The away goal rule: amendments required?

Should away goals be considered only after a particular condition is satisfied?

Consider the Round of 16 clash between Arsenal and Bayern Munich last season. The fixture at the Emirates ended in 3-1 in favour of the Germans. The tie seemed virtually over as the Gunners travelled across Europe for the away game. But everyone was in for a surprise as they won the game 2-0, losing out on away goals.

From the game it was evident that Bayern were looking to rest on the first leg score, while Arsenal were the team that needed to score. Neuer’s infamous “Don’t take my baby away” act when Arsenal drew level, showed how the German superpower were simply trying to while away time. Although it is a tactic used by most teams nowadays, the fact that they did so at home, raises questions.

Should away goals be considered in favour of a team that couldn’t find the net at their own ground? Or should it go to extra time?These are debatable topics and views would differ so it would be difficult to arrive at a definite conclusion.

Away goals in extra time?

This would have to be the most important point that the UEFA needs to reconsider.

Consider a fixture between two teams, say Manchester United and Barcelona. After 90 minutes at Old Trafford, the game ended 1-1.

In the reverse fixture, they drew with the same scoreline. Since both teams have one away goal, it would lead to extra time.

Here, even though Barcelona have the advantage of playing at home for the additional 30 minutes, the English club have more time than the Catalans had to score an extra away goal. So now for every goal that they score, Barcelona will need to score two, in that short period of time.

In such cases, the UEFA should probably look at the rules set by the CONCACAF and AFC Champions League which take away goals into consideration only up to the end of regular time. After that, the team start afresh in extra time.

When both games are played in the same stadium?

AC Milan and Inter Milan were drawn to play each other in the semifinals of the 2003 edition of the Champions League. Since they shared the same stadium, both fixtures were played there with the Inter supporters playing visitors in the first leg and hosts in the second.

Here, away goals seemed fair as they were both accustomed to the ground and supporters thronged the stadium as they did not have far to go to witness the crucial tie.

But what if you had to travel across countries to cheer your team in a “home tie” for a not so important game?

This happened when Australia played Israel in the 1991 World Youth Championship and both fixtures were held in Australia for security reasons. Both matches were like home games for the Australians in terms of support and experience of playing on that field.

Despite a valiant effort by the Israelis, they were knocked out on away goals. A similar situation was encountered when the Bahamas beat the British Virgin Islands vis-à-vis the same rule during a World Cup 2010 qualifier where both games were played on Caribbean soil.

In such cases, would it be fair to decide a team’s fate in this way?

Although this rule does apply fairly to an extent, it does have shortcomings that need to be looked into, to avoid deserving teams feel hard done by.

Generalising a rule seems unjust in particular scenarios and therefore needs amendment accordingly. Let’s hope the European Football Association is listening.