Tournament Structure Thread (Please Read)

[Griffo]

After discussing the matter with Effine we have worked out the only way to make the competition how you want it, after the poll in the Sledging Thread it said you wanted to play both Home and Away but there is a problem with that.

As of now any team which joins after the original start up begins from the bottom, if we make it 6 weeks per promotion/demotion to play both Home and Away the monster teams which join from the bottom will spend more time working their way up

So you need to decide what your preference is, would you prefer Home and Away fixtures or would you rather see the monster teams work their way up as soon as possible. Please vote in the thread with your personal opinion and post your opinions


Griffo

PS: If any people in this tournament have MSN would you please add me following the link under my name to the left, this would make life eaiser trying to organise things.

 

[ste_mc_efc]

i think 6 weeks is fair

if it's 3 some teams will have two away games and one 1 home game. Be hard to alternate that every season so some teams would inevitably play away far more than home (and vice versa) which is unfair in both directions

e.g it'd be unfair as ive set up my team to perform best on a dusty pitch, only to play assassins and murderers both away for 3 seasons on the run. likewise it'd be unfair for them to have to play at my dust bowl 3 seasons on the run

 

[iloveireland]

At the moment the weaker team is at home so the best team in the group doesnt play at home at all.

 

[voldemort]

If we go with sets of 3 weeks we are more likely to fit more games in each season as we can go in multiples of 3, 3-6-9, but if 6 weeks we can only go
6-12-18

@Ste: You cant nurture a team that only bowls on dusty pitch, maybe this might encourage you to look into the pace aspect, thats what the point of this league is, force changes on your team, Handsome and Suren would'nt have played each other competitively unless it was today, and we did indeed see a surprising result...

 

[FreddieFan]

I think six weeks seems fairer. It allows each team a home game against the others, which can make a difference between tight teams - there was a time when if you drew Everton and he produced a dusty pitch, you'd be in real trouble. This isn't the case so much since he sold Dlomo, but the point still stands.

 

[Hooper]

Six weeks.

 

[handsome]

3 weeks. 6 means fewer rounds. with 3 weeks we also will play a varying types of teams.

 

[ste_mc_efc]

If we go with sets of 3 weeks we are more likely to fit more games in each season as we can go in multiples of 3, 3-6-9, but if 6 weeks we can only go
6-12-18

@Ste: You cant nurture a team that only bowls on dusty pitch, maybe this might encourage you to look into the pace aspect, thats what the point of this league is, force changes on your team, Handsome and Suren would'nt have played each other competitively unless it was today, and we did indeed see a surprising result...

it was only ever a mid-term plan. winning most of my home games and the odd away (in the BT FC + OD leagues) would keep me up comfortably. I could then build a more rounded side, add more away wins to push for promotion as i would have better seamers so would be more versatile away on varying pitches, while remaining with 3 spinners i could utilise at home against seam based attacks, even fielding 2 would give me an advantage

i think to be successful in OD FC BT20 and the cup (be it BT or PC) you need 7 good bowlers. For me having 3 of them as spinners provided depth with a strong tactic at home.

that tactic served me well but i needed to sell dlomo so i could bring in 2 bowlers for PF balancing reasons

for the tactical depth of making your team hard to beat at home i tihnk you need to play the same amount of games at home as you do away.

Make it 2 up 2 down to make teams drift through the leagues more if needs be

 

[Griffo]

Make it 2 up 2 down to make teams drift through the leagues more if needs be

Thats good in theory but it would create uneven games and also not bring as much tension into each game

 

[zainawan89]

i think we shuld go with 3 games....
in this way we can play lot more games in one BT season....

 

[ste_mc_efc]

Thats good in theory but it would create uneven games and also not bring as much tension into each game

yeh, no real chance to build a rivalry, which is why i said if needs must, be better if it stayed at 1 up 1 down.

6 matches a season, could fit in 12 matches a season (perhaps 1/2 less depending on cup runs)

could get promoted twice in one BT season seems fluid enough

 

[aussie1st]

3 seems to be a good length. If you are the bottom team in your group then having 5 weeks of losses isn't fun. With only 3 weeks you only have 3 weeks before you join a group more around your skill level. Same works the other way if you are in an easy group then 5 easy games gets a bit boring.

Also it gives you the chance to play more teams on PC.

 

[Griffo]

Exactly, I can see a massive rivalry about to happen between myself and Mental Blank

I think we will leave this thread open for just a few more days so everyone can take a look

 

[viral1991]

I think that we should go with 3 matches for the first few seasons. Then, when all the teams are well-settled in competitive groups, 6 games would be best suitable.

 

[angryangy]

I don't think home ground advantage is all that big. I agree that six is the ideal, but I think three has been better argued.