LOI In Europe 2021

[A N Mouse]

Yes you have - when you say that "having 4 teams now maintain the year on year co-efficient points at or above 1.000 is a sign of progress over the last decade"; that's absolute coefficients right there. It ignores that the CL representatives have more games than before because they drop into the EL/CL2 when knocked out of the CL first round, which has only happened since 2016. So the same coefficient in 2020 is worse than the equivalent total in 2014. In fact, our coefficient in 2020 would have been 0.875 under pre 2016 rules, when Dundalk would have been knocked out straight away (five second legs were all scored as draws, and first-round draws for Rovers/Bohs)

Ok so that's not an 'absolute co-efficient' that's one for a single year. It basically means that if there were three teams that year then 3 wins or 6 draws or some some combination of the two was achieved. And similarly 4 win or 8 draws for 4 teams. And this can be used to compare years. An absolute co-efficient would be comparing the 5 year cumulative totals, this would make no sense.

The second bit is also a nonsense, as the co-efficient is the co-efficient and as you have been so keen to point out the rules changed for everyone. Without looking at the actual results year by year you cannot categorically state that because of new rules this year is now unequal to a previous similar value - the champions may not have even got a draw however many bites of the cherry they got.

I remain unable to square the circle of the the co-efficient can't account for second bites of the cherry, but it's fine for you to count them in your tally?



Sigh. I've actually pointed out that our ranking has fallen from 29th to 46th as well. I'm including lots of factors.
Yet you continue to brush aside inconvenient facts, like the reason for the drop this year as irrelevant.




WTF has this to do with the InterToto? The InterToto is European competition and absolutely should be included when comparing the results of our four European teams year-on-year.

The comparission is apt, inculding the intertoto skews your results. It had no bearing on the rankings, and given the limited pool of opposition likely accounts for a inordinate amount of wins against 'decent teams'.




I've discounted wins against sides from the Faroes, Malta, Iceland, Gibraltar, Montenegro, Estonia, Wales, Andorra and San Marino in looking to see how many decent wins we've had. Don't see an issue with that at all. I've clearly stated this, and the wins, and various other stuff you claim I'm hiding. You've lots of other bits in your post on this - the Donald Trump part was especially bizarre - but really this comes to my request that you read my posts first.


Give over, you can dress it whatever way you want but fewer wins isn't a stat, it's cop out in a headline. So I'll repeat the point - fewer wins is not the same as more losses, absent occurrences it's meaningless.

And maybe you could do me the courtesy of not cherry picking which points you reply to?



But guess what - when Dundalk get lucky and get a Faroese team in the EL play-off round, we get the same points as if they'd beaten someone good. Now other countries can get lucky too of course, but that's why I'm using both the ranking (and we've dropped) and the good results to build up a bigger picture (and we've fewer decent wins).

So allowing for the drop in ranking, have you adjusted your definition of 'decent opposition'? Or is it inflexible too?

[pineapple stu]

Ok so that's not an 'absolute co-efficient' that's one for a single year. It basically means that if there were three teams that year then 3 wins or 6 draws or some some combination of the two was achieved. And similarly 4 win or 8 draws for 4 teams. And this can be used to compare years.
First off, I know how the coefficient (and the InterToto) works, so you can drop the patronising explanations when you're ready.

It is an absolute co-efficient because it's just the number of the coefficient with no context, and I've shown why a number in one year isn't necessarily comparable to the same number in a different year (but surprisingly enough, you've completely ignored that). I absolutely can state that 1.875 in 2020/01 is not comparable to 1.875 in a previous year because Dundalk would not have gotten those extra three rounds pre 2016.


The comparission is apt, inculding the intertoto skews your results. It had no bearing on the rankings, and given the limited pool of opposition likely accounts for a inordinate amount of wins against 'decent teams'.
I know InterToto games aren't included in the rankings, and have never stated that they are. However, they absolutely are European games, and it is valid to include them for the purposes of counting decent European wins. I've already explained that this makes sense when trying to keep the comparison valid (ie there's four teams throughout the comparison period). Once again, read my ****ing posts please. It's getting very annoying when it's clear you don't know what point you're trying to argue against.


you can dress it whatever way you want but fewer wins isn't a stat. So I'll repeat the point - fewer wins is not the same as more losses
Of course "fewer wins" is a statistic. How on earth is it not? And I've never said fewer wins is the same as more losses.


And maybe you could do me the courtesy of not cherry picking which points you reply to?
I'm under no obligation to reply to every single part of your posts - I'm ignoring the repetition or the outwardly bizarre (such as the Donald Trump stuff) for something approaching brevity.


So allowing for the drop in ranking, have you adjusted your definition of 'decent opposition'? Or is it inflexible too?
No, my definition of decent teams has been the exact same since I first mentioned it, in the post that you've evidently not read.

[pineapple stu]

Oh, and for other posters, I have reported my own posts and requested that they be split, cos I know multi-replies are frustrating and I didn't intend this to be clogging up the entire thread...

[passinginterest]

It's an interesting debate to be fair. I think there's enough to suggest that when clubs were widely spending far beyond their means and accumulating huge debts there was a high point in terms of quality in the league. I also thing there's been improvements again in recent years and that there is at least some sense of more stability which should hopefully lead to measurable long term improvement.

Licensing, while flawed, seems to have at least prevented the massive debt building that was happening in the noughties and even if a club is struggling that means there's still a chance it survives and maintains a positive presence in its community.

The big busts of the past alienated a lot of suppliers and local communities but hopefully we're beyond that. The underage leagues might be straining finances in the short term, but long term they should be producing a better caliber of player and facilitating a professional career path within the league.

Brexit can't harm that, although the lack of professional coaches, contact time with players etc. needs to be addressed urgently by the clubs/FAI. If that means further regional academies where the elite levels can be brought in for additional training beyond the clubs then that should be what happens.

[pineapple stu]

There's definitely better stability and better long-term planning, for sure. You look at the amount of money wasted by Shels, Bohs, Drogheda - well, pretty much everyone (except UCD :) ) in the 00s and only in the past couple of years have we now got underage academies (subject to the problems you've noted), while ground improvements lag way behind the rest of Europe (was it here someone posted a chart showing we were the only country in Europe without a single new league ground built in the last ten years?)

But I think on the pitch in the here and now, we're still going backwards a bit - not helped of course by €100k being diverted from every first-team and into the four underage squads. That's a good investment of course, but it has to have an impact on the senior set-up. I'd presume we were one of the only leagues in Europe without any sort of proper underage structure attached to our senior teams until UEFA forced it through?

[Nesta99]

It's an interesting debate to be fair. .

I agree, Ive enjoyed the bit of toing and froing, reasoned discussion. Maybe creeping off 'LoI in Europe 2021' drop the 2021 and its all good lol.

[paul_oshea]

8000 is a realistic amount I think, 10 would have been great but the novelty factor would have worn off after last week

https://m.independent.ie/sport/soccer/league-of-ireland/bohs-hopeful-of-second-aviva-sell-out-as-increased-capacity-of-8000-agreed-fordudelange-tie-40674118.html

[yurt]

Was hoping that they might get 10 or 12k but at least with 8k it's likely to be another sell out and there'll still be some sense of exclusivity around it.

Wonder will it take much more than 24hours to sell out this time? I'm guessing members are expected to take up what 1000 or 2000+ tickets?

Will be interesting to see if any sort of novelty factor does wear off because from the outside looking in it would seem like the Bohemians hype train is just getting going. Could easily be due to parts of the internet being an echo chamber for what I'm interested in but seems like Bohs result and performance got a lot of coverage last week.

[Sidefx]

Oh, and for other posters, I have reported my own posts and requested that they be split, cos I know multi-replies are frustrating and I didn't intend this to be clogging up the entire thread...

...so why not just stop so; or at least move it to another thread?

[ontheotherhand]

8000 is a realistic amount I think, 10 would have been great but the novelty factor would have worn off after last week

https://m.independent.ie/sport/soccer/league-of-ireland/bohs-hopeful-of-second-aviva-sell-out-as-increased-capacity-of-8000-agreed-fordudelange-tie-40674118.html

What novelty factor? Live football with a crowd? Bohs in the Aviva? Bohs in Europe? Can't see them not selling out however many tickets they can get their hands on. People are dying to get out for any reason at all and interest hardly wanes the further you go in Europe. They are even more likely to pull in a few neutrals now as well. I'd go if I could. I'd be wearing the famous....er...white and yellow of Dudelange though of course.

[pineapple stu]

...so why not just stop so; or at least move it to another thread?
It's a discussion forum isn't it?

I can't move it to another thread, but I've asked the mods to.

[sbgawa]

What novelty factor? Live football with a crowd? Bohs in the Aviva? Bohs in Europe? Can't see them not selling out however many tickets they can get their hands on. People are dying to get out for any reason at all and interest hardly wanes the further you go in Europe. They are even more likely to pull in a few neutrals now as well. I'd go if I could. I'd be wearing the famous....er...white and yellow of Dudelange though of course.

Me too could the FAI organise a cough cough "neutral zone" :rolleyes:

[Straightstory]

[QUOTE=pineapple stu;2082182]There's definitely better stability and better long-term planning, for sure. You look at the amount of money wasted by Shels, Bohs, Drogheda - well, pretty much everyone (except UCD :) ) in the 00s and only in the past couple of years have we now got underage academies (subject to the problems you've noted), while ground improvements lag way behind the rest of Europe (was it here someone posted a chart showing we were the only country in Europe without a single new league ground built in the last ten years? QUOTE )

You can hardly say the money was 'wasted' by Drogheda. It brought the FAI Cup to the club in 2005 and the league title two years later. Considering the only trophy the club had won previously was the League Cup in 1984, these victories brought immense joy to thousands of Drogs fans. Sure, things went haywire a few years later, but no-one saw the financial collapse of 2008 coming in 2007. Anyway, the club's fans rallied and the club didn't go under.
At the start of a season fans don't think 'this will be a great year if we balance the budget', they want success on the field. Hopes and dreams and optimism are what drives fans. Football is a risky business. When you hire a new manager and sign new players, you can never guarantee success. No-one in Drogheda will forget the heady days of 2005 and 2007. To win those trophies after decades of failure was truly magical. The money was not 'wasted'.

[Eminence Grise]

Me too could the FAI organise a cough cough "neutral zone" :rolleyes:

Surely a cough cough neutral zone is the very definition of isolating and quarantining?;)

[A N Mouse]

First off, I know how the coefficient (and the InterToto) works, so you can drop the patronising explanations when you're ready.

You may know, you may not, but it's making the point for anyone who else may be interested. Now this next bit may come across as patronizing, because once again you've failed to address how you can just add the second chance games to your tally, but it's problematic having them in the co-efficient? (a function of results of games played)



It is an absolute co-efficient because it's just the number of the coefficient with no context, and I've shown why a number in one year isn't necessarily comparable to the same number in a different year (but surprisingly enough, you've completely ignored that). I absolutely can state that 1.875 in 2020/01 is not comparable to 1.875 in a previous year because Dundalk would not have gotten those extra three rounds pre 2016.
And yet without that very specific context you're unable to pick two random years and say the same thing. Or, for arguments sake, lets say you're right doesn't the same also hold for the era when we had three teams versus when we had four? Or is it suddenly not relevant that it works the same for everyone, regardless of any unique circumstances?
.



Of course "fewer wins" is a statistic. How on earth is it not? And I've never said fewer wins is the same as more losses.
If it's not a collection of (hopefully related) numbers (an absolute statistic, if you will) then it's an interpretation of a statistic, which are readily misused and often come with the inferred opposite. I tried illustrating the point, in a non patronizing manner, and you keep brining it up as a form of distraction.





No, my definition of decent teams has been the exact same since I first mentioned it, in the post that you've evidently not read.

So you didn't allow for any period in which those countries may have out ranked us and otherwise fallen into the category of decent result? Once again, subjective.


In other news, tabulated the results, and happy to share once it's in decent format.

Ignoring non ranking matches, using decades. The rankings changed from year to year

So in the period 00/01 - 09/10
We progress against opponents from a higher ranked country on 16 occasions, and 5 against lower ranked.
We were eliminated by opponents from a higher ranked country on 24 occasions, and 5 times by lower ranked (23 of 24 defeats top 30)
We over came top 20 ranked opponent 2 times, lost 15 times
We over came top 30 ranked opponent 7 times, lost 24 times
And 'decent' (ranked 30-39) 9 times without loss

We started the decade at 41, and finished at 35. So there were more nations above us for the most part.

We rarely troubled teams from nations ranked inside the top 30
exceptions being

Aberdeen
Hadjuk
Djurgarden
Gothenburg
Gretna
Elfsborg
Kryia


Last one of dubious pedregiee, not sure about the russians

In the period 10/11 - 19/20
Progressed against opponents from a higher ranked country on 8 occasions, and 16 against lower ranked
Eliminate by opponents from a higher ranked country on 37 occasions, and 5 by lower ranked. *edit oops technically not eliminated lost the tie (3 times)*
(31 of 37 defeats top 30)
We over came top 20 ranked opponent 0 times, lost 15 times
We over came top30 ranked opponent 6 times, lost 32times
And 'decent' (ranked 30-39) 7 times, losing 15 times

We started the decade at 30, peaked following year at 29, a low of 43 by 15/16 before climbing back into the 30's (just).

Notable scalps

Bnei Yehunda
Partizan (second bite)
Siroki Brijeg
Haken
BATE
Brann

<opinion> I mean I'm not seeing which scalps where there for the taking in the period 16/17 - 19/20 that we were taken before. The Finns? Slovan? We can only beat or be beaten by what's in front of us</opinion>

[EatYerGreens]

Boh’s sold 6k max capacity tickets for the last game in less than 24 hours, I’d imagine they will almost certainly sell 12k tickets for this match.

That's a bit of a stretch tbh. I'd say they'd have been lucky to hit 10k, especially as Dudelange would hardly be a draw for anyone who's not a Bohs or LOI fan.

[EatYerGreens]

8000 is a realistic amount I think, 10 would have been great but the novelty factor would have worn off after last week

https://m.independent.ie/sport/soccer/league-of-ireland/bohs-hopeful-of-second-aviva-sell-out-as-increased-capacity-of-8000-agreed-fordudelange-tie-40674118.html

All the additional 2,000 are going to end up in the South Stand :D

[EatYerGreens]

[QUOTE=pineapple stu;2082182]There's definitely better stability and better long-term planning, for sure. You look at the amount of money wasted by Shels, Bohs, Drogheda - well, pretty much everyone (except UCD :) ) in the 00s and only in the past couple of years have we now got underage academies (subject to the problems you've noted), while ground improvements lag way behind the rest of Europe (was it here someone posted a chart showing we were the only country in Europe without a single new league ground built in the last ten years? QUOTE )

You can hardly say the money was 'wasted' by Drogheda. It brought the FAI Cup to the club in 2005 and the league title two years later. Considering the only trophy the club had won previously was the League Cup in 1984, these victories brought immense joy to thousands of Drogs fans. Sure, things went haywire a few years later, but no-one saw the financial collapse of 2008 coming in 2007. Anyway, the club's fans rallied and the club didn't go under.
At the start of a season fans don't think 'this will be a great year if we balance the budget', they want success on the field. Hopes and dreams and optimism are what drives fans. Football is a risky business. When you hire a new manager and sign new players, you can never guarantee success. No-one in Drogheda will forget the heady days of 2005 and 2007. To win those trophies after decades of failure was truly magical. The money was not 'wasted'.

There will always be some upside from success. A lot of the club's current fans will probably have first been attracted by that period. It's impossible to not reap SOME longer term benefits from a club doing well.

The point is what is there that is tangible, beyond memories ? Money can buy real things, like assets. If you spend it on players, all you're buying at best is memories. And they don't provide long-term stability, let alone future benefits. .

Did Drogheda lose ownership of United Park to the FAI as a result of the club's excesses too ?

Irish clubs in that era were using their money to fund short-term 'feels', not long-term facilities.

[paul_oshea]

What novelty factor? Live football with a crowd? Bohs in the Aviva? Bohs in Europe? Can't see them not selling out however many tickets they can get their hands on. People are dying to get out for any reason at all and interest hardly wanes the further you go in Europe. They are even more likely to pull in a few neutrals now as well. I'd go if I could. I'd be wearing the famous....er...white and yellow of Dudelange though of course.

Ya fair enough given the current circumstances people want to be able to do something, but even so with that in mind I couldnt see them selling 20k, what did Dundalk sell for that Legia game 25k?( it wasnt busy in the stand I was in) The official attendance was probably higher, but it definitely didnt feel liike anymore than that. Given what was at the stake and what you've said youd expect that to sell out(one step from group qualificaton)

[ontheotherhand]

Ya fair enough given the current circumstances people want to be able to do something, but even so with that in mind I couldnt see them selling 20k, what did Dundalk sell for that Legia game 25k?( it wasnt busy in the stand I was in) The official attendance was probably higher, but it definitely didnt feel liike anymore than that. Given what was at the stake and what you've said youd expect that to sell out(one step from group qualificaton)

Yeah fair. I just think Bohs have a bit of buzz about them and should be able to get 10k in the door for this. I'd be disappointed if Rovers weren't able to do it. But you're right on Dudelange not being much of a household name. I like to think that people are slowly getting sick of the elite levels of football and will start seeing a bit more romance in the local game and ties against interesting European opposition. I see grumblings in my friend groups where lads who once worshipped Man U and the rest are starting to get disillusioned with the Super League nonsense etc. Some of them have taken a shine to LoI clubs. Unfortunately Bohs included. Add that to the country opening up while the EPL is on break and I want to believe we are ripe for a bit of an increase in interest. But......I have a cynic on my other shoulder who says the pubs will be a bigger draw every time.

[pineapple stu]

because once again you've failed to address how you can just add the second chance games to your tally, but it's problematic having them in the co-efficient?
Once again, you're not reading my post. I explicitly called out that Dundalk's three 2020 wins would not have been there in previous years, and so needed to be considered in the comparison I made. And I did this for the exact same reason as I've said can't compare absolute coefficients like you're doing.


Or, for arguments sake, lets say you're right doesn't the same also hold for the era when we had three teams versus when we had four?
Well you're the one comparing absolute coefficients, not me. All I'm showing is why you can't really do that. If you want to further undermine your own argument, fire ahead.


So you didn't allow for any period in which those countries may have out ranked us and otherwise fallen into the category of decent result? Once again, subjective.
No, because that wasn't what I was comparing, and I was very clear about what my comparison was (post 452). Is a comparison of results against leagues outside the current bottom ten countries subjective? Of course. Does that make it wrong? I don't see how. You certainly haven't shown how.


So in the period 00/01 - 09/10
...
In the period 10/11 - 19/20
But I was clearly comparing the periods 2003-2011 v 2012-2020 (2003-11 being the LoI's peak period). Another indication that you're not reading my posts. So yet again, can I ask you to go back and read my posts before replying? It might stop you asking more questions which I've already answered.

But the gas thing is you then produce stats which actually back my point up! As a quick summary (and without checking if they're correct; I'll assume they are) -

Top 20 record (W-L) gone from 2-15 in the 00s to 0-16 in the 10s.
Top 30 record gone from 7-24 to 6-32 (a noticeable drop; 22% success down to 15%)
30-39 record gone from 9-0 to 7-15 (a significant drop)

You then compare top-30 scalps in the 00s with "notable scalps" in the 10s, which includes a win against the 34th-ranked league, Bosnia. Those comparisons aren't valid.

So are you honestly going to quote those stats at me and argue against my point that "It's hard not to think that results like this really put the lie to those who say the league is steadily improving"?

What scalps were available in the last five years? Celje, Riteriai, Fehervar, Niederkorn, Norrköping, Dinamo Minsk, AIK - all mid-20s or lower, or Swedish (we used to have a great record against Swedisk clubs). Rosenborg (twice) and Molde (Rovers did beat Brann after all). I could add in Qarabag and Slovan (twice), but they're top teams from a middling league and it'd probably be unfair to expect much from them; they're stronger than their moderate national rating. Still, there's plenty of options there.

Edit - while I think of it, I reckon going from 3 teams to 4 helped our coefficient, not hindered it as you claim. The LoI has always been a flat league in terms of standard - eight different winners in ten seasons from 2005 to 2014 suggests that. Compare that to other leagues where, say, Skonto Riga (well, RIP), BATE Borisov, Lincoln Red Impds, Dinamo Zagreb, etc, win almost every year. The gap from first to fourth in those leagues is going to be bigger than in the LoI, so that should actually hinder their coefficient slightly, not ours. Similar to how Scotland's coefficient would be reduced if they added another team (or in fact was reduced while Rangers were in the lower tiers)

[pineapple stu]

Yeah fair. I just think Bohs have a bit of buzz about them and should be able to get 10k in the door for this. I'd be disappointed if Rovers weren't able to do it. But you're right on Dudelange not being much of a household name.
Can I just say it would be a fantastic achievement if Bohs get 10k for a game against Dudelange. And I think it was a fantastic achievement to get 6k for the Stjarnan game too. OK, no football for years and Lansdowne Road as a bonus - but it's Stjarnan/Dudelange. To say "I couldn't see them selling 20k" is possibly the most curmudgeonly thing I've ever seen on here! (Shock horror - it was Paul :) )

[paul_oshea]

You need to grow up and stop listening to Nirvana stu - you cant be a student for ever :P

I was clearly replying saying that 10k was a nice number of which OTOH didnt agree with. Would you prefer if I said 15k?

[paul_oshea]

Yeah fair. I just think Bohs have a bit of buzz about them and should be able to get 10k in the door for this. I'd be disappointed if Rovers weren't able to do it. But you're right on Dudelange not being much of a household name. I like to think that people are slowly getting sick of the elite levels of football and will start seeing a bit more romance in the local game and ties against interesting European opposition. I see grumblings in my friend groups where lads who once worshipped Man U and the rest are starting to get disillusioned with the Super League nonsense etc. Some of them have taken a shine to LoI clubs. Unfortunately Bohs included. Add that to the country opening up while the EPL is on break and I want to believe we are ripe for a bit of an increase in interest. But......I have a cynic on my other shoulder who says the pubs will be a bigger draw every time.

Ya theres definitely a short window of opportunity there for Bohs and a few other clubs to capitalise on( no pubs, but attendance at games), whether they do or can do it and whether it leads to long term "fans" is another question.

[ontheotherhand]

You need to grow up and stop listening to Nirvana stu - you cant be a student for ever :P

I was clearly replying saying that 10k was a nice number of which OTOH didnt agree with. Would you prefer if I said 15k?

Thanks for the acronym. No idea why I chose the handle I did.

I wasn't disagreeing with the number, more the idea that it was pure novelty that brought out the crowd and that said novelty would be gone now. Much as it pains me to say it, Bohs have done good work (the less cringe stuff) and I wasn't shocked they got 6000 nor would I be shocked if they could pull in 10k given everything going on. It would be a great crowd nonetheless.

[A N Mouse]

Edit - while I think of it, I reckon going from 3 teams to 4 helped our coefficient, not hindered it as you claim. The LoI has always been a flat league in terms of standard - eight different winners in ten seasons from 2005 to 2014 suggests that. Compare that to other leagues where, say, Skonto Riga (well, RIP), BATE Borisov, Lincoln Red Impds, Dinamo Zagreb, etc, win almost every year. The gap from first to fourth in those leagues is going to be bigger than in the LoI, so that should actually hinder their coefficient slightly, not ours. Similar to how Scotland's coefficient would be reduced if they added another team (or in fact was reduced while Rangers were in the lower tiers)


So what you saying is contrary to the three (? four? you read your ramblings how many times was it?) posts were you made it abundantly clear that the move from three to four team affected everyone equally no room for circumstance, you've come around to the idea that maybe it affected different countries in different ways due to 'strength in depth' or something. But of course, by your reckoning, it couldn't affect ours in such a way.




But I was clearly comparing the periods 2003-2011 v 2012-2020 (2003-11 being the LoI's peak period). Another indication that you're not reading my posts. So yet again, can I ask you to go back and read my posts before replying? It might stop you asking more questions which I've already answered.

But the gas thing is you then produce stats which actually back my point up! As a quick summary (and without checking if they're correct; I'll assume they are) -

Top 20 record (W-L) gone from 2-15 in the 00s to 0-16 in the 10s.
Top 30 record gone from 7-24 to 6-32 (a noticeable drop; 22% success down to 15%)
30-39 record gone from 9-0 to 7-15 (a significant drop)

You then compare top-30 scalps in the 00s with "notable scalps" in the 10s, which includes a win against the 34th-ranked league, Bosnia. Those comparisons aren't valid.


So are you honestly going to quote those stats at me and argue against my point that "It's hard not to think that results like this really put the lie to those who say the league is steadily improving"?

The legends should match, they're both top 30. I've been 100% consistent in my approach, I could have omitted them, but when Pat's beat them BHZ were a top 30 country.

Here's the thing Stu, if you read my post I make absolutely 0 claims about this. And there are one or two errors in there, I fat fingered a few manual entries. It means exactly sweet fa. It's an 'executive summary' of the data I compiled. Because the guy claiming to be sitting on the dataset refused to share.

But if you want to post a comparison of 03/04-11/12 and 12/13-20/21 be my guest



What scalps were available in the last five years? Celje, Riteriai, Fehervar, Niederkorn, Norrköping, Dinamo Minsk, AIK - all mid-20s or lower, or Swedish (we used to have a great record against Swedisk clubs). Rosenborg (twice) and Molde (Rovers did beat Brann after all). I could add in Qarabag and Slovan (twice), but they're top teams from a middling league and it'd probably be unfair to expect much from them; they're stronger than their moderate national rating. Still, there's plenty of options there.

As I said I'm not making any claims based on what I posted. I'll let other people come to their own conclusions.

What I take issue with is your narrative, which is look at these results we're rubbish, and it has been at least as long as the last time we had two teams going to Iceland, if not back before even 08/09.

How do you reconcile expectations of beating teams from top 30 on the regular, with the urge to **** in everyone's drink when one team loses to a non 'decent' team?

I'm not claiming we're going to set the world on fire, but somewhere in those posts I've yet to read even you acknowledge we've improved since the financial collapse - course being you it's unclear if you were on about the economy tanking or the off-field antics of LOI clubs. I'm not even claiming we're getting similar result to 'peak loi'. I'm claiming some small mesaure of improvement, from the setbacks over the last decade, as progress.

*EDIT - sorry i missed this bit first time


The LoI has always been a flat league in terms of standard - eight different winners in ten seasons from 2005 to 2014 suggests that.


wt actual f? have you been following the league. It suggests the implosion, collapse, relegation and other scandals involving the leading lights of you 'peak LOI'
*

[nigel-harps1954]

Ya fair enough given the current circumstances people want to be able to do something, but even so with that in mind I couldnt see them selling 20k, what did Dundalk sell for that Legia game 25k?( it wasnt busy in the stand I was in) The official attendance was probably higher, but it definitely didnt feel liike anymore than that. Given what was at the stake and what you've said youd expect that to sell out(one step from group qualificaton)

To be fair, Dundalk v Legia would have sold another 10k tickets if Ticketmaster didn't make an absolute balls of the whole thing. It kept saying sold out repeatedly and they released small sections at a time. If they'd opened up the stadium from the start it might have topped any FAI Cup final record.

[ger121]

5500 sold already as of this evening. I do think we could have easily sold more than 8000 given the opportunity. Anyway, nice time to be a Bohs supporter.

[Bunny Kelly]

5500 from just members before general sale? Who knew they had so many members, the new Dalymount at 6000 while need to be expanded before opening

[pineapple stu]

So what you saying is contrary to the three (? four? you read your ramblings how many times was it?) posts were you made it abundantly clear that the move from three to four team affected everyone equally no room for circumstance, you've come around to the idea that maybe it affected different countries in different ways due to 'strength in depth' or something. But of course, by your reckoning, it couldn't affect ours in such a way.
I think it's a fairly minor factor - certainly it doesn't come close to explaining the drop-off in results we're seeing. But I don't think your view that it was a hindrance to us is correct, and I don't think you've considered the implication on other leagues in the slightest. And again, it'll impact absolute coefficient figures, but I'm generally comparing results (and ranking to a lesser extent)

So your point overall doesn't stack up.


but when Pat's beat them BHZ were a top 30 country.
Nope; ranked 32nd (https://kassiesa.net/uefa/data/method4/crank2012.html) at the end of the 2011/12 season, and the game was in the 2012/13 season.


But if you want to post a comparison of 03/04-11/12 and 12/13-20/21 be my guest
But...I did. It's the stat you're querying to begin with.


How do you reconcile expectations of beating teams from top 30 on the regular, with the urge to **** in everyone's drink when one team loses to a non 'decent' team?
Because the stats which you posted yourself - which agree with the ones I posted earlier - show that we have stopped beating top 30 teams regularly perhaps? Do you not see there's a big drop-off between a 22% success rate and a 15% success rate? And I'd say if you broke your 2010s stats into 2011-15 and 2016-20, you would see a further decline in the second half of the decade.

You mightn't like my conclusion, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. Especially when your own stats back the view up.


somewhere in those posts I've yet to read even you acknowledge we've improved since the financial collapse
That's probably because my whole point is that we haven't, in any meaningful way.


wt actual f? have you been following the league. It suggests the implosion, collapse, relegation and other scandals involving the leading lights of you 'peak LOI'
It can suggest more than one thing. It suggests a bit of that, sure, but you've (again) missed the point I made, which is that we didn't have any one team walking away with the league year-in-year-out, constantly mopping up the European money and getting much better European results than other clubs. For those leagues, adding a fourth team would dilute the coefficient slightly. For us with a relatively competitive league throughout that timeframe (one or two exceptional margins excluded), it wouldn't. So the point you made about a fourth team hurting our coefficient isn't valid.

[Longfordian]

5500 from just members before general sale? Who knew they had so many members, the new Dalymount at 6000 while need to be expanded before opening

You have to buy at least two at a time. I think they might have around a thousand members, maybe a bit less.

[nigel-harps1954]

5500 from just members before general sale? Who knew they had so many members, the new Dalymount at 6000 while need to be expanded before opening

Think it's members and ST holders. Over 2,000 ST holders and 1,000 members this year I'd thought?

[joey B]

Bohs game next week sold out again,fair play to them….

[D24Saint]

Bohs game next week sold out again,fair play to them….

That was quick , lucky I set a reminder on the phone and got mine early.

[Buller]

Bohs game next week sold out again,fair play to them….

8,000 sold amazingly fast for 2nd round against Luxembourg!! I'd say they would have filled at least half that stadium without limits. Most people haven't been to an event in 18 months and noone is on holidays.

[D24Saint]

8,000 sold amazingly fast for 2nd round against Luxembourg!! I'd say they would have filled at least half that stadium without limits. Most people haven't been to an event in 18 months and noone is on holidays.

On mine now the covid pass works a treat. I really enjoyed the last game in the Aviva, the pre match buzz felt very like a bit of normality has returned. It should be an interesting game, I don’t expect Bohs to have it all their own way like the last game.

[A N Mouse]

Nope; ranked 32nd (https://kassiesa.net/uefa/data/method4/crank2012.html) at the end of the 2011/12 season, and the game was in the 2012/13 season.

Thanks for pointing that out. I'll have to go back and revisit all my rankings. Something else I didn't read, the ranking in wiki articles are from 2 year previous, where the access list is worked from.



I think it's a fairly minor factor - certainly it doesn't come close to explaining the drop-off in results we're seeing. But I don't think your view that it was a hindrance to us is correct, and I don't think you've considered the implication on other leagues in the slightest. And again, it'll impact absolute coefficient figures, but I'm generally comparing results (and ranking to a lesser extent)


This is possibly the most sensible thing you've said.

As I stated previously it boils my ****, that year after year you appear to come in with an agenda, say look at these stats, in which I'm discounting xyz, it can only be true.

Because when you look at everything in the round, stats, results, co-efficient and ranking you should be able to look for reasons. These things tell a story, of course the story is up for interpretation, but maybe a consensus can be reached.

I'll get back to my interpretation shortly, but I'm sorry I couldn't let this bit lie.



Edit - while I think of it, I reckon going from 3 teams to 4 helped our coefficient, not hindered it as you claim. The LoI has always been a flat league in terms of standard - eight different winners in ten seasons from 2005 to 2014 suggests that. Compare that to other leagues where, say, Skonto Riga (well, RIP), BATE Borisov, Lincoln Red Impds, Dinamo Zagreb, etc, win almost every year. The gap from first to fourth in those leagues is going to be bigger than in the LoI, so that should actually hinder their coefficient slightly, not ours. Similar to how Scotland's coefficient would be reduced if they added another team (or in fact was reduced while Rangers were in the lower tiers)

They say there's a fine line between genius and crazy.

I say congratulations sir you are not afraid of that line. Either this throwaway comment is a genius level troll or...

In a thread were you're accused of cherry picking data to make a point. You couldn't just stick to your 'peak loi' or use a decade where three digits remain the same. No you had to go and pick 'the one' that best fits.

I mean we're that level that one of those champions, makes zero appearances in the corresponding 06/07 - 15/16 European seasons.

2 of them start the period in the first division, one starts by being relegated, one is demoted.

And if you look at the list of European participants in this period there's 10, and one of them is for good behaviour. Just for good measure there's another demotion and an implosion in there too.

Bohs (09,10,11,12)
Cork(06,08,15)
Derry (06,07,09,13,14)
Drogheda (06,07,08,13)
Dundalk (10,14,15)
Fingal(10)
St Pat's (08,09,11,12,13,14,15)
Shamrock (10,11,12,15)
Sligo (09,11,12,13,14)
UCD(15)

So effectively 8 regular participants in Europe, and half of them spent some of this time in the first division. Now if that occurs organically then fine we should be in a good place, but all this chopping and changing.


Anyway back to the story...
We're here 'peak LOI'

06/07 we've had some success up until now, last year saw two teams progress a round. And this one is a breakout year as all three teams win through at least a round we're going in the right direction.

Then champions Shels go boom.

The heat and step up is too much for Derry. Pat's first European adventure in a while, sees them on a hiding to nothing against strong Danish opponents.

The following year experience counts for Pat's and Drogheda, while Cork struggle.

Now at this point we move to having 4 teams. We're almost at point we were after 05/06, having three teams capable of securing a win, and we're throwing in a fourth untested team. The structure has changed, we have teams starting in different rounds, with some unseeded in the second round.

Kind opening pairings, and experience sees Derry and Pat through one and two rounds respectively. In their first European outings in a while, Bohs do well but fall short against the Austrians, but Sligo struggle.

Some demotion stuff happens domestically.

The less said about Bohs in Wales the better. Fingal are on a hiding to nothing, starting in round 2 somewhere in the north atlantic, is it even off Portugal? While having gotten over stints in the doldrums, and progressing on the pitch Dundalk and Shamrock Rover pop up with a couple of wins.

At this point we've peaked in the co-efficients, yet still only seem to be able to get results from two of four teams.

Due to what can only have been a clerical error or something Sligo start in r3 in the Ukraine, don't get stuffed. Pat's do their thing and win a couple of rounds. Bohs do their thing, go out at the first attempt. And just to rub salt into their wounds Shams do that thing, a second bit of the cherry see them overcome Partizan and well you know.

The following year Shams are back, with a whimper in Lithuania. Once again the draw is unkind to Sligo, starting in r2 against Slovakians(?). And Pat's and Bohs once again do their respective thing, this time Bohs wishing they hadn't gone to Iceland. Only Pat's flying the flag this year.

Summer 13 was far from great, in fairness the draw was pretty unfavourable for Sligo, Derry (back so soon) and Drogheda. Pat's would have fancied their chances, but finally fell at the first hurdle.

At this point the format changes again, or at least we're no longer 'victims of our own success'. In the last few years some of our teams have started in later rounds. From the 8 later starting ties we won just 3, with only Shams win over the Israelis being against the book. Now all our EL teams start at r1.

14/15 saw Pat's up against it in Poland. While favourable draws saw the other three advance a round, to leave things finally looking up.

While in the years since, it can't all be put down to bad luck in the draw, though there have been some awful years. We've haven't been on the wrong end of too many upsets, though 15/16 (UCD performance aside) doesn't look too good. There were signs we might see 4 teams win through a round. Last year was a fecking lotto, but it's the closest we've come to that break out year. Given the new format there may be more luck in the draw.

The reason 'peak loi' was unsustainable wasn't just the financial arms races, but not having everyone start at r1 meant that when we should have been having breakout years and winnable ties we weren't. The only sustainable way forward is having everyone capable of pulling their weight and there are signs of that, and that's what I'm willing to see as progress.

Of course we're never far from Domestic turmoil and Cork and Dundalk having be continuing that trend, in more subdued manner. The question is can whoever replaces them step up.

Of course you're entitled to your own view of things. But if you look at the bigger picture, and the sum of your argument is still we're not winning against sides we were beating before then you sound like old Nicklaus who was going to Ireland on holiday with his football team.

[Buller]

On mine now the covid pass works a treat. I really enjoyed the last game in the Aviva, the pre match buzz felt very like a bit of normality has returned. It should be an interesting game, I don’t expect Bohs to have it all their own way like the last game.

Yeah ordinarily you'd say Luxembourg are maybe a similar level to Icelandic opposition, but not with F91 Dudelange having qualified for the Europa League 2018 and 2019!! Surely at least at Dundalks peak level with that kind of money. Do they have a sugar daddy investor too which enabled qualification in the first instance? Their average league crowds are only around the 900-1000 mark.

No doubt Bohs will give them a very good game and it definitely looks a winnable tie, but they'll have to be at their best.

Atmosphere will be rocking with 8k LOI fans in there.

[paul_oshea]

Is the bohs game on TV tonight?

[Longfordian]

Apparently not.

[yurt]

Is the bohs game on TV tonight?

Looks like there'll be no way to watch the game at all.


Unfortunately F91 Diddeleng will NOT be providing a stream for our UECL game today in Luxembourg. It is not within our rights to stream ourselves unfortunately, therefore the final decision was out of our hands. Next weeks 2nd leg will be streamed on LOITV from the Aviva


Not really sure how something like this can happen? Are Dudelange not meant to be an ambitious club being run in the right way? How on earth are they not streaming their European qualifiers?

Surely there must be some motivation around this that we're missing?

Edit: And yes, that is Bohs official Twitter account that called them F91 Diddeleng

[paul_oshea]

Maybe there's an obscure internet group in the corner of Lu complaining about their state media and broadcaster and flabbergasted at their refusal to show their leagues teams in Europe.

[EatYerGreens]

Not really sure how something like this can happen? Are Dudelange not meant to be an ambitious club being run in the right way? How on earth are they not streaming their European qualifiers?

They have no fans. In a country with a total population that's three times smaller than Dublin City - and half of whom are foreigners anyway.


Edit: And yes, that is Bohs official Twitter account that called them F91 Diddeleng

F91 Diddymen ?

Maybe they'll put that Bohs tweet on their changing room wall to provide extra motivation for their players :D

[joey B]

Bohs 1 up already…

[joey B]

https://mobile.twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1OwGWVzeApNKQ

Game here ,kinda ,if anyone’s interested…

[Buller]

Bohs 1 up already…

Ah, was trying to decipher Bohs cryptic twitter. I narrowed it down to two outcomes, either scored or were just very happy the game kicked off as scheduled at half 5.
Thank you for clearing this up! :P

Bohemian Football Club
@bfcdublin
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!

[sidewayspasser]

And yes, that is Bohs official Twitter account that called them F91 Diddeleng
And? That's just Dudelange in Luxembourgish ("Dudelange" is French). Their most recent crest also spells "Diddeleng" instead of "Dudelange".

[paul_oshea]

Its funny how small a pitch looks on a mobile phone : D

[Dalymountrower]

Various dodgy twitter feeds from the substantial Bohs media and security detail
Decvoy with a sublime through ball to Coote, looked like keeper parried and Tierney finished.
Reportedly veryvery hot there, so Long will need to use his bench.

[nigel-harps1954]

Various dodgy twitter feeds from the substantial Bohs media and security detail
Decvoy with a sublime through ball to Coote, looked like keeper parried and Tierney finished.
Reportedly veryvery hot there, so Long will need to use his bench.

It's currently hotter in Ireland than it is in Luxembourg..