Away Goals Rule Scrapped

[JoshBRFC+]

Should it be scrapped? I personally think it should. If level after the 2nd leg then extra time and penalties.

A goal is a goal. It shouldn't be worth more than any other goal. 

[Stan]

Straight to penalties. 

[The Artful Dodger]

I like it encourages teams to attack away from home and not rely on home advantage, don't see any need to meddle with it.

[Bluewolf]

1 hour ago, The Artful Dodger said:

I like it encourages teams to attack away from home and not rely on home advantage, don't see any need to meddle with it.

Agree with Artful, the idea was to get teams to be willing to play more attacking football away from home, the fact that City played it safe in their first game was their downfall, Spurs had nothing to lose last night by attacking and everything to gain and they succeeded and why we got that drama and all them goals.. leave it alone I say.. those that want to take advantage of it will, those that don't risk the exit.. 

[Mel81x+]

If its not broken don't fix it. Teams get two chances to redeem themselves and they think they can just blame the away goal rule because they didn't take them effectively? 

[tlr]

Should revive Silver Goal 

I Agree in principle with the existing rules but more generally I am not sure about one team getting an extra half an hour on home turf to win a tie / an away goal; though I get that is part of the luck of the draw. 

Was it the League Cup where they didn't count at 90 but did at 120? Now that is bollocks.

[LFCMike]

There's nothing wrong with it as it is. 

[Inverted]

I like it, but could maybe agree that extra time is flawed because the away side gets 30 more minutes to scare away goals, but being at home in the second leg is a big advantage for the other side. It balances out in my opinion, and makes for more interesting ties.

[Happy Blue]

Keep it as it is

[JoshBRFC+]

But a goal should count as a goal. Llorente's goal last night basically counted as 1.5 goals and not a goal. 

Even straight to penalties would be better.

[The Artful Dodger]

1 minute ago, JOSHBRFC said:

But a goal should count as a goal. Llorente's goal last night basically counted as 1.5 goals and not a goal. 

Even straight to penalties would be better.

Home advantage is a real thing, decisions tend to go your way more and the atmosphere can work in your favour. I think the away goal rule is there to stop teams just coming and Mourinhoing it out of the park, then relying on their own home advantage (where the opposition could well do similarly) to see it through. Without the away goal rule you have a real chance of negative tactics resulting in borefests across the board. Don't get me wrong, negative tactics are a valid and often unfairly derided thing, but I think this adds some incentive to attack which is needed.

[Stan]

2 hours ago, Inverted said:

I like it, but could maybe agree that extra time is flawed because the away side gets 30 more minutes to scare away goals, but being at home in the second leg is a big advantage for the other side. It balances out in my opinion, and makes for more interesting ties.

If the away side gets 30 more minutes to score a/another goal, how is it balanced out?

[Inverted]

9 minutes ago, Stan said:

If the away side gets 30 more minutes to score a/another goal, how is it balanced out?

Worded it unclearly.

Playing at home last is an advantage for the team that is at home in the second leg (in my opinion, not sure how the stats reflect it), and that advantage is evened out because if it goes to extra time, the side that's away in the second leg gets 30 extra minutes to score an away goal.

[Pyfish+]

Keep it how it is. Us football fans would still find some way of complaining if it was something else...

[CaaC (John)+]

I would scrap it but it's been around since UEFA introduced it in the 1965/66 season I do believe so I don't think they would change it, I would rather go into extra time and a golden goal rule implicated and no offside. 

 

[6666]

It's definitely an outdated rule that doesn't need to exist and has too much of an influence on who goes through.

Hope we're saved by it today if Napoli win 3-1...

[LFCMike]

Do people really think straight to penalties is a better way to settle a match?

[RandoEFC+]

I don't really think there's anything wrong with it though I can see the argument. I'd have no problem if they changed it to extra time and then penalties but straight to penalties seems a weird one. Why would you want penalties if it's a good enough match that two teams can't be separated over 180 minutes? Rather see them slug it out for 30 more minutes and see if they can get a decider. 

[6666]

Extra time and then penalties when it's level on aggregate is what it'd prefer. I think at least a half measure could be taken where away goals decide the match only after an extra 30 mins have been played.

[True Blue]

If the aggregate is 1-1, 2-2, 3-3 etc i would leave it to ET and then penalties. You lose home 1-3 and win away 0-2 and you go out is a terrible option.

[Smiley Culture]

Think it’s a really interesting part of knockout football in Europe and should stay. It poses another dilemma for managers, on top of the usual demands of European Football. 

[Guest]

I'm against it. I think it makes teams to worried to concead a goalat home. Take arsenal the other day. They were 2.0 up and didn't go for a other goal as it wasn't worth the risk. Also when a team gets an away goal it can kill games.  I would like it to just go to penalties. 

[Azeem]

The weighteg of scoring away isn't that much nowadays as it used to be in the 60s etc that's why i would scrap it for two or three seasons to check whether its still needed or not 

[ScoRoss]

Could be scrapped for UEFA competition at their general meeting on Friday.

[Danny]

Does it actually do what it was intended for? If not scrap it.