I hate penalties. I hate how arbitrarily a winner is chosen. I hate the way penalties discard everything that came in the previous one-hundred and twenty minutes. I hate how they place the burden of winning or losing on one player. Soccer's not about the individual. Teams rise or fall collectively. They train together, they play together, they should win and lose together. But penalties don't work that way. Penalties isolate a player. Suddenly he finds himself alone. There's nothing but the ball, the goal, and, unfortunately, the other team's goalkeeper. If you miss, your team is out. The pressure is mounting. Your teammates have all made their spot-kick and now you need to make yours. If you don't, your team is out and it's your fault. Penalties just aren't in the spirit of the game.

So, what do we do about it? Well, nothing mostly. We can complain about it and suggest things FIFA should do, but almost certainly won't. Stephen Colbert (I know, I know) once said that, and I'm paraphrasing, that deciding the World Cup Final on penalties is like deciding the NBA Championship on a game of 'Horse' Despite the fact that the World Cup Final is so beyond the NBA Championship in both scope and importance as to be incomparable, it remains the best case against penalties that I've heard. People may argue that penalties are exciting or that they've become part of the fabric of the game and either point has valid arguments to be made for it. However, I refuse to accept that entire tournaments, international tournaments, events that billions of people watch, should be decided by ten shots from twelve yards away because we've gotten tired of seeing no one score. The very possibility of penalties hurts the game. It allows less talented teams to put ten men behind the ball in an attempt to stifle a superior opponent's offense and take the game to penalties. Once they've done that, their chances are advancing are just as good as their opponent's, despite being played off the park for two hours. Take, for example, the case of Italy against Spain in the quarterfinals of Euro 2008. It can be universally agreed upon that Spain, based on the run of play, deserved to win that game. Italy, however, did what they do the best and employed their patented style of play 'Catenaccio'. For those of you who don't know, catenaccio means 'door-bolt' in Italian and the system calls for highly organized defense with goals scored on counter-attacks. The definition of boring soccer. Yet, Italy could have been said to have an advantage going into the shoot-out. The Azzuri boasted Gianluigi Buffon in goal, widely considered to be the best in the world. Just two games before, Buffon had made an unbelievable penalty save against Romania's Adrian Mutu, keeping Italy's hopes of advancing alive. Spain's eventual victory on penalties doesn't reflect the fact that they could have just as easily been sent home. A cruel reward for actually playing an attacking style based on possession and skill.

But what can we do to prevent teams from employing strategies like catenaccio or the anti-soccer played by Greece in 2004? The best solution that I can think of would be to keep playing. Wait, what? That's your solution? Just...keep on keepin' on? Well, no. There are a couple changes I would make. They are somewhat radical changes, but I believe they're for the benefit of the game. The first thing I would do would be to grant team's another substitution at the end of regulation. Teams would play the first overtime period just as they do right now. The coach can use whatever substitutions still available to him at the end of the game in addition to the added substitution. If, at the end of the first overtime period, the teams are still tied then both teams will remove a player. Now the game's ten versus ten. The coaches are granted another substitute to use at their discretion. The process should continue for as long as is necessary. At the end of each overtime where the game remains tied, add one substitution and take one player off the field. The addition of extra substitutions will keep the players fresh while the removal of players will open up the game and allow teams playing with guile and flair more opportunities at goal and thus more opportunities to win on their own merit. I rather prefer teams advancing on merit rather than the arbitrary and all-too-cruel solution we currently employ.

Okay, it's time for full disclosure. I'm a big Tottenham Hotspur fan. This is despite the fact that I live in New Jersey and have never set foot in England. I've been a fan of the club since the 02-03 season. The 2002 World Cup had just ended and my 12-year-old self was on the lookout for more soccer. This was before I knew about Fox Soccer Channel or its ilk so a weekly highlights show on MSG called, I believe, Premier League Review had to suffice. My choice of club, having no actual links to England generally or North London specifically, came down to two factors. The first was that I didn't want to root for one of the big four clubs. Even at the tender age of twelve I desired the masochistic pain that comes with rooting for a club that flounders in perpetual mediocrity (I'm also a New York Red Bulls fan). I found Tottenham to be a sufficiently middling club: they finished ninth in the 2001-2002 season. The name itself may have given the club an advantage over its mid-table compatriots. Being an American, it's likely that I was preconditioned to prefer team names that resembled the American 'place'-'team name' formula. Tottenham followed that formula. The second factor had been born at the 2002 World Cup. I am entirely of Irish descent. Every branch of my family tree can somehow trace itself back to Ireland. So, I naturally had a soft spot for the Irish at the World Cup. The fact that the Irish and the Americans performed so well in Japan and South Korea is probably why it remains my favorite major tournament. In any case, I was spellbound by the play of Robbie Keane in Ireland's four games. From his late equalizer against eventual finalists Germany, to his spinning volley against Saudi Arabia, to his game-tying (all for naught) penalty against the Spanish in the Round of 16, to his manner of celebrating goals, the man played spectacularly. The fact that Tottenham had just signed one of my favorite players from the World Cup tipped the scales. I was hooked. Which is why I find the latest rumors about Keane asking to leave Tottenham for Liverpool to be particularly distressing, despite questionable veracity.

Perhaps it's denial, but I can't buy Keane leaving Tottenham. At least not for a few years. He's just about to turn 28 (in four days), undeniably in the prime of his career. At Spurs, Keane is already a legend and shares a magnificent partnership with Dimitar Berbatov. The pair of them form what is perhaps the only true, old-school style strike partnership in the Premier league. Keane has found stability at Spurs, something that eluded him when he was bouncing around from club to club before 2002. I doubt he'd want to leave just as the Juande Ramos revolution (fingers crossed) begins. Then there's the fact that Keane was on his honeymoon with new wife Claudine Palmer when the news broke. It's suspect that business such as transfer requests were at the forefront of his thoughts. In addition, Keane has reported for training for Spurs. Which is, incidentally, the last place you'll see former Aston Villa Captain and Liverpool target Gareth Barry. It's unlikely Keane would make the effort if he planned on leaving the club in the near future. Then there's the fact that the deal just doesn't make sense to me. What does Tottenham need a meager 5 million pounds and Peter Crouch for? They already have the far superior Berbatov to play the role of target forward, so unless Berbatov leaves (which I doubt will happen, despite relentless media links away from White Hart Lane), Spurs have no need of Peter Crouch. Keane also has to consider the fact that he would be relegated to the bench at Liverpool far more often than at Spurs in favor of a five man midfield with Fernando Torres by himself up top. I suppose you'd have to consider the unlikely (and horrifying) prospect that Robbie Keane simply does not figure in Juande Ramos' plans for the club. Ramos has many connections in the Spanish soccer world and if there's one thing Latin countries are good at producing it's creative withdrawn-forward, attacking-midfield players; precisely the role Keane plays for Tottenham. Yet, Ramos went to Croatia to find a central midfielder in Luka Modric to pull Tottenham's offensive strings.

All I know is, however unlikely the prospect, I may weep if this deal goes through.