World Football Round Table: "Do You Prefer Golden Goals or Penalties, and Why?"

After a deserved break, The World Football Round Table Discussions return. In our fifth edition, we asked several of our top writers :

"Which system do you prefer—golden goal or penalties, and why?"

Below is their take on the matter.

• Khalid Shakran - In favour of penalties

The golden goal system has destroyed many matches in past tournaments. The golden goal system encourages negative football, as teams are too afraid of conceding, and the sudden end to a football match can also create safety and security problems. The teams become increasingly cautious in the golden goal system.

That being said, penalties are definitely my choice.

For both squads and teams, extra-time used to be a time of nerve-racking pressure. In the supposedly "penalty" system now, players and fans acknowledge that if their team falls behind by a goal during the second half of extra time, they still have a chance to equalize and possibly win in miraculous fashion.

• Kiran Gokarn - In favour of penalties

Personally, I prefer the system of penalties. The game reaches its flash point in the penalty shootout and the tension is heartbreaking for some.

The system of the golden goal means that even if the team playing badly gets a lucky goal, they go through. Extra time gives the better team more time to get the right result.

Besides, the excitement of penalty shootout has no substitute.

• Chris Potter - In favour of penalties

I think that the fairest way to decide a close football game is a penalty shootout. We often forget that football is a sport, and that a primary aim of any sport is to provide entertainment and drama.

A golden goal is a much more cruel and unjust deciding factor as goals can be fortunate, undeserved, or controversial. However, during a penalty shootout, each side has a minimum of five opportunities with which to gain an advantage and ultimately win a match.

There is more skill involved and poise required, to add to the obvious resulting drama.

Penalties 3 - 0 Golden Goals, just like Spain vs Russia.

• Shyam - In favour of penalties

I prefer the penalty shootouts because they seem to give a much more equal opportunity to teams once a game ends as a draw. The problem with the golden goal system is that the game ends the moment one of the teams scores a goal in the extra-time period. Somehow, that doesn't appeal to me.

The current system seems to be the best, because it allows the teams to play a 30-minute period in its entirety, thereby giving a considerable amount of time for the teams who even go behind in the extra time period to recover.

Golden goals end the game abruptly—even more so than the penalty shootouts, and that is why I prefer the latter.

• Tahira Adams - In favour of penalties

When it comes down to deciding a game, I would have to choose penalties over the golden goal.

My reason is because penalties are a lot quicker and definitely more exciting than golden goal. Penalties actually capture the emotion of the beautiful game! There is nothing beter than an entire stadium in silence while a player steps up to the spot.

A Golden Goal game could last forever, which is absolute torture.

• Salaar Shamsi - In favour of penalties

Perhaps it's unfair to have so much at stake (glory, money) for one spot kick, but for the excitement of it, I prefer penalty shootouts.

The emotion and excitement captivates the spectators. It's a fair chance because, at the end of the day, someone's going to win and someone has to lose.

Golden Goal means an unnecessary rise in fatigue and, as suggested by others, with two tight defenses, it could last till God knows when.

Penalties 6 - 0 Golden Goals, talk about a thrashing.

Unfortunately, we can't keep a clean sheet, over to what the penalty rebels think.

• SB - In favour of golden goals

In my opinion, the golden goal system was far more exciting from a spectator's viewpoint.

The teams had to go after the goal, as just sitting back, defending, and waiting to die was not a wise option. It lead to all-out attacking play, and most matches ended quickly, in dramatic style, and on a high note.

 

Penalties, however, very often end on a sour note, where a player misses and the other team runs off into the middle, commemorating an error. For a neutral spectator this can be a bit of an anti-climax.

 

Another thing I dislike about the penalty system is that it draws out 40 minutes more of very often boring play, as teams tend to close up shop as early as the 80th minute of the second half knowing that a compulsory extra 30 minutes are on the way.

• Keith Griffin - In favour of golden goals

For me, I prefer the golden goal system, because it can guarantee a more exciting and unpredictable finish to any game. It can give a team that is not so experienced at penalties the chance to win an important game against a team who are experts at penalties, e.g. Germany.
 
We would also see the two teams go all out and attack in a bid to score that vital match-winning goal, instead of locking up the defence and playing for the lottery that is penalties.
 
A classic example was the "Golden Goal" scored by Korea against world giants Italy. I'm sure Korea would have preferred to avoid the penalty shoot-out against the notoriously hard to beat Italians, and the "Golden Goal" rule ensured that.
 

Final Score - Penalties 6 : 2 Golden Goals.

Penalties rule the roost!

That's a wrap for this edition of the World Football Round Table Discussions. The next edition will be published very shortly.

Thanks to SB for the topic, during which we produced a healthy debate, some in favour, others against. Fair enough, just how it should be.

Thanks to all our writers who contributed this time around.