries with populations over 100 million. And that example is just the tip of the iceberg when you think about advantages that are achieved from size and geography alone.

    I for one don’t think there is anything wrong with the game. I have enjoyed all of the world cups since 1990. FIFA always comes out with new proposals to “fix” the game. They even had one that would increase the size of the goals…and another that would not allow a defending team to make a wall in front of a free kick. I am sure we will hear about more strange proposed changes in the future.

  11. Toumba says:

    Terrible idea. If you like that then go watch an indoor league. Or Australian Rule Football. Because that is what it would turn into. Two goalies just punting it to the other end to see who can get a lucky touch or bounce.

  12. kimo says:

    I say go with an overtime period and gradually remove players. Can you imagine an 8 vs 8 scenario? The amount of space available for attacking would be immense and as teams tired it would open up even more. Just a thought.

  13. John says:

    Can we convince Capello to stay, and Blatter to retire instead? From his refusal to even consider or beta-test much-needed technology, to his collusion with Michel Platini to favor Europe, that guy has got to go.

  14. Joe says:

    What FIFA should be thinking and preparing for the Zurich meeting is the use of goal line video technology to review every goal scored. It would take just a few seconds to do the review while the play is still stopped and avoid embarrassing moments like the ones we saw in this summer’s worldcup with goals that should have not counted. But eh, that’s just me. ;)

  15. Brian D says:

    Fox Soccer once suggested alternating corner kicks rather than PKs; the result would be kind of like college football OT. I gotta say, I like that idea.

  16. liberoo says:

    I like the subtracting players idea – especially if coupled with additional subs in extra time. If there were one or two fresh attackers in extra time running at tired defenders we might see some goals.

  17. Paul says:

    I’ve always liked that idea. Imagine if it went down to 1 v 1! Good lord!

  18. liberoo says:

    I agree with you Joe – but I’m worried (knowing FIFA) that they will use technology to take away more goals than they award.

  19. Paul says:

    “A technical panel will study the options on October 18, and report to FIFA’s executive committee on October 28-29 in Zurich.”

    FIFA technical panel = bunch of 60-year old men who’ve never watched a game outside of a VIP box puffing on cigars and figuring out what’s most profitable.

  20. Josh D says:

    I prefer Golden Goal myself. I know people claim it creates a defensive mind but sudden death is more exciting all the same.

    The teams that play for penalties will do so either way.

  21. Seriously? says:

    true, but nobody likes teams coming into WC games just playing for a tie either. I’m all for them at least thinking about ways to encourage less defensive play.

    Plus, no need to get so agitated when all they said was it’s one option. It’s not like they came out and said they’ve just decided to implement it again.

    Being an American who grew up with sudden death, I’m not calling for it, but I’d have no problem if it were to become reality. Nobody liked it because it was a new concept, and it was said to be unfair that a team wouldn’t be given a chance to come back in extra time. The question is, if they really are afraid that by attacking, they’re more likely to allow a goal, would golden goal really encourage teams to not try to wait for a shootout, when playing a better team? I don’t see it leading to any tactical changes at all.

  22. Josh D says:

    The goalies will just be punting the ball back and forth for hours!

  23. Aaron in StL says:

    FIFA should use the original MLS shootout rules.. obviously joking.

    I remember doing the subtract-a-player OT rule a few times in indoor tournaments as a kid, can’t imagine how exhausting it’d be 11 v 11

  24. Cy says:

    How would eliminating extra time help? Now teams only have to park the bus for 90 minutes instead of 120 minutes to get to a shootout.

  25. Mike in DC says:

    Is it just me or is SBI struggling to 1) break new stories (lack of contacts? sources? 2)Write original reports that are interesting? (Too many standard reports, fantasy report, College Report, USL/NASL report, MLS report..etc.

    Kind of feel like SBI has lost some of its originality…I know some of you SBI diehards are going to hate me for saying this, but it seems to have been a while since SBI has broke an interesting story. What do you all think? I’ll still be coming to check the site hoping for some new breaking news…

  26. john.q says:

    the worst thing about football/soccer if FIFA

  27. BradAR says:

    Probably the most interesting idea I have seen was to have penalty kicks before extra time. The team that wins the penalty shootout would get an “advantage”. Then after extra time if the score is still level the team with the advantage would move on. There would be a lot more attacking play in extra time, with the team without the advantage would be desperate to score, while the team with the advantage trying to hold on and possibly trying the counterattack to put the game away.

  28. Spectra says:

    I love the corner kick idea. That would be the most intense thing ever.

  29. chris says:

    eliminate ties in group play so we dont have to suffer through the dreck that was on display in the group stages this past world cup. That was someof the most boring soccer i’ve ever seen because everyone played for ties.

  30. Dave in San Jose says:

    Bob Bradley for Wales! :-)

  31. They should have the Golden Goal rule in the group stage, to eliminate draws. But there should be overtime and PK’s in the knockout stages. Just my opinion.

  32. jh says:

    I kind of like that idea too.

    I also like what hockey does during its playoffs, which is not just sudden death, but play until one team scores, no matter how many extra periods it takes.

    I don’t know how FIFA would define periods or if they would just keep playing 45 minute “halves.” It doesn’t really matter, though, in sudden death.

    It becomes a game of attrition, but keeps the essence of the game in place, which isn’t the case with PKs. I HATE PKs!!!!!!

  33. tsingletonvt says:

    Leave the group stage the way it is. Only play 90 minutes, but change the rewards for a tie. Right now, each team gets 1 point for a tie.

    Change the rule so that each team gets a point for every goal they score in a tie, up to 3 goals/points. A 0-0 tie results in no points for either team. A 1-1 is a point for each team, 2-2 is 2 points for each, 3-3 is 3points for each , 4-4 is 3 points for each team and probably exciting for the fans. This change should encourage offense without adding time to the game.

  34. Joe says:

    I’m not a golden goal rule fan but the idea of using it during the group stage only is a good one.

  35. Clayton says:

    Golden Goal is the ONLY way to do extra time. C’mon, if you can’t find a winner in 90 minutes – next goal wins. If you want suspense in football, GOLDEN GOAL is the way to go. Please bring it back.

    As for eliminating extra time altogether – that is blasphemy

  36. Clayton says:

    Yea, let’s make the goals a few feet larger while were at it…..

    Dude, you can’t get rid of offsides, sorry.

  37. Richard says:

    I see what you are saying, but I usually come here first before going to FIFA.com or reading AP reports. I think SBI does a good job covering various topics so that we can quickly access information.

  38. Fireball says:

    I just imagined Messi v. Bornstein with no offsides.

  39. Charles says:

    Anything to get the penalty kicks faster. Maybe eliminate the second half if it is tied 0-0 and to straight to PKs.

    FIFA is a joke.

  40. RLW2020 says:

    Bring Back the NASL/Hockey style Shootout!!! way better than PKs from the putting green.

    or just stop f’ing with the game and step up the refereeing! or just flat out stopping paying the suits so much. It sounds like FIFA does these “shake up plans” just to justify his salary!

  41. John says:

    So with your logic the US, India, and China should be world soccer giants. And small countries like Portugal have no business at the WC.

  42. Brian D says:

    Almost. Keep it like it is now, but a 0-0 tie is .5 points in the standings. Playing for a scoreless draw is just too appetizing for some teams now.

  43. Toumba says:

    Think of Jamaica vs Germany. If you don’t think population size and location play into why some countries are better at football than others then you are not paying attention. The question of how to make the tournament a fair one is moot. It can not be fair when some countries have built in advantages. That is why less talented teams will try to play for a tie.

    BTW – The US, China and India are excellent at the sports that they consider their national past time. Just like Brazil and Germany are in theirs.

  44. Hector says:

    agreed. if fifa wants more goals maybe their refs should stop calling phantom calls or ones that were perfectly onside or crossed the line… haha

  45. davidaubudavid says:

    am i the only person who sees this as sarcasm? I think he is saying (correct me if i am wrong) that goal line technology or instant replay changes the game in such a way that it would be equivalent to getting rid of offsides. seeing as how people reacted to there being no offsides that is a pretty bold statement but i agree with it.

  46. davidaubudavid says:

    That might be true but i imagine most of the 60 year old men puffing on cigars were at one time better players and have more playing experience than anyone on this blog.

  47. DC Josh says:

    Blatter is an ancient idiotic buffoon. No other way to describe him.

  48. Pepe says:

    I’d like to see them experiment with something like the following: After 90 minutes, allow 3 additional subs. And remove 1 player from the field. 10v10. Sudden death. After 5 minutes, remove another player. When it’s down to 6v6, then remove the ability for th GK to use hands. While this is a bit of an extreme idea, it’s no less silly than deciding a game by penalties.

  49. Pepe says:

    And maybe this wouldn’t be a good solution. Though I do think having penalties, be it after 90 or 120 minutes, encourages weaker teams to play for the tie. Not to mention it’s a bad way to decide a game. I’m in favor of anything that gets rid of penalties.

  50. RS says:

    What’s wrong with the Silver Ball overtime? The way I see it, there’s little difference breaking a tie score in the last five minutes of a game than in 15 extra minutes of OT. If it’s still tied, go another 15 minutes.

    But, punishing players, who are exhausted, by forcing them to play a guaranteed 30 minutes of OT is forcing a lot of teams to play cautiously and either wait for a golden opportunity in OT, or settle for PKs. If they know they can settle it in just 15 extra minutes, they might try to gamble a bit more.

    So, what’s the big negative on the Silver Ball?

  51. adam says:

    ROFL, yes it is more ridiculous. At least penalty kicks are part of the game. 6v6 isn’t.

  52. Yinka Double Dare says:

    I have a better proposal that will make most fans happier than what ol’ Sepp wants to do: each team selects 5 players to kick for their side after extra time. They alternate taking a running start to kick Sepp Blatter in the nuts until he pukes. Team whose player finally makes him barf wins. Higher FIFA-rated team goes first.

    Seriously though, eliminating extra time altogether? Great, so PKs would decide even more games and the inferior teams would be even more likely to play for the tie knowing they needed to do it for only 90 minutes instead of 120. And Golden Goal, while really exciting when someone actually scores one, usually resulted in boring extra time periods that were overly defensive.

    If you’re going to remove players, I think the lowest you can go is 8 v. 8 (including the goalies) or it stops resembling the actual game anymore. At that point, you may as well go to PKs.

  53. Stephen says:

    There are sudden death rules in every other sport (with the exceptions of basketball, tennis, rugby and golf, to name a few) why should soccer be any different.

    I agree! It adds drama. While it sucks to be on the losing end, imagine what it would be like if Donovan had scored the game winning goal in extra time due to the golden goal rule. Every team could have that elated feeling us USA fans had if that were to happen.

    I’m all for golden goal. I hate the NFL sudden death rule, but it does add drama. GOLDEN GOAL all the way!

  54. Stephen says:

    I saw it as complete sarcasm. And I agree with you. Is it just me, though, or did FIFA pick the one non-issue in the WC to correct and not any others?

  55. Stephen says:

    What I think they should do instead, is institute some sort of extra time rule in the groups stage. Golden goal, but don’t go to PK’s after the two extra time periods. If it’s tied after two extra time periods, then it’s 1 point. That would make the worse teams that tend to try to hold on for ties in the group stage play a little more attacking style to try to avoid having to risk the 30 minutes of sudden death.

    I have always been comfused as to why there is no extra time in the group stage. I think it would provide more drama and excitement to the groups stage.

  56. Steve/ATL says:

    I’ve loved that idea for years. Imagine: limit both sides to 6-7 players (not unlike choosing 5 for PKs). Teams alternate attacking and defending. No short corners–ball must be played directly into the box. As long as the ball is in the penalty box and not controlled by the keeper, it is live and play continues. The Brazil-Italy final at USA94 was one of the worst games I have ever watched–neither team wanted to take a chance. In the end, it was a miss by Roberto Baggio that decided the match and ultimately tarnished the reputation of a star player.

  57. Stephen says:

    remind me what Silver Ball is? Is it if you score in the first ET then the games over, if not it goes to a second ET?

  58. Adam M. says:

    In the Group Stage, play one 15 minute extra sudden death period if the match is a tie after regulation. Give 4 points for a win earned in regular time, 2 points for a win earned in extra time, and 1 point for a tie. If any team wins a Group game in regulation, no team can win the Group with less than two extra time wins. If more than one team wins a Group game in regulation, no team can advance without a regulation win. That will properly incentivize teams to push for wins in 90s mins. After the Group stage, golden goal.

  59. Stephen says:

    I actually like that.

  60. Stephen says:

    But then you have to raise the incentive for a win. if a 3-3 tie can get you 3 points, then a win shold get you 4. Granted, there are very few 3-3 ties and maybe if you do it you should deserve the 3 points. It would certainly make the groups stage more interesting on who advances and doesn’t.

  61. Stephen says:

    **Maybe just 1 overtime in the group stage.

  62. Stephen says:

    Meaning a 15 minute period, and that’s it.

  63. Stephen says:

    I kind of like that, but I think that if you did that you would have to allow more subs. Maybe 1 more per extra time?

  64. Stephen says:

    Actually, maybe a better idea is to start a coup against Sepp Blatter. That’ll stop all of this nonsense.

    Who’s up for a new world soccer organization? Now to find an investor…

  65. adam says:

    This is horribly off-topic, but you bringing up sudden death golf requires a diversion. How great would it be if the players teed off at the same time and whoever got their ball in the hole first won? Why doesn’t this exist?

  66. bb says:

    so long as the US has great goal keepers, I will love PK’s ;-)

  67. Wm. says:

    Good point. But I never want to be a US fan facing elimination with that rule in effect. I’ll die of a heart attack.

  68. Ted in MN says:

    Personally i like the current system. I love PKs. Suggesting that they just keep playing to me is silly cause it seems like some teams would rather sit and wait for their opponent to move then attack. Greece vs Switzerland in Brazil would never end without some form of pks. They would just stand there for days before Greece asks Germany to lend them some players. Meanwhile, Switzerland refuses to ask for help or for that matter do anything involving international discussions unless it is done in Geneva. Then the German people don’t want to help Greece, Switzerland decides to remain in still and the game ends when everyone dies from old age. (please tell me someone here follows silly European economics). On a more serious note, PKs add drama and flare. Is it soccer? maybe. Is it a perfect way to end a match. Hell if anything they should force the players to take an even longer walk while the opposing team surrounds them and then have a scoreboard right behind the goal so they can see all the pressure. The English team would collectively gain some very old fashion style ( lets go with the gout) disease and refuse to play. Are PKs really that much of an insult to the game? Isn’t The Hand of Gaul a little worse than Brazil winning in 94′. I mean there have been some good teams to win on Pks (none of them English). The current system is perfect. Just give me some replay and i’ll be happy.

  69. Tyler says:

    Getting rid of extra time is pointless, instead of “attacking” more, the underdogs are simply going to sit back and hope for pks. Didn’t he say earlier that he wanted to eliminate draws? Blatter should just pick the teams he wants to win, that’s what he’s trying to do anyway.

  70. Wm. says:

    Why is Sepp considering these sweeping changes when all we want is better reffing? That is: goals counting when they cross the line and teams like, say, the US not having two goals waved off because of bad offside calls.

    The group stage works fine. Draws work fine. FIFA is run by fools.

  71. thisisphil says:

    1. Until goal line technology and instant reply address the issues of questionable goals and non goals, this is all window dressing.

    2. If you get rid of extra time, you’ll have teams that are ahead dropping like flies and calling for stretchers to run down the clock. This is an issue that will also need to be addressed. For example, if you need to be removed with 30 minutes left in the match you must be subbed or cannot come back on.

  72. xwoof says:

    That is genius. They should do that. Wow, I wish I’d thought of that.

  73. xwoof says:

    Combine this with the penalites before extra time and we’re golden.

  74. David Drake says:

    I like the golden goal. That was essentially what Donovan’s goal against Algeria was.

    If there is still no winner after 30 minutes, give the win to the team that had taken the most corners, which would be the team that attacked most.