Would you consider football as an "unjust sport"?

Just imagine that in a particular game one of the teams is the one who attacks more and has more shots on goal ( but it can't score ) than the other team. But later, the team that has being defending itself for the most part of the game, scores a goal in a counterattack play or by taking advantage of one mistake of the opposing team ( either a defender's mistake or a goalkeeper's mistake )

Would it be unjust that the team who attacked more and had more shots on goal loses the game?

Do you think certain rules of football should be modified? For example, if the game ends in a tie, should the winner be determined by who had more ball possesion and shots on goal or clear scoring opportunities?

10 Answers

Relevance
  • 6 months ago

    GEEZE! That is why they play the game.to see who will win. There are thousands of variables at play for, and against, any team. So they play to see who will win that particular day.

    Soccerref

    • Login to reply the answers
  • August
    Lv 5
    6 months ago

    Yes I have imagined it-LEAVE THE GAME AS IT IS !

    • Login to reply the answers
  • F
    Lv 6
    6 months ago

    I was going to say, unpredictability is what draws people to sport, but most football fans would rather see their teams win all games 1-0 and field a back four of Hitler, Genghis Khan, Peter Sutcliffe and Fred West, than play great football and finish 2nd.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 6 months ago

    No never. It's called good defending.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 6 months ago

    I don't think so.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • DEBS
    Lv 7
    6 months ago

    A team that scores 1 goal off of one shot seems like they played much better than a team who had 10 shots and no goals.

    What you are saying is that we should reward a failed game plan.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • jimmy
    Lv 7
    6 months ago

    That's just part of the game, and no, the rules shouldn't be changed.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • John
    Lv 5
    6 months ago

    What you describe is not unjust. Rather, its a characteristic of soccer which adds interest to the sport. More than in many other sports, in soccer its possible for a team which has been outplayed during the match to win or draw against an opponent who is much stronger on paper.

    With disciplined play, some luck, and a goalkeeper who is having a good day, its sometimes possible to prevent even a vastly superior opponent from scoring. When combined with the fact that almost all weaker teams will get at least one or two scoring chances during a game, that can lead to upsets.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    6 months ago

    No, that's all part of any sport, you can be the better team and attack more but all it takes is a few mistakes and you can lose,

    You have to capitalize on your opportunities because if you don't it will come back to bite you.

    No rules should be changed, no need for a tie breaker, a draw is valuable, all those other stats don't matter, the goal of the game is to score more than your opponent, and it doesn't matter if you score with one shot or with 20, it doesn't matter if you defended all game or attacked, when the final whistle blows and you scored more than your opponent you win fair and square.

    unjust is when you clearly win and you get robbed of the victory by the refs, like in boxing, One fighter completely dominates and clearly wins the fight, it's not even close but the judges are payed off, that's unjust.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    6 months ago

    Only liberals think football is an unjust sport. Get a life.

    The only way football is unjust is if no one cared about injuries and CTE.

    • tough guy6 months agoReport

      did you read my question details?

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.