Forum

xml	No replies possible in the archive

Author: nemesys
Date: 18-05-2011, 18:58

Swiss Super League
Only 10 clubs play the competition, so it is possible in a 36 matches long season to have a "Four H2H" Round Robin, with every club facing each other in 2 Home and 2 Away matches. All the points earned are added up, the Domestic Title and the UEFA spots are assigned in the standard way.

Scottish Premier League
12 clubs play the competition, for a total of 38 Matches in the season. A "Three H2H" Round Robin up to the 33rd match, with every club facing each other in 1 Home and 2 Away (or 2 Home and 1 Away) matches, then, in the last 5 matches of the season, the top 6 Clubs face each other (just once, Home OR Away), and the last 6 face each other (just once, Home OR Away). All the points earned are added, the Domestic Title and the UEFA spots are assigned in the standard way.
(the only exception: top 6 clubs after match 33 are the top 6 at the end of the season, no matter if a lower ranked club at match 33 has more points at the end of the season).

Dutch Eredivisie
18 clubs play the competition in a "standard" 34 matches season; the Domestic Title and the UEFA spots are assigned in the standard way unless the last EL spot, which instead is assigned in a H2H Playoff Phase involving the 4 best ranked but not yet qualified clubs.

Belgian Jupiter Pro League
16 clubs play the competition in a "standard" 30 matches season, then the top 6 qualify for a Championship Playoff where they start with 1/2 the point earned in regular season and face each other twice (1 Home and 1 Away), for a total of 40 matches: this post regular season competition assigns the Domestic Title and the top qualification spots to the UEFA competitions. The last UEFA spot (to the EL) is decided in a test match between the 4th in the Championship Playoff and the Winner of a even more complex Europa League Playoff Phase.

Greek SuperLeague
16 clubs play the competition in a "standard" 30 matches season, the winner gains the Domestic Title and qualifies for the next CLGS. The Four clubs ranked 2nd to 5th qualify to a Playoff Round Robin Phase where they face each other twice (1 Home and 1 Away) for 6 extra matches (and 36 total matches). The clubs involved start this Playoff Phase with few bonus points calculated, in a quite complex way, on the points they earned in the regular season. The final ranking of this Playoff Phase assigns all the remaining UEFA spots.

---
note: of course there is also, for all those league, a Cup Winner UEFA spot I didn't mention to simplify a bit.
---

I have few questions:

- did I understand correctly those formats?

- which are the other Leagues adopting similar "not-standard" formats?

- what do you think about those alternative formats?

Thanks in advance.

Greetings,
nemesys.

Author: flob
Date: 18-05-2011, 19:47
Edited by: flob
at: 18-05-2011, 19:48

@nemesys,

- did I understand correctly those formats?

IMHO I think you did, but maybe people of these countries can give you a better answer.

- which are the other Leagues adopting similar "not-standard" formats?

There are a lot. Some are just using the "Three H2H" Round Robin format you mentioned, some combine it with splits as Scotland does, some split after the "regular season" without points changing, some split with points halved, some have just playoffs and so on...
I have to admit that I'm too lazy at the moment to list all the different leagues (especially because it would not be for "eternity", some leagues change the system every few years), maybe I'll make an overwiew during the next weekend, or somebody else does it before me.

- what do you think about those alternative formats?

Personally, I don't like most of them.
I think the teams earning a place after the regular season deserve this place and shouldn't go into any kind of post-season matches/playoffs where just the post-season-form counts and not the form they had over a season. And I don't like the "Three H2H" Round Robin format because of the unbalanced home advantage.

But I understand that in some countries with smaller leagues there is probably no other possibility to get a "full" season with a sufficient number of matches and on the other hand enlarging the league would produce too much uncompetitive teams in the league.

So I'm a bit biased here, but I can live with splits where the teams keep their points and I really like the San Marino playoffs and its double-knock-out system.

Author: Friesland
Date: 18-05-2011, 20:08
Edited by: Friesland
at: 18-05-2011, 20:10

All formats (for the running season)

2 rounds
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bulgaria
Croatia
Czech Republic
England
France
Germany
Greece (number 2-5 in post-season competition for EC spots, 1, 2 or 3 teams may start with extra points)
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands (number 5-8 in post-season play-offs for finale EC spot)
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Serbia
Spain
Sweden
Turkey
Ukraine

3 rounds
Albania
Belarus
Denmark
Faroe Islands
Finland
Lithuania
Macedonia
Moldova
Montenegro
Russia (only in the 2011-12 season)
Slovakia

4 rounds
Armenia
Austria
Estonia
Georgia
Latvia
Ireland
Slovenia
Switzerland

League split
Andorra (4-4)
Azerbaijan (6-6)
Belgium (6-8-2)*
Cyprus (4-4-4-2)
Israel (6-4-6)
Kazakhstan (6-6)
Malta (6-4)
Northern Ireland (6-6) Note: split after 3 rounds
Scotland (6-6) Note: split after 3 rounds
Wales (6-6)**

More than one top league
San Marino (2 groups, first three of each group qualify for the double elimination post-season play-offs).

So,
2 rounds: 22 countries
3 rounds: 11 countries
4 rounds: 8 countries
League splits: 10 countries
2+ top leagues: 1 countries

* Belgium: top-6 lose half of their points in the second phase, number 7-14 start from scratch in second phase (2 groups of four, 15 and 16 play best-of-5 play-offs, with number 15 winning in case of a tie. Winner of the two 7-14 groups play a play-off. And the winner of this play-off plays against the number 4 of th etop-6 group.

** Wales: numbers 4, 5 and 6 of first group qualify for semi-final of post-season play-offs for the final European spot, numbers 1 and 2 of second group qualify for the quarter final of these post-season play-offs.

Author: nemesys
Date: 18-05-2011, 23:36
Edited by: nemesys
at: 18-05-2011, 23:41

@flob
Thanks for Replying!

I agree with your analysis.
I don't really appreciate the Belgian and Greek format for the same exact reasons you point out, but I guess it should be a reason for those countries football leagues to chose that way.(?)
I can be ok also with the Eredivisie new format*, with only the last EL spot being assigned by playoffs: I guess that maybe the idea is to give the opportunity to clubs which are not big names as Ajax, PSV and Feyenoord are, to play few H2H decisive matches and make some more money with TV and/or stadium tickets.(?) And probably also have few more weeks of Eredivisie football matches on TV.(?)
*(if I remember correctly, the previous format was kind of the actual Greek/Belgian ones with also clubs ranked 2 to 5 going to the playoffs, and I appreciated it less).

@Friesland
Wow! Full list! Thanks! Really Appreciated!

Greetings,
nemesys.

Author: Friesland
Date: 19-05-2011, 01:54
Edited by: Friesland
at: 19-05-2011, 01:55

nemesys wrote:

(if I remember correctly, the previous format was kind
 of the actual Greek/Belgian ones with also clubs ranked 
2 to 5 going to the playoffs, and I appreciated it less).

Even the numbers 9-13 got the chance to qualify for the Intertoto Cup. But not in the 2006-07 season.

In 2007 NAC Breda finished 3rd in the regular season. In the play-offs they lost 8-1 on aggregate to Twente who finished 4th. NAC then had to play against fifth placed Heerenveen, to qualify for the UEFA Cup, but they lost again: 4-2. Against 8th placed NEC they got their last chance to qualify for the UEFA Cup, but they lost again: 7-0, on aggregate. So NAC Breda only qualified for the Intertoto Cup despite finishing third.

-----

I think 2 and 4 round system is OK, you play every team at home and away.

That is not the case in a 3 round system, teams have an uneven number of home matches. Especially in a competition with two rivals, you have one team playing the other twice at home, while the other team only plays the other team once at home.

Splitting the league is not a bad idea. But the problem is that the top team(s) of the bottom half have no chance to finish on a higher, while they have nothing to play for in the bottom half. Therefore I think the Welsh system is not a bad idea. They give teams from the bottom half a second chance to get a reward.

The idea of the Belgium system is that the competition should be exciting until the end. However, I think it's strange that win or a draw in the first 30 match is only worth half the points of a win and a draw in the last 10 matches.

Author: dzomba
Date: 19-05-2011, 13:08
Edited by: dzomba
at: 19-05-2011, 13:14

I can accept all formats, except those which apply deduction of points (all points halved or some points nullified).

I consider following leagues as irregular, and not reliable:
These are: KO play-offs in Netherlands (earlier format, when it was about CL spot, now, with the lowest EL spot in question it's not such a problem), play-offs in Belgium, Malta (points halved), Greece (points nullified)

The most stupid is Belgium system, where (almost random ?!) lower team gets a chance to overtake 5th placed team through one KO match.

Irregular are all systems where a win is not worth equally in first and last round, or those where a loss (win) to first or last placed team is not equally worth, where some records are simply erased.

I consider it shameful that Standard plays CL with such a poor domestic performance throughout the year. Or that Panathinaikos misses even the EL.

These systems are especially ruined with winter transfer window, which then has enormous importance and influence.

3-rounds formats are not a problem. It's not important if you play one match more at home or away.

Author: executor
Date: 19-05-2011, 15:16

Friesland: In 2007 NAC Breda finished 3rd in the regular season. In the play-offs they lost 8-1 on aggregate to Twente who finished 4th. NAC then had to play against fifth placed Heerenveen, to qualify for the UEFA Cup, but they lost again: 4-2. Against 8th placed NEC they got their last chance to qualify for the UEFA Cup, but they lost again: 7-0, on aggregate. So NAC Breda only qualified for the Intertoto Cup despite finishing third

So, in 6 games with teams that finished below them, NAC had a GD of 3-19??!! Jeeez! How did they end up 3rd? You should actually be happy that they didn't have the chance to embarrase your country in UC.

Author: cska
Date: 19-05-2011, 17:46
Edited by: cska
at: 19-05-2011, 17:47

Splitting the league is not a bad idea. But the problem is that the top team(s) of the bottom half have no chance to finish on a higher, while they have nothing to play for in the bottom half.
==================================
Hm, I don't think that our friend is right about that.

Teams in the bottom half DO HAVE something to play for !!! That is - to avoid relegation !

If this is "nothing to play for" - I don't see any reason for them to be in top division.

Personally, I think that 3 head-to-head games per year is BAD idea, because it would be a huge scandal in Bulgaria after the decision or draw who will play 2 times at home and 1 time away. Especially, the rivals Litex, Levski and CSKA will never accept any decision, where their opponent gains home advantage...

I like the idea of having a 12 team league, splitting 6-6 after 22 rounds. And a final stage with 10 rounds.
But in Bulgaria we do have a problem with the winter break.
And the big question will be - where is "mid-season" ? If it is at round 16, there will be 6 more games of regular season to be played after the long winter break. This puts some teams in advantage or others in disadvantage.
Also, what happens if a team is expelled or goes bankrupt during the season ? Are its points nullified, or are the rest games set to 0-3 ?
And we cannot put the break after round 11 - there will be 21 rounds in spring - quite unbalanced.
And we cannot put it after round 22. We will have 22 rounds in autumn and only 10 rounds in spring. And both the autumn part and the spring part are almost equal as calendar duration.
So, I like very much the idea to have 12 team league with 6-6 split, which will produce 4 instead of 2 games CSKA-Levski - but we simply cannot arrange it in the calendar.

(not to mention that we must also think of 1-5 games in the cup tournament, plus 2 to 6-8-10-12 autumn games of our teams in EL, plus reserved dates for UEFA/FIFA competitions)

Re: Not-Standard Formats
Author: executor Date: 19-05-2011, 18:04	cska: Teams in the bottom half DO HAVE something to play for !!! That is - to avoid relegation ! If this is "nothing to play for" - I don't see any reason for them to be in top division. I think he was referring to the Top team(s) in the BOTTOM half that is/are far away from relegation. It happens quite a lot, especially when you have 6 teams and only 2 relegation spots.

Re: Not-Standard Formats
Author: amirbachar Date: 19-05-2011, 20:14 Edited by: amirbachar at: 19-05-2011, 20:16	In Israel, the points are also halved and there is one more round after the split (for a total of 35 matches).

Author: dzomba
Date: 20-05-2011, 08:38
Edited by: dzomba
at: 20-05-2011, 08:44

cska: "Personally, I think that 3 head-to-head games per year is BAD idea, because it would be a huge scandal in Bulgaria after the decision or draw who will play 2 times at home and 1 time away. Especially, the rivals Litex, Levski and CSKA will never accept any decision, where their opponent gains home advantage..."

In Croatia we had such format for a while, and i see no problems in practice:

Croatia has two "giants". It was always done that a team placed first after 22 rounds plays at home vs teams placed 2nd team in round 3. That made it important to finish as first in first stage.
Complete schedule was:
for 1st: home vs 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th away vs 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, 11th
for 2nd: home vs 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, 11th, 12th away vs 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th
for 3rd: home vs 1st, 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th away vs 2nd, 5th, 7th, 9th, 11th ...
Upper half had 1 more match at home than lower half, what made it (a little) important to end first stage in upper half.

In Bulgaria, who has 3 "giants" it also shouldn't be a problem, as (example from this season) Litex would play Levski at home, and CSKA away, Levski would play CSKA at home and Litex away, while CSKA would play Litex at home and Levski away.
I really do not see how is it unfair, how it creates advantage for anyone ?!

Eventually it creates minimal advantage for higher placed team, as higher placed team always play the closest lower rival at home, and the closest upper rival away.

Re: Not-Standard Formats
Author: seso Date: 20-05-2011, 08:54	Nemesys, I love it that you sign your posts with your name!!

Author: nemesys
Date: 20-05-2011, 09:39

@seso

^^__ Uhm... I'm a bit confuse.

If you are making fun of the fact I sign my posts with my nick instead of my real name, I see many cases of people doing it in Forums, IMO it helps following the conversation knowing who said what.
But yes, I can admit it might be kind of funny to read:
Greetings,
nemesys.

If it is a joke about Nemesys being the God(dess?) of Divine Punishment or Vengeance (since if remember correctly you are Greek, so you might be more familiar than others with it), I just picked this nick randomly because I like the sound of the word and it is easy to memorize for me, I'm not really into being an avenger of anything... ehm... if you get to know me, I'm kind of a nice guy :D

(btw, @all, if something I said (or will say in future) here wasn't (or will not be) appreciate or might be interpreted as offensive / uncorrect toward someone else, let me know, I mean, I can apologize

).

ehm... nemesys.

Author: badgerboy
Date: 20-05-2011, 10:57

I agree play-offs like this take some getting used to.

I'd say I'm against play-offs for a Championship. If you play 30+ games over a season on a home & away basis (or x3 etc) the team that wins the league should be Champion.

When it comes to playing for other European spots - although it's taken me a while to come round - I think it's kind of OK-ish. We've had play-offs for promotion in England for a very long time (since the mid-1980s I think) & for ages the feeling was - & still is for some people - "it's so unfair on the team finishing 3rd". I now look at it that everyone knows at the start that to get direct promotion/ qualify directly for Europe you must finish in the first two/be Champions.

I must admit I'd like the idea of (CL spot) play-offs more for the countries with 3 or 4 CL places but for 2nd place still OK-ish.

And I prefer the Home/Away KO format 3v6 4v5 - winners play final - rather than the whole new mini-league thing. Not sure why this is - probably because it's what I'm used to - but also because it seems to me the big idea of play-offs is "excitement" & you get this much more in a KO situation.

As for league splits. Each to their own & I suppose those who play x3 are used to it.

I would prefer:

10 team league - playx4 = 36 games.
12 team league - playx2 = 22 games. Split&playx2 = 10. 32 games.
16 team league - playx2 = 30 games.

14 is a daft number & should be avoided. Really 12 isn't much better but still...

Author: dzomba
Date: 20-05-2011, 12:41
Edited by: dzomba
at: 20-05-2011, 12:43

"I must admit I'd like the idea of (CL spot) play-offs more for the countries with 3 or 4 CL places but for 2nd place still OK-ish."

Horrible approach.

First you (generally your country, not personally you) moaned for years how Champions league should consist of 32 really the best teams of Europe, only to get rid of teams from small countries. Then, when you achieved that, suddenly you say, every team deserves a chance to play the CL. Let's introduce play-offs, to let them in.

Lower ranked champions weren't good enough, but average teams from top countries are OK.

No play-off for CL is acceptable, for EL it's OK, but not for CL, not in any country.

Author: badgerboy
Date: 20-05-2011, 17:51

Lower-ranked Champions are fine by me if they are able to beat the 4th best team in England/Spain/Italy in a two-legged KO tie.

But probably the 7th best team in England/Spain/Italy has a better chance to do it than some domestic Champions.

The problem with a play-off for 4th in England etc. is that it's only a play-off for a CL play-off spot. So in reality it's not worth it & better to give the spot to the actual 4th.

If & when UEFA gets round to consigning the Europa League to history (which I suspect is inevitable within the next decade or so) & increases the CL to 64 teams then I think the extra spot - or the last of the extra spots - given to the top countries could & should be via a play-off.

Author: cska
Date: 20-05-2011, 20:15

If & when UEFA gets round to consigning the Europa League to history (which I suspect is inevitable within the next decade or so) & increases the CL to 64 teams
========================
@Badgerboy

1 year before UEFA announced the changes in format that brought to the appearance of Europa League, there was a poll on the website of UEFA.
UEFA asked fans about their opinion on the possible future format of European club competitions.
I voted for "Combine CL and UEFA Cup into one competition"...
And, BTW, why increasing to 64 teams ?
I'd like to see some day groups of 6 teams with 10 matchdays and top 2 teams qualifying. So, 16 groups of 6 teams each will make a total of 96 teams. More champions could be placed directly in groups and at the same time there will be more spots to be contested in qualifying rounds.

Author: cska
Date: 20-05-2011, 20:22

In Bulgaria, who has 3 "giants" it also shouldn't be a problem, as (example from this season) Litex would play Levski at home, and CSKA away, Levski would play CSKA at home and Litex away, while CSKA would play Litex at home and Levski away.
I really do not see how is it unfair, how it creates advantage for anyone ?!
===================

@dzomba

The problem is that CSKA and Levski are from Sofia, while Litex is from Lovech (in Central Bulgaria).
So, "home" or "away" in a game CSKA-Levski is not so important, as in a game CSKA-Litex.
This season, CSKA lost at "home" to Levski 0-1, but won 3-1 "away".
At the same time, CSKA beat Litex in the cup game at home (single KO game), but made 2 draws in the league.
Levski lost in Lovech to Litex twice - both in the league and in the cup tournament. But Levski beat Litex 2-0 at home.

So in your example, Litex would seem "balanced", CSKA will seem "favored" and Levski will seem "disfavoured".

But, anyway, in your example you described how was made the schedule for "final stage" in Croatia. If it is mathematically possible (and it is) to arrange such a schedule - I would favor it.

Author: nemesys
Date: 20-05-2011, 20:23
Edited by: nemesys
at: 20-05-2011, 20:24

Badgerboy wrote:
If & when UEFA gets round to consigning the Europa League to history (which I suspect is inevitable within the next decade or so)

I have the same suspect. I doubt EL will ever become a popular enough competition for best clubs to consider it a priority, and this might likely be an issue, also financially maybe.

In an hypothetical future CL of 64 Clubs, I'd like to have few more National Champions: I mean, I'm fine with Top Countries qualifying some more of course, but a "Platini like" qualification system where at least an "x" number of Non Top Countries Champions surely qualifies would be correct IMO, no matter I recognize #1Country 8th ranked club being stronger than #20 Champion. And personally I would get rid of non-champions paths.

Greetings,
nemesys.

Author: executor
Date: 20-05-2011, 22:17

@badgerboy

64 teams in CL? C'mon, Bboy! Even the 32 team format is already quite hard to follow, not to mention the 48 teams in EL, which is getting boring. Do you really have the strength to watch so many teams?

Already a lot of people say that the real CL start from Last 16, what do you think they'll say then?

And I strongly doubt EL will be abolished, there would be too many teams sitting on the fence a whole year, no matter how big the CL will be. One way or another the EL will survive.

Author: badgerboy
Date: 21-05-2011, 11:23

Executor

You're probably right. But I suspect the Europa League might become the Europa Cup & be a straight KO.

As for following the whole thing. Apart from cursory highlights I agree this is already pretty impossible. But it should be about the fans of the teams in the competition filling their stadium, getting excited about being involved & competing with Barcelona etc. not how easy it is for neutrals to keep in touch with the whole thing.

CSKA

I'm not in favor of groups of 6 because of the number of dead games.

I've done this before but it's been a while & my mind has probably changed slightly. It's only a rough estimate:

1-2 6 teams = 12
3-4 5 teams = 10
5-6 4 teams = 8
7-12 3 teams = 18
13-16 2 teams = 8

It would probably be compulsory for the final qualifying spot for at least the top twelve countries to be decided via a play-off.

That leaves 8 spots for the remaining 36 domestic Champions to fight over & a total of 24 Champions in the groups.

Last time I think I had 28 Champions but here I gave an extra spot to the top two countries (probably more realistic) & tweaked the list a little elsewhere. Possibly you would remove the 3rd team for countries 9-11 & the 2nd team from no 16 & give those spots to the Champions.

TH spot would come from the allocation of the country that wins it as it's extremely unlikely the winner would not qualify domestically under this format.

I'd also abolish the group stage as such & have 2 stages (last 64 & last 32) where you have to win two two-legged ties to progress & the teams that lose two go out. I guess this later variation is unlikely to actually happen although by the time this is all implemented maybe those in power will have realised it makes sense.

Re: Not-Standard Formats
Author: Friesland Date: 21-05-2011, 17:30	CL with 96 teams? I'm against the European Super League, but I think the ESL is a better idea than a CL with 96 teams.

Re: Not-Standard Formats
Author: DIMA1983 Date: 22-05-2011, 23:20 Edited by: DIMA1983 at: 22-05-2011, 23:20	Are you sure? CL is not 96 team. CL is 76 team.

Re: Not-Standard Formats
Author: seso Date: 23-05-2011, 05:15	@nemesys It was a joke, I didn't mean anything. It just seems funny, since one can see your 'name' on the left anyway.

Author: nemesys
Date: 23-05-2011, 11:45

@seso
It was a joke, I didn't mean anything. It just seems funny, since one can see your 'name' on the left anyway.

Yeah... I guessed that. It was probably just me being a little paranoid about my nick.

(since I was bringing up a discussion commenting/criticizing on other countries formats, and I feared I might look too arrogant or a bit offensive).

Thanks for the reply! And you are correct of course, it is on the left already, so signing the post with a nick in the footer might sound a bit funny.

It makes me feel a bit more friendly and polite, something like smiling when meeting new people

Greetings,
nemesys.

Re: Not-Standard Formats
Author: nemesys Date: 23-05-2011, 11:58	@DIMA1983 Are you sure? CL is not 96 team. CL is 76 team. They are not affirming the actual CL format has 96 teams. They are proposing their own ideas on alternative future formats. ( by the way, simple curiosity: what Country are you from? ) Greetings, nemesys.

Author: greenbay
Date: 24-05-2011, 13:09

I'm against all this sick stuff.

Playoffs for whatever purpose do no belong to European football. A league is a league. And a cup is a cup. No one needs all those mixtures. If you look at alle the countries doing such crazy stuff, it's always the minnows. I can imagine all those old chaps sitting at an minnow FA's executive board meeting and moaning: "Look, our TV ratings are lower than ever. People like to watch games from England, Spain, and even Germany, more that watching our showcase match between Trakthor Absurdistan and Cannnot-be-found-on-any-map F.C. Let?s introduce playoffs. Things go their way before common sense had a chance to prevent them from having an unanimous vote to install 137 playoff games, testmatches, challangers and wtf-clashes including making the CL availlable to even the 7th ranked team in a level 3 league, division south by southwest. And two or three years after they again have a meeting, finding out that regular league matches now have a zero TV rating.

Re: Not-Standard Formats
Author: dzomba Date: 24-05-2011, 15:14	I am against any reduction of points. If they divide teams in groups, who continue playing with previously obtained points, then it's OK. If they want to give more emphasis onto play-off matches, they can make a win there worth 5 pts, while draw can be worth 2 pts, but any reduction of points is irregular.

Re: Not-Standard Formats
Author: DIMA1983 Date: 01-06-2011, 07:59	nemesys CL is not 96 teams Cl is 76 teams First round 4 teams Second round 32 teams Tirdh round 13 teams Pley-off 5 teams And Group stage 22 teams = 76 teams

Author: putje
Date: 01-06-2011, 22:38

You can be pro or contra the reduction of points, but a sort of play-off system is used everywere. Sportsmen all over the world admire the NBA as the best sportscompetition: It's all about pla-offs there too.

In Belgium we had the most exciting season this year. In March we had the struggle for 6th (and 14th)place. And in May Standard nearly won the title because they lost 7 of the 15 points they were behind Genk. If footbal is al about passion and excitement, we have got the best season/systhem we ever could have.

Why did Belgium half the points of the 'regular' season? While in Scotland some years ago, the title was won before the play-off started. Why didn't they started the play offs from scratch? Because otherwise the 'regular' season would be 90% meaningless.

Obviously I'm from Belgium, and I would like to see yet another systhem for our league, but this year (nor last year) I didn't complain.

Author: dzomba
Date: 02-06-2011, 13:16

"Sportsmen all over the world admire the NBA as the best sportscompetition"

I do not know who are these, but for me it's the worst sportscompetition (regarding format).

You play 6-8 months for nothing, only to decide everything in one month.
In fact you have 6-8 months of friendlies. How it can be interesting ? Yes, you get one month full-packed of excitement, but is it worth to sacrifice remaining 6-8 months for that one ? I would never choose it.

Author: greenbay
Date: 02-06-2011, 16:45
Edited by: greenbay
at: 02-06-2011, 16:47

That's right. The NBA has the worst playoff-format of all major sports leagues in the US. 16 of 28 teams qualify for the playoffs, at least half of the teams are 95% likely in or 95% likely after 50 to 60 of 82 regular season games are played, so often nothing much left to play for, especially as seedings are not that important due to best of 7.

If there is a playoff format, then it's the NFL playoffs. Only 12 of 32 teams qualify. As there is "Best of 1" in the playoffs, seeding is far more important than in any other major sports, and as there are only 16 regular season games, every game counts.