Hello everyone,
Illustration: 10pm rankings for the D2 championship.
image](https://i.imgur.com/H5uu4B5.jpeg)
10 days ago, no one could have predicted that FYM would be going up. We mobilised a few troops and finally managed to add a little suspense to the end of the season. The result: a perfect tie with our friends Les Mouettes.
They're ahead, we accept it, that's the game. But one question remains: what are the criteria that put one team ahead of the other in these conditions?
There must be some. We'd simply like to know what they are, judge the coherence of this one, and potentially propose an improvement to favour the sporting aspect, best attack, best defence, IS cup ranking of the season... ratio of points according to the matches... that's all there is to it!

Thanks for your attention, congratulations to the seagulls, and also to the members of the FYM resistance who fought until the end! :)

Hi Tazz,

It seems to me that it's a question of the ID of the agreements... You have the 2537, they have the 1780: so they're ranked ahead of you.

I agree with tonight's opponent and the Fyrm agreement: the idea is to have clarity in this case and not to ask ourselves 50,000 questions.
if it's the id of the agreement, that's great for us, but it shouldn't be a criterion that's a bit more sporting than a simple agreement id.
I think it could be reviewed
Happy end of season to everyone!

Thanks for your reply.
If that's the case, an improvement is necessary.
But I'm afraid it will never happen. Or else the problem would have to arise between LR and CP in D1.

Tazz26: Merci pour la réponse.
Si c'est bien ça, une amélioration est nécessaire.
Mais j'ai bien leur qu'elle n'ait jamais lieu. Ou alors faudrait que le problème se pose entre LR et CP en D1

It's already happened, the title was shared I think. It's always been like that with IDs. It's a shame you didn't play more ie because you're not at 100%.

Magik'jojo: Ça a déjà eu lieu le titre avait été partagé il me semble . Ça a tjs été comme ça les ID . Dommage que vous ayez pas jouer plus d’ie car vous êtes pas à 100

We're doing what we can, we've got the same number of games as our seagull friends, so that's not the problem today.
In any case, it was a thrilling end to the season, but we weren't as lucky as our friends from Brest tonight lol.

image](https://i.imgur.com/wp93HKu.jpeg)

image](https://i.imgur.com/WYLWyqu.jpeg)
Is it changed the fym is ahead again, it must not be the id, until the new season it may change several times ...

Ah yes ... Crazy firecracker! Suspense all the way 😂

15 agreements in D1 instead of 16 ... 4 upwards perhaps?

Tazz26: On fait ce qu'on peut, on a le même nombre de match que nos amis mouettes, le problème du jour ne vient pas de la.
En tout cas c'était une fin de saison palpitante, on aura pas eu la chance de nos amis brestois ce soir lol

No, but that's because of the 0.03 xg second-hand conversion rate.

So we're the disadvantaged agreement this year, we're still in D2 despite our position, without really knowing why, a major inconsistency for a game whose aim is to aim for a ranking.
It might be interesting to establish a sporting scale to determine which agreement has the upper hand in this case. Let Aymeric make things official in the rules, and let the administrators do it manually if it's too complicated to program.
image](https://i.imgur.com/hNMflxa.jpeg)

A goal average could be introduced in the same way as for the championships.

Admittedly, this could lead to a new tie, but with 100 or almost a hundred matches, it should solve the problem in 99% of cases, because before there is a tie, such as 170 pts and 234-159 goal average, there is almost no risk, and in any case it would be fairer than the ID number. The ID number only comes into play at a later stage if there is also a tie on goal average.

I support the idea. A simple agreement from Aymeric to introduce it in the rules and potentially leave the manual handling to the administrators?
It's still quite rare... but really inconsistent today. The goal average would be an easily verifiable and justifiable element :)

The goal average is unfair.

Or why not settle the tie by taking into account the matches between the tied teams?

Damien2911: Le goal average est injuste.

No system is perfect, but in any case, it's less 'unfair' than the ID number or 'the age of the captain'! because it represents a certain (albeit imperfect) reality of what happened.
What's your definition of justice?

Direct confrontations between the 2 agreements.

myforsans: Aucun système n'est parfait mais en tout cas, c'est moins "injuste" que le n° ID ou "l'âge du capitaine" ! car ça représente une certaine réalité (même imparfaite) de ce qui s'est passé.
C'est quoi ta définition de la justice ?

None of the 3 you mention.

Direct confrontations, yes.

What if there were no head-to-head matches between the 2 teams? Ah, ah ah!
What if there was only one match and the two teams drew? Ah, ah ah!
What if there have been 2 matches and each association has a team that has won 1-0? Ah, ah ah!
etc. ....
What do you do in all these cases?

Don't try, no system will be perfect.

So the overall goal average over the whole season seems to me to be the simplest to implement and the least imperfect (and in any case less unfair and subjective than the ID number).

myforsans: Et si il n'y a pas eu de matchs de confrontation directe entre les 2 ententes ? Ah, ah ah !
Et si il y a eu un seul match et qu'il y a eu match nul entre les deux équipes ? Ah, ah ah !
Et si il y en a eu 2 et que chaque entente a une équipe qui a eu une victoire 1-0 ? Ah, ah ah !
etc,....
Tu fais quoi dans tous ces cas là ?

Ne cherche pas, aucun système ne sera parfait.

Donc le goal average global sur l'ensemble de la saison me semble être le plus simple à mettre en oeuvre et le moins impar...

Ah, ah ah! N'importe quoi.

As I said earlier, no system is perfect, so why change anything?