My view is that it is broadly a good idea. There is a skill in penalty taking but it's not a core one of the game. This proposal allows all the skills of the game to be used and could be very exciting. But, I would have some concerns:
1. Is there any time limit on how long this extra period could last? What happens if teams are unable to score for an elongated period. It could take ages for two scores to happen and then an indefinite period for the golden score. Television coverage, for example, couldn't really cope with an indefinite period. Similarly, what would happen with an autumnal evening match, heading into darkness and no floodlights.
2. What happens if the weather conditions are such that they advantage one direction of play. So, say there's a strong wind blowing in one direction. Then whichever team wins the toss to play in that direction has a big advantage. A way to deal with that would be to switch ends after the first score but then one team would still have an advantage for the golden score.
3. A minor one would be to lose the 'overtime' name. Too American!
Will players get time and a half for their overtime? Will they get triple time if the overtime is on a bank holiday? Hopefully the GPA can ballot their union members to discuss the players rights if overtime is approved. Lads might have trains to catch.
What do you think of this proposal to replace penalty shootouts?
If Team B scores a "2-pointer" after Team A scored a "point", does Team B win, or we go to the "golden score"? I think B wins as they "more than matched.