You are reading a single comment by @Van_Barben and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
London Fixed Gear and Single-Speed is a community of predominantly fixed gear and single-speed cyclists in and around London, UK.
This site is supported almost exclusively by donations. Please consider donating a small amount regularly.
@Van_Barben
I'm coming late into this.
I'm not a fan of the idea of unlimited goals. I'm not the kind of guy who don't want the game changed, but I think we should have some evolution only if it make the game change in a good way. And I don't see anything really interested the unlimited goals rules.
First, to me, a game who ended by a fast 5-0 is a boring, so why should we have to wait 5 more minute to continue to watch this game 5 more minutes to finish to a 10-0.
Many times I've heard around courts people complaining because a team looked pretentious because after 3-0 they were trying some spectacular plays. So how will it be if instead of doing it 3min they do it during 7min.
We played london BFF with unlimited goals, we won the final with a big gap, something like +10 or even more. I remembered how Luis was pissed on the court and how bad I felt between, it's a final I need to play my best and what the point of killing them, everybody is looking at this game.
From what I've seen (but I was not there, so I might be wrong, please correct me if I am) during Brigthon tournament last WE, the unlimited goals rule did not change any outcome.
To conclude my main point about this rule is, I think the game will move to a most defensive game with this rule. Cause if you lead 4-2 2min before the end of a game, with the 5 goals rules you can choose to defend or to kill the game with a 5th goals, but with the unlimited goals, the only option is defending. With SPD and bunny hopping defense are stronger and stronger don't give them an other argument to stay close to their goal.
So I think that with this rule we'll have more goals during unbalanced games and less during balanced games.