Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (22146)	8/15/2001 3:07:47 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

You should also point out that if there is a tie, which team gets to receive the ball first is determined by a coin toss. Since I understand that the team that receives the ball first in sudden death has a significantly higher winning percentage than the team that defends first, in a way you could say that many playoff games are strongly affected by a coin toss.

To: TimF who wrote (22146)	8/16/2001 8:31:47 AM
From: thames_sider	Respond to of 82486

Tim, thanks - that does sound similar to the way league winners are decided here. [I'm not sure if we have a coin toss here - again, we might but it's certainly never been needed]. I'm personally not keen on penalties being used to find a decider in tournaments (= playoffs), but I think the rationale is that with all the complications of scheduling - especially internationals, on multiple channels - those who pay the piper call the tune. Much of the cash comes from broadcasters, so ultimately they get a lot of say in how long a game will last. And there's no doubt that penalty shootouts are tense, which TV loves. If extra time was unlimited, I suppose in the end stamina (or exhaustion!) would take toll of one or other side - football has far more limited substitution, however, so this might make games rather farcical rather faster... last man standing wins <g>