growing gap between haves and have-nots in the league.
Does anyone else remember an adage that championship form in a doubleYes, in Italy it was called the English Average ("media inglese"). It was sort of useful to reflect the "true" standings midway through the season, when imbalanced schedules could mean that one team had played more home games than another, even if they were equal on points.
round robin league was to aim to win all home games and draw all away
games?
I seem to remember it being voiced surrounding the bundesliga inIn case you want to play with this type of data, here is my Excel spreadsheet with top-6 final league tables in round robin format, going back to the 1930s:
the late 70s and early 80s, but of course those were the days of 2
points for a win. Winning all your home games was never really likely,
of course, but you could compensate for dropping points at home by
winning some away games against the relegation fodder. Taken as an
average goal this would mean aiming for the following points totals or better:
16 team league: 45 (60 in 3 pt era)
18 team league: 51 (68 in 3 pt era)
20 team league: 57 (76 in 3 pt era)
22 team league: 63 (84 in 3 pt era)
24 team league: 69 (90 in 3 pt era)
I did a quick check a few weeks ago on the English first division going
back to 1960, followed by the EPL, looking for years in which the second placed team actually exceeded these totals, and, until fairly recently, these occasions were few and far between.
The switch to 3 points for aIn general, the 3-point per win rule had smaller effects than what people imagined. Yes, it should have created more incentives for attacking play when the score is tied, but also created incentives to park the bus when you are leading by one goal.
win had, at first glance, less influence than I would have thought.
TheYes, very likely.
more recent trend to have at least two (and sometimes more) teams
achieve the goals above probably has to do with the increase in the gap between the richer and poorer teams in the league.
So it looks like a strong effect of the move to 3 points for a win,Among the top 6, only England introduced 3ppw much earlier (1980-81?). Italy introduced it in 1994-95, and it became the global rule one year later.
which happened much later in Germany than in quite a few other
countries.
Before 3pts, there were only two occasions when the win homeAs Mark said, it's probably because of the gap.
draw away formula would not have won the league. After, this was much
more common. But is this because of the 3pt rule, or because of a
growing gap between haves and have-nots in the league. Since the introduction of 3 pts for a win, there was only one year where at least
one team did not attain or better the standard.
On Thursday, September 24, 2020 at 12:31:06 PM UTC-4, MH wrote:
Does anyone else remember an adage that championship form in a double
round robin league was to aim to win all home games and draw all away
games?
Yes, in Italy it was called the English Average ("media inglese").
Il giorno Fri 25 Sep 2020 01:20:01p, *Futbolmetrix* ha inviato su rec.sport.soccer il messaggio news:a184b37e-c614-4f6b-9ac9- d8ca180d6f42o@googlegroups.com. Vediamo cosa ha scritto:
On Thursday, September 24, 2020 at 12:31:06 PM UTC-4, MH wrote:
Does anyone else remember an adage that championship form in a double
round robin league was to aim to win all home games and draw all away
games?
Yes, in Italy it was called the English Average ("media inglese").
note also that in UK they don't know what this "english average" is ;)
Sysop: | Nitro |
---|---|
Location: | Portland, OR |
Users: | 7 |
Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
Uptime: | 36:38:55 |
Calls: | 158 |
Files: | 754 |
Messages: | 90,025 |