Aug 28, 2011

PK's: The Worst Part of Soccer


As a little kid I used to love penalty kicks. They were the most exciting part of soccer to me. In part because soccer video games were lame back then and PK's were the only fun part, but probably more so because I lacked the attention span to watch games in their entirety. As I've grown older though, and gained an appreciation for the intricacies of sports, I've come to despise them. It's an absolutely ridiculous way to decide the winner of a match. It’s like determining the winner of a basketball game by playing 5 games of 1-on-1. It has nothing to do with the actual, strategic game of soccer.

 Even the name "penalty kick" suggests that they should only be awarded after a penalty has been committed. And I do mean awarded. According to The Science of Soccer, 85% of PK's on goal land in the back of the net. It’s all but a certainty that a goal is going to be scored. Which makes sense; they’re only taken after a foul has been committed on a scoring opportunity in the box.

I can understand, to a degree, why they do it. Soccer is the most physically demanding sport there is. Even the constant back and forth of a basketball game doesn't compare to the non-stop running and sprinting that soccer requires. Add to that that there’s only one break between two 45 minute halves, and it's completely understandable why FIFA would want to prevent extreme fatigue. In a tournament or league setting, where teams are playing 3-5 games per week, I get that playing an extra hour would be disadvantageous to a team in their following game. Still, it's seems nonsensical to completely change the dynamic of the game in something as big the World Cup or any championship for that matter. But there has to be a better way than PK’s. It’s an entirely different game.

So here's my suggestion. In finals, let them play until someone scores. I’m a big fan of the golden goal. It’s the most exciting part of a hockey game and I really miss it in soccer. Who cares if they play an extra 45 minutes? There's no next game and no team has an edge-unless superior in conditioning-because they’re both on the pitch for the same amount of time. In the other games, like semi-finals or the regular season, why not alternate set pieces? Corner kicks and free kicks are already one of the most suspenseful moments in sports. And most importantly, they keep the team dynamic in the game. You need a good pass into the box to have a chance and then both the offense and defense have an opportunity to make a play on the ball. Because of the multiple degrees of difficulty associated with each play, the goals per attempt are pretty much reversed on set pieces(about 15%). Plus, the truly gifted players like Cristiano Ronaldo and Marta can still put it in net off of a set play. And isn’t that what you ultimately want in sports? To reward and witness greatness. Not determine the outcome with a shot the average 9 year old can make in their sleep.

Soccer and baseball hesitate to make changes to the rules for a fear of losing their historical nostalgia. In baseballs case, they also love being able to compare stats from different eras(even though most of the records are held by known juicers). Meanwhile, the NFL and NBA constantly tweak themselves to improve their game and its watchability.

Soccer will never lose its international popularity. There are too many countries where it's as much of a religion as a sport, and, like the Olympics, national teams give everyone a squad to root for. Baseball, however, has seen a drastic decline in popularity while the NFL and NBA are thriving at all-time highs. So please soccer, I’m pleading with you, learn from the NFL and NBA and don’t be too proud to make improvements. Oh, and while you’re at it, get rid of the offside penalty. More goals = more excitement.

No comments:

Post a Comment