Season over

[FairWeatherFan]

3 hours ago, GordonS said:

Got to say, there's a seriously massive problem with using flat PPG here.

LTHV have 54 points from 24 games. That's 2.25ppg and the highest in Conf A, so they're up.

But...

Kinnoull have 35 points from 17 games, for a PPG of 2.06.

They've played 9 home games and 8 away games while LTHV have played 14 home and 10 away games.

Kinnoull's home PPG is 2.67 and their away PPG is 1.75. To project that over the season you multiply both of those by 17, the number of home or away games, then add them together, and they would be projected to end the season on 75.08 points.

LTHV's home PPG is 2.57 and their away PPG is 1.8. To project that over the season you multiply both of those by 17, the number of home or away games, then add them together, and they would be projected to end the season on 74.31 points.

In my opinion Kinnoull are being unfairly treated because LTHV have played more home games. If you look at home and away games separately, then Kinnoull have the best record in Conf A.

Using this approach Kinnoull win Conf A, Tynecastle win Conf B, and the best runner-up is IHS. LTHV only have the 4th best record.

ETA table:

Yeah, you've never accounted for Kinnoull's point deduction.

So it would be 72.08 if you just knocked off 3 points.

or you count the points deduction as a home loss, adjust home PPG to 2.33 and end up with 69.36.

Edited April 24, 2020 by FairWeatherFan
their

[Auld Heid]

Seems a premature decision, given the current situation in the world. (As with the other announcements of league winners)

The message from Government doesn't suggest much hope for football in the foreseeable future.

By calling time, all you achieve is to create potential problems for following seasons.

Until you know when football is likely to return - how can you guarantee the league suggested for 2020/21 can be fully completed within the available time.

If football isn't back until the end of 2020 (realistic assumption?) You are then faced with trying to run a league programme in a matter of months. (Starting in winter months - when we lose games due to weather.)

Whereas if you delayed announcement until such time as the future was more certain - then you move forwards with a clear understanding what you can deliver.

But we are where we are and the decision is made - so congratulations to the Beggars*

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, fowler23 said:

But if you null and void the season, with no promotions this year, you loose 2 promotion spots, but would still get 3 next year. 3 in total would go up. And still zero relegated. 2 up this year and 2 up next year is 4 in total. So one extra than you would bill and void a season. Still getting 4 relegated at least rather than normal 3.

Null and void was apparently never an option so why base a comparison on it?

Comparisons are generally best based what we stand to lose compared to what should happen normally. Therefore instead of 6 promotion places over 2 seasons (this year and next) you have 4 (at most 5 if Bo'ness are promoted).

The decision to drop a promotion place next year for the best second placed side ensures this.

The conferences won't be any easier next year, regardless of who has been promoted this year, they have more sides in them and less scope for getting promoted.

As I said though the vote was cast, the majority voted the proposal through and clubs have agreed on the outcome. 

 

[Marten]

50 minutes ago, Ginaro said:

Surely (slightly) easier to get out of the conferences next season as you have got rid of the two (or three) best clubs without receiving anyone from the Premier Division? (Yes I know that 10 more clubs are coming)

That's an important point too, with normal promotion/relegation there would have been 3 more clubs in the First Division, with likely one or more of them challenging for promotion next season.

[Marten]

53 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

Flat PPG has flaws but takes a view of the whole.

PPG weighted against Home & Away places one variable as more important over others. Does it take into account Strength of Opponent? Nope. Suspension or Injuries? Nope. Midweek night games v Saturday afternoon games? Nope. Points deductions? Nope. Kind of important one in this since Kinnoull lose 3 points from a home victory, so that's actually 2 home defeats. So their home average PPG should be 2.33333333333 not 2.6666666666. See how a stupid little thing like that can throw things off. Not just home and away.

I had a look at the average PPG for the opposition of both.

LTHV: home 1.34, away 1.64
Kinnoul: home 1.18, away 1.61

That shows LTHV had considerably more difficult opposition.

[gaz5]

But if you null and void the season, with no promotions this year, you loose 2 promotion spots, but would still get 3 next year. 3 in total would go up. And still zero relegated. 2 up this year and 2 up next year is 4 in total. So one extra than you would bill and void a season. Still getting 4 relegated at least rather than normal 3.

I've never been an advocate of null and void mate, I was only pointing out the numbers involved.

I don't think null and void would have been fair on Tynecastle who deserve to go up or Bo'ness. Again that's always been my position despite the one banger on here with multiple accounts suggesting otherwise. [emoji846]

I don't even mind LTHV and Inverkeithing going up on PPG, as much as I still think ourselves, Leith, Kinnoull and Glenrothes were well in the hunt.

My issue has mainly been applying PPG in one scenario, but not in another and that then having a knock on effect the season after for teams at the lowest level.

I don't think PPG is a "fair" method to use, I don't think a fair method exists. But I do think whatever method you choose can be applied fairly and that's where I don't agree with what has been done. It has benefitted teams at the higher level, regardless of performance, ahead of those at the lower level (not just ourselves) and that will stretch to 2 seasons.

I do agree with Newkie, 5 relegations would be too much, but given the circumstances you could have still had 3 promotions and played a season with 17, having 2 seasons with 4 relegations, as an example.

That way you retain 9 promotions over 3 seasons, still get back to 16 but still only have 8 relegations.

That would have stopped teams going down this season and still got back to 16 without putting the lowest Tier sides at a disadvantage through a lost promotion place for a season.

I realise some people won't agree, which is absolutely fine. Burnie and I for example don't disagree (or haven't) on much over the years on here but we have on this one. That's what a forum is for though.

Would be a bit dull if everyone had the same opinion, despite whatever alias boy thinks. Main thing is most people are playing the ball, not the man, regardless of opinion.

We have a decision now and we move on, regardless of what anyone thinks.

[FairWeatherFan]

4 minutes ago, gaz5 said:

I've never been an advocate of null and void mate, I was only pointing out the numbers involved.

I don't think null and void would have been fair on Tynecastle who deserve to go up or Bo'ness. Again that's always been my position despite the one banger on here with multiple accounts suggesting otherwise.

I don't even mind LTHV and Inverkeithing going up on PPG, as much as I still think ourselves, Leith, Kinnoull and Glenrothes were well in the hunt.

My issue has mainly been applying PPG in one scenario, but not in another and that then having a knock on effect the season after for teams at the lowest level.

I don't think PPG is a "fair" method to use, I don't think a fair method exists. But I do think whatever method you choose can be applied fairly and that's where I don't agree with what has been done. It has benefitted teams at the higher level, regardless of performance, ahead of those at the lower level (not just ourselves) and that will stretch to 2 seasons.

I do agree with Newkie, 5 relegations would be too much, but given the circumstances you could have still had 3 promotions and played a season with 17, having 2 seasons with 4 relegations, as an example.

That way you retain 9 promotions over 3 seasons, still get back to 16 but still only have 8 relegations.

That would have stopped teams going down this season and still got back to 16 without putting the lowest Tier sides at a disadvantage through a lost promotion place for a season.

I realise some people won't agree, which is absolutely fine. Burnie and I for example don't disagree (or haven't) on much over the years on here but we have on this one. That's what a forum is for though.

Would be a bit dull if everyone had the same opinion, despite whatever alias boy thinks. Main thing is most people are playing the ball, not the man, regardless of opinion.

We have a decision now and we move on, regardless of what anyone thinks.

There will be probably be the possibility of a third promotion accounted for in case EoS Premier champion is promoted with no relegated club coming down from the Lowland at least.

[gaz5]

There will be probably be the possibility of a third promotion accounted for in case EoS Premier champion is promoted with no relegated club coming down from the Lowland at least.

Think that's already accounted for in that right now in that scenario (as was a possibility this season) both second placed sides would have gone up to make 4.

Same way I think 4 relegations is accounted for if a Lowland side goes down and a Highland side goes up?

So that would still be one less promotion and relegation overall, I think. If my maths is right. [emoji846]

But I see what you're getting at.

[Toebash1]

59 minutes ago, Marten said:

I had a look at the average PPG for the opposition of both.

LTHV: home 1.34, away 1.64
Kinnoul: home 1.18, away 1.61

That shows LTHV had considerably more difficult opposition.

Kinnoull had to play leith twice, Haddington twice, LTHV, Glenrothes, dunipace away and inverkeithing away plus another barrow load of games. Effectively half a season into 9/10 weeks but yeah LTHV had a harder run in, it’s actually pathetic the disrespect getting shown to LTHV here. This kinnoul hard done by narrative getting spouted is borderline embarrassing (just as bad as the dunipace bush wackers spouting their biased nonsense) they should consider themselves lucky they were even considered for PPG for the amount of games they had played, PPG actually does them a favour because they would of been lucky to make top 5 with their schedule. All the majority of folk on here want to do on here is belittle everything unless their club gains from it. The vote speaks for itself.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Toebash1 said:

Kinnoull had to play leith twice, Haddington twice, LTHV, Glenrothes, dunipace away and inverkeithing away plus another barrow load of games. Effectively half a season into 9/10 weeks but yeah LTHV had a harder run in, it’s actually pathetic the disrespect getting shown to LTHV here. This kinnoul hard done by narrative getting spouted is borderline embarrassing (just as bad as the dunipace bush wackers spouting their biased nonsense) they should consider themselves lucky they were even considered for PPG for the amount of games they had played, PPG actually does them a favour because they would of been lucky to make top 5 with their schedule. All the majority of folk on here want to do on here is belittle everything unless their club gains from it. The vote speaks for itself.

you are right, the vote is concluded and the result will stand. (Doesn't mean anyone is disrespecting lthv or that people have to agree with the outcome though)

Loved the bushwhackers back in the day too!

No one is belittling anything, just debating if it was right to go down this route. (It makes no difference to the outcome of the vote) We don't all have to agree and are all biased towards our club, in one way or another.

[Joe Exotic]

1 hour ago, Toebash1 said:

Kinnoull had to play leith twice, Haddington twice, LTHV, Glenrothes, dunipace away and inverkeithing away plus another barrow load of games. Effectively half a season into 9/10 weeks but yeah LTHV had a harder run in, it’s actually pathetic the disrespect getting shown to LTHV here. This kinnoul hard done by narrative getting spouted is borderline embarrassing (just as bad as the dunipace bush wackers spouting their biased nonsense) they should consider themselves lucky they were even considered for PPG for the amount of games they had played, PPG actually does them a favour because they would of been lucky to make top 5 with their schedule. All the majority of folk on here want to do on here is belittle everything unless their club gains from it. The vote speaks for itself.

Agreed.

Let's feel sorry for Kinnoull is over. Vote stands so move on !

They are pish and would have ended up mid table by the last game anyway  

Blame Carole Fucking Baskin is what I say. 

[junglehenry]

Are Edinburgh South 'AMs' going to be ground sharing with Dalkeith Thistle next season? I know Tynecastle had the park that they currently hold, but this doesn't fit 'criteria'.

I know they wish to have an under 20s side next season too.

 

[junglehenry]

1 hour ago, Joe Exotic said:

Agreed.

Let's feel sorry for Kinnoull is over. Vote stands so move on !

They are pish and would have ended up mid table by the last game anyway  

Blame Carole Fucking Baskin is what I say. 

LTHV have previously won the league a couple of times and been 'hard done by' and it's brilliant for them in that sense.

Being in the Premier brings with it more revenue? Possibly. So one season in there with the top sides, and can foresee further developments off the field the year after.

[patriot1]

34 minutes ago, junglehenry said:

Are Edinburgh South 'AMs' going to be ground sharing with Dalkeith Thistle next season? I know Tynecastle had the park that they currently hold, but this doesn't fit 'criteria'.

I know they wish to have an under 20s side next season too.

 

Yes. I believe it a 3 year deal with Dalkeith. 

[Casey Jones]

A few teams at bottom of the Premier league may have taken a sigh of relief that no relegation this season, none more so than Newtongrange.

Will they now be able to re-group and have a bigger fight whenever season 20-21 begins?

As resources may be an issue for a number of clubs with the lack of recent income, next season could be very interesting!

[Kicker Conspiracy]

17 hours ago, G4Mac said:

its a reprieve. They have changed the number of promotion places for next year in the conferences because of the decision to promote only. It helps the premier clubs and disadvantages everyone in the conferences next year.

Finish 14th this year you are down, finish 14th next year you stay up. But its doesn't give premier clubs a reprieve?

Or another way of looking at it: 

Finish 14th out of 16 (third bottom) you are down, finish 14th out of 18 (fifth bottom) you stay up.

[Guest]

whilst I understand your what you are suggesting, there is no 3rd promotion place next year, only the top two will be promoted from the conferences. That means over the two seasons a maximum of 5 clubs, if boness are promoted, will move into the premier league instead of the normal 6.

The decision is made, some agree, some disagree, some remain objectively impartial, but the majority of clubs agreed on the outcome and that is what we have to work with. 

[PerthFan]

Kinnoull voted for PPG in the full knowledge of the implications and have put a Facebook post out confirming the closure of the season and congratulating the conference champions.
It’s refreshing to see debate alive and well but it’s important to also highlight that the posters advocating for Kinnoull are, as far as anyone can tell, not associated with the club committee.

There is no perfectly fair way to wind up a part complete season but ppg would seem to be the closest without bringing in additional imminently more arguable variables.
There are far more important things happening in the world right now and the league board AND member clubs have agreed a way forward that they are collectively happy with. Surely that is good enough.

[junglehenry]

6 hours ago, Casey Jones said:

A few teams at bottom of the Premier league may have taken a sigh of relief that no relegation this season, none more so than Newtongrange.

Will they now be able to re-group and have a bigger fight whenever season 20-21 begins?

As resources may be an issue for a number of clubs with the lack of recent income, next season could be very interesting!

I believe they will still struggle next season, I hate to see teams struggle in a financial sense and I believe that Newtongrange may have that issue.

[sniffer]

Yes. I believe it a 3 year deal with Dalkeith. 

3 year deal or not I’m sure one of the criteria is you have to show that your ground can be able play a game on any or every Saturday for your club at 4 days notice , so that wouldn’t work for two teams ?