|
|
Post by os on May 5, 2014 18:29:08 GMT
I have just had a quick run through all of the feeder leagues, and of the 12 promotion places on offer only 1 is yet to be determined, the Conference Premier playoff final Cambridge v Gateshead. Of the remaining promotion spots only 1 was gained by a team finishing as runner up in there league, and that was Witham of the Ryman North. 10 out of 11 sides which includes us have all failed in the playoff process, if Gateshead beat Cambridge that will be 11 out of 12.
IMO this makes the a complete mockery of the league season?
Promoted: Witham Town
Failed: Sutton / North Ferriby / FC United / Darlington / Coalville Town / Kingstonian / Folkestone / Chesham / Rugby / Merthur
To play: Cambridge United
|
|
billy
1st team skipper
Posts: 2,648
|
Post by billy on May 5, 2014 18:52:31 GMT
I have just had a quick run through all of the feeder leagues, and of the 12 promotion places on offer only 1 is yet to be determined, the Conference Premier playoff final Cambridge v Gateshead. Of the remaining promotion spots only 1 was gained by a team finishing as runner up in there league, and that was Witham of the Ryman North. 10 out of 11 sides which includes us have all failed in the playoff process, if Gateshead beat Cambridge that will be 11 out of 12. IMO this makes the a complete mockery of the league season?Promoted: Witham Town Failed: Sutton / North Ferriby / FC United / Darlington / Coalville Town / Kingstonian / Folkestone / Chesham / Rugby / Merthur To play: Cambridge United Your opinion is spot on - it's ludicrous.Over a 42 game season Sutton were 12 points , 13 goals and 3 wins better than Dover.They also beat Dover twice to boot , it's a joke. |
|
|
|
Post by johnnie1 on May 5, 2014 19:10:20 GMT
Certainly plenty of arguments for and against the playoffs. I'm currently torn between the 2. It is certainly unfair if the side in 5th go up despite being well off the team in 2nd points-wise, but you could end up with a situation where many teams have nothing to play for towards the end of the season if you scrapped the playoffs. For example in our 1st season back in the Conference South Dartford would have been promoted with games to spare, giving us, Welling and Basingstoke nothing to play for towards the end of the season
|
|
markf
Top Performer
Posts: 3,326
|
Post by markf on May 5, 2014 19:19:28 GMT
Well it doesn't make a mockery of it because everyone knows the competition rules before they start. I don't like the play-offs but they're here and there is bugger all we can do about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stewart on May 5, 2014 19:38:26 GMT
Maybe just have three sides in the play offs. Third and fourth play and the winners play away to the second place team.
|
|
|
|
Post by os on May 5, 2014 20:07:55 GMT
Maybe just have three sides in the play offs. Third and fourth play and the winners play away to the second place team. We would still bloody lose! A letter in the NLP suggested that 2nd place teams just play one match, the final at home. You could have 3rd / 4th / 5th and even 6th all play for the right to play the 2nd place side. I actually think that would make the playoffs better and reward the runners up? |
|
billy
1st team skipper
Posts: 2,648
|
Post by billy on May 5, 2014 20:12:58 GMT
Scrap the play offs altogether and reward the teams in the correct manner after a long hard season.It's farcical.Not because of Saturday's result - i've been saying it for years. Ludicrous.................
|
|
amberchoc
1st team Player
Blessed is the person who having nothing to say abstains from giving us wordy evidence of the fact.
Posts: 1,502 
|
Post by amberchoc on May 5, 2014 20:47:21 GMT
I don't really subscribe to the notion of a perceived advantage in playing the away leg first. In tennis, a player would elect to serve first; in a chess match, a player would choose to play with the white pieces first; in darts, a player would choose to throw first. In each case the idea being to get the first blow in and immediately put the pressure on the opponent. I think a play-off system of 5th v 2nd followed by 2nd v 5th gives no advantage whatsoever to the runners-up (I'm talking generally here, not just because we finished 2nd). Why have two legs anyway? Why not just 2nd at home to 5th? Much fairer.
|
|
|
|
Post by sallycat on May 5, 2014 21:11:17 GMT
Actually, this has been the ONLY season when we've been in the Conference South and a team going up through the playoff DIDN'T finish second. It seems we've made our own mockery of things! I agree, though. I also agree it would be fairer to have 5th v 4th, winners v 3rd, winners v 2nd. The problem with that of course is that the 2nd placed team has to wait a couple of weeks before getting a game.
To answer your question, Billy, in the first season of the new Conference North & South setup, only 3 teams rather than 4 were to be promoted from North and South put together. So both champions went up and then there were playoffs with a North v South final in which Eastbourne Borough lost to Altrincham.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andy K on May 5, 2014 21:50:09 GMT
Odd being a Sutton fan and saying this, but I actually like the play off system. Imagine last season for example - although we didn't get there in the end we spent a lot of March and April having hope to getting somewhere. If there were no play offs we'd just be playing for pride. It gives more teams more to play for at the end of the season. The system can hardly be blamed that teams that finish 2nd fail at the final hurdles. Maybe the actual system needs a review, but I would rather have it in than out.
|
|
Millsy
1st team skipper
Posts: 2,246
|
Post by Millsy on May 5, 2014 22:05:09 GMT
Odd being a Sutton fan and saying this, but I actually like the play off system. Imagine last season for example - although we didn't get there in the end we spent a lot of March and April having hope to getting somewhere. If there were no play offs we'd just be playing for pride. It gives more teams more to play for at the end of the season. The system can hardly be blamed that teams that finish 2nd fail at the final hurdles. Maybe the actual system needs a review, but I would rather have it in than out. I totally agree, adds a great dimension and who said life should be fair! There's a hard line view and a quote somewhere that second is just first of the losers, why not have a shoot-out between the top four losers, I really don't mind it and fully accept that there's no prize for second place; this is known from the outset and for me, the pros outweigh the cons. Just my objective opinion of course, subjectively it's a kick in the teeth this season! |
|
|
|
Post by Stewart on May 5, 2014 22:06:54 GMT
I agree with Andy, they can be very unfair but they do make most game crucial at the end of the season.
|
|
|
|
Post by os on May 5, 2014 22:26:03 GMT
Surely the purpose of the league system is to have the best teams in a division. I do not see how a side which came 5th in its league a dozen or so points behind a side that comes second enhances the league above. Effectively and its simply a lottery played out over 2 weeks, I think the fact that just 1 runner up has gained promotion shows that. It must make a mockery of the notion that the best sides are promoted and the league table doesn't lie at the end of the season, because clearly it does.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andy K on May 5, 2014 23:21:42 GMT
One could almost argue that it isn't actually a lottery. Look at our game on Saturday - if we'd turned up, we'd have won. So it's not really just like pulling numbers out of a hat. I do agree that a season of good work could be undermined in 90mins. But then even the biggest tournament in the world, the World Cup is a just a lottery - even more so.
I'd also argue that the purpose of the league is more to provide a competitive competition where many clubs have something to play for, for as many games as possible. Hence the play offs, and also hence why leagues are loathed to throw a club out and bend rules for them mid season. Throw a team out, then there is one less team to relegate, meaning teams at the bottom have less meaningful games.
Imagine if we'd secured 2nd place or even if we couldn't get to 2nd place with 4 games to go and our last games were against Basingstoke, Boreham Wood, Farnborough and home to Weston. Putting aside those who go every game, what would the more occasional supporter go for?
Honestly if we were not so rubbish at play offs (and for those of you with longer memories, 2 legged games in general) most of us wouldn't even consider that the play offs are unfair.
|
|
tonyd
1st team Player
Posts: 1,496
|
Post by tonyd on May 5, 2014 23:31:48 GMT
Yes, OS, but if you charge people to watch the games you have a duty to make them as interesting as you can, and the play-off system changes lots of otherwide meaningless matches into meaningful ones. The best side IS promoted and one of the less than best sides also goes up. Theoretically, having a 2-legged game should favour the best side, as the more games you play, the more often the better team should come out ahead.
What was unusual about this season, is that the play-off winner frequently comes from a team making a late run, whereas Sutton's 2nd half of season form had been tremendous and we must have been clear favourites.
Was at Palace tonight thinking I was on for a 2nd 0-3 bashing to end the season. What I'd have given for a similar come back on Saturday.
|
|
