Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? 22:06 - May 9 with 2512 viewshoppy

I guess getting rid of Sunderland of the two would be preferable?

Poll: Which Which nickname for ITFC do you prefer? poll do you prefer?
Blog: Graphical Blog: I Feel the Need...

0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 22:07 - May 9 with 2509 viewsWarkystache

I'd prefer Wycombe. Sunderland are a basket case club if they don't go up this season. Just think it'll be Wycombe as well.

Poll: If we were guaranteed promotion next season, how would you celebrate?
Blog: [Blog] It's Time the Club Pushed On

1
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 22:09 - May 9 with 2475 viewscressi

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 22:07 - May 9 by Warkystache

I'd prefer Wycombe. Sunderland are a basket case club if they don't go up this season. Just think it'll be Wycombe as well.


Always the 5th and 6th placed sides
0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 22:24 - May 9 with 2414 viewsChurchman

It’ll be a home game for Sunderland and they’ll win an inevitability scrappy game.
0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 23:00 - May 9 with 2324 viewsEastTownBlue

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 22:24 - May 9 by Churchman

It’ll be a home game for Sunderland and they’ll win an inevitability scrappy game.


They'll be back at Trafalgar Square again.
0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 23:38 - May 9 with 2271 viewsMach_foreignBlue

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 22:24 - May 9 by Churchman

It’ll be a home game for Sunderland and they’ll win an inevitability scrappy game.


You never know. But if they do it then Alex Neil deserves the plaudits for the some tweaks he's done since he's been appointed. Prior to his arrival they had been on the horror run.
0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 07:43 - May 10 with 1936 viewssouthnorfolkblue

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 22:07 - May 9 by Warkystache

I'd prefer Wycombe. Sunderland are a basket case club if they don't go up this season. Just think it'll be Wycombe as well.


That’s how I see it. I suspect that the game will just become a slog and Wycombe are better equipped to play that game.

Poll: On 14th April 2020, will we be

0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 07:46 - May 10 with 1910 viewsElephantintheRoom

Which of the two weakest teams in the play offs goes up? Kind of irrelevant really. Wycombe would be quite funny - but presumably Sunderland will win quite easily.

Blog: The Swinging Sixty

0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 07:48 - May 10 with 1901 viewsFrimleyBlue

Did we beat Blackpook away 1-4 last season?

If so. If Wycombe win the playoffs. That's 2 play off winners we've beaten 1-4. Doesn't mean anything at all just a random stat if that is even the case.

Waka waka eh eh
Poll: We've had Kuqi v Pablo.. so Broadhead or Celina?
Blog: Marcus Evans Needs Our Support Not to Be Hounded Out

0
Login to get fewer ads

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 07:48 - May 10 with 1911 viewsSTYG

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 22:09 - May 9 by cressi

Always the 5th and 6th placed sides


I would propose that it’s about time the 3rd and 4th placed teams were able to nominate whether they wish to play the first leg at home or away.

I’m sure the percentages of teams getting into the final were much higher for the bottom two places and saw a graph a while back that showed it wasn’t because they were in form when sneaking in and the teams above were dejected from missing automatic.

More teams were winning at home and then had something to hold onto away. Should be the case the higher finishing club picks which way round they want those ties.
0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 08:13 - May 10 with 1840 viewsChurchman

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 07:48 - May 10 by STYG

I would propose that it’s about time the 3rd and 4th placed teams were able to nominate whether they wish to play the first leg at home or away.

I’m sure the percentages of teams getting into the final were much higher for the bottom two places and saw a graph a while back that showed it wasn’t because they were in form when sneaking in and the teams above were dejected from missing automatic.

More teams were winning at home and then had something to hold onto away. Should be the case the higher finishing club picks which way round they want those ties.


I’d leave it as it is. Play offs are a flawed concept, but they do work in that they extend interest in the season for many clubs for longer. I doubt very much many teams would nominate home leg first and it’s really up to the 3rd and 4th best teams to take advantage of it. It’s always more advantageous.

Sheffield Weds created very few chances over the two games and on reflection didn’t offer anywhere near enough. Sunderland were marginally better and would have won whatever way round the tie was played. MKD threw their chance away by making a pigs ear of the first leg.
0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:10 - May 10 with 1744 viewsMach_foreignBlue

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 08:13 - May 10 by Churchman

I’d leave it as it is. Play offs are a flawed concept, but they do work in that they extend interest in the season for many clubs for longer. I doubt very much many teams would nominate home leg first and it’s really up to the 3rd and 4th best teams to take advantage of it. It’s always more advantageous.

Sheffield Weds created very few chances over the two games and on reflection didn’t offer anywhere near enough. Sunderland were marginally better and would have won whatever way round the tie was played. MKD threw their chance away by making a pigs ear of the first leg.


No, Sunderland weren't marginally better. They were much better as they had created hat full of chances in the first leg. They had more of the ball and created more.
0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:14 - May 10 with 1735 viewsPrideOfTheEast

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:10 - May 10 by Mach_foreignBlue

No, Sunderland weren't marginally better. They were much better as they had created hat full of chances in the first leg. They had more of the ball and created more.


Sunderland deserved to win over the two games. They're a much better side than I remember to be honest - the front 3 looked good and the defence looked solid.

Bannan for Sheff Weds looked as good as ever - have always liked him.
0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:21 - May 10 with 1725 viewsMach_foreignBlue

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:14 - May 10 by PrideOfTheEast

Sunderland deserved to win over the two games. They're a much better side than I remember to be honest - the front 3 looked good and the defence looked solid.

Bannan for Sheff Weds looked as good as ever - have always liked him.


Yes. Alex Neil has done a very good since he has been appointed. Tweaked a few things as they had been on the horror run and it has paid off.
0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:27 - May 10 with 1705 viewsSTYG

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 08:13 - May 10 by Churchman

I’d leave it as it is. Play offs are a flawed concept, but they do work in that they extend interest in the season for many clubs for longer. I doubt very much many teams would nominate home leg first and it’s really up to the 3rd and 4th best teams to take advantage of it. It’s always more advantageous.

Sheffield Weds created very few chances over the two games and on reflection didn’t offer anywhere near enough. Sunderland were marginally better and would have won whatever way round the tie was played. MKD threw their chance away by making a pigs ear of the first leg.


The playoffs work fine in the NFL.

Seedings. One off matches. Highest ranked team gets to play at home. How is should be.

There is no need in reality to have two legged semi finals. Of course it makes for more drama for Sky, but in reality the first legs can often be tense and it's only the second leg that's enjoyable to watch anyway.

I'd have 3 v 6 and 4 v 5 and then a final. Wycombe finished below MK Dons, got a lead with a partisan home crowd and held on. Sunderland finished below Wednesday, got a lead with a brilliant home crowd and then proceeded to waste time at Wednesday from the 1st minute.

Some years a team finishes 3rd on 87 points and then faces a team that finished 15-18 points below them. Absolutely that team should have the advantage, either at home in a single leg or at least getting to choose whether to play at home or away first.

If there's genuinely no advantage to be had playing at home first then they can choose to play home second can't they. If there is an advantage however they get to have that as the highest finishing team over 46 games.
0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:28 - May 10 with 1705 viewsArnoldMoorhen

Poundland Loki versus Brighthouse Gollum.

We have to want the financially well-run club doing it on a budget to go up, don't we? And the one buying on the Never-Never to stay in our League until the day the loans get called in.

Plus Ainsworth never managed the Budgies.
0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:34 - May 10 with 1688 viewswaveneyblue

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:28 - May 10 by ArnoldMoorhen

Poundland Loki versus Brighthouse Gollum.

We have to want the financially well-run club doing it on a budget to go up, don't we? And the one buying on the Never-Never to stay in our League until the day the loans get called in.

Plus Ainsworth never managed the Budgies.


My Play offs - all one leg

5th v 6th - 5th at home -

Winner plays 4th, 4th at home

Winner plays 3rd at Wembley -

Therefore there's an advantage as to where you finish ......
2
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 17:51 - May 10 with 1371 viewsOldsmoker

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:34 - May 10 by waveneyblue

My Play offs - all one leg

5th v 6th - 5th at home -

Winner plays 4th, 4th at home

Winner plays 3rd at Wembley -

Therefore there's an advantage as to where you finish ......


Scraping 6th and then going up is the Johnny-come-lately of Football.
Yes, we have been stuffed before - West Sham - but recent tables suggest that if we are to make the play-offs then 6th place is our likely finish.

If you lose in the play-off semis then it was down to the last game of the 2 ties.
If you lose in the final then it was them or us.
Your suggestion says hope then more hope then Samaritan help line.

Don't believe a word I say. I'm only kidding. Or am I?
Poll: What mode is best?

0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 19:38 - May 10 with 1318 viewsStewart27

Beast against the beast in footballing terms.

I’ll go Sunderland with a 197th minute penalty winner.
0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 20:07 - May 10 with 1292 viewsjayessess

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 22:07 - May 9 by Warkystache

I'd prefer Wycombe. Sunderland are a basket case club if they don't go up this season. Just think it'll be Wycombe as well.


Sunderland are owned by a billionaire, aren't they? Presumably most of the old Championship contracts must have expired by now too, so they're probably becoming less of a basket case year on year.

Wycombe's revenue is probably about 1/5th of Sunderland's, they basically have to roll double sixes year after year after year to compete the way they do.
[Post edited 10 May 2022 20:17]

Blog: What Now? Taking a Look at Life in League One

1
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:30 - May 11 with 1102 viewsnshearman1

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:27 - May 10 by STYG

The playoffs work fine in the NFL.

Seedings. One off matches. Highest ranked team gets to play at home. How is should be.

There is no need in reality to have two legged semi finals. Of course it makes for more drama for Sky, but in reality the first legs can often be tense and it's only the second leg that's enjoyable to watch anyway.

I'd have 3 v 6 and 4 v 5 and then a final. Wycombe finished below MK Dons, got a lead with a partisan home crowd and held on. Sunderland finished below Wednesday, got a lead with a brilliant home crowd and then proceeded to waste time at Wednesday from the 1st minute.

Some years a team finishes 3rd on 87 points and then faces a team that finished 15-18 points below them. Absolutely that team should have the advantage, either at home in a single leg or at least getting to choose whether to play at home or away first.

If there's genuinely no advantage to be had playing at home first then they can choose to play home second can't they. If there is an advantage however they get to have that as the highest finishing team over 46 games.


The play-offs have always been a lottery, they made nonsense of the old adage that the League never lies, and are largely based on money-making as well as the added excitement value. So they're not going to go away. But too often 3rd-place teams lose out, it's certainly an unfair system as it stands. I'd scrap the 6th place, have 4th and 5th play out a two-legged semi and then play the 3rd-placed team in the Final. This makes more of a scrap to get 3rd place, and lessens the possibility of teams scraping in 6th and winning promotion but not having the wherewithal to survive in the Championship.
1
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:39 - May 11 with 1073 viewsSTYG

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:30 - May 11 by nshearman1

The play-offs have always been a lottery, they made nonsense of the old adage that the League never lies, and are largely based on money-making as well as the added excitement value. So they're not going to go away. But too often 3rd-place teams lose out, it's certainly an unfair system as it stands. I'd scrap the 6th place, have 4th and 5th play out a two-legged semi and then play the 3rd-placed team in the Final. This makes more of a scrap to get 3rd place, and lessens the possibility of teams scraping in 6th and winning promotion but not having the wherewithal to survive in the Championship.


Exactly.

People make a case for it being unfair that a team can go up over another, like Bristol Rovers pipping Northampton on Goals Scored. But that's over 46 games and is a fair representation of the season whether you do it by a goal or 10 points.

But the playoffs are two matches, which could come with injuries, players out of form etc. When you can promote Rovers in 3rd into the next league, but a team with the same goal difference can miss out completely, then you can certainly make a case that 3rd should have a better chance of promotion than 6th.

It's a lottery as you say, purely for TV purposes. Not integrity or fairness. 3rd should have an advantage over 4th who has an advantage over 5th etc. Whether it's a one leg affair at home.

Even in the Conference, which has a ridiculous six playoff teams, 4th play 7th and 5th play 6th, and 2nd and 3rd get given a bye. So even that recognises the teams higher up deserve an easier route to the final / promotion.
0
So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 09:50 - May 11 with 1057 viewsSTYG

So, Wycombe or Sunderland in the final? on 20:07 - May 10 by jayessess

Sunderland are owned by a billionaire, aren't they? Presumably most of the old Championship contracts must have expired by now too, so they're probably becoming less of a basket case year on year.

Wycombe's revenue is probably about 1/5th of Sunderland's, they basically have to roll double sixes year after year after year to compete the way they do.
[Post edited 10 May 2022 20:17]


Get rid of Sunderland. As much as I don't like Neil, the bloke seems to be an excellent manager.

If they stay down they'd be my title favourites. Wycombe have to keep punching above their weight which they seem capable of doing. But their better players will be poached and maybe even Ainsworth at some point if QPR or someone came calling.
0
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2024