Why football would be better off without penalty shoot-outs

Here’s the take:  Deciding football matches by penalty shoot-outs spoils football matches and the only solution is to get rid of them.

Here’s why…

The purpose of a penalty shoot-out is to provide a result to a game where neither side scored a winning goal during the allotted time.  The argument being that teams could just play forever and not score.  The problem is they’re fundamentally unsatisfactory and make the football beforehand a worse spectacle.

The pro argument 

A penalty shoot-out decides the game relatively quickly, with extremely long shoot-outs statistically unlikely.  There is validity to this point which appeals to broadcasters, whose schedules are backing up, match organisers who want to clear the stadium and supporters who want to get home.  In tournament football, outside of the final, there is also the factor of exhaustion for the winning team whose players need to play the next round.

The other pro argument is for the spectacle where two tired teams appear incapable of finding a winner and the drama of a shoot-out reignites the excitement of the crowd.   Shoot-outs are particularly good on television, with the player close-ups and replays.  For spectators, less so, particularly when you’re at the opposite end of the ground.

The arguments against

“It’s a lottery”

The case against penalty shoot-outs is often based around them being “a lottery”.  This isn’t entirely true as goalkeepers become more specialised in saving them, while there have always been players with better technique and better able to handle the pressure. It is notable though that it remains rare for a team to win more than one penalty shoot-out in a given tournament.  With the extreme pressure and non-specialist penalty takers, the fine margins do make it more of a game of chance.

A different game

The main issue is that football is a team game played according to one set of rules, whereas a penalty shoot-out is fundamentally a different game.  Compare to tennis, where in a tie-break, the players still win the game by playing for points in the same way.

Penalty shoot-outs are way too different to the normal game as a way to fairly decide a footballing contest.  Of course a penalty can decide a game in normal time, but this is determined within the game itself.  It has to be earnt by good attacking play and/or poor defending.

The game will be a better spectacle

This is the key reason for getting rid of shoot-outs and it’s the most overlooked. In modern football, we increasingly see analysis of game states and how they influence a team’s approach during a game.  You’ll see how a manager changes their side’s setup after a sending off, or after falling behind, etc.  Even an injury to a key player on either side can reshape the approach to a game.

In knock-out football, where so much is at stake, teams often set up to not lose a game.  Finals are often poor spectacles and low scoring as a result.

Teams know that if they don’t concede they will get the chance of a penalty shoot-out at the end.  For the perceived underdog, this can influence their setup, particularly as the game draws on.  Teams “settle for a penalty shoot-out” and extra-time is a non-event.  Similarly if a team has a player sent off, they will “try and hang on for penalties” rather than try and score.

Managers and teams then escape blame for losing, with the focus turning on the poor player who misses a deciding kick.

The whole psychology changes if you remove penalty shoot-outs.  Both teams have to try and score.  They have to win by playing football.   The game state is changed.

Consequently the psychology is changed.  If a team focuses solely on defending, they will eventually concede.  They will at least need a strategy to counter attack.  The requirement to facilitate attacking will enable openings.

If the winning team has another game in a couple of days, that becomes a further incentive to push for a winner and end the game quickly.  Looking to hang on and make a game last all night makes no sense.

The unfair focus on those who miss

The shoot-outs themselves put too much focus on players who might never have taken a penalty, yet can become career defining moments etched in a nation’s psyche.  Southgate, Batty, Baggio, Diana Ross – we will never forget your failure.

TV schedules are history

We’re now in the age of streaming, where a fixed TV schedule has given way to broadcasts that can run for however long it takes.  Post match analysis and chat already lasts hours.

How to facilitate deciding a game of football by actually playing football?

Funnily enough FIFA came close in the 1990s with the “golden goal”, but typically they didn’t get it quite right, as they still had a penalty shoot-out, and the fear of conceding outweighing the desire to score was actually exacerbated.

The golden goal was quite brutal as the match is over as soon as the goal goes in.  A better solution would be to have the usual 30 minutes of extra time.  Then if the scores are still level, have an extra 10 or 15 minutes (with the usual change of ends), then repeat until we have a winner.

But it might last all night you cry? But it won’t as managers and players know they have to score and their tactics will change accordingly.  For player welfare, we could allow an extra substitution in the initial 30 minutes extra-time with a further one for each additional period.

We often see in tournament football how the group stages provide the most exciting games as teams know they need to get the points to qualify.  In the opening set of fixtures in the 2026 World Cup, there was open, attacking football as everyone was looking for that initial win, knowing that 4 points would likely see them qualify.

When the knockout stages come, games often become poorer spectacles as teams fear losing.  They may not want penalties, but better “the lottery” than losing in open play.

In the coming matches in the 2026 World Cup, we’ll see the fates of teams decided by these shoot-outs with the losers set to be forever aggrieved, feeling that they didn’t really lose in the playing of the game.  The winners might not care, but I’d still rather see a team game won through a goal scored by team play and games played by both teams looking to score rather than one focus on not conceding.

If we wish to improve the attacking spectacle in the latter stages, penalty shoot-outs have to go!