Division Three South (2015-16)

Venues, fixtures, teams and related matters.
Alan Walton
Posts: 1296
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by Alan Walton » Mon Feb 15, 2016 4:22 pm

These arguments about the pool system are always around

Personally I preferred the old APA system of 12 team divisions with 3 up and 3 down; but I also understand there are positives with the pool system

Though if the league did want to revert back to the APA system it would take alot of thought on the best way to recompose the leagues to keep everybody happy and make sure there is something to play for during the previous season

pauldhatchett
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 8:45 pm

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by pauldhatchett » Mon Feb 15, 2016 4:59 pm

Mike Truran wrote:Joey

As you say, we're fair people. The pros and cons aren't quite as clear-cut as you make them out to be to be honest, but you're clearly passionate about the subject.

Anyway, if there's a groundswell of opinion that all results should be carried forward I'm sure we would have no particular problem changing.

Over to you!

Mike
Although I have not spoken to the team I think we would not be in favour of a change midway through the season. The system used is the same as Div 1 and 2 and there should be consistency. (After all, have they complained?)

I am a big supporter of the current rules.The split after 7 rounds adds value and excitement to matches which otherwise be rather irrelevant. For instance, we next play Oxford with the result very relevant to how many points are taken to the relegation pool by both teams and, hence, the chances of avoiding relegation. If we were in a big Swiss with neither of us with a hope of promotion then there would be significantly less interest in the result.

We are potentially going to lose one of our wins if Anglian Avengers do not lose to the Rookies but that is not particularly unfair in my opinion. The relegated teams will ultimately do worse in matches against the teams who have landed in that division so you are judging the performance against the peers. This is the first year of the new Div 3 and 4 south and perhaps you may wish to see how it goes for a period of time before tinkering.
Paul Hatchett
(Captain - Rhyfelwyr Essyllwg)

LawrenceCooper
Posts: 5234
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by LawrenceCooper » Mon Feb 15, 2016 5:12 pm

pauldhatchett wrote:
Mike Truran wrote:Joey

As you say, we're fair people. The pros and cons aren't quite as clear-cut as you make them out to be to be honest, but you're clearly passionate about the subject.

Anyway, if there's a groundswell of opinion that all results should be carried forward I'm sure we would have no particular problem changing.

Over to you!

Mike
Although I have not spoken to the team I think we would not be in favour of a change midway through the season. The system used is the same as Div 1 and 2 and there should be consistency. (After all, have they complained?)
I think it's safe to say that Mike has no intention of changing the rules mid season :)

Neil Graham
Posts: 1404
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by Neil Graham » Mon Feb 15, 2016 5:13 pm

Can I respond to the comments made in this thread?

Firstly at a captains' meeting sometime ago I suggested the 4NCL was split into all-play-all Divisions of 12 teams. It's easy to understand from a layman's point of view and mirrors professional sport elsewhere. This suggestion didn't meet with any approval at all and until there is a groundswell to change back, I really don't think it worthwhile pursuing.

Secondly as regards the seeding in Division 3 (South), it's impossible to predict who may or may not turn out for a team based on previous season's results. A fair and thoughtful seeding was done based on the criteria laid down; it's so happened that Pool A has turned out stronger than Pool B but I would suggest that this happens every year. If all the seeding was correct and all matches went with seeding we would have a very boring league.

Finally I'd like to reject the comment that the system is somehow "a carnival lottery". Every captain knows at the start of the preliminary round what they need to do to get into the promotion pool or avoid the relegation pool. My team was perfectly aware what was required this weekend to achieve that objective. All the teams playing in Round Seven now know the challenges - there are promotion/relegation issues at stake in the majority of matches which will make for an interesting and closely fought weekend.

pauldhatchett
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 8:45 pm

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by pauldhatchett » Mon Feb 15, 2016 6:02 pm

Neil Graham wrote:
Secondly as regards the seeding in Division 3 (South), it's impossible to predict who may or may not turn out for a team based on previous season's results. A fair and thoughtful seeding was done based on the criteria laid down; it's so happened that Pool A has turned out stronger than Pool B but I would suggest that this happens every year. If all the seeding was correct and all matches went with seeding we would have a very boring league.

Finally I'd like to reject the comment that the system is somehow "a carnival lottery". Every captain knows at the start of the preliminary round what they need to do to get into the promotion pool or avoid the relegation pool. My team was perfectly aware what was required this weekend to achieve that objective. All the teams playing in Round Seven now know the challenges - there are promotion/relegation issues at stake in the majority of matches which will make for an interesting and closely fought weekend.
Sounds right to me.
Paul Hatchett
(Captain - Rhyfelwyr Essyllwg)

Mike Truran
Posts: 2392
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by Mike Truran » Mon Feb 15, 2016 6:08 pm

I had forgotten Neil's captains' meeting point, but yes, his version of events is pretty much much spot on.

It's ironic that as soon as we moved to a pool system in imitation of the French League (to be fair, we had done our research across a number of other European leagues - it wasn't just the whim of a moment), their organisers (I think the very next year) changed to the APA model they still have today.

LawrenceCooper
Posts: 5234
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by LawrenceCooper » Mon Feb 15, 2016 6:27 pm

Neil Graham wrote:Secondly as regards the seeding in Division 3 (South), it's impossible to predict who may or may not turn out for a team based on previous season's results. A fair and thoughtful seeding was done based on the criteria laid down; it's so happened that Pool A has turned out stronger than Pool B but I would suggest that this happens every year. If all the seeding was correct and all matches went with seeding we would have a very boring league.
Agreed, if captains don't know how strong their own teams will be over the season (myself included) what chance do the organisers have?

User avatar
Joey Stewart
Posts: 1145
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
Location: All Of Them
Contact:

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by Joey Stewart » Mon Feb 15, 2016 6:58 pm

Ok, so I have put a pretty good argument for the cons of the pool system, what actually are the pros? Other then 'there might be imbalances in team strength' (which, given the fluid nature of player composition, is impossible for anyone to really account for) is there anything else?
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.

Rhys Cumming
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 11:31 am

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by Rhys Cumming » Mon Feb 15, 2016 7:17 pm

A few easy ones off the top of my head:

1. Bigger divisions means it's quicker for teams to rise up divisions and therefore it encourages new teams with stronger players to form. I doubt Alba would have formed for example if they had to go into a div 4 or 5.
2. Keeps intrigue in the middle of the season. Round 7 in particular can be quite exciting with the amount on the line.
3. If everything goes according to plan, the biggest games will happen at the end of the season. The top teams from each pool play each other in round 11 leading to Wood Green vs Guildford type matches from a couple of years ago. The same is also true in relegation and promotion fights.
4. Gives meaningful goals for midtable teams. This is less true in Div 2 and by the looks of it Div 3S where all teams are very similar and the concept of a midtable team is slighty foreign, but for any teams where promotion is unrealistic and relegation likely to be avoided, then the goal of getting into the promotion pool is much more meaningful than battling over 6th or 7th in an APA.
Last edited by Rhys Cumming on Mon Feb 15, 2016 7:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2627
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by MartinCarpenter » Mon Feb 15, 2016 7:55 pm

1 is especially true - how else would you organise 16 team divisions? You could argue for Div1/2 being smaller, but Div3 would be much harder to cut down.

You can see it working well in 3N - most teams sorted into the top/bottom pools as expected, all carry overs entirely as expected and some last round intrigue for a few of the mid range teams. The teams in 3S do seem to be so equal that the model gets a bit stretched.

User avatar
Joey Stewart
Posts: 1145
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
Location: All Of Them
Contact:

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by Joey Stewart » Mon Feb 15, 2016 9:31 pm

It only really works as intended in division 1 where you have professional vs amateur teams with massive gaps between them and the fight for relegation/championship is divided more evenly (and,almost always, the pool merger does not cost anyone many points).

Division 2 and 3 both have much more evenly balanced teams and therefore not appropriate to be penalising anybody for 'failing' to defeat opposition equally good if not better then themselves.
I have heard it said that it gives mid table teams more to pay for but you know what would create even more intrigue, and keep players motivated- Every game point mattering! Then you can always be trying your hardest, not just waiting till round 5 to decide if the remaining matches have any bearing on the pool your team will end up in.
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.

Mike Truran
Posts: 2392
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by Mike Truran » Mon Feb 15, 2016 10:15 pm

To be fair to Joey (and I apologise if I have misunderstood his point), his original criticism was that only some, and not all, of the first pool matches are carried forward into the second pool. I didn't understand his original point to be a criticism of the pool system per se, but more about which match results were or weren't carried forward.

So (although I personally believe that there are good reasons fort not carrying forward all results), I'm not sure that the replies to Joey's point have necessarily addressed his concerns.

pauldhatchett
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 8:45 pm

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by pauldhatchett » Mon Feb 15, 2016 10:25 pm

I don't think it is particularly unfair.

You decide who gets promoted or relegated by reference to the results against the teams who have succeeded or failed to get into the promotion or relegation pool. The discarded results still had value as they were instrumental in deciding whether you got into the promotion or relegation pool in the first place. Therefore all results count but just have an effect on different things.

I am sure nobody fails to put maximum effort regardless
Paul Hatchett
(Captain - Rhyfelwyr Essyllwg)

Mike Truran
Posts: 2392
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by Mike Truran » Mon Feb 15, 2016 10:48 pm

That would be pretty close to the answer I would have given. The results that aren't carried forward are still important (they are an important part of the tie break sequence under rule 13.1), but the results that really matter most are those against your promotion/relegation peers.

But as Joey has rightly pointed out, there is more than one opinion on the matter. However, at the end of the day, and in the absence of the 4NCL Board and captains having a transmitter to God, it can probably only ever be a matter of opinion.

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2627
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: Division Three South (2015-16)

Post by MartinCarpenter » Mon Feb 15, 2016 10:51 pm

Well if you take the pool system/16 team divisions as read, you're left choosing between the potential unfairness/randomness of the current system or the unfairness of people being compared over potentially quite unequal fields if (when :)) the pools end up notably unbalanced.

I've no idea how you'd go about trying to compare those objectively.

Post Reply