Idiot alert scores level after two legs...

[Hiney]

I would have been SCREAMING for the play-offs in 1978

 

[Hiney]

Mooney missed and Gurney hit the post

Tommy Mooney.

When he missed that pen I nearly DIED, falling down a few rows of seats, only being saved by [MENTION=457]sheebo[/MENTION] who got in the way.

Absolute MAYHEM

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Mooney missed and Gurney hit the post

I can vaguely remember going on the pitch at the end of that downright MYSTICAL match and reverently kissing the goalpost (right hand post at the turnstiles end if memory serves)

 

[Tricky Dicky]

I am sure I heard or was told (voices in my head)

That if the scores are level are two legs away goals do not count, and we would go through even if we drew 0-0 at Hillsbrough and then drew 1-1 at home is this correct...

Or was that a dream...

Makes a change from those voices in your head telling you to KILL, KILL, KILL

 

[ditchy]

I'm just not comfortable with the awarding of "ghost goals" at the start of what is basically a cup tie. Its a contrivance too far for me, and would warp the entire approach to the game that the teams would take. In your example for this season, if we started this tie 3 goals up on Sheff W, then what do we do, just park the bus for 180 minutes ? Or do we play our normal game that got us to this position in the first place ? What about the Final, does this goals-for-points ratio carry over to the teams at Wembley ?

Interesting idea, but it shouldn't be about giving 1/2/3 goal starts to the higher placed team, its STILL got to boil down to 90/180 minutes on the pitch IMO.

Yeah can see your point Easy and would accept final has to be a one off game equal . but i was just trying to come up with a solution to the semi finals of the play offs which i think hand the advantage to the team finishing 6th . Nothing will be perfect , it was just an opinion

 

[Easy 10]

Yeah can see your point Easy and would accept final has to be a one off game equal . but i was just trying to come up with a solution to the semi finals of the play offs which i think hand the advantage to the team finishing 6th . Nothing will be perfect , it was just an opinion

Agreed, there is no way of totally balancing up the scales without ending up properly mucking things about. The current format is simple and about as fair as it can be I suppose, except I'd still support the idea of the 3rd placed team getting a bye to the Final.

I'd also have the team finishing 17th in the Premier League playing off against the 4th/5th/6th teams in the Championship for the right to meet the 3rd placed team in the Final. That'd put the cat amongst the pigeons. BOX office stuff.

 

[GT49er]

Can see where you are coming from . I would do it on points finished above awarded as goals . For every 3 points you finish above the lower teams gives you an extra goal . so we would take a 3-0 lead into game vs sheff .. It also stops the teams that have made play offs already putting out a reserve side in their last game which is meaningless . That way they would need as many points as poss to overcome the disadvantage

Why make it so complex? We have to keep the play offs, now that they've been invented, because of the money generated (and that was the only reason for them, really). So keep them, but just change it so that the lower placed team has to actually beat the higher placed team to progress - tie drawn and the higher placed team goes through.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Agreed, there is no way of totally balancing up the scales without ending up properly mucking things about. The current format is simple and about as fair as it can be I suppose, except I'd still support the idea of the 3rd placed team getting a bye to the Final.

The very, very, very obvious answer, to confer better advantage on the higher placed teams, is to leave it as it is, except (as is already the case in lower leagues) the semi-finals should be played as a SINGLE match, with the 3rd / 4th placed teams at home.

 

[GT49er]

Agreed, there is no way of totally balancing up the scales without ending up properly mucking things about.

Yes there is - keep the format the same, but lower placed team has to actually win - a draw favours the higher placed team - that would be their justifiable advantage.

 

[DTES]

Tommy Mooney.

When he missed that pen I nearly DIED, falling down a few rows of seats, only being saved by [MENTION=457]sheebo[/MENTION] who got in the way.

Absolute MAYHEM

What a day. Huge pitch invasion afterwards where I bumped into Dick Knight and couldn't think of anything to say other than "I love you". Then the drive back to Southampton soaked through - Hiney I'm guessing your car might just about have dried out 12 years later?

 

[Hiney]

What a day. Huge pitch invasion afterwards where I bumped into Dick Knight and couldn't think of anything to say other than "I love you". Then the drive back to Southampton soaked through - Hiney I'm guessing your car might just about have dried out 12 years later?

Only just.

Roasting hot during the day so everyone wore shorts, then a DELUGE before kick-off.

What a night

 

[Easy 10]

The very, very, very obvious answer, to confer better advantage on the higher placed teams, is to leave it as it is, except (as is already the case in lower leagues) the semi-finals should be played as a SINGLE match, with the 3rd / 4th placed teams at home.

Agree, this is simple and workable. Its a lot riding on a single game, mind. 46 games boiling down to 1, with no chance of retrieving an injustice (as happened in our 46th game this season). But then its the same in the Final as well. I'd have no problem with this. Saves a few quid for the fans as well.

Yes there is - keep the format the same, but lower placed team has to actually win - a draw favours the higher placed team - that would be their justifiable advantage.

Not keen on this to be honest. The tie should always start as a level playing field IMO, one team must ultimately have to score more than the other in order to progress. Das fubull. Anything else is a contrivance.

 

[GT49er]

The very, very, very obvious answer, to confer better advantage on the higher placed teams, is to leave it as it is, except (as is already the case in lower leagues) the semi-finals should be played as a SINGLE match, with the 3rd / 4th placed teams at home.

Thus losing a substantial percentage of the revenue stream. Yes, that should go down a storm when the time comes to vote on it!

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Thus losing a substantial percentage of the revenue stream. Yes, that should go down a storm when the time comes to vote on it!

Pennies. As stated earlier in the thread, the 'revenue generating' point of the play-offs is nothing whatsoever to do with crowds from the knock-out games themselves. Its about 12-15 teams (instead of 3-5) having meaningful (and thus well attended) matches for most of the season.

 

[DTES]

Thus losing a substantial percentage of the revenue stream. Yes, that should go down a storm when the time comes to vote on it!

Then play it over THREE matches, and the highest place team is home in TWO of them. Extra revenue, plus there is no worry over 46 games boiling down to 1.

We'd all love to play Wednesday over 270 minutes, right? (At least we'd have Dale back for the final if we made it...)

 

[GT49er]

Not keen on this to be honest. The tie should always start as a level playing field IMO, one team must ultimately have to score more than the other in order to progress. Das fubull. Anything else is a contrivance.

Does start as a level playing field - exactly the same circumstances as our game at 'Boro, actually - the lower placed team HAD to win, while a draw after 90 minutes was sufficient for the higher placed club to progress.

 

[ditchy]

Agreed, there is no way of totally balancing up the scales without ending up properly mucking things about. The current format is simple and about as fair as it can be I suppose, except I'd still support the idea of the 3rd placed team getting a bye to the Final.

I'd also have the team finishing 17th in the Premier League playing off against the 4th/5th/6th teams in the Championship for the right to meet the 3rd placed team in the Final. That'd put the cat amongst the pigeons. BOX office stuff.[/QUOTE

Now you are talking Easy but we know that wont happen as the PL are more likely to up the drawbridge than lower more ladders

 

[ditchy]

Why make it so complex? We have to keep the play offs, now that they've been invented, because of the money generated (and that was the only reason for them, really). So keep them, but just change it so that the lower placed team has to actually beat the higher placed team to progress - tie drawn and the higher placed team goes through.

If you read my post thats exactly what i am saying but reward the higher placed team in the play off system

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I can vaguely remember going on the pitch at the end of that downright MYSTICAL match and reverently kissing the goalpost (right hand post at the turnstiles end if memory serves)

I got to kiss the real Lord B (Bassam of Brighton).

 

[Easy 10]

Does start as a level playing field - exactly the same circumstances as our game at 'Boro, actually - the lower placed team HAD to win, while a draw after 90 minutes was sufficient for the higher placed club to progress.

Yes but that just happened to be the way it panned out. We had the chance to be the ones in the ascendant position that day, but we stuffed it up against Derby. Playoffs are post-season cup ties and should be approached as such. None of this "you need to do this and you only need to do that" bobbins. Are you going to have the same rule at Wembley ? Just "draw" your way up through the Playoffs ?

Nah.