|
theFOOTBALLlover
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+xAs numbers seem to be the thing around here recently, I've had a first bash at creating an 'NPL state coefficient' based on the UEFA country coefficient. UEFA coefficient: 1 point for draw 2 points for win (a win by penalties is classified as a draw, a win in extra time is classified as a win) Bonus points: 4 points for qualifying to the champions league 5 points for qualifying for the round of 16 1 point for progressing through each of the knockout stages All divided by the number of competing teams, added up over five years. NPL coefficient: 1 point for draw (I've given a point to teams that take it to extra time for some of the weaker federations) 2 points for win (a win by penalties is classified as a draw, a win in extra time is classified as a win) Bonus points: 4 points for qualifying through the NPL (as there are no other qualifying rounds, I don't think it makes sense to give points for simply showing up) 1 point for progressing through each of the knockout stages (I've classified round of 32 as knockout as there aren't the six games you play through in the Champions league) Double points against A-league opposition (I.e. if you take them to extra time 2 points, if you beat them in regular time 4 points + 1 bonus point for making it to the next round) All divided by the number of competing teams, added up as far as the comp has gone. Results compared to spots so far:  Clearly not advocating that NSW go down to one spot, but I think there's a case to drop their fifth spot as well as NNSW and WA to lose their second with SA, TAS and ACT being the main beneficiaries (maybe SA up from 1 to 3 and TAS/ACT playing off for a second spot) Tough one this year as we had 2-3 games where it was NSW teams against each other. No excuse for the past few seasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
HortoMagiko
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
"Not a fun place to live though. Anyone here who's a Melburnian will probably agree" Wash your mouth out. Broady is the south yarra of the west.
Is Wellington diverse? Dont know, however this is a club that has no historical or existing link to a specific migrant group - Rusty Einstein
The negative stereotypes are perpetuated by people who either have no idea or are serving a vested interest; neither viewpoint should get anywhere near running Australian football - Ange Postecoglou
|
|
|
|
HortoMagiko
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
"It is building bridges between Old Soccer and New Football." Thanks mark bosnich (in the pregame show).
Is Wellington diverse? Dont know, however this is a club that has no historical or existing link to a specific migrant group - Rusty Einstein
The negative stereotypes are perpetuated by people who either have no idea or are serving a vested interest; neither viewpoint should get anywhere near running Australian football - Ange Postecoglou
|
|
|
|
|
Glh37
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xAs numbers seem to be the thing around here recently, I've had a first bash at creating an 'NPL state coefficient' based on the UEFA country coefficient. UEFA coefficient: 1 point for draw 2 points for win (a win by penalties is classified as a draw, a win in extra time is classified as a win) Bonus points: 4 points for qualifying to the champions league 5 points for qualifying for the round of 16 1 point for progressing through each of the knockout stages All divided by the number of competing teams, added up over five years. NPL coefficient: 1 point for draw (I've given a point to teams that take it to extra time for some of the weaker federations) 2 points for win (a win by penalties is classified as a draw, a win in extra time is classified as a win) Bonus points: 4 points for qualifying through the NPL (as there are no other qualifying rounds, I don't think it makes sense to give points for simply showing up) 1 point for progressing through each of the knockout stages (I've classified round of 32 as knockout as there aren't the six games you play through in the Champions league) Double points against A-league opposition (I.e. if you take them to extra time 2 points, if you beat them in regular time 4 points + 1 bonus point for making it to the next round) All divided by the number of competing teams, added up as far as the comp has gone. Results compared to spots so far: Clearly not advocating that NSW go down to one spot, but I think there's a case to drop their fifth spot as well as NNSW and WA to lose their second with SA, TAS and ACT being the main beneficiaries (maybe SA up from 1 to 3 and TAS/ACT playing off for a second spot) Tough one this year as we had 2-3 games where it was NSW teams against each other. No excuse for the past few seasons. I think the analysis is a good quick and dirty, if you excluded state derbies altogether to a certain extent you can correct how that skews the numbers but it still reduces the number of games significantly Similarly you would want to either exclude matches vs A-League opponents or at least factor the margin in as a 1-0 loss is going to give the same points as an 8-0 loss despite one being a much better result Given the small number of teams from most states the numbers are very up and down and even 3 years is a very small sample, so perhaps it can be reviewed after the end of the 2017 cup and tell us more than we can tell at the midpoint of the 3rd season At this stage I would say Vic, SA and Qld would all be in line for an extra spot if NSW were to lose one, and the table does support that.
|
|
|
|
|
aussie scott21
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
Newcastle getting the same amount of spots as Brisbane and one more than SA imo is a mistake.
|
|
|
|
|
aussieshorter
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.2K,
Visits: 93
|
+xNewcastle getting the same amount of spots as Brisbane and one more than SA imo is a mistake. I agree on the comparison to SA, but not so much about Brisbane. My issue is the way in which the four Queensland spots are distributed. It guarantees that FNQ Heat or Northern Fury will get a spot each year, and another will usually go to Sunny Coast/Gold Coast/Toowoomba. Travel plays a big part in this, but I would rather see the draw opened up to be state-wide at the last hurdle to keep things different each year. Brisbane clubs might get more spots some years and less in others.
____________________________________________________________________________ TPO Rankings - the FIFA World Rankings for Australian football clubs 
|
|
|
|
|
aussie scott21
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xNewcastle getting the same amount of spots as Brisbane and one more than SA imo is a mistake. I agree on the comparison to SA, but not so much about Brisbane. My issue is the way in which the four Queensland spots are distributed. It guarantees that FNQ Heat or Northern Fury will get a spot each year, and another will usually go to Sunny Coast/Gold Coast/Toowoomba. Travel plays a big part in this, but I would rather see the draw opened up to be state-wide at the last hurdle to keep things different each year. Brisbane clubs might get more spots some years and less in others. The set before that would be even better imo but cost too much. But yeah a round of 8 - 4 x Brisbane, 1 x FNQ/NQ 1 x CQ, 1 x SC/WB, 1 x GC/SWQ But then is that fair for Toowoomba who may beat one of the other teams but lose to GC every year? Have to draw the line somewhere though.
|
|
|
|
|
aussie scott21
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
I am waiting to see what happens in NPL Queensland. Would be a lot of pressure on Fury if Heat take out the entire NPL. That would mean they would most likely face Frenchville after a local team from Cairns. Would they make it atm?
|
|
|
|
|
Vanlassen
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xAs numbers seem to be the thing around here recently, I've had a first bash at creating an 'NPL state coefficient' based on the UEFA country coefficient. UEFA coefficient: 1 point for draw 2 points for win (a win by penalties is classified as a draw, a win in extra time is classified as a win) Bonus points: 4 points for qualifying to the champions league 5 points for qualifying for the round of 16 1 point for progressing through each of the knockout stages All divided by the number of competing teams, added up over five years. NPL coefficient: 1 point for draw (I've given a point to teams that take it to extra time for some of the weaker federations) 2 points for win (a win by penalties is classified as a draw, a win in extra time is classified as a win) Bonus points: 4 points for qualifying through the NPL (as there are no other qualifying rounds, I don't think it makes sense to give points for simply showing up) 1 point for progressing through each of the knockout stages (I've classified round of 32 as knockout as there aren't the six games you play through in the Champions league) Double points against A-league opposition (I.e. if you take them to extra time 2 points, if you beat them in regular time 4 points + 1 bonus point for making it to the next round) All divided by the number of competing teams, added up as far as the comp has gone. Results compared to spots so far: Clearly not advocating that NSW go down to one spot, but I think there's a case to drop their fifth spot as well as NNSW and WA to lose their second with SA, TAS and ACT being the main beneficiaries (maybe SA up from 1 to 3 and TAS/ACT playing off for a second spot) Tough one this year as we had 2-3 games where it was NSW teams against each other. No excuse for the past few seasons. I think the analysis is a good quick and dirty, if you excluded state derbies altogether to a certain extent you can correct how that skews the numbers but it still reduces the number of games significantly Similarly you would want to either exclude matches vs A-League opponents or at least factor the margin in as a 1-0 loss is going to give the same points as an 8-0 loss despite one being a much better result Given the small number of teams from most states the numbers are very up and down and even 3 years is a very small sample, so perhaps it can be reviewed after the end of the 2017 cup and tell us more than we can tell at the midpoint of the 3rd season At this stage I would say Vic, SA and Qld would all be in line for an extra spot if NSW were to lose one, and the table does support that. I think we should include games played at the end of year NPL Interstate finals. I think these games should carry more weight than the FFA Cup as it is a tournament against other semi-pro federations and it is a tournament which an NPL club side can actually win. I think NSW, SA and possibly TAS should be given an extra spot and Vic should be reduced to three spots and Qld reduced two. I would suggest NNSW to lose one of their spots but there are more registered players there than Victoria so it's not exactly fair. I'm not saying the NSW NPL teams don't take the FFA Cup seriously but, at this point in the tournaments development, it seems to be that the games are not played with the same level of intensity to which other NPL games are played. Point in case Blacktown beating Sydney Utd 6-2 in extra time whilst Sydney Utd are fighting to win the Club Championship in the NSW NPL.
|
|
|
|
|
loki
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xAs numbers seem to be the thing around here recently, I've had a first bash at creating an 'NPL state coefficient' based on the UEFA country coefficient. UEFA coefficient: 1 point for draw 2 points for win (a win by penalties is classified as a draw, a win in extra time is classified as a win) Bonus points: 4 points for qualifying to the champions league 5 points for qualifying for the round of 16 1 point for progressing through each of the knockout stages All divided by the number of competing teams, added up over five years. NPL coefficient: 1 point for draw (I've given a point to teams that take it to extra time for some of the weaker federations) 2 points for win (a win by penalties is classified as a draw, a win in extra time is classified as a win) Bonus points: 4 points for qualifying through the NPL (as there are no other qualifying rounds, I don't think it makes sense to give points for simply showing up) 1 point for progressing through each of the knockout stages (I've classified round of 32 as knockout as there aren't the six games you play through in the Champions league) Double points against A-league opposition (I.e. if you take them to extra time 2 points, if you beat them in regular time 4 points + 1 bonus point for making it to the next round) All divided by the number of competing teams, added up as far as the comp has gone. Results compared to spots so far: Clearly not advocating that NSW go down to one spot, but I think there's a case to drop their fifth spot as well as NNSW and WA to lose their second with SA, TAS and ACT being the main beneficiaries (maybe SA up from 1 to 3 and TAS/ACT playing off for a second spot) Tough one this year as we had 2-3 games where it was NSW teams against each other. No excuse for the past few seasons. I think the analysis is a good quick and dirty, if you excluded state derbies altogether to a certain extent you can correct how that skews the numbers but it still reduces the number of games significantly Similarly you would want to either exclude matches vs A-League opponents or at least factor the margin in as a 1-0 loss is going to give the same points as an 8-0 loss despite one being a much better result Given the small number of teams from most states the numbers are very up and down and even 3 years is a very small sample, so perhaps it can be reviewed after the end of the 2017 cup and tell us more than we can tell at the midpoint of the 3rd season At this stage I would say Vic, SA and Qld would all be in line for an extra spot if NSW were to lose one, and the table does support that. I think we should include games played at the end of year NPL Interstate finals. I think these games should carry more weight than the FFA Cup as it is a tournament against other semi-pro federations and it is a tournament which an NPL club side can actually win. I think NSW, SA and possibly TAS should be given an extra spot and Vic should be reduced to three spots and Qld reduced two. I would suggest NNSW to lose one of their spots but there are more registered players there than Victoria so it's not exactly fair. I'm not saying the NSW NPL teams don't take the FFA Cup seriously but, at this point in the tournaments development, it seems to be that the games are not played with the same level of intensity to which other NPL games are played. Point in case Blacktown beating Sydney Utd 6-2 in extra time whilst Sydney Utd are fighting to win the Club Championship in the NSW NPL. Table with the NPL games also included (and retaining the 4 bonus points for winning the thing):  The problem for the NSW sides is that they struggle to beat anyone from the other three big federations. In 12 attempts against interstate competition they've won 4 games. Three of those were against tassie/ACT/WA teams who you'd expect them to beat, and one was against Far North Queensland, who consistently suck. I can't see why NSW should be given another spot when they've already been given an extra one compared to other major states and they're struggling to justify that on the field.
|
|
|
|
|
loki
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7.4K,
Visits: 0
|
(I definitely don't think Victoria or Queensland should get any more spots though, I think four should be the max for any state and you can get five if they win through the NPL. South Australia is clearly the state that is getting gypped here.)
|
|
|
|
|
thewitness
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 0
|
When thinking about allocations, I think clubs entering the Cup should be taken into consideration. Even with Victoria's notorious early round forfeits excluded they still have 70+ more clubs entering the Cup than any other state. Registered numbers is rubbish if they are not trying to qualify. Giving allocations partially based on entry would incentivise federations to make the Cup formats more user friendly for more grassroots clubs to enter and expand the competition further. I think WA are on the right path with regionalised early rounds then all together final rounds.
|
|
|
|
|
Vanlassen
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xAs numbers seem to be the thing around here recently, I've had a first bash at creating an 'NPL state coefficient' based on the UEFA country coefficient. UEFA coefficient: 1 point for draw 2 points for win (a win by penalties is classified as a draw, a win in extra time is classified as a win) Bonus points: 4 points for qualifying to the champions league 5 points for qualifying for the round of 16 1 point for progressing through each of the knockout stages All divided by the number of competing teams, added up over five years. NPL coefficient: 1 point for draw (I've given a point to teams that take it to extra time for some of the weaker federations) 2 points for win (a win by penalties is classified as a draw, a win in extra time is classified as a win) Bonus points: 4 points for qualifying through the NPL (as there are no other qualifying rounds, I don't think it makes sense to give points for simply showing up) 1 point for progressing through each of the knockout stages (I've classified round of 32 as knockout as there aren't the six games you play through in the Champions league) Double points against A-league opposition (I.e. if you take them to extra time 2 points, if you beat them in regular time 4 points + 1 bonus point for making it to the next round) All divided by the number of competing teams, added up as far as the comp has gone. Results compared to spots so far: Clearly not advocating that NSW go down to one spot, but I think there's a case to drop their fifth spot as well as NNSW and WA to lose their second with SA, TAS and ACT being the main beneficiaries (maybe SA up from 1 to 3 and TAS/ACT playing off for a second spot) Tough one this year as we had 2-3 games where it was NSW teams against each other. No excuse for the past few seasons. I think the analysis is a good quick and dirty, if you excluded state derbies altogether to a certain extent you can correct how that skews the numbers but it still reduces the number of games significantly Similarly you would want to either exclude matches vs A-League opponents or at least factor the margin in as a 1-0 loss is going to give the same points as an 8-0 loss despite one being a much better result Given the small number of teams from most states the numbers are very up and down and even 3 years is a very small sample, so perhaps it can be reviewed after the end of the 2017 cup and tell us more than we can tell at the midpoint of the 3rd season At this stage I would say Vic, SA and Qld would all be in line for an extra spot if NSW were to lose one, and the table does support that. I think we should include games played at the end of year NPL Interstate finals. I think these games should carry more weight than the FFA Cup as it is a tournament against other semi-pro federations and it is a tournament which an NPL club side can actually win. I think NSW, SA and possibly TAS should be given an extra spot and Vic should be reduced to three spots and Qld reduced two. I would suggest NNSW to lose one of their spots but there are more registered players there than Victoria so it's not exactly fair. I'm not saying the NSW NPL teams don't take the FFA Cup seriously but, at this point in the tournaments development, it seems to be that the games are not played with the same level of intensity to which other NPL games are played. Point in case Blacktown beating Sydney Utd 6-2 in extra time whilst Sydney Utd are fighting to win the Club Championship in the NSW NPL. Table with the NPL games also included (and retaining the 4 bonus points for winning the thing): The problem for the NSW sides is that they struggle to beat anyone from the other three big federations. In 12 attempts against interstate competition they've won 4 games. Three of those were against tassie/ACT/WA teams who you'd expect them to beat, and one was against Far North Queensland, who consistently suck. I can't see why NSW should be given another spot when they've already been given an extra one compared to other major states and they're struggling to justify that on the field. I think the rest of Australia should be thankful that NSW only have 7 out of the 21 allocated spots (11 out of 31) when NSW make up more than half of the of the total people playing football in Australia. This is evident when considering that most past and present Socceroos hail from the state of NSW. I think what you are saying is more evident of lesser states trying to justify their own place in football and people from those lesser states with an inferiority complex taking the opportunity to bag NSW over a relatively new competition which does not really showcase the true level of where each state sits in respect to the development of football.
|
|
|
|
|
SoccerLogic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 652,
Visits: 0
|
On one hand I like the idea of rewarding more places to States that perform well, so long as each state has a minimum one place.
However basing places on registration is more representative of the football population.
Part of the fun is seeing clubs from everywhere. This isn't a promotion relegation system where the cream rises to the top, anyone can win in knockout football and it might have nothing to do with skill!
I don't think an entire state should be punished for an unlucky extra time goal, or poor draws that sees two teams from the same state face each other. So I think the registration based system is best, although SA should probably get another spot...
|
|
|
|
|
loki
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+xOn one hand I like the idea of rewarding more places to States that perform well, so long as each state has a minimum one place. However basing places on registration is more representative of the football population. Part of the fun is seeing clubs from everywhere. This isn't a promotion relegation system where the cream rises to the top, anyone can win in knockout football and it might have nothing to do with skill! I don't think an entire state should be punished for an unlucky extra time goal, or poor draws that sees two teams from the same state face each other. So I think the registration based system is best, although SA should probably get another spot... I don't see why it can't be a combination of the three: registration, number of clubs entering each year and performance. I think SA being locked into one spot for so long on the basis of registration of (for the most part) children, when they clearly have a few ambitious clubs vying for a spot and their current clubs have done well, is unreasonable.
|
|
|
|
|
theFOOTBALLlover
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+xOn one hand I like the idea of rewarding more places to States that perform well, so long as each state has a minimum one place. However basing places on registration is more representative of the football population. Part of the fun is seeing clubs from everywhere. This isn't a promotion relegation system where the cream rises to the top, anyone can win in knockout football and it might have nothing to do with skill! I don't think an entire state should be punished for an unlucky extra time goal, or poor draws that sees two teams from the same state face each other. So I think the registration based system is best, although SA should probably get another spot... I understand the idea of basing it on participation numbers but I'm a fan of pro/rel which is all about winning and 'survival of the fittest'. If some states are struggling (NNSW) whilst others are killing it (SA) then there should be a coefficient system to reward those who achieve success. Either clubs in NNSW step up or get left behind in place of states that are stepping up.
|
|
|
|
|
loki
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xOn one hand I like the idea of rewarding more places to States that perform well, so long as each state has a minimum one place. However basing places on registration is more representative of the football population. Part of the fun is seeing clubs from everywhere. This isn't a promotion relegation system where the cream rises to the top, anyone can win in knockout football and it might have nothing to do with skill! I don't think an entire state should be punished for an unlucky extra time goal, or poor draws that sees two teams from the same state face each other. So I think the registration based system is best, although SA should probably get another spot... I understand the idea of basing it on participation numbers but I'm a fan of pro/rel which is all about winning and 'survival of the fittest'. If some states are struggling (NNSW) whilst others are killing it (SA) then there should be a coefficient system to reward those who achieve success. Either clubs in NNSW step up or get left behind in place of states that are stepping up. That's a much better way of saying it. Registration numbers was a good place to start, but then you have to back that up with performances.
|
|
|
|
|
Hutch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xOn one hand I like the idea of rewarding more places to States that perform well, so long as each state has a minimum one place. However basing places on registration is more representative of the football population. Part of the fun is seeing clubs from everywhere. This isn't a promotion relegation system where the cream rises to the top, anyone can win in knockout football and it might have nothing to do with skill! I don't think an entire state should be punished for an unlucky extra time goal, or poor draws that sees two teams from the same state face each other. So I think the registration based system is best, although SA should probably get another spot... I understand the idea of basing it on participation numbers but I'm a fan of pro/rel which is all about winning and 'survival of the fittest'. If some states are struggling (NNSW) whilst others are killing it (SA) then there should be a coefficient system to reward those who achieve success. Either clubs in NNSW step up or get left behind in place of states that are stepping up. That's a much better way of saying it. Registration numbers was a good place to start, but then you have to back that up with performances. Stop pushing your anti-NSW/pro-VIC bias by saying SA should get more spots.
|
|
|
|
|
Heineken
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 49K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xAs numbers seem to be the thing around here recently, I've had a first bash at creating an 'NPL state coefficient' based on the UEFA country coefficient. UEFA coefficient: 1 point for draw 2 points for win (a win by penalties is classified as a draw, a win in extra time is classified as a win) Bonus points: 4 points for qualifying to the champions league 5 points for qualifying for the round of 16 1 point for progressing through each of the knockout stages All divided by the number of competing teams, added up over five years. NPL coefficient: 1 point for draw (I've given a point to teams that take it to extra time for some of the weaker federations) 2 points for win (a win by penalties is classified as a draw, a win in extra time is classified as a win) Bonus points: 4 points for qualifying through the NPL (as there are no other qualifying rounds, I don't think it makes sense to give points for simply showing up) 1 point for progressing through each of the knockout stages (I've classified round of 32 as knockout as there aren't the six games you play through in the Champions league) Double points against A-league opposition (I.e. if you take them to extra time 2 points, if you beat them in regular time 4 points + 1 bonus point for making it to the next round) All divided by the number of competing teams, added up as far as the comp has gone. Results compared to spots so far: Clearly not advocating that NSW go down to one spot, but I think there's a case to drop their fifth spot as well as NNSW and WA to lose their second with SA, TAS and ACT being the main beneficiaries (maybe SA up from 1 to 3 and TAS/ACT playing off for a second spot) Tough one this year as we had 2-3 games where it was NSW teams against each other. No excuse for the past few seasons. I think the analysis is a good quick and dirty, if you excluded state derbies altogether to a certain extent you can correct how that skews the numbers but it still reduces the number of games significantly Similarly you would want to either exclude matches vs A-League opponents or at least factor the margin in as a 1-0 loss is going to give the same points as an 8-0 loss despite one being a much better result Given the small number of teams from most states the numbers are very up and down and even 3 years is a very small sample, so perhaps it can be reviewed after the end of the 2017 cup and tell us more than we can tell at the midpoint of the 3rd season At this stage I would say Vic, SA and Qld would all be in line for an extra spot if NSW were to lose one, and the table does support that. I think we should include games played at the end of year NPL Interstate finals. I think these games should carry more weight than the FFA Cup as it is a tournament against other semi-pro federations and it is a tournament which an NPL club side can actually win. I think NSW, SA and possibly TAS should be given an extra spot and Vic should be reduced to three spots and Qld reduced two. I would suggest NNSW to lose one of their spots but there are more registered players there than Victoria so it's not exactly fair. I'm not saying the NSW NPL teams don't take the FFA Cup seriously but, at this point in the tournaments development, it seems to be that the games are not played with the same level of intensity to which other NPL games are played. Point in case Blacktown beating Sydney Utd 6-2 in extra time whilst Sydney Utd are fighting to win the Club Championship in the NSW NPL. Table with the NPL games also included (and retaining the 4 bonus points for winning the thing): The problem for the NSW sides is that they struggle to beat anyone from the other three big federations. In 12 attempts against interstate competition they've won 4 games. Three of those were against tassie/ACT/WA teams who you'd expect them to beat, and one was against Far North Queensland, who consistently suck. I can't see why NSW should be given another spot when they've already been given an extra one compared to other major states and they're struggling to justify that on the field. And yet in the 3 national NPL finals, NSW NPL1 teams have made the finals on all 3 occasions, and won it twice.
WOLLONGONG WOLVES FOR A-LEAGUE EXPANSION!
|
|
|
|
|
A16Man
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.2K,
Visits: 0
|
Not that it matters or anything but: Wolves sold short by crowd figure bungleABOUT a thousand people were left off the official FFA Cup crowd figure, after security staff opened an extra gate to fast-track entry before kick-off.Sydney FC’s 3-nil victory over the Wollongong Wolves at WIN Stadium started on Wednesday night, as hundreds of people were still queued outside.In an effort to ease the bottleneck, ground officials and security provided another entry point, but it resulted in them not being included on the official number of 8029.“Just received word that Security opened up extra gates to get people in quicker for last nights match, meaning a lot weren't counted...9000+,” the Wollongong Wolves official Twitter handle posted on Thursday.
It’s not the first time the Wolves’ official crowd number has been sold short.Two years ago, the then South Coast Wolves lost 1-nil to A-League club Central Coast in front of 5238.However, the count failed to include hundreds of children under the age of 14 who attended the game. On Wednesday, the WIN Stadium western capacity was almost full to its 6000 capacity, while Sydney FC supporters packed into bays at the northern end.Wolves coach Jacob Timpano declared the support showed Wollongong deserved an A-League team.“It was awesome,” he said.“Maybe early on, we were a bit nervy and not used to it, but as the game went on, the nerves settled.“That sort of crowd on a Wednesday night, a school night, probably does show that we could have very good support down here, if there was an A-League team.”
The Wolves went to half-time at nil-all, after goalkeeper Justin Pasfield – who won the inaugural A-League grand final with Sydney FC – saved a Milos Ninkovic penalty. The Sky Blues were denied other penalty shouts in the opening half, but the Wolves took control for periods in the second stanza.Even down 2-nil, after Matt Simon scored twice in four minutes, the Wolves had a late chance to fightback, when Josh Macdonald’s drive from outside the box hit the post.“If we had gotten back to 2-1, it would have been an interesting 10 minutes,” Timpano said.“But I’m very proud of the boys that went out there.“It was a great experience for a few young boys who got an opportunity, which is what it was about as well.“It was a loss, but at the end of the day, we were never expected to get anything (as a result out of the game) and I think we caused them a few problems at times.”
Sydney FC will travel to take on Perth Glory in the round of 16, to be played later this month.
http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/story/4090476/wolves-sold-short-by-crowd-figure-bungle/?cs=2439
|
|
|
|
|
TheSelectFew
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 30K,
Visits: 0
|
Load of garbage it was 8k it looked above for sure and it matches the pre game expectations.
|
|
|
|
|
sasha
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 934,
Visits: 0
|
+xLoad of garbage it was 8k it looked above for sure and it matches the pre game expectations. bull shit i was there 11,000 at least
|
|
|
|
|
TheSelectFew
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 30K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xLoad of garbage it was 8k it looked above for sure and it matches the pre game expectations. bull shit i was there 11,000 at least Agreed. It's a shame this game was underdone by ticket scanners etc.
|
|
|
|
|
sasha
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 934,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xLoad of garbage it was 8k it looked above for sure and it matches the pre game expectations. bull shit i was there 11,000 at least +xLoad of garbage it was 8k it looked above for sure and it matches the pre game expectations. oops sorry did not read your post right just come off an all nighter
|
|
|
|
|
TheSelectFew
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 30K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xLoad of garbage it was 8k it looked above for sure and it matches the pre game expectations. bull shit i was there 11,000 at least +xLoad of garbage it was 8k it looked above for sure and it matches the pre game expectations. oops sorry did not read your post right just come off an all nighter I know ;) Just reiterating my contention to highlight it.
|
|
|
|
|
A16Man
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.2K,
Visits: 0
|
#ffaconspiracy
#gallopout
|
|
|
|
|
loki
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xAs numbers seem to be the thing around here recently, I've had a first bash at creating an 'NPL state coefficient' based on the UEFA country coefficient. UEFA coefficient: 1 point for draw 2 points for win (a win by penalties is classified as a draw, a win in extra time is classified as a win) Bonus points: 4 points for qualifying to the champions league 5 points for qualifying for the round of 16 1 point for progressing through each of the knockout stages All divided by the number of competing teams, added up over five years. NPL coefficient: 1 point for draw (I've given a point to teams that take it to extra time for some of the weaker federations) 2 points for win (a win by penalties is classified as a draw, a win in extra time is classified as a win) Bonus points: 4 points for qualifying through the NPL (as there are no other qualifying rounds, I don't think it makes sense to give points for simply showing up) 1 point for progressing through each of the knockout stages (I've classified round of 32 as knockout as there aren't the six games you play through in the Champions league) Double points against A-league opposition (I.e. if you take them to extra time 2 points, if you beat them in regular time 4 points + 1 bonus point for making it to the next round) All divided by the number of competing teams, added up as far as the comp has gone. Results compared to spots so far: Clearly not advocating that NSW go down to one spot, but I think there's a case to drop their fifth spot as well as NNSW and WA to lose their second with SA, TAS and ACT being the main beneficiaries (maybe SA up from 1 to 3 and TAS/ACT playing off for a second spot) Tough one this year as we had 2-3 games where it was NSW teams against each other. No excuse for the past few seasons. I think the analysis is a good quick and dirty, if you excluded state derbies altogether to a certain extent you can correct how that skews the numbers but it still reduces the number of games significantly Similarly you would want to either exclude matches vs A-League opponents or at least factor the margin in as a 1-0 loss is going to give the same points as an 8-0 loss despite one being a much better result Given the small number of teams from most states the numbers are very up and down and even 3 years is a very small sample, so perhaps it can be reviewed after the end of the 2017 cup and tell us more than we can tell at the midpoint of the 3rd season At this stage I would say Vic, SA and Qld would all be in line for an extra spot if NSW were to lose one, and the table does support that. I think we should include games played at the end of year NPL Interstate finals. I think these games should carry more weight than the FFA Cup as it is a tournament against other semi-pro federations and it is a tournament which an NPL club side can actually win. I think NSW, SA and possibly TAS should be given an extra spot and Vic should be reduced to three spots and Qld reduced two. I would suggest NNSW to lose one of their spots but there are more registered players there than Victoria so it's not exactly fair. I'm not saying the NSW NPL teams don't take the FFA Cup seriously but, at this point in the tournaments development, it seems to be that the games are not played with the same level of intensity to which other NPL games are played. Point in case Blacktown beating Sydney Utd 6-2 in extra time whilst Sydney Utd are fighting to win the Club Championship in the NSW NPL. Table with the NPL games also included (and retaining the 4 bonus points for winning the thing): The problem for the NSW sides is that they struggle to beat anyone from the other three big federations. In 12 attempts against interstate competition they've won 4 games. Three of those were against tassie/ACT/WA teams who you'd expect them to beat, and one was against Far North Queensland, who consistently suck. I can't see why NSW should be given another spot when they've already been given an extra one compared to other major states and they're struggling to justify that on the field. And yet in the 3 national NPL finals, NSW NPL1 teams have made the finals on all 3 occasions, and won it twice. Yeah, but to be fair we've had the massive handicap of having South Melbourne as our only representative... :PI don't think anyone genuinely thinks that the numbers NSW is getting is indicative of the quality of the league, they're clearly just desperately under-performing, but I think the numbers do highlight that the league isn't miles above the other NPLs and that the state leagues are much more even (with clear exceptions) than we thought before this whole shebang kicked off.
|
|
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
+xI am waiting to see what happens in NPL Queensland. Would be a lot of pressure on Fury if Heat take out the entire NPL. That would mean they would most likely face Frenchville after a local team from Cairns. Would they make it atm? Already a heap of pressure. Cairns are far superior. -PB
|
|
|
|
|
bohemia
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
Anyone know the crowd figure from Ballymore?
|
|
|
|
|
TheSelectFew
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 30K,
Visits: 0
|
+xAnyone know the crowd figure from Ballymore? 3,028
|
|
|
|