Asunto: Questions & Answers

Perhaps I can help.

From the guide: (last paragraph of the full guide)

"If the playoff is played on 2 matches, the team with the better aggregate score from both legs will move on. If the score is tied, the team with the higher number of away goals advances. If still tied, the second leg is followed by extra time and penalty kicks if needed."

This is specifically under the section for credit tournament playoffs, but i believe this is what Alkeis is trying to explain.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awa...
soccer.powerplaymanager.c...
There is evidence

I ment that if both teams do goal in extratime(in quals) Away team wins!

ahhhh gotcha. yes, that is a stupid rule.

What about national teams? vlady said, it's gonna start next season? What about national trainer election?

I also said that it wasnt certain. And now I can safely say that there wont be national teams in season 3 unfortunately. Season 4 is a more realistic target.

What about seson bonuses in football?

will be implemented later.

I think there is no UFA or RFA in real life football, so is there really need for bonuses for football game?

Too bad. It would have been nice to have national teams.
At least now you can announce it way before start of season 4 so that managers have enough time to search for national players. It would have been to short this time. Maybe you can hold the first elections some weeks before the start of the season.

But these are the official rules for UEFA and FIFA for two-leg-knockout-rounds in CL, EL and some national team qualification rounds. Has been like that for as long as I remember.
It is a small advantage for the away team in the second leg - which can be seen as some compensation because in RL it's often considered to be better if you play the second match at home. With your fans and home advantage you can aim for a specific result. And if you score in overtime in Bernabeu against 80000 people after a long and tiring match that should be worth something.

All in all I don't think that's a stupid rule like you and Alkeis think. At least it's better than a decision via penalty shootout.

I can see how the rule makes sense. I do think that a goals for / against would be better, but hey, i'm a hockey person rather than a footy person.

Right now players lose same energy playing 5 or 90 minutes, is that going to change next season?

Goals for/against are even in any case here. Even more, both matches have to end with the same result with both teams winning one each or both were draws. That's why overtime has to be played. And for/against rule is considered 1st after overtime also.

Mrk1 is right.

The only other options would be sudden death or penalty shootout. In my opinion it's better to have a final result in overtime rather than penalties and the away goal rule makes a shootout less likely.
And something like sd has been tested in the nineties with golden and silver goal - and it was not liked by fans and players; it's not very 'footballish'. Though germany won the 1996 european championship this way!