|
Post by monkey on Mar 20, 2013 2:17:59 GMT
Hi All
The committee met last night to organise the divisions for the forthcoming Summer season which starts on 11th April. We have 77 of the 78 teams that started the Winter season. The only team to drop out is Tev. Con. Club D. We also have 5 new teams which are the Emperor (A), Emperor (S), Tally Ho, Pavilion and Jenny Wren (B). This gives us a record total of 82 teams. We considered various options but in the end decided on 9 divisions. This is one division of 10 teams and 8 divisions of 9 teams. The Premier division has the 10 teams and all of the others have 9 teams. This was so that the number of teams getting relegated would be minimised. Unfortunately, this has still led to some teams getting relegated when outside of the bottom two places. As you go down the divisions then this happens to more teams. In addition, we have in the lower divisions relegated some teams by two divisions. Let me take the White Lion (B) as an example. They finished bottom of division 5, which is the sixth tier of eight, if they only go down one division then in effect they are not getting relegated as they will be in the seventh tier of nine. This is still the third division from the bottom. So we have relegated them two divisions. Before the expansion they would have gone to the seventh tier of eight and are now going to the eight tier of nine. This helps to limit the number of teams getting relegated. We have also relegated an extra team to place the new Emperor (A) team in Division 4. We would have liked to have placed them higher but did not think it was appropriate. By putting them in division four we have relegated all three of the teams that finished on 16 points instead of two out of the three. The Pavilion team has been placed in division 7 and the remaining new teams have gone into division 8. Due to the extra relegations there has not been any room to promote any team more than one division this season. The new divisions are listed in full below.
Premier Division C.S.C. (A) Mickey Flynn's (A) The Old Boys Black Bull Man on the Moon (A) King St. Run (A) C.S.C. (Young Guns) C.S.C. (H) Man on the Moon (B) Hopbine (A)
Division One Rathmore (A) C.S.C. (OZ) C.S.C. (R) Portland Arms (A) Cambridge Uni. (A) Cambridge United S.C. (A) Rathmore (B) Waterbeach S.C. Hardwick S.S.C. (A)
Division Two Jenny Wren (A) formerly Milton Arms (A) Mickey Flynn's (C) C.S.C. (M) Fulbourn Institute (B) Sir Isaac Newton Bar Hill S.C. Rathmore (E) Rathmore (Flintstones) Caldecote S.C. (A)
Division Three Tev. Con. Club (C) Tev. Con. Club (R) formerly Rock (B) Mickey Flynn's Lions Little Rose (A) Cambridge U.S.C. (B) Portland Arms (B) Cambridge City Salisbury Club (A) King St. Run (B)
Division Four Salisbury Club (B) C.S.C. (C) Rock formerly Rock (R) King's Head White Lion (A) Tev. Con. Club (B) Emperor (A) New Frank Lee Centre Pemberton Arms (A)
Division Five Fulbourn Institute (C) Hardwick S.S.C. (B) Emperor (Penguins) formerly Fulbourn SC Cambridge Uni. (B) Newnham Croft S.C. Chesterton M.C. Brewery Tap C.S.C. (F) Six Bells
Division Six Ida Darwin (A) Admiral Vernon formerly Over Community Centre Pemberton Arms (B) Hopbine (B) The Med (A) Little Rose (B) Railway Vue White Horse (Foxton) The Med (B)
Division Seven Dobblers White Lion (B) The Grapes Earl of Beaconsfield The Fox Tev Con Club (A) Histon BL Caldecote S.C. (B) Pavilion New
Division Eight Milton Arms formerly Milton Arms (B) The Ship (A) formerly The Ship C.S.C. (OZB) The Ship (B) formerly Girton SC King St. Run (C) Ida Darwin (B) Jenny Wren (B) New Emperor (S) New Tally Ho New
Finally the Hopbine (B) and Six Bells will start the Summer season on minus 2 points and minus 1 point respectively for failing to send in results.
|
|
|
Post by Craig Benstock on Mar 20, 2013 2:59:40 GMT
wait for it.......
|
|
|
Post by MalteseMauler on Mar 20, 2013 7:06:29 GMT
is it going to be frame difference what separates teams this season or head to head results ?
|
|
|
Post by monkey on Mar 20, 2013 7:32:06 GMT
It is the same as last season. Head to head results then number of wins then number of frames won.
|
|
|
Post by ejac on Mar 20, 2013 10:13:14 GMT
Cue all of the usual complaints
|
|
|
Post by controller on Mar 20, 2013 10:34:11 GMT
"We have also relegated an extra team to place the new Emperor (A) team in Division 4"
that isn't right!
Why the special treatment. Put them in division 9!
relegating teams 2 divisions is also wrong. It wouldn't happen Prem - Div 2, so lower league teams get treated like second class teams it seems.
|
|
|
Post by dad - AKA Onespin on Mar 20, 2013 10:50:38 GMT
"We have also relegated an extra team to place the new Emperor (A) team in Division 4" that isn't right! Why the special treatment. Put them in division 9! relegating teams 2 divisions is also wrong. It wouldn't happen Prem - Div 2, so lower league teams get treated like second class teams it seems. We always try to place new teams, that have 'good' players, in as high as we can. This has always been the case. Because of the amount of teams, we had to relegate the bottom 4 teams from division 4 (7th - 10th place). 6th-8th all had the same amount of points. Therefore as nothing seperated these teams we felt we should relegate 6th place too. This gave an extra slot in Div 4, which we then gave to one of the 5 new teams (Emperor A). As for teams being relegated 2 divisions........The reasoning behind this was 2 fold: 1) Because of the amount of relegations that were required, if we only relegated 1 division at a time, then the 2 bottom teams would end up playing pretty much the same teams as they did last season, and in effect wouldn't have had a relegation. 2) Relegating some teams 2 divisions meant that we didn't have to relegate as many teams from other divisions, as we would have if it was only 1 relegation per team.
|
|
|
Post by schmack on Mar 20, 2013 11:18:07 GMT
well explained Garry it's almost as if you were at the meeting during which this was decided AT GREAT LENGTH oh wait..... you were there!! picking single sentences out of entire explanations (given in the interest of transparency) isn't original orrible, copying other members styles is beneath even you, boredom is no excuse it is impossible to keep everyone happy, we accept that and fully expect the fallout from aggreived parties. any suggestions are taken on board. we do however make every effort to take the "path of least resistance" where (as Garry explained)disruption is kept to a minimum number of teams as is feasible we are always looking for a better way of doing this and may be making progress towards that - more soon............. now back to the criticism ......ian?
|
|
|
Post by dad - AKA Onespin on Mar 20, 2013 11:22:54 GMT
As a quick example...............
If we'd have relegated all teams just 1 division, then that would have meant the following:
Div 4: 5 relegations Div 5: 6 relegations - including teams that had 18 & 20pts Div 6: 7 relegations - including teams that had 19pts Div 7: 6 relegations - including teams that had 18 & 24pts
Keeping it as 2 relegations for some teams meant it looked like this:
Div 4: 5 relegations
Div 5: 4 relegations - most amount of points gained by a relegated team was 15pts
Div 6: 5 relegations - most amount of points gained by a relegated team was 17pts
Div 7: 4 relegations - most amount of points gained by a relegated team was 14pts
As you can see if we relegated 1 division at a time it meant multiple teams getting relegated, and the bottom 2 teams playing the same teams as last season, and in effect not being relegated to play teams below where they were.
It also means much less relegations, and not relegating teams above 17pts.
|
|
|
Post by Qubit on Mar 20, 2013 15:31:03 GMT
Absolutely ridiculous. NO team should ever be relegated down 2 divisions. Truly disgraceful, I don't care what the 'explanation' is, there is no justification for it. Whats to stop them relegating a team 3 divisions, just cos it makes life easier?? Or relegating them 2 divisions next year if they get relegated again (distinct possibility, frankly id stop playing if i was relegated 2 divisions for no reason other than 'it makes life a bit easier'!!!! So a team could easily lose most of its players and then suffer the same fate again if it couldnt find decent replacements)
Personally I think the whole relegations thing shouldnt be an issue anyway. It should be fixed. end of, 1 or 2 teams. New teams shouldn't be slotted in at the expense of others, and certainly not relegated 2 divisions! Words fail me.
We get too many super teams being created that are short lived glory hunters and other teams lose hard fought places to accomodate these frankly flaky wannabes. The counter argument is of course that its unfair to place them in lower divisions -well i dont reckon you'd get that many taking it up if starting at the bottom (like they should) was the only option!
Appalling decision making (yet again). I know its a thankless task (believe me ive run my share of committees before), but decisions like this really dont help their cause at all. Of course there are going to be complaints!! Mainly because some team just got royally f*cked over!! We really should be all up in arms about this to be honest, because if it can happen to them it can happen to anyone! (unless you're in the prem probably)
|
|
|
Post by dad - AKA Onespin on Mar 20, 2013 15:41:17 GMT
Ok.......Please enlighten us with how you would have dealt with this. 77 teams the same, 5 new teams, making 82 teams.
Let us know your strategy of how you'd stick to only 2 relegations. Even putting all 5 new teams in the bottom division wouldn't have stopped that.
Far from it...........It would have still meant 3 relegations from div 3 4 from div 4 5 from div 5 6 from div 6 4 from div 7.
Feel free to join us at the next re-structure.
|
|
|
Post by schmack on Mar 20, 2013 15:56:49 GMT
Absolutely ridiculous. NO team should ever be relegated down 2 divisions. Truly disgraceful, I don't care what the 'explanation' is, there is no justification for it. Whats to stop them relegating a team 3 divisions, just cos it makes life easier?? Or relegating them 2 divisions next year if they get relegated again (distinct possibility, frankly id stop playing if i was relegated 2 divisions for no reason other than 'it makes life a bit easier'!!!! So a team could easily lose most of its players and then suffer the same fate again if it couldnt find decent replacements) Personally I think the whole relegations thing shouldnt be an issue anyway. It should be fixed. end of, 1 or 2 teams. New teams shouldn't be slotted in at the expense of others, and certainly not relegated 2 divisions! Words fail me. We get too many super teams being created that are short lived glory hunters and other teams lose hard fought places to accomodate these frankly flaky wannabes. The counter argument is of course that its unfair to place them in lower divisions -well i dont reckon you'd get that many taking it up if starting at the bottom (like they should) was the only option! Appalling decision making (yet again). I know its a thankless task (believe me ive run my share of committees before), but decisions like this really dont help their cause at all. Of course there are going to be complaints!! Mainly because some team just got royally f*cked over!! We really should be all up in arms about this to be honest, because if it can happen to them it can happen to anyone! (unless you're in the prem probably) lol your 6 monthly rant. EVERY single season - honestly!! is this copied and pasted? i await the predictable response to that. we received no constitutional proposal or even a verbal suggestion from this mysterious source. it is so much easier to critisise than to be constructive there is a space on the committee available. it has only just become available, applications ar einvited - cue predictable response please give us the benefit of your "own fair share of committee running" whatever that means maybe we should start by sending a PM to me and actually saying who you are? i would be genuinely interested. then the conversation could be more constructive in any event, as i said, we are trying to evolve the system, we know it is not ideal, do you have any suggestions? i won't wait for a response on this one i look forward to hearing from you in september
|
|
|
Post by Qubit on Mar 20, 2013 17:20:44 GMT
Absolutely ridiculous. NO team should ever be relegated down 2 divisions. Truly disgraceful, I don't care what the 'explanation' is, there is no justification for it. Whats to stop them relegating a team 3 divisions, just cos it makes life easier?? Or relegating them 2 divisions next year if they get relegated again (distinct possibility, frankly id stop playing if i was relegated 2 divisions for no reason other than 'it makes life a bit easier'!!!! So a team could easily lose most of its players and then suffer the same fate again if it couldnt find decent replacements) Personally I think the whole relegations thing shouldnt be an issue anyway. It should be fixed. end of, 1 or 2 teams. New teams shouldn't be slotted in at the expense of others, and certainly not relegated 2 divisions! Words fail me. We get too many super teams being created that are short lived glory hunters and other teams lose hard fought places to accomodate these frankly flaky wannabes. The counter argument is of course that its unfair to place them in lower divisions -well i dont reckon you'd get that many taking it up if starting at the bottom (like they should) was the only option! Appalling decision making (yet again). I know its a thankless task (believe me ive run my share of committees before), but decisions like this really dont help their cause at all. Of course there are going to be complaints!! Mainly because some team just got royally f*cked over!! We really should be all up in arms about this to be honest, because if it can happen to them it can happen to anyone! (unless you're in the prem probably) lol your 6 monthly rant. EVERY single season - honestly!! is this copied and pasted? i await the predictable response to that. we received no constitutional proposal or even a verbal suggestion from this mysterious source. it is so much easier to critisise than to be constructive there is a space on the committee available. it has only just become available, applications ar einvited - cue predictable response please give us the benefit of your "own fair share of committee running" whatever that means maybe we should start by sending a PM to me and actually saying who you are? i would be genuinely interested. then the conversation could be more constructive in any event, as i said, we are trying to evolve the system, we know it is not ideal, do you have any suggestions? i won't wait for a response on this one i look forward to hearing from you in september Every single season? Really? Much more often that that surely Mainly though because you refuse to listen to sense. You shot me down in flames once at a meeting without listening to how my idea might be implemented and then proceeded to listen to someone else describe the exact same scenario and solution and pronounce it a good idea! I won't be coming to a meeting again. I DO genuinely understand how hard it is to run/organise something like this. However, honestly, do you really believe that relegating a team 2 divisions is ever a fair and equitable way of doing things in this scenario? No problem Garry, although im not in possession of all the facts and this is just off the top of my head. But I would say a standard 2 up 2 down for each div. Leaves all divisions the same as currently numbers-wise, with the bottom 2 both consisting of 7 apiece. Yes, a reduced fixture list but i certainly wouldnt mind personally, particularly as it is fairer by far than relegating a team 2 divisions! You could alternatively promote teams to achieve numbers rather than relegate, which (while less than ideal) would at least seem a bit fairer. This should hopefully leave a bottom div of 12 which should still be do-able perhaps?? or 2 of 11 if not. Whatever the solution I am very sure than relegating a team 2 divisions cannot be the best answer.
|
|
|
Post by schmack on Mar 20, 2013 17:36:13 GMT
Mainly though because you refuse to listen to sense. You shot me down in flames once at a meeting without listening to how my idea might be implemented and then proceeded to listen to someone else describe the exact same scenario and solution and pronounce it a good idea! I won't be coming to a meeting again. nice - it's personal then. i see......my bad i don't know what you are talking about as i don't know who you are. what was the idea? honestly i am interested now, if you think i wasn't before. you can take all the credit you want then, no flames i promise picking the ball up, going home and then telling your mum the big boys wont let you play isn't going to change things....
|
|
|
Post by dad - AKA Onespin on Mar 20, 2013 18:01:00 GMT
One of the first things we decided on was the divisional structure.
Ideas were 12 teams in a division, 8 teams in a divsion, doing 12 teams in a division, and then split it in 2 halfway through - per Scottish Prem league................
We tried going with 8 teams before, and then had a few teams pull out, leaving 6. This ended up a bit of a farce for all involved, and for a venue to pay £30, and not get the same amount of home games isn't fair. So we decided against this.
11 or12 teams in a division adds on 4 extra weeks, which then would cause us issues around when the season ends, and the next one starts. It would have meant much more promotions than we have relegations, and the league moving around completely. On top of that I believe it causes issues with producing fixtures (Andy Greenley can answer that one), in that we have multiple teams from venues, and we have to ensure one team is away when the other is at home............When this has be done for multiple venues it becomes very difficult.
From memory I think a structure of 12 in a division is harder then 10.
That left one division of 10, and 8 lots of 9. We then made the best job of what we had.
|
|
|
Post by Steve McCann on Mar 20, 2013 18:04:51 GMT
You could alternatively promote teams to achieve numbers rather than relegate, which (while less than ideal) would at least seem a bit fairer. Great idea! As we have more than 80 teams, how about we put the new division at the top, and then promote all the teams that have done really well up a division
|
|
|
Post by Qubit on Mar 20, 2013 18:24:54 GMT
Mainly though because you refuse to listen to sense. You shot me down in flames once at a meeting without listening to how my idea might be implemented and then proceeded to listen to someone else describe the exact same scenario and solution and pronounce it a good idea! I won't be coming to a meeting again. nice - it's personal then. i see......my bad i don't know what you are talking about as i don't know who you are. what was the idea? honestly i am interested now, if you think i wasn't before. you can take all the credit you want then, no flames i promise picking the ball up, going home and then telling your mum the big boys wont let you play isn't going to change things.... Not personal I assure you, Im really a nice guy, honest And we get on well (at least id like to think so). I think context is hard to gauge on a forum though. However, if I think a situation is literally daft, am I not allowed to say?? I think you misunderstood me, I have no interest in taking credit for anything whatsoever, the other fellow articulated himself probably better than I could, but I didnt appreciate being dismissed out of hand thats all. So, perhaps being consistent with not articulating myself very well, to boil down my earlier (slightly ranty ) post: I honestly dont believe relegating a team 2 divs can ever be the answer. (although as I said before, i do appreciate that its a difficult/thankless task).
|
|
|
Post by Qubit on Mar 20, 2013 18:31:14 GMT
You could alternatively promote teams to achieve numbers rather than relegate, which (while less than ideal) would at least seem a bit fairer. Great idea! As we have more than 80 teams, how about we put the new division at the top, and then promote all the teams that have done really well up a division Hmmm, i get the distinct impression you aren't taking me seriously? lol. Actually though, i think your suggestion is still a better/fairer idea than relegating some poor team down 2 divs.
|
|
|
Post by Craig Benstock on Mar 20, 2013 18:58:21 GMT
Great idea! As we have more than 80 teams, how about we put the new division at the top, and then promote all the teams that have done really well up a division Hmmm, i get the distinct impression you aren't taking me seriously? lol. Actually though, i think your suggestion is still a better/fairer idea than relegating some poor team down 2 divs. It's the same idea... so c'mon and tell the world WHO IS QUBIT?
|
|
|
Post by Box on Mar 20, 2013 19:13:53 GMT
Hmmm, i get the distinct impression you aren't taking me seriously? lol. Actually though, i think your suggestion is still a better/fairer idea than relegating some poor team down 2 divs. It's the same idea... so c'mon and tell the world WHO IS QUBIT? He is obviously an ex Queen Edith A player who now plays for Rathmore E
|
|