there is a flaw in his plan He says that if you finish 3rd you could play against the in form team, surely under his plan's they will face a team who is even more 'in form' after already beating two teams to get to the final whilst the 3rd placed team will still be in the exact same position after just missing out on promotion.
I like it as it is. The 2 legs add excitement. Always got that chance in the 2nd leg to put it right. You could argue that in 1 off fixtures, as has been suggested, that the poorest of the teams has more chance of progressing as anybody can get lucky in a single game. 2 legs gives a chance for the truly best team to get it right. And it doesn't matter that the 6th place team might get through. They play the league season to get a finishing position for prize money, you either qualify for the play-offs or you don't. Everybody is on an equal footing once in the play-offs.
Should have play offs for third relegation place. The last games of the season wouldn`t have as many teams with nothing to play for. I think this may have been done in the past seem to remember Charlton being involved.
I think they should do the same at the bottom as they do now at the top Bottom two relegated, and the next four up have a play-off to see who joins them.
Playoffs for who goes down is too complicated... It works if there is only one prize up for grabs - i.e. a promotion - but there are three winners and one loser (i.e. the relegated team). For promotion, you win your games and you're awarded the prize. For the relegation fight you'd have to have the teams play each other off in a mini league - maybe home and away, and then count up who does worst effectively to relegate one. Now for the promotion playoffs - you're talking about decent sides who have proven themselves over a season to a greater or lesser extent. Exciting and worth watching for the third party viewer (generally). For relegation playoffs, you're talking about the dog **** end of the division (and we can be talking about the first and second divs here too) and an extended calendar of dog **** ugly football. Who wants to watch that? No offence, but our game against Leicester at Oakwell was no 1970 world cup final. As it stands the mathematical/logistical shake up at the end of a season, where sometimes survival is pinned on an unlikely victory against a very good side - that's far more romantic and exciting altogether. So why fix what aint broke? I'm I being thick and over looking something very simplistic?
They did The first season (and maybe 2nd) the 3rd bottom in the top division played 5th in 2nd division and 3rd v 4th in 2nd division. Charlton played Leeds in the final and won to stay up.
I'm not saying that I like the idea but I would assume that a play-off at the wrong end of the table would/could work like this in order to be as close to how it works at the top as possible) Match 1: 3rd bottom plays 6th bottom - winner of that is safe Match 2: 4th bottom plays 5th bottom - winner of that is safe Match 3: Loser of match 1 plays loser of match 2 with the team losing this 'final' going down.
That makes more sense! Sounds more simple that way! (doh) Stills sounds like dog **** football though. And to be honest, as far as relegation goes - I think that where you stand on the least day should be the only thing that counts. They have included the playoffs to keep the mid-table sides involved until the last day. I don't think there is any benefit to having a playoff between third to sixth from bottoms sides, because usually they're still in the **** til the last (or at least penultimate) game anyway. We had our turn going down, Leeds got theirs, Leicester theirs this year - if you can't keep yourself out of that third from bottom spot, you don't deserve to get out by a one off lucky win (in my book anyway). Imagine the injustice?
