sm11
Bench Warmer
Posts: 87
|
Post by sm11 on Jun 23, 2022 23:56:26 GMT
I really do think that BE need to start taking things like this far more seriously. I honestly think there are people on their board that think that things like this doesnt matter as long as people are participating in the sport then nothing else matters, after all i think players will keep playing regardless. But these kind of injustices may put people off sponsoring clubs, could put volunteers off, will mean that clubs could collapse which does lower participation. If they are going to stick to the written regulations which is fine then they have got to be more proactive with those regulations and write in procedures to cover situations like mentioned above.
|
|
|
|
Post by tony on Jun 25, 2022 7:51:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by dandayr on Jun 25, 2022 11:17:29 GMT
so many things look wrong in this.
team that wins play-offs remains in D3 while 3 teams they beat are now in D2.
from comments here, the NBL facebook page and Teesside statement, seems a league structure was put in place and started without any agreed documented rules on how promotion and relegation would be managed.
league managers make a decision using a system that doesnot take into consideration the size of different leagues
far too late now, but all of that should have been sorted when they put the D1 to D3 NBL structure in place.
if they were struggling to work out how to come up with a 'formula' to decide promotion of 4 teams from 7 leagues they could have gone a fairly obvious way (I am sure others will have other obvious ways) but the key is need to publish what ever the process is before the first tip occurs.
League winners go into a end of season round robin promotion tournament. 6 further games , top 4 promoted. Top 2 can still go to Manchester to play a one off game for play-off title.
An alternate, treat each div3 league like a FIBA tournament group and use the well documented methods FIBA have for classifying teams not in the same group. Now first flaw with this is it relies on teams in each group play each other same number of times (not true for D3 North compared to the others, but would have been solved by better balancing of the D3 leagues) but once you have each league is a traditional H/A only - then if one league has 9 teams and the other 8 then you ignore the results against the 9th placed side. You could even take this one step further and when calculating win% only include the results between the top 4 sides in each league.
A lot of these ideas may be impractical and junk - maybe one of them is a real solution, all that matters is teams need to know when a competition starts how things like promotion will be decided - not learn after the season is over.
|
|
|
|
Post by SamH on Jun 25, 2022 12:46:32 GMT
Couldn't agree more!
|
|
sm11
Bench Warmer
Posts: 87
|
Post by sm11 on Jun 25, 2022 13:52:40 GMT
For me this should be the priority for promotion going forward...
1) League position
2) Play Off Performance
3) Winning percentage
Following this far more satisfying criterea then Teesside Lions, Worcester Wolves, St Helens Saints and London Thunder would be promoted.
|
|
|
|
Post by tallerman on Jun 26, 2022 17:59:03 GMT
I was of the opinion that teesside should've gone up before reading that, opinion changed now, didn't realise they threw away a couple of games at the end of the season.
What seems to be clear is they thought they were bigger than basketball England once again, especially after saying they're a d1 team last year
|
|
|
|
Post by SamH on Jun 26, 2022 18:22:21 GMT
I don't know the details about that but I'm of the opinion that if they were kept down as a punishment for something, BE should release a statement to say so. But generally if you're good enough and got the results, you should move up and if there's a conduct issue that should be dealt with separately. When you say they threw games away, are we saying they lost on purpose?
|
|
|
|
Post by tallerman on Jun 26, 2022 21:04:53 GMT
No I'm saying they lost games they should've won based on ability. Not in a nasty way but in a way you should've won that
|
|
sm11
Bench Warmer
Posts: 87
|
Post by sm11 on Jun 26, 2022 21:38:55 GMT
Some people really did over react to that tweet by Teesside Lions during the pandemic offering to step in if a current D1 team couldnt. For me they were simply just saying what they were, that they were in a position to fill in. They werent wishing another to fold nor saying nobody else would have been able to fill in either. They were simply just saying they were ready if needed. Oh the horror.
The same people who harp on about how dreadful it is when Uni teams or other clubs who arent bothered about attracting crowds get promoted into D1, are the same people who were then scoffing when a club who has clearly works very hard to attract crowds simply just says something as honestly harmless as above during a very unorthodox time for sports as a whole. Its just laughable when you think about it.
It just beggars belief that somebody at EB decided to put the 'play offs performance will not be considered for promotion' regulation into there rule books. Why word it that way. Why restrict your self like that. If you want League performance to be what you want clubs to focus on then fine, im ok with that, but surely have Play Off performance as a secondary measure at least. Why write it out completely. Why restrict yourselves like that, now you have ended up forcing your self into making an embarrassing decision like this.
|
|
|
|
Post by tallerman on Jun 26, 2022 22:04:38 GMT
I dont think it's an embarrassing situation at all. Quite a simple one really. The best 4 winners from their leagues went up as has always been the case. Playoffs don't affect promotion, nor have they in the past
|
|
sm11
Bench Warmer
Posts: 87
|
Post by sm11 on Jun 26, 2022 22:54:11 GMT
Fair enough, but its just that when you have 7 league winners and 4 to send up, surely the better method would be to use the play off results to decide. The league results analyses them in a manner in which none of them have been on court together nor any of your opponents have met any of their opponents. Surely the best way would be using the play off results as thats when some of them come on court together. League position first absolutely, but play off performance next.
You say its always been the case but im going through all the old league tables now and cannot see any other instance in history of the the NBL since regional divisions were introduced in 01/02 where there were more league winners than promotion places available (literally never before, this is the first). Play Off results havent been needed to determine promotion for a very long time as i said previously this is the first time in possibly ever that no one has withdrawn from above therefore the situation has arisen that there are more league champion/promotion eligible teams than there were promotion places. But we have finally arrived at this point and they have restricted themselves to having to use winning percentages. I mean one of the promoted teams played just 9 league games, they were a whole 3.5 games ahead of 2nd in just a 6 team league, jesus christ. And Teesside beat all the other 3. How can anybody say winning percentage is a better way to decide promotion at this point. I just cant see it that way. EB have to do it that way unfortunately because of that very narrow minded regulation they wrote in. I really hope they amend the regulations in future to something like what i said at the end of the paragraph above.
|
|
|
|
Post by tallerman on Jun 27, 2022 6:10:18 GMT
I'm not saying its better either but its how they determine promotion as they always have.
In the 20 years you looked playoffs havent been a contender so they wouldn't change the rules without it being mentioned at the start.
I do feel its ridiculous to have 7 regional leagues to fill d2 but that's the growth of lower level clubs, there has to be a funnel to d2 and d1 and there is
|
|
sm11
Bench Warmer
Posts: 87
|
Post by sm11 on Jun 27, 2022 9:22:20 GMT
Yep tbf to EB they can technically only go by whats written in the regulations and it does say play off performance is not considered. But even then the rest of the regulations are very vague. It definately leaves people guessing. Now should be the time to write proper regulations surrounding promotion and relegation. I hope they do so.
Despite what ive written I am actually in favour of the shape of the NBL at the moment. An elite set of divisions with a very wide ranging heavily regionalised bottom Division to start off with. 4 or 3 Divisions overall I dont mind. Its just they need to recognise that if they have 7 leagues at the bottom then they need either 7 relegation places above to match or if not then to use play off performance to seperate the league winners below. Set strongly defined regulations before we set off.
When i started going through the leagues, interestingly i found a number of league winners in the past that were not promoted. I started in 2003/04 (so post Conference era) and found 2003/04 Brixton Topcats, 2005/06 Manchester Magic II, 2005/06 Loughborough Cardinals, 2009/10 Huddersfield Heat, 2009/10 Barking Abbey. I got tired and gave up after 2009/10. I might start looking further later, but it was still interesting to see how different promotion and relegation has been treated over the years. Having said that some of the teams mentioned just then may have turned down promotion so its still difficult to say that the study proved anything lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by SamH on Jun 27, 2022 10:09:11 GMT
Could it also be to do with setup and facilities? Standards are higher for D1 and I think D2 than they are below.
|
|
|
|
Post by tallerman on Jun 27, 2022 12:06:39 GMT
I think teesside are probably the most professional outfits in the d2 and d3 combined Sam.
I agree something needs to be in place to make it abundtly clear for promotion. Will be interesting to see if teesside go up next year after losing Steutal
|
|
|
|
Post by SamH on Jun 27, 2022 13:33:02 GMT
Yeah I meant for some of those previous teams sm11 mentioned rather than Lions. They should have consistent rules on it for sure though.
|
|
|
|
Post by samgray on Jun 29, 2022 23:03:22 GMT
Yep tbf to EB they can technically only go by whats written in the regulations and it does say play off performance is not considered. But even then the rest of the regulations are very vague. It definately leaves people guessing. Now should be the time to write proper regulations surrounding promotion and relegation. I hope they do so. Despite what ive written I am actually in favour of the shape of the NBL at the moment. An elite set of divisions with a very wide ranging heavily regionalised bottom Division to start off with. 4 or 3 Divisions overall I dont mind. Its just they need to recognise that if they have 7 leagues at the bottom then they need either 7 relegation places above to match or if not then to use play off performance to seperate the league winners below. Set strongly defined regulations before we set off. When i started going through the leagues, interestingly i found a number of league winners in the past that were not promoted. I started in 2003/04 (so post Conference era) and found 2003/04 Brixton Topcats, 2005/06 Manchester Magic II, 2005/06 Loughborough Cardinals, 2009/10 Huddersfield Heat, 2009/10 Barking Abbey. I got tired and gave up after 2009/10. I might start looking further later, but it was still interesting to see how different promotion and relegation has been treated over the years. Having said that some of the teams mentioned just then may have turned down promotion so its still difficult to say that the study proved anything lol. I played (not much) for that magic team. The club rejected promotion and most of the players left. Was a great team and season! |
|
|
|
Post by tony on Jul 7, 2022 6:11:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by tony on Jul 18, 2022 10:12:37 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by tony on Aug 7, 2022 15:51:21 GMT
|
|
