Just to Add to the Hilarity that is Women's Football!

What the...?

Decision made by an independent panel, where clubs are assessed on 'financial sustainability', which considers factors such as management, marketing and quality of coaching staff.

Apparently part of the FA's 5-year plan to make women's football the second-most watched sport after men's football. This sort of farce is sure to bring spectators flocking to the grounds!

Don't they do a similar thing in the Super League Rugby where the teams apply for promotion and are elected for relegation depending on financial stability and general shitness.

If they do, that's equally a farce. Why bother playing matches at all?

[quote="The Tonker"]Decision made by an independent panel, where clubs are assessed on 'financial sustainability', which considers factors such as management, marketing and quality of coaching staff.

Apparently part of the FA's 5-year plan to make women's football the second-most watched sport after men's football. This sort of farce is sure to bring spectators flocking to the grounds![/quote

Can't blame them for trying but as it's so shite they are on a hiding to nothing. Other than friends and family, who really watches this garbage? Became big in the States because it grew up beside Major League Soccer.

That's crazy and doesn't make sense at all.

Despite your explanations I still don't really understand how this works

Rhys wrote:That's crazy and doesn't make sense at all.

Despite your explanations I still don't really understand how this works

Do you work for the FA then, Rhys?

this seem utterly pointless, how is it that common sense doesn't come in to play at the top.

reminds me of those leagues around the world that finish their season with a playoff, particularly the mls. out of 19 clubs, 10 of those go on to the end of season playoffs, which renders the entire league campaign pointless. you can be bottom of the table most of the season, go on a late run and make it in and become mls champion, that really doesn't sit well does it?
also, man city and the new york yankees have just payed $100m for the 20th franchise, if they were to introduce relegation and promotion to the lower leagues there could be a case of a team playing on the same field who were registered for only $8,000. it's so unfair it will never happen.

i don't understand how the minds of the people who run these leagues work. to take something as simple as a football league that works so well and turn it into that mess is not only illogical but tantamount to gross misconduct. sometimes i worry for this game i love so much

DrewBlue wrote:this seem utterly pointless, how is it that common sense doesn't come in to play at the top.

reminds me of those leagues around the world that finish their season with a playoff, particularly the mls. out of 19 clubs, 10 of those go on to the end of season playoffs, which renders the entire league campaign pointless. you can be bottom of the table most of the season, go on a late run and make it in and become mls champion, that really doesn't sit well does it?
also, man city and the new york yankees have just payed $100m for the 20th franchise, if they were to introduce relegation and promotion to the lower leagues there could be a case of a team playing on the same field who were registered for only $8,000. it's so unfair it will never happen.

i don't understand how the minds of the people who run these leagues work. to take something as simple as a football league that works so well and turn it into that mess is not only illogical but tantamount to gross misconduct. sometimes i worry for this game i love so much

Quite simply, "The generation of money."
I agree with you that the play off system, when applied to so many teams at the end of a season especially in the top flight leagues, dilutes achievements during the season. Look no further than the Aviva Premiership in Rugby Union. But then any play off system does that - even the current promotion playoff system in the Football League.

Doncaster Belles,given their history in Women's Football should have been allowed the dignity of retaining their place in PL1 should they have avoided relegation this season (If anything Womens Football in the UK is developing in such a way that it is even more a "Moneyball Game" than the men's game!!). And Manchester City should have earned promotion to PL1.

However this does echo the initial development of football in the UK when Spurs were kicked out of Div 1 to make way for Arsenal!!

money does spoil everything doesn't it. at least the playoffs in the football league are something to aim for, and are only 4 spots from 24 teams, i agree it can dilute achievements but they have become an exciting and good way to end the season.

money came into the game much later for the mens game, it seem as if the powers that be are trying to make the women's game about money from the outset which is a real shame, much like mls clubs there won't be any grounded history such as starting out as a cricket club in the early 1900's and building from there

South America has some strange arrangements in the administration of their football.

In Argentina, relegation is based on an averaging system – at the end of each season, the two teams with the worst three-year points average and the worst positioned team in the season table are relegated. This is clearly designed to prevent one of the ‘big’ teams being demoted if they have a one-off bad season.

In Brazil, there are 2 league structures – the local State Championship (of which there are over 20 different leagues due to the sheer size of the country) and the National League. This means there is year-round football, i.e. when the State League finishes, the National League begins.
Obviously, in the State leagues there are many teams just making up the numbers compared to their bigger rivals. Over here, it would be like Man Utd, Man City and Liverpool playing in a Lancashire league with Rochdale, Bury, Oldham, Accrington, Stockport, etc.

“Bonkers” says I.

aye in brazil the state leagues aren't really taken seriously by any of the big clubs, but the power over the football is held at state level so it works out fairer i guess. you can read more about it in tim vickery's bbc column this week:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22679134

i quite like the idea of the state championships but they are highly impractical, no journalists take it seriously at all

G-ster wrote:South America has some strange arrangements in the administration of their football.

In Argentina, relegation is based on an averaging system – at the end of each season, the two teams with the worst three-year points average and the worst positioned team in the season table are relegated. This is clearly designed to prevent one of the ‘big’ teams being demoted if they have a one-off bad season.

In Brazil, there are 2 league structures – the local State Championship (of which there are over 20 different leagues due to the sheer size of the country) and the National League. This means there is year-round football, i.e. when the State League finishes, the National League begins.
Obviously, in the State leagues there are many teams just making up the numbers compared to their bigger rivals. Over here, it would be like Man Utd, Man City and Liverpool playing in a Lancashire league with Rochdale, Bury, Oldham, Accrington, Stockport, etc.

“Bonkers” says I.

I guess we should be appreciative of what we have, even if it the FA are total tools at times

You can slice it and dice it any way you like - there is no chance of Manchester United, Manchester City, Chelsea or Arsenal getting relegated now. Happily I've seen three of the four relegated!! :bounce:

There is also little chance of seeing Spurs, Everton (unless Martinez is true to form) or Liverpool relegated - any of the rest could have a bad year.