Uh oh, under this system we wouldn't be promoted. I don't have a subscription, but this would take into account the number of home and away games played by each team.
Where does the idea of "herd immunity" come from and what actual evidence is there for it? There is no herd immunity for colds, the flu, aids, ebola, swine flu... I could go on. Vaccines I can understand but herd immunity could only work the same way. i.e. people catching it just a little bit. Or is there some glaring point I may have missed?
For all the self righteous "covidiot" bashing, Sweden has not experienced the huge numbers of infections, critical cases or deaths that some were predicting when they announced that they were bucking the worldwide trend of hard lockdowns. As I have mentioned before, the Nordic societies do have an advantage by way of their natural social distancing measures, self enforced even before all this palaver. Haters may well benefit from introspection (conveniently afforded by the lockdown) but will probably just blow off on social media instead.
Having rewards for snitching is just Orwellian and has no place in a free society. When self policing is widespread the fascists are winning. F**k that.
Interestingly Gary Neville has just said on Sky that he is 99% certain Leagues 1 and 2 will not return and likely to go to points per game. He feels a decision will be made next couple of weeks.
@chairboyscentral said:
Uh oh, under this system we wouldn't be promoted. I don't have a subscription, but this would take into account the number of home and away games played by each team.
I've seen a couple of people point out that if you weight for one variable, you have to for the rest. And wouldn't that effectively award more points for away wins and draws? It seems like they're trying too hard to find a perfect solution where there isn't one.
I heard another option on the table is to settle it by Big Club Index...
@NorsQuarters most of us will catch it have minor symptoms or not at all and build up immunity. That's herd immunity. Anti vaxxer kids are safe as long as they are in an area where everyone else is vaccinated. That is why we almost wiped out tb and measles. Sweden had a similar death rate but did not lock down but thats a choice isnt it. Agree about dobbing people in but if you dont think there were idiots abroad i want to live where you live. ?
This is even worse than I thought. So it predicts the remaining games based on PPG when the season stopped. How simplistic is that and how on earth can it play a part in deciding a season?
And considering we'd still have both Oxford and Rotherham to play at home when our home form is 2nd best in the league, would make this method even more of a shafting.
This does look like a cheerleading excercise by certain clubs, the article is at pains for some reason to show that the top 3 in L1 are unchanged by this and that "Some clubs have discussed using more complicated statistical models that factor in how hard each club’s run-in was before the season was suspended in March. There is considerable opposition to these models, though, with one club dismissing them as “hypothetical and unfair”
Either you null and void (that won't happen), use standard PPG or - if you have to base things partly on what's not happened - predict using a much more complex method. Not going up under this model would feel like an absolute shafting.
Where does the idea of "herd immunity" come from and what actual evidence is there for it? There is no herd immunity for colds, the flu, aids, ebola, swine flu... I could go on. Vaccines I can understand but herd immunity could only work the same way. i.e. people catching it just a little bit. Or is there some glaring point I may have missed?
The best way I’ve seen it explained is to think of it like a chain of dominoes. If nobody is vaccinated they can all fall once one becomes infected. If you have some level of vaccination/immunity within the line then those people act as a break in the chain, preventing the spread across the entire group. It does rely on people developing some immunity themselves and then not being able to spread it, and it isn’t yet clear if that is the case.
I don’t know how accurate a representation of the science that explanation is, but it helped me make some sense of it. And it helps explain why only a proportion need to be vaccinated/immune to limit outbreaks.
‘The Athletic understands that a League One club has prepared a detailed explanation of this method, with a full set of final tables, and emailed it to the EFL board.‘
Thanks for the reply @Wendoverman. To my knowledge it has been shown that one cannot contract the disease twice but that does not account for mutations. As the death rate is relatively low/slow (full respect for all those losing loved ones to it of course) there is every chance that it will mutate and we will have a situation like the flu where you have to guess the correct strain every year (season) and come up with a vaccine for that, never reaching the fabled land of herd immunity.
In fact, the only thing we are a herd about is letting the government impose curfew and being good little brown shirts.
Of course, there are idiots everywhere. Yet if most people keep to social distancing guidelines then let idiots be idiots and try to keep them together as much as possible. How about a nice cruise for example... Social distancing should work if practiced properly. If someone "invades" my space, I hold my breath and walk away (unless I am in a Q and have to use the evil eye;) Not easy in cities but very possible in countries like Norway with over 66km/1000 people (UK has just under 4km/1000 people).
Summary: there are too many authoritarian measures already in place and using idiots as the excuse is not good enough. Maybe we just need a strain of covid-19 that disproportionately affects idiots?!
@chairboyscentral said:
Either you null and void (that won't happen), use standard PPG or - if you have to base things partly on what's not happened - predict using a much more complex method. Not going up under this model would feel like an absolute shafting.
Going up on PPG will require a degree of modesty and respect for those clubs who missed out. Should it be top three on straightforward PPG then a socially distant dance in my WWFC face mask (still available on eBay and profits for a good cause) around the Kassam would surely hit the right solemn note. Said mask hiding my shit-eating grin.
As for herd immunity - links to r0 and R0 and is well explained for those who like maths here.
Whichever way you fiddle the final standings, we still finish ahead of Sunderland, Ipswich and Pompey who constantly remind as they're too good for this shit league.
Are we deciding the league by points per game or herd immunity? I am confused.
If the term sporting merit is being used as the driver for a decision it can't include any guessing on games not played. I am pretty sure whatever happens it will be contested.
Working in data analysis and having spent a few minutes to consider this weighted ppg proposal properly, and talking to a friend who's written a thesis on sports results modelling and data analysis, this proposal is actually disgraceful and so obviously pitching a flawed model for personal gain that the club putting it forward should be outed.
Here's a short list of other factors which have been ignored for this surface level complexity fudge (In no particular order)
Strength of teams left to play
Their relative home or away strength
Your form
Oppos form
Distance to away ground
Your squad fitness/ availability
Oppo squads fitness/ availability
Style matchup
Previous result vs oppo
Change in manager
Oppos league situation (do they have anything to play for?)
That's just a start
I expect the story is nonsense, but if its remotely true then the club should be asking any independent statistician to have a look and theyll dismiss it immediately as an awful solution.
You either build a real deep model, explaining what's included and what isn't (which is not practical) , or you use a simple method using the 2 undebateable things: points gained and matches played.
And would still send Oxford up, but I guess they realised that wasn't a viable option and they had to look like they'd done their homework on a 'proper' solution which would make them look more worthy of promotion.
To be honest I’m not too worried about how the league standings are decided. As the alternative is to void the season anything other than that is preferable in my view.
Basic PPG is probably the simplest way to sort it (and obviously favours us) but I’ve no strong objection to using a more weighted process to decide.
Out of curiosity anyone remember how to get that link to the predicted positions with various degrees of confidence that was updated constantly on some website based on form, opponents, phases of the moon, etc. I’m curious to know where everyone would have ended up using that.
I may be on my own in here but personally I really don’t want us to get promoted (although I’d love to see us 3rd in the ‘final’ table). I’d find it really hard to celebrate (other than in the way @Manboobs suggests, which I must admit did almost make me change my mind).
Also a disrupted season in the Championship where we may not be able to watch games in person for half of it would be a thoroughly miserable experience.
I may be on my own in here but personally I really don’t want us to get promoted (although I’d love to see us 3rd in the ‘final’ table). I’d find it really hard to celebrate (other than in the way @Manboobs suggests, which I must admit did almost make me change my mind).
Also a disrupted season in the Championship where we may not be able to watch games in person for half of it would be a thoroughly miserable experience.
I'm with you on this, although I'd definitely celebrate - before the emptiness of what's ahead sets in.
If we're still in League One, we should be well set to compete again.
And would still send Oxford up, but I guess they realised that wasn't a viable option and they had to look like they'd done their homework on a 'proper' solution which would make them look more worthy of promotion.
Exactly, but by looking to have found a "proper" solution then a lot of football fans (/ chairman/ governors) would simply accept it as they don't fully understand (or care) about statistical validity to see how crazy it is.
I'm really not fussed about going up, but I certainly wouldn't want to see us shafted by Oxford. Applying weighting to PPG would be ridiculous. Where do you stop? For me promoting only those sides in the automatic places and reducing relegation places by 1 is the fairest solution and would spare a lot of pointless arguing.
@Wycombe85 said:
I'm really not fussed about going up, but I certainly wouldn't want to see us shafted by Oxford. Applying weighting to PPG would be ridiculous. Where do you stop? For me promoting only those sides in the automatic places and reducing relegation places by 1 is the fairest solution and would spare a lot of pointless arguing.
Exactly, although I dont think leagues should lose a promotion spot in principle.
There's plenty of methods where Wycombe don't go up that are acceptable, creating a flawed weighted ppg method isnt one of them
Comments
Uh oh, under this system we wouldn't be promoted. I don't have a subscription, but this would take into account the number of home and away games played by each team.
A few thoughts:
Where does the idea of "herd immunity" come from and what actual evidence is there for it? There is no herd immunity for colds, the flu, aids, ebola, swine flu... I could go on. Vaccines I can understand but herd immunity could only work the same way. i.e. people catching it just a little bit. Or is there some glaring point I may have missed?
For all the self righteous "covidiot" bashing, Sweden has not experienced the huge numbers of infections, critical cases or deaths that some were predicting when they announced that they were bucking the worldwide trend of hard lockdowns. As I have mentioned before, the Nordic societies do have an advantage by way of their natural social distancing measures, self enforced even before all this palaver. Haters may well benefit from introspection (conveniently afforded by the lockdown) but will probably just blow off on social media instead.
Having rewards for snitching is just Orwellian and has no place in a free society. When self policing is widespread the fascists are winning. F**k that.
End of rant.
Interestingly Gary Neville has just said on Sky that he is 99% certain Leagues 1 and 2 will not return and likely to go to points per game. He feels a decision will be made next couple of weeks.
It was clear weeks back league 1&2 were done.
It's the premier they're going to be stubborn to play it out simply due to money.
Was hoping that home n away weighting nonsense was an Oxford fan's fantasy.
But that would be a strange way to do it.
I've seen a couple of people point out that if you weight for one variable, you have to for the rest. And wouldn't that effectively award more points for away wins and draws? It seems like they're trying too hard to find a perfect solution where there isn't one.
I heard another option on the table is to settle it by Big Club Index...
Can we have David Wheeler as our representative at the next meeting?
Yep agree.
If they do PPG you simply have to do it straight on overall.
@NorsQuarters most of us will catch it have minor symptoms or not at all and build up immunity. That's herd immunity. Anti vaxxer kids are safe as long as they are in an area where everyone else is vaccinated. That is why we almost wiped out tb and measles. Sweden had a similar death rate but did not lock down but thats a choice isnt it. Agree about dobbing people in but if you dont think there were idiots abroad i want to live where you live. ?
This is even worse than I thought. So it predicts the remaining games based on PPG when the season stopped. How simplistic is that and how on earth can it play a part in deciding a season?
And considering we'd still have both Oxford and Rotherham to play at home when our home form is 2nd best in the league, would make this method even more of a shafting.
This does look like a cheerleading excercise by certain clubs, the article is at pains for some reason to show that the top 3 in L1 are unchanged by this and that "Some clubs have discussed using more complicated statistical models that factor in how hard each club’s run-in was before the season was suspended in March. There is considerable opposition to these models, though, with one club dismissing them as “hypothetical and unfair”
I don't mind this method as long as they include the final step "multiplied by the number of sides your stadium has"
Either you null and void (that won't happen), use standard PPG or - if you have to base things partly on what's not happened - predict using a much more complex method. Not going up under this model would feel like an absolute shafting.
The best way I’ve seen it explained is to think of it like a chain of dominoes. If nobody is vaccinated they can all fall once one becomes infected. If you have some level of vaccination/immunity within the line then those people act as a break in the chain, preventing the spread across the entire group. It does rely on people developing some immunity themselves and then not being able to spread it, and it isn’t yet clear if that is the case.
I don’t know how accurate a representation of the science that explanation is, but it helped me make some sense of it. And it helps explain why only a proportion need to be vaccinated/immune to limit outbreaks.
If they use a more complex, more flawed ppg method over a simple ppg method, then legal action would be fully justified.
It doesn't make mathematical sense, or "political" sense now that other leagues have used ppg
I suspect strongest team is right and it's essentially lobbying by a supporter of the 3 sided club up the road
‘The Athletic understands that a League One club has prepared a detailed explanation of this method, with a full set of final tables, and emailed it to the EFL board.‘
I wonder who ?
Thanks for the reply @Wendoverman. To my knowledge it has been shown that one cannot contract the disease twice but that does not account for mutations. As the death rate is relatively low/slow (full respect for all those losing loved ones to it of course) there is every chance that it will mutate and we will have a situation like the flu where you have to guess the correct strain every year (season) and come up with a vaccine for that, never reaching the fabled land of herd immunity.
In fact, the only thing we are a herd about is letting the government impose curfew and being good little brown shirts.
Of course, there are idiots everywhere. Yet if most people keep to social distancing guidelines then let idiots be idiots and try to keep them together as much as possible. How about a nice cruise for example... Social distancing should work if practiced properly. If someone "invades" my space, I hold my breath and walk away (unless I am in a Q and have to use the evil eye;) Not easy in cities but very possible in countries like Norway with over 66km/1000 people (UK has just under 4km/1000 people).
Summary: there are too many authoritarian measures already in place and using idiots as the excuse is not good enough. Maybe we just need a strain of covid-19 that disproportionately affects idiots?!
Going up on PPG will require a degree of modesty and respect for those clubs who missed out. Should it be top three on straightforward PPG then a socially distant dance in my WWFC face mask (still available on eBay and profits for a good cause) around the Kassam would surely hit the right solemn note. Said mask hiding my shit-eating grin.
As for herd immunity - links to r0 and R0 and is well explained for those who like maths here.
https://plus.maths.org/content/maths-minute-r0-and-herd-immunity
Whichever way you fiddle the final standings, we still finish ahead of Sunderland, Ipswich and Pompey who constantly remind as they're too good for this shit league.
Are we deciding the league by points per game or herd immunity? I am confused.
If the term sporting merit is being used as the driver for a decision it can't include any guessing on games not played. I am pretty sure whatever happens it will be contested.
Working in data analysis and having spent a few minutes to consider this weighted ppg proposal properly, and talking to a friend who's written a thesis on sports results modelling and data analysis, this proposal is actually disgraceful and so obviously pitching a flawed model for personal gain that the club putting it forward should be outed.
Here's a short list of other factors which have been ignored for this surface level complexity fudge (In no particular order)
Strength of teams left to play
Their relative home or away strength
Your form
Oppos form
Distance to away ground
Your squad fitness/ availability
Oppo squads fitness/ availability
Style matchup
Previous result vs oppo
Change in manager
Oppos league situation (do they have anything to play for?)
That's just a start
I expect the story is nonsense, but if its remotely true then the club should be asking any independent statistician to have a look and theyll dismiss it immediately as an awful solution.
You either build a real deep model, explaining what's included and what isn't (which is not practical) , or you use a simple method using the 2 undebateable things: points gained and matches played.
Taking the table as is has more merit
And would still send Oxford up, but I guess they realised that wasn't a viable option and they had to look like they'd done their homework on a 'proper' solution which would make them look more worthy of promotion.
To be honest I’m not too worried about how the league standings are decided. As the alternative is to void the season anything other than that is preferable in my view.
Basic PPG is probably the simplest way to sort it (and obviously favours us) but I’ve no strong objection to using a more weighted process to decide.
Out of curiosity anyone remember how to get that link to the predicted positions with various degrees of confidence that was updated constantly on some website based on form, opponents, phases of the moon, etc. I’m curious to know where everyone would have ended up using that.
I may be on my own in here but personally I really don’t want us to get promoted (although I’d love to see us 3rd in the ‘final’ table). I’d find it really hard to celebrate (other than in the way @Manboobs suggests, which I must admit did almost make me change my mind).
Also a disrupted season in the Championship where we may not be able to watch games in person for half of it would be a thoroughly miserable experience.
I'm with you on this, although I'd definitely celebrate - before the emptiness of what's ahead sets in.
If we're still in League One, we should be well set to compete again.
Exactly, but by looking to have found a "proper" solution then a lot of football fans (/ chairman/ governors) would simply accept it as they don't fully understand (or care) about statistical validity to see how crazy it is.
To me its cynical and sinister
Since when are home and away points treated differently in tables. That should be the simple question posed.
We never take final tables and weight points so why would we add that as an extra step now?
Purely bonkers
I'm really not fussed about going up, but I certainly wouldn't want to see us shafted by Oxford. Applying weighting to PPG would be ridiculous. Where do you stop? For me promoting only those sides in the automatic places and reducing relegation places by 1 is the fairest solution and would spare a lot of pointless arguing.
Exactly, although I dont think leagues should lose a promotion spot in principle.
There's plenty of methods where Wycombe don't go up that are acceptable, creating a flawed weighted ppg method isnt one of them