These past few weeks towards the end of the high school season I heard a lot of complaining about ending a game in PKs. I want to know why? I'm not ignorant to the game of soccer I play it and I'm pretty well knowledgeable about the game. I have lost and won in Pks and I see nothing wrong with them.
I figure it if two teams have competed so well on the field for 100 minutes or more then you have to move to another skill. That is what PKs are. They are the skill of the keeper and shooter. It takes skill to take a PK. You have to be able to deal with the pressure and keep your cool. You can't think about the keeper or it will go to her, you can't think about what will happen after you make the goal because you will lose your focus. You have to apply things that you have learned in all your years of soccer. For the keeper you have to use the skills that you have picked up from practice and being in the situation of PKs. You use strategies to guess where the player is going to kick and use your body to extend yourself to make sure you will get to the ball. You might also use little intimidation to psych out the kicker. It is psychological and skillful.
Yes, it totally stinks to lose in PKs, but if you look at it, if you were really the better team you should have been able to beat the opponent in regulation. After that regulation time you have to move on to a different skill that many do posses and many do not.
People say that we should figure out a new way to find a winner but I disagree. I think PKs are fair. Who ever wins PKs is the team with one more skill under their belt that the other team doesn't have.
