|
|
This forum is read-only now. Please use Forum 2 for new posts
| xml |
No replies possible in the archive |
|
Author: panda
Date: 28-09-2006, 10:15
| Does anyone know why UEFA decided on the present GS fixture format, where in the middle 2 fixtures, 2 teams play each other twice together, home and away?
Given that you can't (always) predict before a GS starts which the key fixtures are going to be, no order is necessarily better than a different order; but did UEFA (or anyone else) ever offer an explanation for this order? |
|
Author: ferdi
Date: 28-09-2006, 10:41
| {i>Does anyone know why UEFA decided on the present GS fixture format, where in the middle 2 fixtures, 2 teams play each other twice together, home and away?{/i>
At least those who decided this should know.
{i>Given that you can't (always) predict before a GS starts which the key fixtures are going to be, no order is necessarily better than a different order; but did UEFA (or anyone else) ever offer an explanation for this order?{/i>
As for "UEFA": This is really hard to answer. Has anybody ever asked UEFA for a reason, and if so, did he get an answer, and if so, did he make it public?
As for "anyone else": I have my personal explanation, but AFAIR I have never made it public because I always thought the advantages would be obvious.
What is the intention of your meta-questions? |
|
Author: panda
Date: 28-09-2006, 10:45
| @ferdi
No- it's not obvious to me why this or any other arrangement of the GS fixtures is the best one. But maybe it's very stupid of me. So I would be glad to hear your own explanation showing me the advantages of the current schedule. |
|
Author: Ricardo
Date: 28-09-2006, 10:46
| I think the reasoning was that all teams should have a home& away game in the first 2 matches and in the last 2 matches. I don't think that it is possible in another schedule |
|
Author: ferdi
Date: 28-09-2006, 11:06
Edited by: ferdi
at: 28-09-2006, 11:20 | This way you minimize the number of matches where a team has two (or even more) subsequent matches at home, or away, and distribute this "disadvantage" (if you should see it like as a disadvantage) evenly on all teams. (I am not sure whether this is indeed the motivation, but I have always supposed that this is the reason.)
Start with
Day 1
A-B
C-D
and then
Day 2
B-C
D-A
Now it is inevitable that one team has two home matches and one team has two away matches on matchday 2 and 3. Say this will be team B and team C:
Day 3
A-C
B-D
Day 4
C-A
D-B
Now again you have the problem of two home matches and two away matches subsequently. But if you continue with the rematch of matchday 1, then this time it will be the two other teams which have the "disadvantage", team A and team D:
Day 5
B-A
D-C
Day 6
C-B
A-D
So the "disadvantage" of not having alternating matches home and away is minimized and as even as possible distributed on all teams. And, as Ricardo points out, it would be undesirable if any team started or ended with two away matches or two home matches. More generally speaking, the difference of home matches and away matches allready played should be zero after even matchdays for all teams. |
|
Author: badgerboy
Date: 28-09-2006, 11:36
| Nice explanation Ferdi (& Ricardo). Thanks.
I must confess I hadn't really thought about the reasons for the order of matches before. I just thought that the Matchday 3 & 4 reverse fixtures were a feature someone liked - otherwise why not play the Matchday 1 reverse fixtures on Matchday 4.
Now I see there's more to it. |
|
Author: ferdi
Date: 28-09-2006, 12:00
| {i>otherwise why not play the Matchday 1 reverse fixtures on Matchday 4. {/i>
And the reverse fixtures of matchday 2 on matchday 5? Then the sequences would be
team A: h-a-h-a-h-a
team B: a-h-h-h-a-a
team C: h-a-a-a-h-h
team D: a-h-a-h-a-h
Seems fine for team A and team D, but undesirable for team B and team C. |
|
Author: panda
Date: 28-09-2006, 13:00
| @ferdi ricardo
Great, thanks guys; exactly what I was looking for. |
|
Author: ferdi
Date: 28-09-2006, 13:30
Edited by: ferdi
at: 28-09-2006, 13:38 | I have just noticed that this thread has nothing to do with coefficients and rankigs. So I must apologize for the off-topic. (In fact it was all panda's fault.) |
|
Author: panda
Date: 28-09-2006, 13:33
Edited by: panda
at: 28-09-2006, 13:34 | @ferdi
But bert writes in the rubric:
"Contributions about related subjects like formats, draws, seedings, etc. are welcome."
So I have always thought these subjects were essentially on-topic.
My understanding has been (to pick up your word) this is a kind of meta-forum, where abstractions are welcome. |
|
Author: ferdi
Date: 28-09-2006, 13:44
| Oh, yes, it is a matter of format. So my shock was without a good reason. |
|
|