The Dolman Pragmatist Posted November 13, 2017 Report Share Posted November 13, 2017 22 hours ago, Red Right Hand said: Wasn`t it changed from goal average to goal difference too around the same time? It all seems so long ago now! Yes, goal difference was adopted in the UK in 1975 having been first trialled at the 1970 World Cup Finals. With goal average, a 3-1 win (goal average 3) would have been better than a 4-2 win (goal average 2) so it's easy to see why it was changed in order to favour more attacking play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
handsofclay Posted November 13, 2017 Report Share Posted November 13, 2017 15 hours ago, Cowshed said: Three points for a win did not lead to more attacking football. A fact unless somehow teams attacked more and managed to statistically score less goals which did occur. It can therefore be argued that teams attacked more pre rule change because teams that go a goal ahead became less likely to seek another goal, with yellow cards and fouls increasing in protection of the lead = Teams become more negative defending the two points for giving a goal away v one for a draw. Excellent point that I hadn't thought of and agree with. Thinking back to pre 3 points for a win I used to see some cracking games full of attacking football and flair as well as some dour ones. This still occurs now. I might be looking through rose tinted glasses but I reckon back then the games were that bit more entertaining. Two of the greatest national sides I ever seen, albeit on TV, for flair and attractive, fluid play did their biz in the 2pts for a win era that being Brazil 1970 and Holland 1974-78. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin1988 Posted November 13, 2017 Report Share Posted November 13, 2017 On 12/11/2017 at 09:20, 22A said: You may have a point. In 1976 if it had been three for a win instead of two Bolton, not City would have been promoted to Div 1. City W19 D15 = 53pts. 3 for a win = 72pts. Bolton W20 D12 =52pts. 3 for a win = 72pts, but the Trotters had a better goal difference than City. WBA would have been 2nd. 3pts for a win was introduced to encourage teams to go for a win rather than settle for a draw. Someone should tell Mourinho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1bristolcity Posted November 13, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 13, 2017 13 hours ago, gow2gooseya said: Not exactly no. They went hammer and tongs for 78 minutes, then when they found out the score from Roker Park they called a truce in the last 12 minutes. I would hardly call that playing for a draw, and I dont believe anyone who was at that game would either. It was a blood and thunder occasion to put any derby to shame for most of the match Well they did play for a draw then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted November 13, 2017 Report Share Posted November 13, 2017 47 minutes ago, handsofclay said: Excellent point that I hadn't thought of and agree with. Thinking back to pre 3 points for a win I used to see some cracking games full of attacking football and flair as well as some dour ones. This still occurs now. I might be looking through rose tinted glasses but I reckon back then the games were that bit more entertaining. Two of the greatest national sides I ever seen, albeit on TV, for flair and attractive, fluid play did their biz in the 2pts for a win era that being Brazil 1970 and Holland 1974-78. I hadn't thought of it either I thought opposite, but the stats back up the points change leading to less goals scored over decades right across Europe not just England. The theme is unmistakable and also applies to Internationals. There is very little variance and what there is again challenges perceptions - Italian teams don't score less and Spanish teams foul a little more but three points for a win did result in teams attacking less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUSSEL85 Posted November 13, 2017 Report Share Posted November 13, 2017 Someone mentioned about 3 points for a win, 1 point for a score draw and 0 for a loss or a nil nil, it would certainly make things interesting!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snufflelufagus Posted November 13, 2017 Report Share Posted November 13, 2017 How about 3 points for a home win, 4 points for an away win and 1 point for a draw!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midlands Robin Posted November 13, 2017 Report Share Posted November 13, 2017 It always bugs me how a side a goal up loses 2 points if the opposition equalise while the opposition gain a point. So the leading side are penalised more heavily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 13, 2017 Report Share Posted November 13, 2017 On 12/11/2017 at 10:27, 29AR said: I prefer the devaluing the draw to be honest. It does promote a more attacking game. I think we would simply see all away teams playing 11 behind the ball otherwise. There was a suggestion about making 0-0 draws pointless.. kinda like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murraysrightplum Posted November 13, 2017 Report Share Posted November 13, 2017 2 for a draw and 5 for a win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
22A Posted November 13, 2017 Report Share Posted November 13, 2017 4 hours ago, Snufflelufagus said: How about 3 points for a home win, 4 points for an away win and 1 point for a draw!!! It works like that in Speedway, but with 2 pts for the away draw. OK in that sport, but in football that would encourage the visitors to park the bus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gert Mare Posted November 14, 2017 Report Share Posted November 14, 2017 On 12/11/2017 at 20:34, gow2gooseya said: Not exactly no. They went hammer and tongs for 78 minutes, then when they found out the score from Roker Park they called a truce in the last 12 minutes. I would hardly call that playing for a draw, and I dont believe anyone who was at that game would either. It was a blood and thunder occasion to put any derby to shame for most of the match But Coventry called the truce as there was only one team that was going to win it that night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.