OK - thanks Stu.
Yes - had Rovers won their opening CL game and lost the next round, they would have dropped into the EL qualifying, and had they lost there, they would have dropped into the Conference League qualifying.
OK - thanks Stu.
PAOK even brought a small singing section over from Theasalonoki when we played them in the under
nineteens.!
Don`t your lot have a love in with their hated shamrock wearing Athens rivals? Wouldn`t be encouraging too many of them to come over, if I were you ( it isnt going to happen)
Any word on when the Bohs european tickets will be on general sale ?
But in that case, I don't see how you can raise it as a factor to be honest. If you don't know how it impacted on other leagues, you can't really use it as a comparison point?
Of course. The InterToto was where the fourth team went while it existed. To ignore it would make the comparison invalid; you'd be comparing the ties won by three teams to the ties won by four teams, which makes no sense.
That's a pretty low bar there, to be honest.
To repeat myself though, I'm not looking at selected fixtures in isolation. I'm looking at the last 20 years' worth of fixtures. I'm looking at the number of times we've won against a certain calibre of league in time-frames within that time, and it's falling. That does tell a story, as does our overall ranking.
A lot of the rest of your post I do agree with - the league needs to improve in general of course. But I think at this stage you've gone away from the original point I made, which was -
So the stuff about 40th being a fair reflection of the league or saying we need to improve the league or need to have more teams competitive isn't really relevant. (Actually, it's effectively the point I'm making.)It's hard not to think that results like this really put the lie to those who say the league is steadily improving.
From Bohs statement earlier; expect confirmation tomorrow, Tuesday.
They should really try and get tickets on sale ASAP so that they can try and sell as many tickets as they can before the first leg is actually played. If there's a convincing result in the first leg one way or the other it could put people off.Originally Posted by Bohemians
I don't go for all that love in/links horse€hit, DR.
Made some friends when we played them back in 2011.
Is it not 12k at your European games now, or did I read that wrong-If so then plenty of tickets available I would have thought. Boez have only about 3k max anyway 😋.
These guys will find a way to get tickets if available, believe me.
I mean we're talking about our league. How the change impacted other leagues is neither here nor there. I believe the term I was looking for was 'strength in depth'. We lacked the 'strength in depth' for three teams, so struggled a bit more when had to fill four slots, not helped by our own unique circumstances.
You are including the inter-toto results? So your dataset is inherently flawed.
I shouldn't need to point out the inter-toto did not contribute towards co-efficient, and was a pre-qualifier for entry to the europa league. It's not like for like. (if only there were some statistically formula however flawed for comparing european performances, regardless of the number of teams, hmmm)
It had one entry from each country, and was both regionalised and seeded, so the probability of certain fixture combinations was much greater.
Entry was not explicitly tied to league position, but purely at the invitation of the fai.
The inter-toto results account for somewhere in region of 25-33% of your claimed ties won. But you ignore all the above and then comapare victories in opening two rounds of a pre-qualifying competition requiring 4/5 wins just to get to the qualifiers proper. So you're taking fixtures in isolation of competition.
Come off it, apart from the steady decline from the giddy heights of being ranked 29th, last year and this, our 5 year scores have alway had a number lower than 1.000 in there. And there's never been a period in which the lowest was greater than 1.000.
So let me get this straight. You take the dataset, break it into smaller sets (time-frames). Further filter for data-points you're interested in (calibre of opponent) subjectively. In other words, you're being selective, and looking at fixtures in isolation.
Also the vague 'its falling'. Publish and be damned. Saying number of wins is falling is not necessarily the same as the number of losses is rising.
I've addressed progress, yet you continue to ignore my main thesis which is that the number reached when 1 is divided by 4 (or on thankfully rare occasion 5) is lower than the number when 1 is divided by 3. If we can agree on that then it shouldn't be too great a leap to arrive at the conclusion that it is (marginally) easier for 3 teams to maintain a co-efficient. And 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 not defeatist, it's a demonstrable fact this is only the second such period for our country. Could it be higher? yes. But rome wasn't built in a day
How can ranking be relevant (like in your previous paragraph) when you want to claim our current ranking 47(46), down from 37 last season after losing our best ever year's co-efficient score, to back up your claim about a lack of progress; yet not relevant when I point out the reason for the drop, or what I think is a fair reflection of our league. Incidentally as you've pointed out this season is not over yet, and having already matched the 17/18 points we're sitting at 42 for 2023, before a ball is kicked next year.
OK - to be honest Mouse, I think you need to go back and read my posts again, because you're starting to completely misrepresent what I've said. A couple of examples -
I included the InterToto when comparing the number of ties our clubs won in the various timeframes. In that regard, including the InterToto is inherently logical.
Yes, I take the data and break it into smaller sets to analyse the data. if you see a pattern such as, for example, 10 decent teams beaten in 2011-2016 versus one decent team beaten in 2016-2021 (or whatever the exact figures were), that's something which can help draw a conclusion. That's how this sort of thing works.
What's the relevance of the number of losses? The number of losses is probably falling because we're getting through fewer rounds to be honest. Barcelona lose more ties per season than any LoI club. Wins (and calibre thereof) are the marker of progress, not fewer losses.
I've addressed your point repeatedly by pointing out that the exact same logic applies to every other league in the bottom half of the UEFA rankings, who all gained an extra team at the same time we did. And I've never compared absolute UEFA coefficients; I've been comparing rankings or number of ties won (where your division by 3/4/5 is irrelevant). Your own comparison of absolute coefficient points won is actually the flawed one, because it doesn't allow for the CL teams getting extra shots - as I've pointed out, pre 2009, once the CL team lost, they were out; then they had to win a tie before being sure of dropping down (which few enough teams did), and now they drop down regardless of how badly they do in the opening round (which Dundalk benefitted from spectacularly last year, and Rovers may well do this year). So comparing coefficient points, like you're doing, doesn't really make sense as a comparison.
42nd - wow! That really challenges my basic argument that "It's hard not to think that results like this really put the lie to those who say the league is steadily improving." Nosebleed territory there, what?
Last edited by pineapple stu; 20/07/2021 at 10:47 AM.
Curiously anyone know why Bohs get the nod to use the Aviva but not Rovers or even Dundalk ?
Did either of them ask?
I'd say Rovers probably not interested and Dundalk had a bit of a falling out over the Aviva last season didn't they?
Tallaght Stadium Regular
I'm old enough of a Rovers fan to still be delighted at the fact we no longer need to go hoer-in out ourselves trying to find a place to play in.
Not saying boez are doin that btw, fair play to them for getting their games in landsdowne.
dundalks owners have spent the last 18 months soiling themselves in public to all and sundry so were probably never considered.
Thought that the atmosphere in the Aviva with 6,000 was brilliant., we will see whether they increase capacity in line with what Croker had on Sunday last. 2 or 3 more thousand would make a big difference. Though I can see why Rovers would want to stay in Tallaght , familiarity with the pitch and set up and a lot of noise from 1,500.
I don't think you're being genuine here. You want to discuss European results in a historical sense, but disregard the canonical source of rankings in favor of something you've made up and refuse to share.
So Pats really can claim preseaon victory?
Can you not see an issue with this? For one thing the format changes (are going to be more noticeable than a running rating), second the rankings change, only you know what this concept of a decent team is
So put your data in a sheet and share. Previously you've pulled numbers that don't seem to add up, used odd year selections to make comparisons, and shown us exactly nothing. Show us your data
You said the number of wins is falling.
I can say Donald Trump will lose fewer elections this year than last. It doesn't make the inverse true. So show us your working.
What constitutes a 'decent team'?
If you're pulling numbers from your hoop then 10 wins in 2011-2016 could be from 20 attempts, where the 1 win in 2016-2021 could be from 1. You've so much ill defined stuff what is a decent team? What is a win (a tie? a leg?)? All of this is encompassed in the co-efficient. Now it's not without flaws, but it applies to everyone.
But the rankings are of the co-efficients, which in turn are a function of wins/draws and number of representatives. And guess what they work the same for everyone.
And yet you count those same results in your data. Or are you now only counting our champions results until they lose a round? Because guess what it works the same for everyone. Or is this another example of something only being relevant when you say it is?
Also I've never once used absolute co-efficients. That would be comparing the cumulative value when ranked 29th, with the value now. But I have used the rankings, and the year on year, which guess what work the same for everyone.
Except I can point to the data. Where is your data to back up the claim 'the lie to those who say the league is steadily improving'?
Also as you keep reminding me it's the same for everyone else (it's not, everyone got an extra place, but not everyone was able to fill it with a team just as strong - bit like if ucd were only able to field 10 players, and they asked you to tog out). Yet you keep banging on about decent teams, could maybe something else have changed in the last twenty years? Perhaps Swedish teams don't go to Ireland for a holiday anymore? I mean we haven't stood still why should anyone else?
Sigh. I've actually pointed out that our ranking has fallen from 29th to 46th as well. I'm including lots of factors.
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.
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.
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).
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)
Last edited by pineapple stu; 20/07/2021 at 1:56 PM.
Bookmarks