|
Post by PompeyFC on May 18, 2005 8:57:25 GMT 10
What do you guys think the best method is to decide the A-League Champs? Has it been decided at this stage? I came up with a few combinations. - Euro-Way: After the 21 rounds are complete the team with the highest points are the champs. - Aussie-Way: The top four placed teams go into a finals series and then the winner is decided in a final. The Aussie way is quite common in weekend leagues. Do you think this is the best way? I reckon the euro-way could never be accepted here in Oz as we are unfamiliar with it. We have been brought up on finals and grand finals in all sports since we were kids plus I think we need as much hype as we can get. The type of hype only created when your team is in the finals. Another idea is to play a 2 or 3 match series between the top 2 teams at the end of the season. Whaddawe reckon?
|
|
|
Post by Tancred on May 18, 2005 9:15:30 GMT 10
The Euro-way. Even more now we are heading into Asia.
The Aussie way is stupid. How can a team that plays 38, wins 38 not be considered champions? And then, after playing well all season to have a mini-cup comp to decide the champions and who gets into the champions league? pointless.
|
|
|
Post by paulm on May 18, 2005 10:16:03 GMT 10
Straight forward "Euro" way for me.
Especially once/if the FA cup style thingo becomes reality in the second season.
|
|
|
Post by Der Kaiser on May 18, 2005 10:19:39 GMT 10
I much prefer the Euro way.
But when I asked this question someone brought up the valid point of the extra income a finals series would bring in.
In the AFL all the gate takings for Finals goes to the AFL (and not to the clubs) and is distributed through all the clubs so no one loses out. This is probably a good idea for a fledgling league.
Also a grand final gives us the best opportunity for a 40,000+ SFS match and the exposure that comes with it.
|
|
leroy
JUNIOR MEMBER
Posts: 63
|
Post by leroy on May 18, 2005 12:45:42 GMT 10
pure league format.
as much of a marketing extra finals are thats what we should be using cup formats for (same as the rest of the world).
|
|
|
Post by PompeyFC on May 18, 2005 14:25:06 GMT 10
I guess if we can emulate the thrills n spills of finals fever via an FA cup type tournament throughout the year then we could do away with Finals series!
|
|
|
Post by martyp on May 18, 2005 16:55:00 GMT 10
i would rather have the euro way however it wont happen... there will be a finals series as like some1 said above it brings xtra money and xtra attention which is what the a league needs! however i dont want to c 4 teams qualify cause thats half the league i think it should either b the following: 3 teams a-1 v 2 b-3 v loser a c-winner a v winner b (home and away thingy) or 3 teams a-2 v 3 b-1 v winner a (3 match series) or something like that!
|
|
tim
JUNIOR MEMBER
Posts: 72
|
Post by tim on May 18, 2005 19:08:58 GMT 10
the euro way is the way to go. maybe having a cup comp that has its last three or so games including the final after the season has finished would be worth thinking of?
|
|
|
Post by swich on May 19, 2005 19:40:24 GMT 10
also euro. maybe give it a couple/few years but definitely euro, finals series don't make sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by sydneyfc04 on May 19, 2005 19:50:37 GMT 10
Euro style, stick to tradition, this isnt rugby union shyt.
|
|
|
Post by Phormic on May 19, 2005 20:36:04 GMT 10
Although the Euro method is definately preferrable, we face the problem of no cup competition yet and no relegation. What this means is when the Bling streak away in the league (snarf) there could very well be a large chunk of the season where none of the teams have anything to play for.
Although the Oz way is crass, in the short term it might offer interest right till the end of the season, until the competition can be fleshed out.
Phormic: Devils Advocacy is my game.
|
|
|
Post by thewinnerissydney on May 19, 2005 20:52:24 GMT 10
The Euro way is great....if you're in Europe!
Most countries there have at least 2 divisions, which means promotion and relegation battles with the bottom 3-4 spots and the fight for UCL and UEFA Cup places at the top - 3, 4 up to as many as 6 or 7 in the big leagues. This maintains the interest in the final rounds without the need for a finals series. Plus you have FA cup and equivalent comps in most countries.
Now to the A-League: no knockout comp, no promotion and relegation, and it's safe to say at this stage that only the A-League winner will be in the Asian Champions League. This means an interest in just 1 spot. Without a finals series, at least in the early years, you run the risk of a lot of 'dead rubbers' towards the end of the competition. Remember in the NSL a few years back when Perth Glory had the minor premiership wrapped up with 4-5 weeks to go. If it was first past the post, the whole of the last month would have been meaningless. Should this happen in the A-League, players would lose interest, crowds would dwindle and it wouldn't be a good look for the game.
Australia is not Europe. I don't think we should copy anyone - lets do things our own way! Once we get more teams with more Champions League spots, or if we get another division or a separate FA Cup style comp as Pompey FC suggested, then we should have first past the post. But now that we have just this 8-team mini league leave the finals series as is.
|
|
|
Post by jubal1 on May 19, 2005 22:39:31 GMT 10
All this 'grand finals' and minor premiership stuff is bullshit, the league winners should be the team that gets the best overall results over the course of an entire season.
I can see the problem that people are talking about where there is the potential for meaningless games near the end of the season due to the absence of promotion/relegation but don't forget that the A-League is fairly unique in world football in that it has a strictly enforced salary cap (MLS is the only other one I am aware of), whcih should help to ensure a decent level of parity.
I think eventually A-league will go the way of the J-league which introduced a second division (made up of existing regional league clubs) and eventually introduced promotion and relegation once the second tier was established. However I reckon the first goal should be to get to 10 A-League teams and a full 36 game season. 21 seems like a short season to me and palying other teams 3 times is a bit weird too.
|
|
|
Post by PompeyFC on May 20, 2005 8:41:22 GMT 10
I guess having 8 teams only allows us to have 21 rounds. A finals series will add another 4 or so weeks onto the season and that would make it a little more acceptable. I still find it unfair that each team plays each other 3 times because how do they decide who gets to play home or away in the 3rd match up? I understand each club will get the same amount of home games overall but what if Sydney and Melb for example are the 2 top clubs all season and in the final few games Melb get a 2nd home game against us and therefore have an advantage. I guess it would work out alright if we played each team 4 times = 28 rounds thus making it fairer. We could ditch the finals series in turn due to the fact that season is longer.
|
|
|
Post by Wands on May 20, 2005 9:56:43 GMT 10
I still find it unfair that each team plays each other 3 times because how do they decide who gets to play home or away in the 3rd match up? I reckon that the third match up should be played at somewhat neutral locations: IE townsville or canberra or Dubbo or Hobart, places like that, it gives the game a chance to encounter more potential fans and give the league an even greater exposure...
|
|