| Wyrdness said: Except point out the insult because the are none if you think someone responding to your post is insulting you that's your own personal issue otherwise you're fabricating something because you don't have much to stand on, want to talk about strawman arguments look at your post it's essentially "But that was a long time ago things are different now", it's like saying human rights shouldn't exist because we're not living in the dark ages. You sure like your straw men, don't you? Try this one, it's like saying death penalty shouldn't exist because we're not living in the dark ages. Or, homosexuality should have remained illegal because it was once criminalized (at least in Finland). These arguments make no sense, do we agree? The sport is different now, playing away matches is different now so I'm saying it's time for re-evaluation. The example of West Germany shows you that people don't have the mentality you'd like them to have so the game had to be changed to stamp such things out, I read the rest of your post by the way, you admitted the rule is doing its job then went on to say you don't like Atleti as well as come up with no counter argument for the rule. Yup, game and rules need to be improved. I'm all for video refs too. West Germany example was a serious matter, good they resolved it. Maybe back then there was some people saying "noo this is how it has been and should be" :) I did say that the rule is (obviously) doing it's job but also thought it forces certain tactics that shouldn't be there today. Just because a rule is doing what it's aimed to do doesn't necessarily mean there is a need for the rule. Your two questions were already answered, with out the rule Bayern would not have attacked as hard as they did as 2-1 would mean going to extra time and penalties, the rule meant that Atleti's goal counts towards their head to head so Bayern could no longer hope for extra or penalties and had to win the game outright with out response. Yes Football would revert back to exploiting tactics probably even more so now why? Because things are more money driven now, grind the win out and progress, more teams would park the bus away. Yes, without the rule Bayern wouldn't have been forced to go all-out attack when goals are 2-2. Both teams with same amount of goals, it's a tie. This is my problem with the rule. But surely you agree they would have had to attack if they were a goal down? I know this isn't exactly what you said but I find it hard to believe teams would just take turns in parking the bus and attacking. Scoring goals also when playing away would be a good tactic, and away goals aren't so rare today, like I said, playing away these days is not as hard as it was in 60s for various reasons. What if we saw more of them because home team wouldn't have to be overly cautious with attacking?
|
Ok I'll start watching the game studio now so I don't have time to finish all my thoughs. We'll continue tomorrow if you want. We're getting nowhere though heh.
