Section 11.a.i of the official FA Cup rules reads as follows:
When a first match has resulted in a draw, it shall be replayed on the ground of the Club drawn second.
Replays are a classic element of the FA Cup; they could make a tie stretch on forever (Fulham’s eleven games in the 1975 tournament included five replayed matches), and they give lower league teams the chance of perhaps making a little more money from their gate proceeds.
And yet somehow, I’m not completely sold on their value; there’s something that seems a bit false about the replay. That sense was felt particularly acutely after two of the replays in this week’s FA Cup.
The two replays, I’m sure you’ve figured, were Leicester City-Manchester City and Arsenal-Leeds. In both cases, a Premier League team with legitimate title aspirations came in against a lower league club a bit cocky and a bit unprepared. In both cases, the Premier League team fell behind early, and in both cases said Premier League team managed to fight back to save some face and “earn” (the quotes are for you, Theo) a draw. And a week later, at the replay, both Premier League teams – who’d been alerted to the skill of their opponent the week before – rectified their complacency and managed to advance.
The problem for me is that this seems like a ridiculous way of resolving draws. The match date, for all intents and purposes, was last two Saturdays ago; that’s the day everyone prepped for, and both Man City and Arsenal didn’t take that date seriously enough to win the match outright. Leicester and Leeds, meanwhile, did; they played to win, and did well enough to draw. Those matches should be finished that day; go to extra time, go to penalties, and move on.
Instead, Arsenal and Manchester City were able to tweak their lineups and their preparation to actually take the prospect of elimination seriously. If you come out against a team underprepared (with a lineup that includes Tomas Rosicky, Sebastien Squillaci, and Emmanuel Eboue), and that team beats you, than you deserve what you get; that’s how sports work. You have to be prepared to play every time you step out on the court, or field, or pitch, or whatever; if you aren’t prepared, you risk losing.
Replays undermine that. For all the talk about the “romance of the cup” and the giantkilling, replays seem to be a mechanism that’s left in place to safeguard against a bigger team completely bottling it against a smaller team.
I know it would be impossible to enforce, but it would be interesting make the teams start the replay with the same Starting XI as the first tie. If Arsenal things they can get by with Rosicky and Squillaci once, make them try it again. And if Wenger wants to change, make him use his substitutions.
I thought about that, but like you said it’d be impossible to enforce (especially with injuries). I also thought it was a bit shady to leave Walcott out; Leeds should’ve gotten a chance to actually foul him.
Good point, Mags. Although the big clubs that play the first match are still being “penalized” with fixture congestion. Look at Arsenal – they face 2 matches a week for basically the rest of the season.
I do like Andrew’s suggestion though. That’s something I never though of. However that’s unfeasible because of injuries, transfers, etc.
i also think it’s important because the ground changes to the second team. How much of an advantage is it if you play with a stronger lineup when you’re at home with fan support?
Without replays, Exeter City would have been wound up 6 years ago. The money that they got from the televised replay w/ Man. Utd. in the 2004-05 FA Cup saved them. Now they are the highest-placed supporter-owned club in the English game.