Winter League III

just my suggestion, it will come to a vote eventually. I just think rewarding goals more would be good, and making it harder to come back would make games better/more tactical/emphasise defense and just make the whole game more considered and creative.

If you want to reward goals, surely you don't want to emphasise defense?

I like it but I can't get my head round exactly how it would change games.

If you want to reward goals, surely you don't want to emphasise defense?

why not? means the goals are more rewarding and should be counted in the final result.

#IMO

I'd rather watch high scoring games than see teams grind out 1-0 wins over half an hour. However, I have a very short attention span.

I'd rather watch high scoring games than see teams grind out 1-0 wins over half an hour. However, I have a very short , ooooh look, a butterfly…

.

I'd rather watch high scoring games than see teams grind out 1-0 wins over half an hour.

I can't see that happening. It's two games not one, so when you score 5 in the first game it finishes. Could happen in 2:29. And these aren't European finals, most games will not be evenly matched. And the ones that are evenly matched, well they deserve a tense and tactical game.

The point of my suggestion would be to get the benefits of a half hour game to ten points, but without the negatives that you mentioned above.

No one wants a 1-0 win over half an hour, but meh these things happen.

Anyway, any other suggestions for league fixture formats...? Would be good to have more discussion before we vote

#IMO

you need more rules for polo, just like rugby union, especially ones that no-one understands.

no drongoes - that's the only rule

nicely done bdw

IMO

Two 15 minute chukkers, combine scores, that's the result.

so chukker 1 finishes 5-2, chukker 2 finishes 4-5 = fixture result 9-7. Allow draws.

That's basically one game with two chukkers Snoops.
A 30 minute game...

Duh

So it finishes 9-7 and Team A get 3 points, Team B get nothing.

Or

Team A get 3 points and a +2 GD, Team B get 3 points and a -2 GD

The league positions stay closer together using the second system, this is a good thing if you want a 'tense' league and people to remain interested.

no dingoes - that's the only rule

Fixed

dingo ate my baby…

that must have been a big dingo big daddy

10 min games are way too short. Unlimited goals suck.

Snoops, love te idea of two 15min games and combine score! Spot on

So basically a half hour game of two halves!

IMO

Two 15 minute games, combine scores, that's the result.

so game 1 finishes 5-2, game 2 finishes 4-5 = fixture result 9-7. Allow draws.

The above can be viewed as 1 game of 30mins with a half time, if you only award the final combined result.

I'm liking the format snoops give...as each team gets to play both ends of the court and two 15mins games is a good overall time for fixture. But it would be good to switch the points scoring to the following...

2 points for a win, 1 for a draw for the results of the 15min games, then another 1 point to the overall winner when the total goals are combined (goal difference also still important).

So based on the game example snoops gave...

Game 1 finishes Team A winning 5-2. Team A get 2 points.
Game 2 finishes Team A losing 4-5. Team B get 2 points
Fixture result is Team A win 9-7. Therefore get an additional 1 point.
Overall point scores =
Team A 3 points +2GD
Team B 2 points -2GD

My main gripe with last seasons format was you didn't get rewarded for scoring more goals or for winning the overall fixture. All points were given on a game by game basis.

I like the idea of awarding points per game and for the fixture as a whole. Although surely you need to give more points for winning the fixture so that you can give one for a draw?

Again, it would be better to give 3 points for a win to make winning/goal scoring more valuable.

I think the extra one point for the overall win would work well.

So lets say the fixture went 4-3, 3-3:

Team A gets 4 points (2 for the win, 1 for the draw, 1 for the overall win), Team B gets 1 point.

If the fixture went 4-4, 3-3:

Both teams get 2 points, no bonus points to anyone.

If the fixture went 4-3, 3-4:

Both teams get 2 points for their wins, no bonus points to anyone.

If the fixture went 4-3, 4-3:

Team A gets 5 points, Team B gets 0 points.

Or maybe.... you get one extra point if you win the two games overall, like in Mat's example above, but you get two extra points if you win both your games?

So my last example would give Team A 6 points, and Team B zero points.

so perhaps...

Point scoring for individual 15 mins games =
3 points for a win and obviously 0 points for losing
1 point each for draw
(greater motivation for a win)

Point scoring for overall scores after the two games =
1 point for the overall win. Obviously 0 points for losing and 0 points for an overall draw over the two 15min games.
(basically the overall better goal diff gets rewarded with 1 point)

so perhaps...

Point scoring for individual 15 mins games =
3 points for a win and obviously 0 points for losing
1 point each for draw
(greater motivation for a win)

Point scoring for overall scores after the two games =
1 point for the overall win. Obviously 0 points for losing and 0 points for an overall draw over the two 15min games.
(basically the overall better goal diff gets rewarded with 1 point)

I think 2 points for the win in the individual games would be ok, then followed by 1 point for an overall win, and an extra 1 point for a double win (more incentive to win both games).

If you have 3 for a win in each game, and then an extra 1 point, then if the score is 4-3, 4-3, the winning team gets 7 points and the loser gets 0 points.

7 points for a double win, rather than 6, seems quite a lot...

3 points for a win is crucial for me... a win and a loss should be more valuable than two draws (2 points for a win makes them of the same value).

3 points for a win is crucial for me... a win and a loss should be more valuable than two draws (2 points for a win makes them of the same value).

Yeah but if its only 2 points for a win, thats when the bonus points kick in to make you try and score more goals, to win the overall challenge over the two games.

Lets say your team loses your first game 0-3.

Then in your second game you are comfortably winning 3-0, with a minute left.

You'll get your two points for your win in this second game, but the extra bonus point for the overall win over the two games is within your reach, so you fight harder to win it 4-0 before the end (and then you deservedly get your three points for your win).

The only way you get 6 points would be for a double win.

3 points for one of your wins depends on how many goals you score over the course of the two games... which is something that is trying to be encouraged, right?

Agreed. That's why rewarding the overall goal difference is important. It also makes the second game become more intense and tactical. It will incentivise teams to push for the win or get the better goals difference.

The point system would still work well by giving 2 for a win, 1 for a draw and 1 additional point for the best goal difference.

I feel this game/point format gives the overall fixture more depth.

Unlimited goals suck.

Why? seems to work well in lots of other sports.