I was talking about dropping from 9 games to 8. Throw in a cup game and that's 9 games.

For what it's worth (which I suspect isn't much) I still seriously dislike a 10 team division 1.

As we've somehow ended up with a 9 (this might be very difficult using the software), how about 3 conferences of 3, play teams in your conference twice and play the 6 in the other two conferences once = 10 games. 3 conference winners promote, 3 relegate from Div 3.

Of course, if I can't play that rather smoothes the numbers out, but still awaiting dates/info on making that decision unfortunately.

well im not gonna worry too much about this any more. aslong as i can get as many games in as possible i dont care. developing the team is more important to me in the lower leagues. if there is any way at all we could arrange that all teams get 10 games that would be fab but i understand its not easy.

having said that, very nice idea.

Nice idea however it only works with 9 and it a lot of admin on my part to set up. Also it would be difficult to transition back to a straight league/division system next season if the numbers worked out right.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

For the sake of 1or 2, why not just draw a random person in the league to play. So u play a randomly selected player twice, just to make the games up.

in the case of making up the missing games form Div 2+3 why not play the team that is in the same possition as you in the other division.

eg.
1st in div2 - VS - 1st in div3

that way we all get to play 10 games, huge inducements help towards the lower teams having a good go at the teams above and also gives the lower division the chance to advance their teams a little more before the next season.

Had a few minutes at work to think about this and came up with:


In this system only three player numbers give rise to any division missing out on a game at all. My aim in this was to maintain a six-man division for Div1 at all times while also avoiding 11-man divisions at all.

Where you see T[+|-]x this refers to any given team's position plus or minus x. These positions would be set at the end of the round indicated with an asterisk. So a nine player division (as we might have with 27 currently signed up) would see each team playing each other team once, and then at the end of round eight the final two rounds would be created using the round eight standings. In a seven player division, these play-off matches are extended to cover the teams two positions above and two positions below to ensure ten matches. An eight player division would be the only size of division that would miss out on a round.

But with odd numbered divisions, someone is always missing a game.

I see what you've tried to do there Pete, but it doesn't work



In a 5 team division, you need 5 rounds to play 4 games - so 8 games in a 10 round season.

And in case anyone is interested... here are 9 team divs and 8 teams divs.

Yes, I forgot about the odd number of pairings each round - my bad.

Edited to adjust division size matches. However the main part of the exercise was the breakdown of division sizes avoiding the unliked 11-man.

Division size of 11 isn't universally unliked, sure it brings a slightly different dynamic to the league but priority should go to number of games as the whole reason we are in a league is to play games not to sit bye whilst others do.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

Im not keen. But at the end of the day you have to manage it not me. Obviously if we where to play and it lost something from the league this would effect peoples desire to continue that would be my concern.

Hope we all had a nice Xmas guys and happy new year to come, just wondering as it looks like nobody else will be joining are there any ideas on the division sizes and where we will be placed yet?

It will be done when it's done. Let me finish my holiday first

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk