Extra time and 2 legged ties

[Hibby70]

Always thought that it's a bit unfair that the second leg home team gets the advantaged of extra time at their ground if a draw after 180 mins.

Would it not be fairer to have 15 mins after the first leg if a draw after 90. Then another 15 after the second leg if still tied.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Always thought that it's a bit unfair that the second leg home team gets the advantaged of extra time at their ground if a draw after 180 mins.

Would it not be fairer to have 15 mins after the first leg if a draw after 90. Then another 15 after the second leg.

No.

What if it ends 3-0 after extra time?

Is that just ignored for the second leg?

It's the luck of the draw.

[wearethehibs]

I think the opposite. It's an advantage to the away team. They get an extra 30 minutes to score an away goal. The away goal rule should be scrapped if the game goes to Extra time imo

[Hibby70]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think the opposite. It's an advantage to the away team. They get an extra 30 minutes to score an away goal. The away goal rule should be scrapped if the game goes to Extra time imo

I was thinking in the context of tonight's playoff where away goals don't count.

[Hibby70]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No.

What if it ends 3-0 after extra time?

Is that just ignored for the second leg?

It's the luck of the draw.

No of course not but it's no different to it ending 3-0 during 30 minutes at one ground only.

[danhibees1875]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Always thought that it's a bit unfair that the second leg home team gets the advantaged of extra time at their ground if a draw after 180 mins.

Would it not be fairer to have 15 mins after the first leg if a draw after 90. Then another 15 after the second leg if still tied.

So you wouldn't do the extra time in the first game if it's 1-0, even when it could be 1-0 to the other team in the second game and need extra time?

Would the goals from the first extra time count even if there shouldn't have been extra time by the end of the traditional 180?

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think the opposite. It's an advantage to the away team. They get an extra 30 minutes to score an away goal. The away goal rule should be scrapped if the game goes to Extra time imo

For games where away goals apply I agree with you, but I think the advantage is even greater. When I was growing up the traditional thinking was you wanted to play the second leg at your own place and get home advantage.

I think that’s rarely the case anymore and hasn’t been for years. Keep it tight at home in the first leg and don’t concede. Go over for the second leg and suddenly the opposition are having to score multiples if you are finding the net.

The last few seasons in Europe have seen teams scoring away goals I suspect in record numbers. Jonathan Wilson wrote a piece about it a number of months back, trying to provide a tactical analysis as to why.

[Hibby70]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So you wouldn't do the extra time in the first game if it's 1-0, even when it could be 1-0 to the other team in the second game and need extra time?

Would the goals from the first extra time count even if there shouldn't have been extra time by the end of the traditional 180?

Yes to both

[Hibby70]

Actually just add an extra 15 at the end of every game if a draw.

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

For games where away goals apply I agree with you, but I think the advantage is even greater. When I was growing up the traditional thinking was you wanted to play the second leg at your own place and get home advantage.

I think that’s rarely the case anymore and hasn’t been for years. Keep it tight at home in the first leg and don’t concede. Go over for the second leg and suddenly the opposition are having to score multiples if you are finding the net.

The last few seasons in Europe have seen teams scoring away goals I suspect in record numbers. Jonathan Wilson wrote a piece about it a number of months back, trying to provide a tactical analysis as to why.

I wonder if it’s partly a fan expectation thing. Fans accept a cagey performance at home in a first leg because everyone understands the importance of taking a clean sheet into the second leg. So there’s not the same impatience/impetus home fans normally have?

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No of course not but it's no different to it ending 3-0 during 30 minutes at one ground only.

It is different.

Imagine the psychological hurdle both teams would have to overcome.

The team who lost, would be under unfair pressure to win in 90 because they knew they had no chance in extra time.

How would the "winning" team approach the last part of the game? etc etc etc.

I agree that the current system isn't perfect, but 2 X 15 would be horrible, imo.

Scrap extra time and go straight to penalties or replay at a neutral venue.

They want the 2 legs to maximise income.

[danhibees1875]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes to both

I don't see it becoming a thing.

[Hibby70]

Neither do I 😁

[The 90+2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I was thinking in the context of tonight's playoff where away goals don't count.

Tonight goes in favour of the team who finished higher in the overall spfl with the home advantage last. Dundee Utd has advantage over ICT last game as they finished higher. Can’t see the issue personally.

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I wonder if it’s partly a fan expectation thing. Fans accept a cagey performance at home in a first leg because everyone understands the importance of taking a clean sheet into the second leg. So there’s not the same impatience/impetus home fans normally have?

Yeah, makes sense. Fans expect to go out and try and score, regardless of home or away, but understand that securing a home clean sheet in the first leg is almost an automatic advantage.

Wilson, if I was reading him right, also linked it to a regression in defensive skills in European competition. The teams who consistently qualified tended to be dominant domestically. As a consequence or maybe rather as precursor they lined up with more positive defences domestically - the attacking full backs and the centre back who would step out, to break down weaker domestic teams who were set up to defend. The consequence was that they maintained their domestic dominance and then ended up in Europe playing against opponents who had similarly fantastic attacking players and similarly attack-minded defenders. I think he had stats to show how the goal rate had increased massively, especially in the latter stages of the tournaments.

Anyways, it has always confused me why no one ever seems to point out that the first thing to do in a first leg at home was not to concede, and why you wouldn’t want to be drawn at home first and while going for a result, ensure you didn’t concede!