LogFAQs > #877465394

argonautweakend posted...

like they dont see a reason to force a team to win just to make it more exciting. if they could logistically have the world cup knockout rounds without OT they probably would.

the way most leagues work is each team plays eachother twice once home and once away. so everybody plays eachother the same number of times so its more even. ties are very important since the standings are most points, 3 per win 1 per tie

It sounds like you're talking arguments for/against having overtime at all. My argument is that since they have it, it should be sudden death.

TheCyborgNinja posted...

PKs are the worst as it stands. It wouldn't be as bad if it was 2 on 2 (incl. goalie), because there's a larger element of skill involved.

I like how the NHL tried to get away from shootouts because they're so stupid, and people loved the 3-on-3 overtime change. And the NHL also didn't use shootouts for playoffs, even before the 3-on-3 rule. I get PKs for smaller games (though I'm not sure if any league uses them, since they have ties), but elimination games IMO shouldn't come down to that. I think people just accept it for soccer since it's been that way for a long time.