Make or Break in USFooty's Top 10

Welcome to World Footy News Tuesday, July 15 2025 @ 10:25 pm ACST

Make or Break in USFooty's Top 10 | 10 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

This site requires you to be logged in to post a comment. If you have an account already (or need to create one), please login here.

Make or Break in USFooty's Top 10

Authored by: Wayne Kraska
on Monday, June 25 2007 @ 05:26 am ACST

Well appreciated its a good effort but when it excludes more more games than it includes because of some subjective reasoning that the game needs to be played with a certain amount of players then I think its lost most of its value. For instance MAAFL teams have been playing 14 a side games for 5 years, deciding a Premiership Trophy on them and the USAFL have used those results to consider seedings for Nationals etc.

Make or Break in USFooty's Top 10

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Monday, June 25 2007 @ 10:10 am ACST

I must admit it surprises me to hear that MAAFL 14-a-side matches aren't included. I'll be interested to follow-up the reasoning. No doubt a line must be drawn somewhere but I would've thought MAAFL was in. I don't know, but I suspect very few US matches would have more than 14 to 16 per side, even if that is the initial intention when scheduling.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Include higher level 14-a-side games

Authored by: fox
on Monday, June 25 2007 @ 12:17 pm ACST

For an unofficial USFooty ladder or ranking to have any credibility, all official EAFL, MAAFL Championship Division and Western Regionals games need to be included because these results will directly influence USFooty Nationals rankings.

Many significant games are going to be 14-a-side. That's simply standard team size in most parts of the US. Frankly, with the size of the fields, 14-a-side usually makes more sense.

Under MAAFL rules, each team could have 20 players available but play only 14 on the field (with 6 interchange players) if that is what the away team prefers.

Besides, how do you determine how many player where on each team in every game? These details often aren't recorded in match reports. It seems to be extra work for no benefit.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Include higher level 14-a-side games

Authored by: fox
on Monday, June 25 2007 @ 12:29 pm ACST

The phrase "how many player where on each team in every game" in my previous post should read "how many players were on each team in every game." I really must proof read before I hit that "Submit Comment" button!

I notice there are references to the determination of US Nationals division 1 berths alongside a reference to the "USFooty's unofficial ladder" in the article. This reinforces my argument that 14-a-side games that directly influence Nationals division 1 berths should be included in this "USFooty's unofficial ladder."

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Include higher level 14-a-side games

Authored by: Aaron Richard
on Monday, June 25 2007 @ 07:04 pm ACST

The author of the ladder is Chris Adams, who's over stateside with y'all. Send him an email and talk shop :) I'm sure he's more then happy to take onboard any discussion about the ladder/rankings.

The solution could be for USAFL clubs to get an account with the Footy Record. You enter the results yourself but it's pretty easy to use. Then if the ladder isn't correct it'll only be because the clubs haven't entered their scores.

Link is www.thefootyrecord.net.

Cheers, Aaron

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Include higher level 14-a-side games

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Tuesday, June 26 2007 @ 01:17 am ACST

Yep, this has been discussed by email by a few of us, but Chris is pretty tied up at the moment. I believe he's taking the ideas on board but to a degree no matter where you draw the line on games it'll be controversial - you only have to read the US Footy forum to see how passionate people are about how their club is rated. That can be a bit disappointing at times, but having passion for the game is better than not caring at all about it.

My 2 cents, said as an interested onlooker rather than as an editor of WFN, is that it would be nice to see all games included that are roughly interstate matches (as opposed to local metro games). So 9-a-side through to 18-a-side, taking in the MAAFL, EAFL and Western Regionals, amongst others, though not the more locally focused leagues like the AZAFL, GGAFL or SCAFL. But such a consolidated ladder would still be controversial and take a lot of work, and such a ladder is something that US Footy have avoided probably for those reasons. Hopefully Chris will get a chance at a later date to explain his rationale here, but at the end of the day each of the leagues have their own ladders, and there's Nationals, so plenty of opportunity for teams to set the record straight themselves.

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

Include higher level 14-a-side games

Authored by: Christopher P. Adams, Ph.D.
on Thursday, July 05 2007 @ 08:44 am ACST

I've spent Independence Day adding back in earlier games. I think I have covered all of them. I have not included Cincinnati's recent scratch match against Milwaukee or the Louisville Tourny games.

Have a look and see what you think. Also check out the other information at www.usfootynews.blogspot.com.

Chris

---
Carna Revos!

---
Carna Revos!

www.usfootynews.com

RSS news	RSS events
Twitter	Facebook

World Footy News

Search

Translate

User Functions

Events

Featured Sites

Older Stories

Friday 11-Apr

Sunday 30-Mar

Thursday 27-Mar

Friday 21-Mar

Thursday 06-Mar

Wednesday 05-Feb

Tuesday 04-Feb

Socials

Who's Online

What's New

Articles last 2 weeks

Comments last 2 weeks

Links last 2 weeks

Advertisements