Remove this Banner Ad

The on topic thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jatz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I like my history and was intrigued a little in the formative years of The Football League, and one thing I noticed in that first season in 1888-89 was the tiebreakers for teams on the same points.
I saw the bottom of the league, Notts County and Stoke tied for last on 12 points.
In today's tiebreakers, Stoke would've finished 11 with a Goal difference of -25 beating out Notts County on -33.
HOWEVER, at that time, the difference was goal average. Notts County averaged 0.548 goals to 1 against, where as Stoke average 0.510.

I just wonder what people would think of the idea of reverting back to this tiebreaker?
Rather than awarding teams who keep it close in 1-2 type wins, it'd reward teams for being attacking. Losing 3-5 would be better than losing 1-2.

Honestly, in fairness, I think this is a bad idea, but in theory it could improve the 'attractiveness' of the game with more attacking football.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Just looked into it a little more, foolish they kept it that way.
It hurts teams the other way.
1966-67
2nd was Nottingham Forrest
3rd was Tottenham
Tied on 56 points, tied on +23 GD.
however, Nottingham went 1.561 going 64 for, 41 against.
Tottenham went 1.479 going 71 for 48 against.

At the top end, defence is better.

Obviously a flawed system.
Really shouldn't have focused on 1 example (1888-89) before suggesting it.
 
I rate David Silva slightly ahead of Eden Hazard. Silva is more aesthetically pleasing to watch imo.

Matic would be my player of the season but i suspect Fabregas will win it.
Id take Hazard before Silva personally. He just seems more damaging and is still getting better too. He has magic feet too, Messi type where he moves at pace and the ball just sticks. He's frightening.
 
Id take Hazard before Silva personally. He just seems more damaging and is still getting better too. He has magic feet too, Messi type where he moves at pace and the ball just sticks. He's frightening.
Fair enough mate. We just like different things. Hazard is better 1 on 1 but i think Silva is a smarter player. It's the Coutinho vs Eriksen thing all over again :D. Just depends on your personal preference.
 
depends if you want someone who runs at the fullback or someone who puts in killer balls over and over

for me it's silva but i imagine sometimes how much better he could be if he consistently played in the middle and had someone like hazard out to the left of him. silva played some of the best stuff of his career when we didnt have a striker. finally added goals to his game this season too.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Tony Hibbert is better than Alexis Sanchez imo

tony-hibbert.jpg
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

With Walcott only have a year to run on his current come this summer, not sure what he would get on the market. Maybe £10m-£12m.
 
fully expect 2 of wilshere, walcott and barkley at the club

txiki and that need to have a big window and nail it. still a fair way behind garry cook's silva/yaya/kun effort.

Why would you want either of Wilshere or Walcott?

One is perma-crocked, angry and inconsistant and the other runs fast but has no other skills.

The Ox has moved past both this season and is 2 years younger.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom