QT TIE-BREAKERS

Anarchy wrote:Tie breaker should be based on which teams has the hottest moms!!

silentparent wrote:

02Dad wrote:There is more to soccer than just winning. You act like not getting beat is no big deal. A team that can go the tournament without losing is likely a great defensive team.

IMO, the 10 point system is by far, the best way to go. Especially in youth soccer.

If gives everyone something to fight for.... even in a blowout. In the 3 pt win / 1 pt draw scenario, a team that is losing 6-0 at the half has nothing to play for. They are not going to win the game, they are not going to draw either.

In the 10 pt system however, they can be giant-killers sometimes. An underdog, getting beat big time that scores a last minute goal denies the shutout point from the giant. Potentially let's say giving them a 29 point total after three games (where they won the other games 3-0 or better with shutouts).

Other giants/uber-squads may hold on and grab the three shutouts and walk away with 30 points in group play, ahead of the 29 from the other team.

Makes games interesting all around, for the entire length of the game, blow out or not. There's always something to fight your ass for if you are winning (keep the shutout to get the 1 pt) and if you are getting your ass handed to you, there are likely several other teams that got beat up on too. The team that played hard to the final whistle and got the goal to make it say 7-1... they deserve a point. Their loss should be rewarded more than a team that scored nothing the entire game.

10 pt system is better all around for ALL involved. It keeps everyone on their toes. In a 10pt system tournament the keeper winning a game 8-0 has to stay on her toes, if not she risks alot. In a 3/1 pt system, she and the team risk hardly nothing at all.

There are so many scenarios that make the 10 pt system better. Not even a question.

It's NOT just about winning. It's how you play the game. Can you play offense... can you play defense... can your keeper maintain her composure until the final whistle even in a blowout.

If you be honest with yourself, I think you will find it hard to argue otherwise.

i disagree and think the system in place sucks the sweat off a dead man's back...

02Dad wrote:
You're of course under no obligation to answer anything I asked you but I am curious what you think.

For example, why you think winning is a better indicator of a team than not losing?

If two teams play the same other teams within a bracket, I say the one with three draws is more deserving of advancing than the team with 1 win, 1 draw and 1 loss.

In my book, a loss trumps a win in determining things in this case.

SantaFe wrote:

02Dad wrote:
You're of course under no obligation to answer anything I asked you but I am curious what you think.

For example, why you think winning is a better indicator of a team than not losing?

If two teams play the same other teams within a bracket, I say the one with three draws is more deserving of advancing than the team with 1 win, 1 draw and 1 loss.

In my book, a loss trumps a win in determining things in this case.

Just my own 2 cents here, let's look at this logically:  In its basest form, there are  just two goals in soccer:

1.  Put the ball in the opponent's net
2.  Keep the opponent from putting it in your net

You might also combine this and just state

3.  Put the ball in the opponent's net more than they put it in your own net

Only a win accomplishes the complete goal (3).   A win also accomplishes goal (1)  It  may or may not accomplish goal (2)

A tie does not accomplish goal (3).  It may or may not accomplish goal (1).  It may or  may not accomplish goal (2).  At most, a tie only accomplishes one of the goals, and never accomplishes the ultimate goal (3).

A loss may or may not accomplish (1).  It fails to accomplish (2).  It fails to accomplish (3).     A loss is much like a tie in that it never accomplishes the ultimate goal (3) and at most only accomplishes one of the other two.

I believe it's reasonable to expect  a system to tilt at least partly in favor of a team that at some point in their tournament accomplishes the ultimate goal of the sport in which it is participating, over a team that never once does that.