qrj Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 It's the "39th" game with the "top five teams" seeded I have a problem with. Not to mention everyone from managers to players whinging about players burning out and fixture congestion, already, if a player struggles to cope with international friendlies a mid season trip to Sydney, New York or Tokyo will probably destroy him. I can see Sir Al, Wenger, Benitez and Grant bickering about locations, opponents, pitches and culture already. No thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carnoch04 Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chas (Psyatika): <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chas (Psyatika): I don't think the plan is as detrimental to the league as some of you moaners make it sound. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> With the exception of the 39th fixture. That's just silly! Leave it at 38 and give us a useless match. The clubs will earn so much money anyway, that it won't matter if the overseas match caused them to finish 14th instead of 13th. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> The 39th game is vital. Otherwise half the teams in the league would lose a home fixture. It may not matter if an extra away fixture makes you finish 14th instead of 13th, but what if it made you finish 16th (relegated) instead of 15th (safe) ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_33 Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 I almost scared to say I support this. I'm from South Africa and the prospect of watching premiership football (even Derby vs Wigan) excites me greatly. I know South Africa hasn't been listed at this point but hopefully it would be considered at a later stage. According to Sky News they would give a week break before and after the fixture. This means a max of 3 games in 14 days over this period - this is better than the usual schedule of a successful premiership club Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSCCG Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 Most importantly this affects the balance of the teams playing 2 matches with every other team and difference of venue can affect results this can't be overcome so its not possible unless the results did not count towards the final points Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyinuk Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 i don't know what are the fans getting upset about. it's not like they are losing a home game to go to. however i am strong against this idea because it unbalance the league finish, if say, Man U draw against a weak in the 39th game, Arsenal draw against Chlesea and there is only one point seperate the three of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
homerjnick Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 Why do people worry about features that MIGHT be in the NEXT game? If it happens in real life then it will happen in FM0X. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bongo-Bongo Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by andyinuk: however i am strong against this idea because it unbalance the league finish, if say, Man U draw against a weak in the 39th game, Arsenal draw against Chlesea and there is only one point seperate the three of them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I think thats a lot of peoples problems. It completley unbalances the entire league. If clubs really want to sell the Premiership abroad, it would be a far more logical idea to stage the Community Shield abroad. It's not exactly considered prestigous in England so I doubt few people would miss it after a year or so, and it would give other countries the chance to see two of Englands top teams compete. This would make far more sense then unbalancing an entire league competition in the pursuit of money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sthptngomad76 Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">but what if it made you finish 16th (relegated) instead of 15th (safe) ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I think you mean 18th (relegated) vs 17th (safe)? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xavierm Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ched: Glad to see some are a little more open minded. I do find the talk of boycott hilarious - i would be willing to bet my house that all these people talking of boycotts would possibly do it for as much as a month, and then realise that nothing has changed that much and start spending again - yet another case of internet bravado. I would support my team wherever they go (not saying i could afford to go there, but i'd sure as hell watch them on tv), if they want to make money then fair enough, how else are they going to pay the team. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Let's talk about sport one minute, please. Just imagine your team is a relegation candidate, they draw their 39 fixture against Man Utd, whereas another relegation candidate gets a fixture against, hmm, Fulham or Middlesbrough. Where's the equity ? Wouldn't you feel cheated ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ched Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xavierm: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ched: Glad to see some are a little more open minded. I do find the talk of boycott hilarious - i would be willing to bet my house that all these people talking of boycotts would possibly do it for as much as a month, and then realise that nothing has changed that much and start spending again - yet another case of internet bravado. I would support my team wherever they go (not saying i could afford to go there, but i'd sure as hell watch them on tv), if they want to make money then fair enough, how else are they going to pay the team. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Let's talk about sport one minute, please. Just imagine your team is a relegation candidate, they draw their 39 fixture against Man Utd, whereas another relegation candidate gets a fixture against, hmm, Fulham or Middlesbrough. Where's the equity ? Wouldn't you feel cheated ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> It would be exactly the same as drawing man utd in a cup - if the draw is fair then i wouldn't complain. If it could happen to other teams i would accept it when it happened to us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFC Lloydy Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 I am not against the Premier League going abroad but to do it with the format that currently being suggested would be wrong. It would defeat the whole point of what a league competition is. Draws such as this are acceptable for cup competitions becuase that is the concept of them but a league is different. It is meant to be as exact a measurement as possible as to who is the best in that group of clubs. IMO the extra game would have a negative effect on the league's integrity. Then there are all the other problems such as fixture congestion. It would be much better if another format was thought up, preferably one that doesn't directly interfere with the league. One way is with the Community Shield although I don't think the Premier League greed will be satisfied with one match. Anyway, rant over so back to the game, as everyone has said SI can't and won't do anything yet as this is still in the very early stages. It would be like SI putting in a limit on foregign players just because there might be one in the future. I do think however that in a game it would work much better and be more enjoable that IRL. I would be very interested to see how SI put it in the game. Although that is a long way off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
metropolistechnique Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 I am torn on this. I agree with people who say it unbalances the league, but that can be looked atm, maybe 2 games? We'll see. But people going on about being 'real fans' 'us real fans' are talking complete nonsense. theres are TONNES more HARDCORE man utd etc fans in the far east than there are in england. who's to say theyre not REAL FANS? You still get your 38 games, and you won't even let them have 1 or 2. Football Clubs are businesses, this could be a huge boost to teams otherwise looking at going into administration. So actually overall, I am for it, but only if they find the right format. Boycotters are idiots. Premiership is only going to get more and more popular so your 'stand' would mean nothing and just show you were being selfish. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
turn it upto 11 Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 i dont think it will happen anyway, too many people would be upset, and everybodys already said about the possibilty of having an extra game against the big four it wouldnt be right They are saying if it happens it will happen in january will wont directly decide the league as much as man u arsenal final game of the season. It will still have a long term affect because for example of the bug four would have an extra game against relegation candidates and probaly easily win whereas another of the big four could have a game against mid table where they may not win hence giving the first an unfair advantage another view is that it would put even more money between the premiership and championship, say the games in question gave another million to each team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hufton Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ched: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hufton: so many foreign owners and so much greed </div></BLOCKQUOTE> They are business men, they own clubs in order to make money, you don't do your job for free, so they don't own a club in order to make a loss. The lack of common sense on these forums is truly astounding. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I never said that it didn't make good business sense, I just think that it is a really bad idea, and I'm wondering if the football will ever come ahead of the desire to make huge amounts of money like it used to. Remember when the owners of football clubs were people who had the best interests of the club at heart instead of the best way to line their own pockets? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlos1879 Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 I think this is a terrible idea the top 5 teams are seeded so its basically an extra 3 points per season for them really as they dont have to worry about being drawn against Chelsea or Man U. Think about it if the top 5 dont have to play each other that means that one of them could get say Derby 3 times in a season. I think it will make it really unbalanced all the managers and chairmen are saying its a wonderful idea and why simply becaude it will mean more money. But imagine this scenario say two teams are fighting relegation say Fulham and Derby and Derby get drawn against Chelsea and Fulham get drawn against Bolton and Derby lose but Fulham win and this makes Derby get relegated do you think the manager will be happy then that he had to play an extra game against Chelsea or the other way round if Chelsea win the league by 3 points if they get drawn against weak oponents but Man U get drawn at a good team like Villa or Pompey and lose do you think Sir Alex would be happy with that. If they are going to do this which I hope they dont it'l just give managers and players more reason to complain about fixtures but if they decide this is a good idea there should be no seeding as if its considered fair for lower teams to be drawn against Chelsea/Arsenal etc... it should be fair for the top 5 to be drawn against each other its unfair otherwise as who ever finishes top 5 will be laughing because they know they will be gauraunteed a 3rd fixture against lower opponents and not have to worry about being picked against a big team and will give them an advantage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlos1879 Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Football Clubs are businesses, this could be a huge boost to teams otherwise looking at going into administration. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Sorry for double post forgot about this bit I just wanted to say how many EPL clubs have gone into administration in recent years compared to Championship or league 1 & 2 clubs it may make the clubs in the EPL richer but it will just mean that the money for transfers will keep skyrocketing and teams in the lower leagues wont be able to keep up financially. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
turn it upto 11 Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 the fairest way to do it would be 1st to 4th drawn in one hat 5th to 8th 9th to 12th 15th to 16th 17th to 20th but the only reason the want to top four seeded is so there is more chance the big "brands" get seperated across the globe which will increase revenue its unfair theyve asked the chairmans, how many chairmans are fans of thier team, how many have got foriegn owners who are after a quick buck. to be honest i think these buisness men are worse than ambromovich, he just has far to much money and wanted a laugh, these chairmen are trying to make money. this is just the death of football, final nail in the coffin if you ask me, next step, half time shows, cheerleaders fireworksbefoe games, im glad my team is in the lowwer leagues Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SI Staff Ter Posted February 8, 2008 SI Staff Share Posted February 8, 2008 I'm sure we'll be watching this with interest to see how (if anything) it develops. In the meantime, you can discuss this in the topic about it in the Off Topic Discussion section. http://community.sigames.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/8191933985/m/7802054973 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.