WEEKLY WHINE

Go away, away goals

It's time to destroy the away goals rule.

You will no doubt recall that in these bytes a couple of months ago, we had a little chat about the MLS playoffs. I'm not a fan of the home-n-away series; it needs too many tiebreakers. Maybe it's just because I'm from the US, but I always like playing an odd number of games, disallowing draws, and waiting to see who wins more.

I recognise that it's necessary in many cases. It's best used in circumstances when you can't decide who should be the higher seed. For example, who's better in the UEFA Cup, Feyenoord or Rangers? Nobody can say until after they play. Home-n-away is the only fair way to go.

As I say, though, it's too prone to tiebreakers. If both matches are draws, or if they're split, you need some way to decide a winner. The first tiebreaker is aggregate goals scored: whoever scored more wins. There's not much to argue about that one, although some feel that margins of victory shouldn't matter. Well, if one team wins 8-0 at home but loses the return leg 1-0, who's the better team? It shouldn't come down to an overtime in this sort of situation.

The other tiebreaker is the infamous away goals rule. This rule is implemented frequently; in the UEFA Cup third round two weeks ago, Olympique Lyonnais of France defeated Club Brugge of Belgium 3-0 at home. The 4-1 win by Club Brugge in the first leg made the aggregate score 4-4, but because Lyon got the shutout at home, they moved through.

The darkest hour of the away goals rule was undoubtedly the 1997 playoff for the last position at the 1998 Men's World Cup. Iran lost the Asian playoff against Japan 3-2 in overtime, forcing them to play a two leg series against Australia. The first leg was a 1-1 draw in Tehran, setting the stage for yet another historic sporting event at the Melbourne Cricket Ground in Australia. Midway through the second half, Australia led 2-0 and appeared ready to stamp their passport to France. But the momentum shifted late, and Khodadad Azizi scored Iran's second goal with ten minutes left to play. The match ended 2-2, which, on the away goals rule, was enough for Iran to jump into the tournament.

The inequity here is the important point. Had Iran been the ones to squander a 2-0 lead in the return leg, the atmosphere would have been very different, but the result would have been the same. Wouldn't we have wanted this match to move to overtime? Fans around the world were getting swept up in the hype surrounding this series, and an overtime period would have kept them excited whilst settling the contest fairly. It might also have given Iran coach Badu Vieira heart problems, seeing that Iran narrowly missed qualifying directly from their second round group, lost another chance to qualify in overtime against Japan, and would have been subjected to sudden death yet again.

We shouldn't feel too afraid to let teams go to overtimes, since they provide the greatest excitement and the greatest possibility for upsets. But if there are upsets every day, they're not really upsets any more. Keep the aggregate goals rule, mostly because it's sensible, but also because "aggregate" is a fun word to say and to type. But do away with the away goals rule and let Lyon go to overtime against Brugge. If Lyon really are the better side, they'll score in overtime.

Now that we've covered this, may I suggest another improvement: the Infinite Overtime. The Golden Goal rule is a good start, but the problem remains that if nobody scores after thirty minutes, we get to the even more exciting, but even more arbitrary, penalty shootout. I prefer the method used in NHL playoff games. In these, the teams start an overtime period and continue until someone scores, or until twenty minutes elapse. If there was no goal, they have an intermission, and then they do it again. And again, and again, as long as they need until a puck enters a goal. This has provided a number of memorable marathons, most recently the quintuple overtime game in which the Philadephia Flyers defeated the Pittsburgh Penguins 2-1 in the fourth game of their 2000 Eastern Conference semifinal series.

So the Infinite Overtime could involve a series of fifteen minute periods, in which the teams trade sides of the field each period. Perhaps substitution rules could be relaxed to allow, say, an extra substitution every other overtime, and to allow substituted players to come back in after the third overtime or so.

Certainly, penalty shootouts have offered their share of famous moments as well. However, I'm fairly sure that Brandi Chastain still would have removed her shirt if she'd scored the overtime winner in the 183rd minute. Then again, she might have just flopped to the ground and taken a quick nap.