Arena League Regional finals

[Analyst]

Ok all those with the virtual gala spreadsheets - where are your predictions for the regional finals (or anyone else for that matter)?:funnyhat:

[city4nil]

virtual spreadsheets wow is that a new technology.... lol yeah I have a prediction : Salford to make the A final .... Cmon we're gonna come second in our regional Final to to eventual League Champions Preston, beating Stockport/Liverpool and Warrington in the process

I would love to see the real spreadsheet for the virtual gala that ranks the clubs after the regional finals.

[comeondarlo]

virtual spreadsheets wow is that a new technology.... lol yeah I have a prediction : Salford to make the A final .... Cmon we're gonna come second in our regional Final to to eventual League Champions Preston, beating Stockport/Liverpool and Warrington in the process

I would love to see the real spreadsheet for the virtual gala that ranks the clubs after the regional finals.

What's happened to Stockport (if your prediction comes true of course)?

[city4nil]

What's happened to Stockport (if your prediction comes true of course)?

I'm thinking a season in the B final, that they could well win

We too would be served better on a results basis in the B final, but there's nothing like the qdos of the A final, so i'm banking that the couple of peeps we where down in the last round will make a significant difference in there events and this could be a peak for us in this topsi turvi sport

[Cordwangle]

Spoke to someone from Stockport over the weekend and they told me they had a weak team out for R2.
I think Stockport will win, Preston 2nd, Salford 3rd, Liverpool 4th, Southport 5th and Warrington 6th.
The top 4 to 6 teams could end up in the A or B finals.

[BIGBrian]

The top 4 to 6 teams could end up in the A or B finals.

Getting 6 teams (out of a maximum of 6) into the finals would be a big challenge and one that I personally hope doesn't happen (nothing personal against any particular region).

Having come up against them twice in the first two rounds, its hard to see past Beckenham in South and probably Guildford. Windsor would be my bet for third, and hopefully a place at Finals day, but history says that getting a 4th team from our region into the top 20 doesn't usually happen, due in part to having our Regional final in a notoriously slow pool.

[Cordwangle]

There's 8 teams in the NW final, I only named what I thought would be the top 6.
5 from the NW went through last year and I think 6 have in the past by virtue of the virtual gala.

[BIGBrian]

It doesn't matter how many teams you have in the regional final, only the top 6 can be included in the virtual gala.

And I think the times of 5 or 6 teams from one region being included in finals day probably predate the reintroduction of the NE region.

My view, FWIW, is that there should be a maximum of 4 teams from each region in finals day

[Cordwangle]

If that were the case you could possibly get a situation where a team that finished 5th could get to finals day ahead of the team that beat them in 4th. If you're included in the virtual gala you've got to be eligible to go to finals, even if you are 6th in your region.

[BIGBrian]

If that were the case you could possibly get a situation where a team that finished 5th could get to finals day ahead of the team that beat them in 4th

That would be ridiculous, right? Except actually it's a circumstance that already exists under the current arrangements, and it has happened.

The league already seems to recognise, in guaranteeing at least two places at finals day to every region, that there's a need to spread presence at finals day across all the regions. I agree with this.

I don't see it as much of a stretch from that position to stating that none of the 7 regions should have more than a 20% presence at finals day.

The currrent situation allows potentially 6 of out 20 teams to come from the same region. If you're going to allow that, you might as well just do everything from the virtual gala and ignore the actual 3 rounds of swimming completely.

The virtual gala pits clubs against each other who have never actually swum against each other. I don't dispute that some sort of virtual gala is necessary in bringing together what is essentially 7 regional competitions into one national competition, but in my opinion, you either have to accept that that situation becomes more flawed the deeper into it you go, or you have to introduce some sort of semi-final type competiion that allows clubs from different regions to swim off against each other.

The idea that a 5th placed club from one region, for example, should proceed ahead of a 4th placed club from a different region, on the basis of the fact they've both been competing against different competition, in different pools, at the same time, seems non-sensical to me.

The virtual gala is a necessity, but it becomes increasingly irrelevant the further down the table you go.

[Cordwangle]

No, I was actually saying that a 5th or 6th placed team in a regional final could actually place higher in the virtual gala than the team that beat them in 4th in the same regional final. They would then go to the National final ahead of the team that actually beat them.
Therefor, if you're in the virtual gala you have to be eligible to compete in the National finals

[BIGBrian]

No, I was actually saying that a 5th or 6th placed team in a regional final could actually place higher in the virtual gala than the team that beat them in 4th in the same regional final. They would then go to the National final ahead of the team that actually beat them.

Yes, and that can already happen.

But is that really the right way? You beat a team over three rounds of competition but you lose out to them in the virtual gala based on one round of competition? It's supposed to be a league, not a knockout competition

Therefore, if you're in the virtual gala you have to be eligible to compete in the National finals

Yes, and that's exactly how it curently happens. But a team that finishes 6th in one region can make finals day ahead of a team that finishes 3rd in a different region, when they've had no opportunity to compete against each other.

[GettingFaster]

No, I was actually saying that a 5th or 6th placed team in a regional final could actually place higher in the virtual gala than the team that beat them in 4th in the same regional final. They would then go to the National final ahead of the team that actually beat them.
Therefor, if you're in the virtual gala you have to be eligible to compete in the National finals

Looking at the recent inter-counties Masters gala, the change of position in the "big" gala has already happened.

Interesting situation, definitely. And certainly worth of further debate, even if one has not massively fervent feelings one way or the other.

For an event to be "national", you have to define very clearly what qualifies a team to get through to the final round. If the rules are clearly defined at the beginning, there can be no cause or excuse for whingeing at the end of the third round. What I find a little peculiar is that the regions don't all run with the same set of conditions for the qualifying rounds, so that for example clubs in one region if they get to R3 finals can only pick swimmers who have already taken part in R1 or R2, whereas other regions don't have the same kind of restriction. Please note that I have NO specific club affiliation, so I have the luxury of looking at this as an unbiased onlooker. (I do enjoy officiating at NASL galas though, brilliant events!)

IMHO, all the different regions should, over the next season, attempt to get their respective regional conditions as close as is humanly possible. Some of the regions have come up with very sensible conditions which could only enhance the national competition. I appreciate that something like NASL requires a bit of time to get things synchronised, but it's not a completely ridiculous aim, and would mean that regional competitions could take place with clearly defined competitions and the saddoes among us (including me) could happily (or sadly, depending on your point of view) digest all the various national events and put together some kind of massive, 150+-club virtual gala (junior statto where are you?) so we could have some statisticians' orgy. Either that or so that all the clubs taking part could know that they all have the same chance of achieving a place at the national final.

Yeah, it could be hard on regions where there are already two really huge clubs who always get to finals.

So what conditions would YOU like to see implemented across all the regions?

[awaldram]

What I find a little peculiar is that the regions don't all run with the same set of conditions for the qualifying rounds, so that for example clubs in one region if they get to R3 finals can only pick swimmers who have already taken part in R1 or R2, whereas other regions don't have the same kind of restriction. Please note that I have NO specific club affiliation, so I have the luxury of looking at this as an unbiased onlooker. (I do enjoy officiating at NASL galas though, brilliant events!)

IMHO, all the different regions should, over the next season, attempt to get their respective regional conditions as close as is humanly possible. Some of the regions have come up with very sensible conditions which could only enhance the national competition.

Not sure what the situation is today but in previous years.

Harmonised rules would see some regions 'clubs' disqualified from the event . !!

Given these 'clubs' were/are vehicles created for the sole intent of wining the arena league I'm not sure it would be a bad thing.

[Cordwangle]

I would always like to see the best teams in the final, be they from where-ever, I think it makes for a better competition. The way it's done at the moment seems pretty sensible to me.

[chris_lamb]

Harmonised rules would see some regions 'clubs' disqualified from the event . !!

It depends what rules were come up with surely?

[johnhy]

Much as I would love it that BB's prediction on the South Final would come true I cannot see Guildford not coming top again and the runner up being any one from 4 or 5.

Whilst the new rules on having to swim in an earlier round to be able to swim on Finals day are better it will be interesting to see who turns out in the 3rd round for some clubs who have not already swum in rounds 1 and 2. The irony is that swimmers with little (if any) real connection with clubs can still compete in the Arena League divisional finals and National finals merely by dint of being available on one Saturday in December whilst long standing members of clubs cannot be considered because they are based abroad having gone to University or for training reasons.

[awaldram]

It depends what rules were come up with surely?

Well everyone would adopt our rules as there obviously the right ones :devil:

[city4nil]

I think the general rules of guaranteed places for either the A or b and the remainder being made up by the fastest loosers in the vitual Gala make good sense.

This way the rounds have there purpose regionally and there is an incentive to do as well as you can, the virtual gala being used to make the remainder up and also to provide lane rankings for the finals. I think that the rulings regarding swimming in early rounds to qualify for the final needs some redrafting and the regions should be unified in such crucial rulings, they clearly effect the relative strength of teams.

We are always on the cusp of this but having the Stockport Club ( ITC ) swimming it's olympians is a tall order in our region but we enjoy the competition and as for there weakened team that included - Michael Rock and James Goddard, have phelps and thorpeodo signed up when I wasn't looking!

It's all good fun and the competition is always 1st rate in our region, you either have to get used to it or take up another sport tbh - Role on the regional finals.

[Cordwangle]

It's great to have Olympians in a team, obviously, but they can do no better than finish first. However, there's no swimming up for them, so a really good age grouper is more valuable to a team, in my opinion.
There's more to it than just having Olympic swimmers.

[Bold Dave]

Ok all those with the virtual gala spreadsheets - where are your predictions for the regional finals (or anyone else for that matter)?:funnyhat:

Too close to call in West Midlands ten gala points separating Coventry, Derby and Boldmere all undefeated :zip:perm 2 from 3 its anyones game!

[BIGBrian]

The virtual gala is a device used to pull together 7 different regional competitions into some sort of artificial national ranking. As such, it shouldn't have any place in rearranging the results of 3 rounds of actual swimming, and yet its possible for a team finishing 3rd over three rounds to miss out on finals day at the expense of a team that finished below them in the same region.

I don't see what would be wrong with putting the 7 regional champions into the A final, along with the 3 highest ranking runners up (from the virtual gala). Then put the other 4 runners up in the B final along with the 6 highest ranked 3rd place teams.

[Bek]

Much as I would love it that BB's prediction on the South Final would come true I cannot see Guildford not coming top again and the runner up being any one from 4 or 5.

Whilst the new rules on having to swim in an earlier round to be able to swim on Finals day are better it will be interesting to see who turns out in the 3rd round for some clubs who have not already swum in rounds 1 and 2. The irony is that swimmers with little (if any) real connection with clubs can still compete in the Arena League divisional finals and National finals merely by dint of being available on one Saturday in December whilst long standing members of clubs cannot be considered because they are based abroad having gone to University or for training reasons.

But this is not true because of differing regional rules. As per my earlier post, in the Western League a swimmer "...with little (if any) real connection with a club" as you put it cannot compete in the long course regional final in Dec unless they have also competed in either R1 or R2 short course galas.

Perhaps this rule also applies to the NW League (right one?) as I understand that Fran Halsall competed for Liverpool in R2 and I see Michael Rock & James Goddard also competed for Stockport in R2. Good for them suporting their home (I presume?) clubs at grass roots level.

[comeondarlo]

But this is not true because of differing regional rules. As per my earlier post, in the Western League a swimmer "...with little (if any) real connection with a club" as you put it cannot compete in the long course regional final in Dec unless they have also competed in either R1 or R2 short course galas.

Perhaps this rule also applies to the NW League (right one?) as I understand that Fran Halsall competed for Liverpool in R2 and I see Michael Rock & James Goddard also competed for Stockport in R2. Good for them suporting their home (I presume?) clubs at grass roots level.

Adam Brown also took part in Round 2. I think the Regional final clashes with something else but I can't remember what!

[comeondarlo]

It's great to have Olympians in a team, obviously, but they can do no better than finish first. However, there's no swimming up for them, so a really good age grouper is more valuable to a team, in my opinion.
There's more to it than just having Olympic swimmers.

Spot on, especially if you have one that can do well when swimming up too.

[city4nil]

Spot on, especially if you have one that can do well when swimming up too.

spot on with the swimming up

@Bek Have you heard Michael Rocks accent? He is a genuine nice guy but is a scouser not really a born and bred cheshire lad, he has been with Stockport a while and it is really up to him who he swims for and that's right

I'm all for the world class peeps joining in, it definately raises the interest and it's great as there is definately a different mix of swimmers than you see at open meets

[Bek]

spot on with the swimming up

@Bek Have you heard Michael Rocks accent? He is a genuine nice guy but is a scouser not really a born and bred cheshire lad, he has been with Stockport a while and it is really up to him who he swims for and that's right

I'm all for the world class peeps joining in, it definately raises the interest and it's great as there is definately a different mix of swimmers than you see at open meets

About Michael Rock 1st para... Not sure what you mean here ? Did I imply he shouldn't be swimming for Stockport? I think it's great he gets stuck in to a club competition and hopefully inspires the youngsters.

2nd para - Agree 100%.

[Apostle]

The virtual gala is a device used to pull together 7 different regional competitions into some sort of artificial national ranking. As such, it shouldn't have any place in rearranging the results of 3 rounds of actual swimming, and yet its possible for a team finishing 3rd over three rounds to miss out on finals day at the expense of a team that finished below them in the same region.

I don't see what would be wrong with putting the 7 regional champions into the A final, along with the 3 highest ranking runners up (from the virtual gala). Then put the other 4 runners up in the B final along with the 6 highest ranked 3rd place teams.

Unfortunatley the virtual gala that is run after the regional finals can have a devasstating effect on a teams ability to reach the national final if they have a DQ or two.

In the regional final a team may win the gala and even have a couple of DQ's and only lose a maximum of 16 points (2 DQ's 8 lane gala).

When the results from that gala are fed into the virtual gala those DQ's could be worth as much as 42 points each. So if team A wins the regional final over team B by 20 points they could very easily find themselves behind team B after the virtual gala.

Lets say team A sets a time in the virtual gala that is the 3rd fastest time. They would get 40 points for that normally. Because they got DQ'd they will get 0. Team B sets the 6th fastest time in the VG and gets 37 points.

Immediatly the 20 points advantage that Team A had in the regional final is gone when determining the national final positions.

[Taxiandbank]

Adam Brown also took part in Round 2. I think the Regional final clashes with something else but I can't remember what!

European short course

[comeondarlo]

European short course

That's it, I take it that it'll affect most teams selections for the Regional Finals.

[DaveCheshire]

My son and daughters club got promoted to premier divison couple years back

It was great to see them compete against the "big clubs " in the north west
and despite being releagated it was a great experience swimming against top
quality swimmers.

Ive met Micheal Rock & James Goddard when they came to Cheshire training camp
for 11-12 year olds with my son and they were a credit to there club and swimming
in general

[BIGBrian]

Unfortunatley the virtual gala that is run after the regional finals can have a devasstating effect on a teams ability to reach the national final if they have a DQ or two.

In the regional final a team may win the gala and even have a couple of DQ's and only lose a maximum of 16 points (2 DQ's 8 lane gala).

When the results from that gala are fed into the virtual gala those DQ's could be worth as much as 42 points each. So if team A wins the regional final over team B by 20 points they could very easily find themselves behind team B after the virtual gala.

Lets say team A sets a time in the virtual gala that is the 3rd fastest time. They would get 40 points for that normally. Because they got DQ'd they will get 0. Team B sets the 6th fastest time in the VG and gets 37 points.

Immediatly the 20 points advantage that Team A had in the regional final is gone when determining the national final positions.

Not when I rule the world. In a league competition, actual performance over the duration of the league campaign must surely take precedence over any one off individual performance.

In the system I put forward above, what you say couldn't actually happen. Team A would always finish above Team B and be higher up the list to go the finals day because they finished ahead of Team B in their region. The virtual gala should only be used for (what I see as) its primary purpose.....to rank teams finishing in equal placings in different regions. It should play no part in re-arranging the results already achieved within any given region over 3 rounds.

Also I think the effect of DQs in R3 is somewhat overstated. Yes, as you say above, it could potentially cost 42 points instead of the maximum of 6 (or 8) on the night. But if Team A won on the night in R3 by 20 points, then, unless Team A and Team B happen to finish in all the other events only one place apart each time in the virtual gala (16th and 17th, 8th and 9th, 22nd and 23rd etc), then that 20 point lead will be magnified and increased significantly in the virtual gala before the result of the DQ is brought into the mix.

[Apostle]

Not when I rule the world. In a league competition, actual performance over the duration of the league campaign must surely take precedence over any one off individual performance.

In the system I put forward above, what you say couldn't actually happen. Team A would always finish above Team B and be higher up the list to go the finals day because they finished ahead of Team B in their region. The virtual gala should only be used for (what I see as) its primary purpose.....to rank teams finishing in equal placings in different regions. It should play no part in re-arranging the results already achieved within any given region over 3 rounds.

Also I think the effect of DQs in R3 is somewhat overstated. Yes, as you say above, it could potentially cost 42 points instead of the maximum of 6 (or 8) on the night. But if Team A won on the night in R3 by 20 points, then, unless Team A and Team B happen to finish in all the other events only one place apart each time in the virtual gala (16th and 17th, 8th and 9th, 22nd and 23rd etc), then that 20 point lead will be magnified and increased significantly in the virtual gala before the result of the DQ is brought into the mix.

Thats also possible, even probable.


Lets remember that the VG is the tool in place that allows the organisers to fill up the lanes at the national A&B finals. Something we all thought would add to the competition. It's not perfect but it serves a purpose.

[junior statto]

Having come up against them twice in the first two rounds, its hard to see past Beckenham in South and probably Guildford.

I agree with Johny, I think Guildford are exceptionally strong this year and will beat Beckenham on the day.

[city4nil]

I agree with Johny, I think Guildford are exceptionally strong this year and will beat Beckenham on the day.

Only to be crushed by the might of the Northwest in the final lol

[comeondarlo]

Only to be crushed by the might of the Northwest in the final lol

But which team in the Northwest?

[city4nil]

But which team in the Northwest?

Well Stockport have the pedigree for sure and a host of fine athletes in the open area but I think Preston would be my form favorite... will it be their first national league win?

I wish I could say City of Salford but we aren't as strong in all ages and genders, I still think that tail wind permitting we may make the A final

[comeondarlo]

I think we've got a better balanced team this season and I think we came fourth time round, time will tell

[noeyedear]

What about PL ?

[comeondarlo]

What about PL ?

Someone said exactly that to me this morning.

I don't know, it's hard to tell with everyone not swimming their first choices. They've got to be there or there abouts.

[Apostle]

Never discount PL.

But I predict it will be close between PL, Hatfield, SM, Millfield.

[city4nil]

There is a new P in swimming these days PSC.... lol

See attached


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ce1-lQHBhc&feature=related

[comeondarlo]

There is a new P in swimming these days PSC.... lol

See attached


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ce1-lQHBhc&feature=related

Surely there's two Ps, Poole have come on along very nicely over the last couple of years.

[comeondarlo]

Never discount PL.

But I predict it will be close between PL, Hatfield, SM, Millfield.

This years comp could be very interesting!
There's a lot of good teams around.

[MindGames]

PL to win comfortably - 30 new quality swimmers this year, and, coincidently, they fill the vital gaps in AL age groups. Buy 'em in, better than producing 'em!

[Happi Blue]

PL to win comfortably - 30 new quality swimmers this year, and, coincidently, they fill the vital gaps in AL age groups. Buy 'em in, better than producing 'em!

So its taken you approx 2 1/2 years since you've joined SwimClub to post something and you chose PL as your first topic ;)

Been doing this for 10 years now and still love this competition. Good luck to you all and enjoy :)

[BIGBrian]

Just looking at the possible outcomes in the Guildford gala this weekend, and it looks like a straight shoot out to avoid last place on the night.

The league points already on the board are so tight, with only 2 points across all 7 teams, that I can't see any scenario where the team that comes last on the night avoids the one relegation spot.

Even Woking, the highest ranked team going into the gala, aren't safe. If they come last, their points total goes from 4 to 6 (double points in R3), and then if Wycombe, the lowest ranked team at the moment, only come second last, Wycombe will be safe. They go from 2 to 6, tying on league points with Woking. Then it comes down to gala points in R3 and Wycombe must by defnition have scored more than Woking, so Woking get the drop.

Should make for a tense evening!

[awaldram]

Just looking at the possible outcomes in the Guildford gala this weekend, and it looks like a straight shoot out to avoid last place on the night.

The league points already on the board are so tight, with only 2 points across all 7 teams, that I can't see any scenario where the team that comes last on the night avoids the one relegation spot.

Even Woking, the highest ranked team going into the gala, aren't safe. If they come last, their points total goes from 4 to 6 (double points in R3), and then if Wycombe, the lowest ranked team at the moment, only come second last, Wycombe will be safe. They go from 2 to 6, tying on league points with Woking. Then it comes down to gala points in R3 and Wycombe must by defnition have scored more than Woking, so Woking get the drop.

Should make for a tense evening!

No pressure then ;)

[GettingFaster]

Am I missing something? I thought that those in the regional final get an extra 36 points, those in the middle gala get an extra 24 and those in the third gala get an extra 12. Could be wrong, but I get the feeling that's how it used to go. Or is my feeble mind playing tricks on me?

[Pink Paraffin]

PL to win comfortably - 30 new quality swimmers this year, and, coincidently, they fill the vital gaps in AL age groups. Buy 'em in, better than producing 'em!

Buy them in? Surely it's the swimmers who pay to go there?

[junior statto]

Just looking at the possible outcomes in the Guildford gala this weekend, and it looks like a straight shoot out to avoid last place on the night.

The league points already on the board are so tight, with only 2 points across all 7 teams, that I can't see any scenario where the team that comes last on the night avoids the one relegation spot.

Even Woking, the highest ranked team going into the gala, aren't safe. If they come last, their points total goes from 4 to 6 (double points in R3), and then if Wycombe, the lowest ranked team at the moment, only come second last, Wycombe will be safe. They go from 2 to 6, tying on league points with Woking. Then it comes down to gala points in R3 and Wycombe must by defnition have scored more than Woking, so Woking get the drop.

Should make for a tense evening!

Can't see that happening. I thought Woking looked strong in R2.

I think it will be a relegation battle between Canterbury and Wycombe (I think Basingstoke will edge it) and a straight fight at the top between Staines, Woking and Thanet (Epsom struggled in R2).

But yes, I think it will be one hell of an evening. Can't wait

[awaldram]

Am I missing something? I thought that those in the regional final get an extra 36 points, those in the middle gala get an extra 24 and those in the third gala get an extra 12. Could be wrong, but I get the feeling that's how it used to go. Or is my feeble mind playing tricks on me?

Were only running 2 3rd round galas this year an 8 and 7 so all 7 in the bottom gala are at risk.

[BIGBrian]

Am I missing something? I thought that those in the regional final get an extra 36 points, those in the middle gala get an extra 24 and those in the third gala get an extra 12. Could be wrong, but I get the feeling that's how it used to go. Or is my feeble mind playing tricks on me?

With only 15 teams in the Prem Div this year, there's only two galas in the final round this time (top 8 in the Regional final at K2, the other 7 duking it out at Guildford) so its 24 bonus points to everyone in the Regional final and 12 to everyone in the other gala, but it doesn't make any difference. Everyone in the same gala gets the same bonus points, so you can disregard their effect on the final placings. I ignored them in the points I put up earlier.

No team in the second gala can get enough points, including bonus points, to overtake any team in the Regional final gala (that being the whole point of the bonus points) so their only relevance is making sure that the league knows, going into the final round, which galas the promotion/relegation places are going to be settled at.

[BIGBrian]

Can't see that happening. I thought Woking looked strong in R2.

I think it will be a relegation battle between Canterbury and Wycombe (I think Basingstoke will edge it) and a straight fight at the top between Staines, Woking and Thanet (Epsom struggled in R2)

May not be that straighforward. Only two teams (Woking in R2 and Epsom in R1) have got 3 points in any gala, and they both came last in their other round. Every other team, in every other gala, finished in the bottom two places, which is why no team currently has more than 4 points.

Its hard to tell who's stronger, when they've all been up against teams at the top of the tree in both rounds (Basingstoke have had Beckenham twice in two rounds, for example, and I know other teams have also come up against serious opposition in both rounds)

Bring it on!

[Bully]

Buy them in? Surely it's the swimmers who pay to go there?

Surely it's the parents ;)

[Bully]

Everyone in the same gala gets the same bonus points, so you can disregard their effect on the final placings. I ignored them in the points I put up earlier.

Having an 8 team final will have a major effect, in that the point spread between winning a race and finishing last in a race is far greater, than if it were a 6 team final.

[BIGBrian]

Having an 8 team final will have a major effect, in that the point spread between winning a race and finishing last in a race is far greater, than if it were a 6 team final.

Which is true in the other one as well, but the bonus points are irrelevant, since everyone in the same gala gets the same bonus points.

And I was only dealing with the other one at Guildford, since that's the only one that matters :zip:

[Bully]

And I was only dealing with the other one at Guildford, since that's the only one that matters :zip:
Guildford V Crawley...Guildford V Crawley...Mmmmmmm well I know where I'd rather be ;)

[BIGBrian]

Guildford V Crawley...Guildford V Crawley...Mmmmmmm well I know where I'd rather be ;)

Not saying we wouldn't rather be competing at Crawley, obviously <coff>

But there's more hanging on the Guildford gala, and more uncertainty about the result, than Crawley. Obviously Guildford and Beckenham will get the top two spots....it's a foregone conclusion :rainbow:

Seriously, if Windsor make it into the top two, do make a point of accosting me at the next meet we're both at, and I'll be more than happy to buy you a celebratory cappuccino. :beer: (where's the cappuccino smiley when you want one?)

[awaldram]

May not be that straighforward. Only two teams (Woking in R2 and Epsom in R1) have got 3 points in any gala, and they both came last in their other round. Every other team, in every other gala, finished in the bottom two places, which is why no team currently has more than 4 points.

Its hard to tell who's stronger, when they've all been up against teams at the top of the tree in both rounds (Basingstoke have had Beckenham twice in two rounds, for example, and I know other teams have also come up against serious opposition in both rounds)

Bring it on!

Totally agree , You've also got to take into account the 'Cantebury effect' that pool affected the swims of all young swimmers (accept Canterbury :) ).

With 60% of youngsters swimming 2-3 secs out over 50 the situation will be totally different in a better pool.

Will be really exciting.

[comeondarlo]

Anyone know if the 3rd Round is licensed?

[BIGBrian]

Anyone know if the 3rd Round is licensed?

I believe South and London are the only two regions to have licensed their Regional finals

[Pink Paraffin]

I believe South and London are the only two regions to have licensed their Regional finals

And the West

[comeondarlo]

I believe South and London are the only two regions to have licensed their Regional finals

Thanks Brian, it was the London League I was after; so good news.

While I'm on who's going to Basildon?

[Apostle]

Thanks Brian, it was the London League I was after; so good news.

While I'm on who's going to Basildon?


Gotta work saturday. :(

[comeondarlo]

Gotta work saturday. :(

I didn't see you over the weekend at Norwich either, you need a new job mate.

[junior statto]

May not be that straighforward. Only two teams (Woking in R2 and Epsom in R1) have got 3 points in any gala, and they both came last in their other round. Every other team, in every other gala, finished in the bottom two places, which is why no team currently has more than 4 points.

Its hard to tell who's stronger, when they've all been up against teams at the top of the tree in both rounds (Basingstoke have had Beckenham twice in two rounds, for example, and I know other teams have also come up against serious opposition in both rounds)

Bring it on!

I agree, it was just my attempt at a prediction. However, Epsom was in the same gala as Thanet and Woking in Rd2 and struggled (imho) so I still can't see Epsom competing for top position.

[BIGBrian]

I agree, it was just my attempt at a prediction. However, Epsom was in the same gala as Thanet and Woking in Rd2 and struggled (imho) so I still can't see Epsom competing for top position.

The lane draw doesn't do Canterbury and Wycombe any favours either. Because they spearhead the lane draw based on league standings, they've got the two outside (occupied) lanes, and Canterbury will have an empty (8th) lane outside them as well.

[Noswimdad]

Can't see that happening. I thought Woking looked strong in R2.

I think it will be a relegation battle between Canterbury and Wycombe (I think Basingstoke will edge it) and a straight fight at the top between Staines, Woking and Thanet (Epsom struggled in R2).

But yes, I think it will be one hell of an evening. Can't wait

On paper it should be a good one!

The AOE is confirmed by the pool with a certain swimclub member at the helm of the console.

Really getting quite excited even if it is Gala 2 for the Premier South Div!

[BIGBrian]

On paper it should be a good one!

The AOE is confirmed by the pool with a certain swimclub member at the helm of the console.

Really getting quite excited even if it is Gala 2 for the Premier South Div!

Excellent! Electronic recording as well on the official spreadsheet? Or using a proper meet management setup? :D

[Noswimdad]

Excellent! Electronic recording as well on the official spreadsheet? Or using a proper meet management setup? :D

Just be thankful that we should have times up on a scoreboard, what happens after that I don't know!

[BIGBrian]

Just be thankful that we should have times up on a scoreboard, what happens after that I don't know!

I'm probably going to be driving the league's Excel recording programme from the galleries anyway....if you need someone to do it poolside, even as a back up to manual recording, let me know.

[GettingFaster]

A certain green-clad little chap with a shilleleagh (sp?) will be driving the Daktronics, and I know he's getting assistance from assorted Hytekers, so it's possible it'll be recorded on Hytek but might only be done on the Excel spreadsheet.

It'll be REALLY exciting!

[BIGBrian]

A certain green-clad little chap with a shilleleagh (sp?) will be driving the Daktronics, and I know he's getting assistance from assorted Hytekers, so it's possible it'll be recorded on Hytek but might only be done on the Excel spreadsheet.

It'll be REALLY exciting!

Will you be there GF? If so, we might have a record attendance for SwimClub members at the same gala.....

You (?), me, awaldram, Juniorstatto, Noswimdad, Leppy and I believe Chris_Lamb has also scored some deckside duties in white there too. Don't know where Judge_Dredd is fetching up, or Oldsparky, but it's possible....

Anyone else going?

[GettingFaster]

Who's hosting that gala? I may well be able to let's see what happens...

[Taxing]

Totally agree , You've also got to take into account the 'Cantebury effect' that pool affected the swims of all young swimmers (accept Canterbury :) ).

With 60% of youngsters swimming 2-3 secs out over 50 the situation will be totally different in a better pool.

Will be really exciting.

Ah yes shallow end start, dodgy boom, we're there in 2 east this weekend

Some of our swimmers have a fair bit of experience there, bur not many...

[taxi service]

Will you be there GF? If so, we might have a record attendance for SwimClub members at the same gala.....

You (?), me, awaldram, Juniorstatto, Noswimdad, Leppy and I believe Chris_Lamb has also scored some deckside duties in white there too. Don't know where Judge_Dredd is fetching up, or Oldsparky, but it's possible....

Anyone else going?
Maybe me.

[Judge Dredd]

Will you be there GF? If so, we might have a record attendance for SwimClub members at the same gala.....

You (?), me, awaldram, Juniorstatto, Noswimdad, Leppy and I believe Chris_Lamb has also scored some deckside duties in white there too. Don't know where Judge_Dredd is fetching up, or Oldsparky, but it's possible....

Anyone else going?

Not me, I'm afraid. Services were offered but not required this time. Shall be usefully occupied transporting better half to and from a Christmas "do", but looking forward to hearing how it all goes. Have fun.

[BIGBrian]

Who's hosting that gala? I may well be able to let's see what happens...

Staines....be good to see you there

[Apostle]

I didn't see you over the weekend at Norwich either, you need a new job mate.

Tell me about it.

But saving the world is not easy!

[junior statto]

I'm probably going to be driving the league's Excel recording programme from the galleries anyway....if you need someone to do it poolside, even as a back up to manual recording, let me know.

I will be driving my own 'home grown' spreadsheet from the gallery!!

[BIGBrian]

Maybe me.

Excellent! The more the merrier!

[BIGBrian]

Not me, I'm afraid. Services were offered but not required this time. Shall be usefully occupied transporting better half to and from a Christmas "do", but looking forward to hearing how it all goes. Have fun.

With half an eye on what's happening at Waterlooville too, perhaps? It's a similar situation there, with only 2 points separating all 5 teams, but with two to go down. They've all come bottom in at least one of the earlier rounds, but it looks like the bottom two in that gala will be dropping out too

Looks like Littlehampton might have enough to avoid trouble, but Fareham Nomads could struggle, and its going to be tight between Alton, Hart and Tilehurst for the other spot, although Hart did beat Alton reasonably comfortably in R2.

[GettingFaster]

BB, can you send me the Excel spreadsheet please, and is it this year's version you have?

[BIGBrian]

It's v2.4, dated 2009, but I believe it's the current one. If you want to PM me an e-mail address I'll send it over

[Judge Dredd]

With half an eye on what's happening at Waterlooville too, perhaps?

No, not really.

[BIGBrian]

Can someone explain to me why they go to the trouble of putting the R3 galas into neutral venues, but then appoint referees from two of the competing clubs? The referees for the gala at Guildford this weekend are from Thanet and Basingstoke.

I know all referees are impartial, obviously <coff>, but it just seems if you're going to have neutral venues, you should making a point of having neutral referees

[Judge Dredd]

Can someone explain to me why they go to the trouble of putting the R3 galas into neutral venues, but then appoint referees from two of the competing clubs? The referees for the gala at Guildford this weekend are from Thanet and Basingstoke.

I know all referees are impartial, obviously <coff>, but it just seems if you're going to have neutral venues, you should making a point of having neutral referees

Which is why I was a bit surprised to not be wanted this weekend (now being a member of a club from a completely different region).

With just one exception, I would not question the integrity of anyone that I suspect will be refereeing this weekend. However, there's always the possibility that an unknowing (or unprincipled) spectator might take exception to a decision which goes the way of that official's club. I would have thought that, for the sake of the officials concerned, it would be good to aim to use neutrals.

[BIGBrian]

Which is why I was a bit surprised to not be wanted this weekend (now being a member of a club from a completely different region).

With just one exception, I would not question the integrity of anyone that I suspect will be refereeing this weekend. However, there's always the possibility that an unknowing (or unprincipled) spectator might take exception to a decision which goes the way of that official's club. I would have thought that, for the sake of the officials concerned, it would be good to aim to use neutrals.

Exactly my point. It's the potential for the perception of a lack of impartiality that could cause issues.

Not to mention the use of resources - it seems bizarre that there's a gala in Basingstoke that's being refereed by people from the clubs competing there (as a neutral venue, so they're all travelling) while a referee from Basingstoke is travelling to Guildford to referee a gala that Basingstoke are competing at.

[awaldram]

I suppose its 'right of redress'

If you had non neutral venue with obvious advantage to the 'home' team the what could you do.?

If a parent has a complaint against a refereeing decision then there is a well defined complaint process.

Mind you in all the years I've been pool side and many decisions I've not agreed with, not once could I put my hand on heart and say they were positively wrong.

I've found referees to be almost 100% nonpartisan. with very few exceptions.

[Cordwangle]

Can someone explain to me why they go to the trouble of putting the R3 galas into neutral venues, but then appoint referees from two of the competing clubs? The referees for the gala at Guildford this weekend are from Thanet and Basingstoke.

I know all referees are impartial, obviously <coff>, but it just seems if you're going to have neutral venues, you should making a point of having neutral referees

The NW R3 gala is not in a neutral venue, nor was it last year.

[chris_lamb]

I know all referees are impartial, obviously <coff>, but it just seems if you're going to have neutral venues, you should making a point of having neutral referees

If you know all referees are impartial then there isn't a problem. If you doubt it (as your "<coff>" implies) I suggest you take up your doubts with the ASA in the form of a complaint.

[BIGBrian]

If you know all referees are impartial then there isn't a problem. If you doubt it (as your "<coff>" implies) I suggest you take up your doubts with the ASA in the form of a complaint.

Not at all...my <coff> wasn't meant as any indication that I have any issues with any referee (although apparently some do), but, as JD says, its trivially easy to avoid putting referees in the position where their impartiality could be questioned in what, to many spectators, participants, coaches etc, is a high stakes environment.

I'm not questioning the officials' impartiality at all, just wondering why a simple step isn't taken to avoid the risk of it being questioned, when, at the same time, they go to the trouble of putting R3 galas in neutral venues. UEFA will tell you that they don't doubt the impartiality of their football referees either, but you don't ever see an English referee put in charge of a Champions League game involving an English club. It's not that they're not trusted to do their job properly, it's to avoid them being put in that position.

But the other issue is management of available resources. I don't know for certain, but I'm guessing that officials are entitled to claim expenses for Arena League galas? That being the case, for the league's own financial benefit, it seems to make sense to try and put them as close to their home environment as possible, particularly when there's actually a gala taking place there that other officials are having to travel to from further afield. It just seems a bit inefficient, that's all.

[Judge Dredd]

I don't know for certain, but I'm guessing that officials are entitled to claim expenses for Arena League galas?

Never been told that I could. Never tried. Until last year, always had a swimmer there, so wouldn't have even thought of it.

[GettingFaster]

I don't think there SHOULD be a deliberate attempt to make the ref not from one of the competing clubs. When there's an open meet, the refs are from one club or another, often with swimmers in the pool, and there's not a blink. And the timekeepers at NSL usually timekeep for their own club, so why pick on refs?

With only one very obvious exception, I cannot say I have ever noticed an official at any qualified level being partisan or anything but impartial. TBH, when I'm officiating I just refer to "Lane 3" or "Lane 7" and pay no attention to the colour of the hat on the swimmer's head.

I'm going to be there in some capacity or another and am really looking forward to being at another NSL gala without any particular affiliation to any of the clubs, so I can just enjoy it.

[taxi service]

It's v2.4, dated 2009, but I believe it's the current one. If you want to PM me an e-mail address I'll send it over

I have the 2011 version but only the 6 team one.

[Blower]

An eight lane, Host Club, version to Arena League South rules, including split points for tied places (from 2 to 8!) is available on PM request.

[BIGBrian]

An eight lane, Host Club, version to Arena League South rules, including split points for tied places (from 2 to 8!) is available on PM request.

That would be useful. From what I can see the current version (in spite of claims from the league to the contrary) doesn't manage tied places the way they say it does (and the way that South requires). It would be OK in other regions (Western, for example). Having said that, that seems to be about the only flaw in it that I've found.

[Apostle]

Good luck to everyone at today's finals!

[comeondarlo]

Good luck to everyone at today's finals!

Seconded.

Do you want updates?

[Apostle]

Seconded.

Do you want updates?

yes please!

[comeondarlo]

Ok, what suits you, on here or txt?

PM me your number if you want txts

[Apostle]

here's fine. Or facebook!

[comeondarlo]

I'll put updates on here then, don't forget it's a 3pm kick off

[BIGBrian]

I'll put updates on here then, don't forget it's a 3pm kick off

Western regional final went off at 11.00am this morning - anybody got any results from there?

[Apostle]

Western regional final went off at 11.00am this morning - anybody got any results from there?

I dont know the full results but i do know that PL won by 53 points.

[Happi Blue]

I dont know the full results but i do know that PL won by 53 points.

PL 343
Millfield 290
Cardiff 232
Poole 215
Taunton 213

Haven't got the other points sorry

[comeondarlo]

After 10 events......

Hat 75
Eal 60
Cam 49
Ips 48
Ted 36
Nor 36
Rom28
Wan 27

[comeondarlo]

After 18 events.......

Hat 129
Eal 97
Cam 91
Ips 87

Missed the rest I'm sat next to Lilys mum and Lily was swimming.
My boy got his 100 back British Champs time, well chuffed

[comeondarlo]

Final placings.....

Hatfield 349
Ealing 274
Camden 242
Ipswich 225
Norwich 195
Teddington 185
Wandsworth 171
Romford 157

[Apostle]

Well done hatfield!

[mike_lamb]

BB .. any chance of some points as we go .. I am sitting on pool side at Basingstoke

[taxi service]

South Premier "Relegation" Gala at Guildford
1 Thanet 243
2 Woking 235
3 Staines 227
4 Epsom 191.5
5 Canterbury 169
6 Wycombe 163
7 Basingstoke 156.5

All straight points from the 7 team gala, not adjusted.

[Bully]

South Premier Top Gala Results
1st Guildford 300 Pts (or there abouts)
2nd WINDSOR 258 Pts
3rd Amersham 253 Pts
4th Beckenham 225 Pts
5th Rushmoor 209 Pts
6th Bracknell 181 Pts
7th Oxford 176 Pts
8th Sevenoaks 170 Pts

[BIGBrian]

BB .. any chance of some points as we go .. I am sitting on pool side at Basingstoke

Sorry Mike, couldn't get any kind of connection poolside, and got sidetracked by some friends on the way back who insisted on inviting us in for a drink. It would have been rude to refuse a consolatory glass of Merlot.

The points were as posted by taxi_service, not yet adjusted for 7 to 8 team equivalnets, but that obviously won't alter the positions. Unfortunately it looks like the mighty Bluefins have been relegated into Div1 West for next year. Particularly frustrating since we had a number of DQ's which is not normally an issue that causes our team too many problems.

Managed to have a chat with the lovely GettingFaster and the almost as lovely Juniorstatto, who unfortunately let me down by not having his laptop fully charged up! Also bumped into Leppy as well, although he was busy doing stuff with electronics.

[BIGBrian]

South Premier Top Gala Results
1st Guildford 300 Pts (or there abouts)
2nd WINDSOR 258 Pts
3rd Amersham 253 Pts
4th Beckenham 225 Pts
5th Rushmoor 209 Pts
6th Bracknell 181 Pts
7th Oxford 176 Pts
8th Sevenoaks 170 Pts

Way to go Windsor! The cappuccinos are on me (I'll have one myself....it will help to wash down the humble pie :wave: )

[awaldram]

Sorry Mike, couldn't get any kind of connection poolside, and got sidetracked by some friends on the way back who insisted on inviting us in for a drink. It would have been rude to refuse a consolatory glass of Merlot.

The points were as posted by taxi_service, not yet adjusted for 7 to 8 team equivalnets, but that obviously won't alter the positions. Unfortunately it looks like the mighty Bluefins have been relegated into Div1 West for next year. Particularly frustrating since we had a number of DQ's which is not normally an issue that causes our team too many problems.


I thought if most unfair the teams present could have let us win some :(

Well done to Canterbury, Wycombe and Epsom who all stood up to be counted.

[BIGBrian]

So, final standings in R3. Guildford gala points in R3 taken as Bully's estimate of 300 (doesn't make any difference) and with the Guildford gala points uplifted to 8 team equivalent

Congratulations to Guildford as Regional Champions and Windsor as Runners Up, edging Amersham to take 2nd place overall by virtue of the extra 5 gala points scored in the 3rd round gala.

Technically, I believe Leatherhead and Haslemere are actually in 16th and 17th places, since they didn't withdraw from the league, just declined to compete this year, so will obviously be relegated for scoring no points.

Basingstoke also to go down into Div 1 West, unless one of the teams in the division withdraws from the league next year (in good time)

Don't know what happens if two teams withdraw (assuming neither of them is Leatherhead or Haslemere). In that case ordinarily the 16th placed team should also not be relegated, but which one of them is it?

[junior statto]

South Premier Top Gala Results
1st Guildford 300 Pts (or there abouts)
2nd WINDSOR 258 Pts
3rd Amersham 253 Pts
4th Beckenham 225 Pts
5th Rushmoor 209 Pts
6th Bracknell 181 Pts
7th Oxford 176 Pts
8th Sevenoaks 170 Pts

Guildford 317

[junior statto]

So, final standings in R3. Guildford gala points in R3 taken as Bully's estimate of 300 (doesn't make any difference) and with the Guildford gala points uplifted to 8 team equivalent

Congratulations to Guildford as Regional Champions and Windsor as Runners Up, edging Amersham to take 2nd place overall by virtue of the extra 5 gala points scored in the 3rd round gala.

Technically, I believe Leatherhead and Haslemere are actually in 16th and 17th places, since they didn't withdraw from the league, just declined to compete this year, so will obviously be relegated for scoring no points.

Basingstoke also to go down into Div 1 West, unless one of the teams in the division withdraws from the league next year (in good time)

Don't know what happens if two teams withdraw (assuming neither of them is Leatherhead or Haslemere). In that case ordinarily the 16th placed team should also not be relegated, but which one of them is it?

Does Thanet really end up ahead of 7Oaks? I didn't think it was possible for a team in the 'relegation' gala to finish above a team in the Top 8 but my appreciation of the Arena Rules is that not good!!

[400IMer]

Not that there are many midlanders here but our result was

Ledbury 214
Kingsbury 204
Solihull 180
Droitwich 173
Flitwick 159
Aylesbury 110

Enjoyable gala. Any other midlands (west) results?

[junior statto]

Managed to have a chat with the lovely GettingFaster and the almost as lovely Juniorstatto, who unfortunately let me down by not having his laptop fully charged up! Also bumped into Leppy as well, although he was busy doing stuff with electronics.

Great to finally meet you and Andy.

Laptop seems to be more terminal that just a dead battery!! :cry:

Still can seem to get a Costa with NSD!! Great comeback by Woking last night although 3 DQs in quick succession really hurt Staines in the end.

Great night.

[Noswimdad]

Still can seem to get a Costa with NSD!! Great comeback by Woking last night although 3 DQs in quick succession really hurt Staines in the end.

Great night.

Great night all round well done Thanet. As you say the DQs really hurt Staines. Woking very pleased with first time out in the Premier.

We will meet one day, was busy "assisting" with the recorders last night!

[BIGBrian]

Does Thanet really end up ahead of 7Oaks? I didn't think it was possible for a team in the 'relegation' gala to finish above a team in the Top 8 but my appreciation of the Arena Rules is that not good!!

You're right, it's not supposed to be possible. That's the function of the bonus points - they award enough points to the teams in each of the respective galas to make sure that the teams in the lower galas can't catch the teams in the higher galas.

24 and 12 points respectively is what the league stated in advance that they would be awarding in this round, which, as you point out, doesn't achieve the above. Normally in two 8 team galas, (or an 8 and a 7 in this case) the bonus points have traditionally been 16 in the top gala, and 0 in the other one.I

If they stay with 24 and 12, then, on the league's own rules, indeed Thanet do finish ahead of Sevenoaks, (tied on league points, but with Thanet scoring more gala points in R3). They may decide to tweak the bonus points to prevent this from happening.

[Blower]

The rules do say that "Calculations are based on Divisions of 18 teams" so there is the implication that adjustment is possible. as BB says, for other arrangements.
That would reasonably be, for this year, a bonus of 14 points for Div 1 teams, and no bonus for those in Div 2.
Final rank order is then correct.

[BIGBrian]

I think the basic principle is that the differential between the bonus points awarded in the R3 galas in any division should be at least equal to the maximum number of league points you get for winning the gala.

So, for example, with 3 x 6 team galas, and therefore 12 league points on offer for winning any of the galas, there should be 12 more bonus points available for competing in gala 1 than in gala 2, and 12 more bonus points available for gala 2 than gala 3. So the traditional bonus points of 24, 12 and 0 for that arrangement works.

In Div 1 West, where the final round was scored as 2 x 7 team galas, and therefore 14 points for winning, awarding bonus points of 14 for the top gala and 0 in the other would be fine, as would 20 and 6, or 28 and 14....the actual numbers don't matter, as long as one is 14 more than the other.

The problem with the Premier Division scoring in R3 this year is that with it being scored as 2 x 8 team galas, and therefore 16 league points for the win, the bonus points available in the top gala at K2 needed to be 16 more than those awarded at the other gala in Guildford, but they were advertised as being 24 and 12 which doesn't do it.

That leaves open the possibility that the team finishing last in the top gala will score 26 points on the night (2 league + 24 bonus), while the team that wins the bottom gala will score 28 points (16 league + 12 bonus), which is exactly what happened. Since they were only two points apart before the gala, that differential was competely overturned in the 3rd round.

The other possibility would be to score the Guildford gala as a 7 team event (which it was) with only 14 points for the win, ignoring the fact that the other gala in the same division in the same round was 8 team. This goes against what the league rules actually state regarding galas in the same round having different numbers of teams, but in R3 the galas are effectively separate stand alone events with no real reason to compare one with the other.

Does it matter who finishes 8th and who finishes 9th? Yes, in so far as the final standings are used to determine the first round draws in next year's competition. The 8th and 9th placed teams won't be drawn in the same gala, so they'll get materially different draws depending on what their final placing actually is.

[Silver Fox]

Was it the third round yesterday ?

Anybody got any results especially in the NW please ?

[city4nil]

1st COLiverpool 279
2nd Preston 275
3rd COSalford 272
4th Stockport Metro 266
5th Warrington W 220
6th Southport 192
7th Cockermouth 185
8th Carnforth Otters 110
H

[comeondarlo]

1st COLiverpool 279
2nd Preston 275
3rd COSalford 272
4th Stockport Metro 266
5th Warrington W 220
6th Southport 192
7th Cockermouth 185
8th Carnforth Otters 110
H

I'm gobsmacked by that result!

PL must be big favorites now

[city4nil]

I'm gobsmacked by that result!

PL must be big favorites now

I think we'd best wait for the virtual rankings :)

Was extremely tight. COL had a DQ, stockport and preston were missing a few notables

[Cordwangle]

Thought Liverpool had blown it with a DQ in on one of the last relays ( in which they'd finished first ).
I was really surprised by the result, my prediction was way off.

[city4nil]

Thought Liverpool had blown it with a DQ in on one of the last relays ( in which they'd finished first ).
I was really surprised by the result, my prediction was way off.

u often finish first when you leave early :)


Was a very close gala, shame the announcer didn't try to make it more exciting as the top 4 continually changed places until 3/4 through when COL had established a good lead. But it was a good competitive gala, surpirsed at WOW really slipped a long way back this year.

[Cordwangle]

Could well have been the deciding factor though, and had greater consequences had Liverpool had to rely on the virtual gala for A or B final.

Your girl swam well, by the way.

[BIGBrian]

Does Thanet really end up ahead of 7Oaks? I didn't think it was possible for a team in the 'relegation' gala to finish above a team in the Top 8 but my appreciation of the Arena Rules is that not good!!

Just had all the (current) official results through from the league (South) and indeed it does show Thanet in 8th place ahead of Sevenoaks.

Teams promoted into the Premier Division are Southampton (W), Bromley (E), Guildford B (W) and Atlantis (E) in that order (15th to 18th places, assuming 18 teams), so Guildford will have two teams in the Premier Division next year

In West, Basingstoke A will drop to Div 1 West, along with Haslemere and Leatherhead who didn't compete this year, while Littlehampton, Alton and Fareham Nomads are relegated from Div 1 West to Div 2 West, replaced by promoted teams from Maxwell, Reading and Dorking.

In East, Sevenoaks B, Redhill/Reigate and Erith are promoted to Div 1 East, no teams relegated from Div 1 E to make way, so the bottom 3 clubs Dartford. Beckenham B and White Oaks avoid the drop.

All results should be on the website shortly

[junior statto]

Just had all the (current) official results through from the league (South) and indeed it does show Thanet in 8th place ahead of Sevenoaks.


Yep, just seen them as well. In the spirit if what is intended I don't think it is right that a Team in Gala B finishes above a Team in Gala A but you were absolutely right with your calculations. :thumb:

I not sure 7Oaks will be happy about it. As you said, I guess it will depend on the draw which I guess you can now work out for me ;) (I still only have the old rules!!)

Will be interesting if Guildford A end up competing against Guildford B in Rd1!

[junior statto]

Full set of results attached for South.

What are we going to do with ourselves for 10 months?

[BIGBrian]

Yep, just seen them as well. In the spirit if what is intended I don't think it is right that a Team in Gala B finishes above a Team in Gala A but you were absolutely right with your calculations. :thumb:

I not sure 7Oaks will be happy about it. As you said, I guess it will depend on the draw which I guess you can now work out for me ;) (I still only have the old rules!!)

Assuming that the AGM doesn't throw out any changes to the way they draw the R1 galas, and assuming the standings remain as they are, without any withdrawls or other larking about, I make it:

Gala 1

Guildford A
Bracknell/Wokingham
Oxford
Epsom
Canterbury
Atlantis

Gala 2

Windsor
Rushmoor Royals
Thanet
Staines
Wycombe
Guildford B

Gala 3

Amersham
Beckenham
Sevenoaks
Woking
City of Southampton
Bromley

Will be interesting if Guildford A end up competing against Guildford B in Rd1!

Not in the first round, anyway, but it could still happen in later rounds. But not if it was the Spanish Football League. :flash: Real Madrid and Barcelona both have B teams playing in the lower divisions, and they're ineligible to be promoted to the top division, cos the rules don't allow for the A team and B team from the same club to compete together.

[BIGBrian]

Full set of results attached for South.

That's another monster performance from Maxwell. In the three rounds, which have all been 7 team galas for them, therefore with 350 points as a maximum, that 319 is actually the lowest total they've achieved. They got 333 in R1 and 320 in R2.

The 319 in R3 included 33 first place finishes and 6 second places. Methinks they might do a Guildford B and go straight through to the Premier Division two years after entering the league in Div 2.

[Blower]

Having both A and B teams of a club in the same gala would be an 'interesting' suituation!
It gives a significant advantage to the A team since the B team will take points off the other teams but not, if team selection is correct (fastest swimmer in the A team) off the A team!

[swimclublurker]

Not in Arena but in another league we had A and B teams up against each other. It was the most exciting gala I have ever been to and it produced some fabulous swims by the B team with something extra to prove!

[BIGBrian]

Not in Arena but in another league we had A and B teams up against each other. It was the most exciting gala I have ever been to and it produced some fabulous swims by the B team with something extra to prove!

Sounds similar to the Gemini Trophy that we compete in. Each 6 team gala has two teams from each of three clubs in a smilar programme to the Arena League. The A and B teams are not strictly speaking competing against each other, since the final placings are determined by adding together the points from each of the two teams from each club and the club with the highest points total wins. It's a good test of strength in depth for the clubs.

[Analyst]

Does anyone have the results from K2 with all times & relay splits?

[BIGBrian]

What are we going to do with ourselves for 10 months?

One thing I'm going to do is to see if, and how, we can get back to 18 team divisions. 2007 was the last time the Premier Division ran with 18 teams, and you have to go back to 2006 to find 18 teams in all of the top 3 divisions.

Obviously, you can't force teams to compete, but I'm wondering whether the league can somehow be more flexible in reacting to teams pulling out. March 31 seems awfully early to be expecting teams to confirm or decline their place in the league for the following season. At the end of March, there are only 20 clubs in the country who have any interest in the Arena League. Everyone else is focused on Easter meets, Regionals, National Qualifying etc
Much easier for them to say "yes, we're in" and then change their mind later, rather than opt out and then not be able to go back on that.

Having, say, 17 teams in the division causes all sorts of difficulties, not least because it means that a team got relegated that didn't ultimately need to be. It also brings out the mechanism for converting 5 team galas to 6 team equivalents which, however reasonable it seems, and I accept it's about the best solution, doesn't give the "right" result.

One example: If you're a mid-table kind of team, when you look at the first round draw, there's always a couple of teams that you think you have no realistic chance of beating, but you might look at the 6 teams and say "OK, we could be 4th here". Which gets you 3 league points.

But then when one of the teams you thought you had a good chance of beating pulls out, it's down to 5 teams. No problem, you're still going to come 4th. But now that only gets you 2 league points. So you're disadvantaged in the standings because someone else pulled out late.

And you could end up in a 5 team gala next time out as well, with the same result.

So I'm wondering whether it's possible to leave it much later before finalising the divisional composition. Need to find out what the driving factors are behind the 31 March date, other than it just being convenient for the NASL year end.

[city4nil]

Clearly a no expense spared approach up north



4464

4465

[city4nil]

Could well have been the deciding factor though, and had greater consequences had Liverpool had to rely on the virtual gala for A or B final.

Your girl swam well, by the way.

ty she did, was proud

[junior statto]

Gala 2

Windsor
Rushmoor Royals
Thanet
Staines
Wycombe
Guildford B

Gala 3

Amersham
Beckenham
Sevenoaks
Woking
City of Southampton
Bromley



I hope we stay 8th because I don't fancy Gala 3 much!

[comeondarlo]

A final

Plymouth
Hatfield
Leeds
Guildford
Liverpool
Derby
Peterborough
Millfield
Sheffield
Ealing

B final

Preston
Windsor
Coventry
Cambridge
Salford
Cardiff
Stockport
Amersham
Camden
Bodmere

[Cordwangle]

Is that in lane order?
Surprised Preston didn't make the A final and Warrington didn't make it at all.

[comeondarlo]

Is that in lane order?
Surprised Preston didn't make the A final and Warrington didn't make it at all.

I believe that they are in qualifying order.

[BIGBrian]

I believe that they are in qualifying order. I don't know who COPS are, Peterborough were in the London league so it's not them

COPS is indeed City of Peterborough. They compete in East Midlands, and if that list is in qualifying order, they seem to have won it


http://www.nationalswimmingleague.org.uk/east-midlands/round-draws/1504-division-one-2011-round-two

[comeondarlo]

COPS is indeed City of Peterborough. They compete in East Midlands


http://www.nationalswimmingleague.org.uk/east-midlands/round-draws/1504-division-one-2011-round-two


You're right I got them confused with Colchester for some reason. Either that or because of the East Region short course Champs.

Anyway it is them.

[Matron]

You're right I got them confused with Colchester for some reason. Either that or because of the East Region short course Champs.

Anyway it is them.

The league table shows that Peterborough 1st, Lincoln Vulcans A 2nd, Cambridge 3rd. I wonder why Cambridge are in the second gala and not LVSC A.

http://www.nationalswimmingleague.org.uk/east-midlands/results/1503-division-one-2011-league-table

Only interested because LVSC was my club as a youngster (and I obviously don't understand the Arena league Rules)!

[BIGBrian]

The league table shows that Peterborough 1st, Lincoln Vulcans A 2nd, Cambridge 3rd. I wonder why Cambridge are in the second gala and not LVSC A.

http://www.nationalswimmingleague.org.uk/east-midlands/results/1503-division-one-2011-league-table

Only interested because LVSC was my club as a youngster (and I obviously don't understand the Arena league Rules)!

Thems the results after R2. They haven't yet posted the results after R3, but it looks like Cambridge did well enough in R3 to overtake the mighty Vulcans for second place overall

But, as it happens, a quirk of the Arena League rules means that a team placed 4th in the league after 3 rounds can get to finals day instead of a team that finished 3rd in the same region. (But 3rd place doesn't get you in ahead of 2nd place)

[city4nil]

A final

Plymouth
Hatfield
Leeds
Guildford
Liverpool
Derby
Peterborough
Millfield
Sheffield
Ealing

B final

Preston
Windsor
Coventry
Cambridge
Salford
Cardiff
Stockport
Amersham
Camden
Bodmere

Top Man - thanks for the heads up

Do you fancy a job as webmaster for arena as to say that the communication could be improved would be being very polite. My area, NW, hasn't even put round 3 draw up never mind the results of R3, to think that people complain about the ASA's website, but I guess there all volunteers.

Is lane order spearheaded from this qualification order?

[comeondarlo]

Qualification order

[Apostle]

Top Man - thanks for the heads up

Do you fancy a job as webmaster for arena as to say that the communication could be improved would be being very polite. My area, NW, hasn't even put round 3 draw up never mind the results of R3, to think that people complain about the ASA's website, but I guess there all volunteers.

Is lane order spearheaded from this qualification order?

Yep.

I have to say pre-empting an announcement from the national secretary like this could end up in tears if there's a late reason for change. It might have been better for the official announcement.

But good luck to everyone who has qualified. Looks like being two great finals.

My prediction for the A final, if I'm allowed to put it in this thread is

PL
Leeds
Hatfield
Millfield
Sheffield
Ealing
Derby
Liverpool
Guildford
COPS

[city4nil]

Qualification order

Is the list a prediction or actual?

[comeondarlo]

Yep.

I have to say pre-empting an announcement from the national secretary like this could end up in tears if there's a late reason for change. It might have been better for the official announcement.

But good luck to everyone who has qualified. Looks like being two great finals.

My prediction for the A final, if I'm allowed to put it in this thread is

PL
Leeds
Hatfield
Millfield
Sheffield
Ealing
Derby
Liverpool
Guildford
COPS

Lol

It's a educated prediction.

[swimleeds]

Don't rule out Co Sheffield. All 3 rounds against Co Leeds have been extremely close with only a few points in it.

[junior statto]

Similarly, I think Guildford will be a surprise package especially as they finished 4th in the Virtual Gala.

They have strength in depth and now how 2 teams in the Premier Division (South).

Can't see them displacing PL or Hatfield but I think they will be fighting for that 3rd place imho.

[BIGBrian]

Similarly, I think Guildford will be a surprise package especially as they finished 4th in the Virtual Gala.

They have strength in depth and now how 2 teams in the Premier Division (South).

Can't see them displacing PL or Hatfield but I think they will be fighting for that 3rd place imho.

You wouldn't be able to e-mail the results of the virtual gala would you, by any chance? :wave:

Edit: Oh hang on.....I've just realised that you probably took that 4th placing off comeonedarlo's listing :banghead:

Anyone actually got the VG results? Can be e-mailed or handed over surreptitiously in a brown paper bag if anyone happens to catch me at the Bournemouth meet this weekend......

[Pandi]

You wouldn't be able to e-mail the results of the virtual gala would you, by any chance? :wave:

Edit: Oh hang on.....I've just realised that you probably took that 4th placing off comeonedarlo's listing :banghead:

Anyone actually got the VG results? Can be e-mailed or handed over surreptitiously in a brown paper bag if anyone happens to catch me at the Bournemouth meet this weekend......

tar BB.Looks loikes a sea swim.Seeing as litttedown is booked with.:rolleyes:

[junior statto]

Edit: Oh hang on.....I've just realised that you probably took that 4th placing off comeonedarlo's listing :banghead:



Yep, took it from comeonedarlo's listing. But like you would love to see the spreadsheet.

[city4nil]

Yep, took it from comeonedarlo's listing. But like you would love to see the spreadsheet.

I am beginning to think the VG spreadsheet is one of those urban myths designed to quell the inquisitive masses

[clipboard]

Don't rule out Co Sheffield. All 3 rounds against Co Leeds have been extremely close with only a few points in it.

There position will depend on which of their Senior swimmer are available and not out of the country.

[Apostle]

The spreadsheet is controlled by the national secretary and you wont see it. For the same reason the resukts from the thrid round are not published.

[awaldram]

The spreadsheet is controlled by the national secretary and you wont see it. For the same reason the resukts from the thrid round are not published.

Makes sense it not like the Arena league is fraught with rumours of fraud and cheating is it .??

So no need for any resemblance of transparency.!!

[Apostle]

Makes sense it not like the Arena league is fraught with rumours of fraud and cheating is it .??

So no need for any resemblance of transparency.!!

If your calling the Nat Sec a cheat then I suggest you tell him so. You can email him via the arean league website.

I suspect the reason that they don't publish the VG results or 3rd round is to stop several version of results being bandied around. The only one that matters is the one he sends out.

[BIGBrian]

I suspect the reason that they don't publish the VG results or 3rd round is to stop several version of results being bandied around. The only one that matters is the one he sends out.

As I understand it, the stated reason is to prevent coaches/clubs from seeing where the strengths/weakness of other teams lie, and selecting their team accordingly.

To which my response is.......so? Isn't that a regular function of team sport?

[city4nil]

As I understand it, the stated reason is to prevent coaches/clubs from seeing where the strengths/weakness of other teams lie, and selecting their team accordingly.

To which my response is.......so? Isn't that a regular function of team sport?

Obviously BB has hit it on the head and I agree with what I believe he infers, withholding this information is not constructive, causes rumours and leaves the charge of poor transparency on the table. However to suggest that anyone is in anyway cheating in the organisation committee is ludicrous and I am a little sadened that i found myself even typing the word, it is so clearly not what the league organisers are about. I feel sure that the word was used without thought and in haste, perhaps it should have read that it is clear that some of the teams inadvertantly misinterpret the rules occasionally.

If a team and it's coaching staff has the ability to analyse the results and alter their team ( bearing in mind others may be doing the same ) why shouldn't they, we are after all in this competition striving to crown the best team and if the backroom staff can add a bit of value I think that is good for the sport.

[awaldram]

If your calling the Nat Sec a cheat then I suggest you tell him so. You can email him via the arean league website.

I suspect the reason that they don't publish the VG results or 3rd round is to stop several version of results being bandied around. The only one that matters is the one he sends out.

Thats a bit of a straw man.

Not only did I not say, it I didn't imply it.

Arena National league (as a group) constantly suffers from accusations of cheating from both rival clubs and the swimming press.

Clubs constantly dropping out and the league contracting.

In this climate I think everything should be done to promote transparency, Not publishing the results that directly affect the successful clubs seasonal targets is not IMO the best way forward.

[BIGBrian]

Lets remember that the VG is the tool in place that allows the organisers to fill up the lanes at the national A&B finals. Something we all thought would add to the competition. It's not perfect but it serves a purpose.

(Sorry, just belatedly picked up on this part!)

I don't disagree with the VG as a concept - its a tool that, as you say, fills up the lanes at finals day. It's what they do with the results of the VG that I take issue with.

When a team finishing 6th in one region can make finals day ahead of a team that finishes 3rd in a different region, or a team finishing 3rd in one region can make the A final while the team that finished 2nd in the same region only makes the B final, or a team that finishes 4th in one region makes finals day while the team that finished 3rd in the same region can miss out, then something needs to be addressed. And its not a difficult thing to address, either.

Too much emphasis on what happens in the 3rd round vs what happened over all three rounds.

[city4nil]

(Sorry, just belatedly picked up on this part!)

I don't disagree with the VG as a concept - its a tool that, as you say, fills up the lanes at finals day. It's what they do with the results of the VG that I take issue with.

When a team finishing 6th in one region can make finals day ahead of a team that finishes 3rd in a different region, or a team finishing 3rd in one region can make the A final while the team that finished 2nd in the same region only makes the B final, or a team that finishes 4th in one region makes finals day while the team that finished 3rd in the same region can miss out, then something needs to be addressed. And its not a difficult thing to address, either.

Too much emphasis on what happens in the 3rd round vs what happened over all three rounds.

It is true that, rounds one are two are simply the warm up for round 3. In essence for the serious contendors you only have to turn up proper in round 3. This may not be the spirit of it I guess but it's how the system works for sure

[BIGBrian]

It is true that, rounds one are two are simply the warm up for round 3. In essence for the serious contendors you only have to turn up proper in round 3. This may not be the spirit of it I guess but it's how the system works for sure

It's how the system is played, because of how the results of the VG are used. The tail is wagging the dog.

[Pink Paraffin]

It is true that, rounds one are two are simply the warm up for round 3. In essence for the serious contendors you only have to turn up proper in round 3. This may not be the spirit of it I guess but it's how the system works for sure

Not in the West - cos if you don't turn up with all of your athletes in either R1 or R2, you can't use them in R3....

Level playing fields huh? :rolleyes:

[awaldram]

Not in the West - cos if you don't turn up with all of your athletes in either R1 or R2, you can't use them in R3....

Level playing fields huh? :rolleyes:

But doesn't that mean you need commitment from the swimmers for the competition rather than Buy-into the final. :D operative word being BUY :devil:

Seriously though I think that's a great rule and goes a long way to addressing many issues the 'smaller' clubs have with the league.

[Apostle]

(Sorry, just belatedly picked up on this part!)



When a team finishing 6th in one region can make finals day ahead of a team that finishes 3rd in a different region, or a team finishing 3rd in one region can make the A final while the team that finished 2nd in the same region only makes the B final, or a team that finishes 4th in one region makes finals day while the team that finished 3rd in the same region can miss out, then something needs to be addressed. And its not a difficult thing to address, either.

Too much emphasis on what happens in the 3rd round vs what happened over all three rounds.

As far as im aware are the runners up in the regional finals go into the league by right and of course the winners of every region go into the a final. After that the remaining clubs basically fight it out in the vg for places in the a abd b final with the teams with the most points going into the a final and downwards until all the places are filled.
There has to be one team from region in each final hence the winners and runners up being split up. Otherwise the east & west midland regions would not get represented. (in my opinion and from sight of previous vg results).

The fact is that some regions are stronger than others and thats why you can sometimes see the remaining places filled by one or two regions.

[Apostle]

As far as im aware are the runners up in the regional finals go into the league by right and of course the winners of every region go into the a final. After that the remaining clubs basically fight it out in the vg for places in the a and b final with the teams with the most points going into the a final and downwards until all the places are filled.
There has to be one team from region in each final hence the winners and runners up being split up. Otherwise the east & west midland regions would not get represented. (in my opinion and from sight of previous vg results).

The fact is that some regions are stronger than others and thats why you can sometimes see the remaining places filled by one or two regions.

But i'd be interested in how you would change it.

[BIGBrian]

But i'd be interested in how you would change it.

I don't believe there has to be one team from each region on each final, but I may be wrong. I think it's possible for the top two from one region to be in the A final and the 3rd place team from that region to miss out completely.

As to how I would change it, I would use the virtual gala only to differentiate between teams on equal placings in different regions (since they've never had the chance to swim against each other), and not to overturn, as it can do and sometimes does, the results of 3 rounds of swimming.

So put the 7 Regional champions in the A final with the 3 highest ranking (from the VG) runners up. Then put the other 4 runners up in the B final with the 6 highest placed (from the VG) 3rd placed teams. This means that one 3rd place team misses out, but then at least one already does anyway.

Using the virtual gala results to place a 4th placed team in the B final while the 3rd placed team in the same region misses out, because the 4th placed team had a better performance in that one round of competition, just seems wrong. The competition either takes place over three rounds or it doesn't.

As you say, some regions are stronger than others, but you can't presuppose what would happen if you swam say, a 6th place team from one region against a 3rd place team from another. The Regional final galas are all swum in different pools, and some pools are faster than others. Also, different levels of competition in different regions will inevitably mean that clubs will swim as well as they need to to be beat the opposition in front of them. They may well have swum faster if the level of their competitors at the time demanded it.

This isn't actually hugely different to what the league already does. At present, they guarantee places at finals day to the top two teams from each region. The above really only extends that to 3rd place teams as well (or at least as many of them as the pool can accommodate)

[city4nil]

This would penalise the mighty northwest who regularly takes 4 if not 5 teams to finals day on merit I believe. Changing that wouldn't improve the final just take weaker teams there.

I think the current system works okay really and in our region we don't really hold any store by the position you come in the regional league, it all about making the regional final when you know you are swimming against the clock and not just the other teams so you have to go for it regardless. Personally I think these R3 galas should be licensed L1 to allow swimmers to have other wider targets, they are after all now all swam LC with AOE and certainly the NW gala seems to have enough officials to qualify for a license.

[BIGBrian]

This would penalise the mighty northwest who regularly takes 4 if not 5 teams to finals day on merit I believe. Changing that wouldn't improve the final just take weaker teams there.

I wouldn't expect the regions that regularly get 4 or more teams to finals day to think that the proposal was a good idea. Turkeys voting for Christmas and all that. But I don't believe that repeatedly taking the same teams to finals day from what you would probably regard as the weaker regions necessarily makes the final any stronger in the longer term either. It's certainly more likely though in the longer term to continue the recent trend for teams to drop out of the league altogether because they see it as an increasingly closed shop

I think the current system works okay really and in our region we don't really hold any store by the position you come in the regional league, it all about making the regional final when you know you are swimming against the clock and not just the other teams so you have to go for it regardless. Personally I think these R3 galas should be licensed L1 to allow swimmers to have other wider targets

Some of them are. Funny that the mighty NW can't get their own Regional final organised to be L1 licensed like some of the other regions do :wave:

[awaldram]

Some of them are. Funny that the mighty NW can't get their own Regional final organised to be L1 licensed like some of the other regions do :wave:

Introspection and self aggrandizement tends to lead to insular ideas which are seldom in the interests of those involved.

[Apostle]

Brian, it is correct that the winners of each region go into the a final and the runners up go into the b final. The remaining slots are filled from the VG taking the highest ranking teams who have not qualified by right. In the past this has meant that some of the teams who have qualified have come from outside the top twenty teams because of thier guarenteed position. Most notably from the east and west midlands.

Surely the finals day is about the best teams in the country battling it out on the day to see who is the best rather than being ultra fair in terms of region representation. If you look at the results of the past few years the east and west midlands struggle to compete on the day, and these are the best teams they have got. Should we have a third team from those leagues and deprive two stronger teams just to make it even? I dont think so.

The league has gone a long way in making sure the third round was as even as possible so that a fair way could be found to fill the lanes up at ponds forge and make it an exciting spectacle. If they used your suggestion a lot of the teams would get battered and it would turn out to be no more than a 2 or 3 team battle.

[Pink Paraffin]

But doesn't that mean you need commitment from the swimmers for the competition rather than Buy-into the final. :D operative word being BUY :devil:

Seriously though I think that's a great rule and goes a long way to addressing many issues the 'smaller' clubs have with the league.

Yes it does. But getting a large squad of athletes through two rounds rather than three to make sure you have everyone at your disposal come the National final is quite hard - particularly if you don't want to compromise your chances of winning the Regional League by swimming a 'weakened' team in the early rounds

The National rule solves your issue. The Region didn't need to make it even more restrictive

[BIGBrian]

Brian, it is correct that the winners of each region go into the a final and the runners up go into the b final. The remaining slots are filled from the VG taking the highest ranking teams who have not qualified by right. In the past this has meant that some of the teams who have qualified have come from outside the top twenty teams because of thier guarenteed position. Most notably from the east and west midlands.

The National League website seems to be down for some reason so I can't get at the past finals day contenders. If it is as you say, then its even more ridiculous. If all of the runners up are in the B final, then the A final must always have 3 teams in it who finished the league below the runners up in their respective regions. This is clearly absurd. Its akin to the football league promoting the 4th place team automatically at the end of the regular season instead of the 3rd place team, just because they beat them in the last game of the season. At least they have a play off system (which is far from satisfactory anyway, but.....)

Having said that, I was always under the impression that the VG results are used to decide the remaining 3 places at the A final after the Regional Champions are taken out. The top 3 teams of the 35 remaining, whether they be runners up in their respective regions, or 2nd, 3rd and 4th from the same region, or any combination thereof, get added to the A final, with the next 10 dropped into the B final. Then, as long as the 7 runners up are in the 20 somewhere, its job done. Otherwise, as you say, they have to be promoted at the expense of someone who finished in the VG above them.

Surely the finals day is about the best teams in the country battling it out on the day to see who is the best rather than being ultra fair in terms of region representation

If that's the intent, then why not do away with guaranteed places for anyone? Just take the results off the VG and be done with it. That way you'll get the 20 best teams duking it out on the day. The point of guaranteeing places to certain teams is exactly to be fair in terms of region representation. Why 2 per region? It seems a pretty arbitrary number. Why not 1 per region, just the Champions? Or 3? (in so far as you can only take a maximum of 6 3rd place teams).

[johnhy]

A couple of points:-

The B Final does not contain all the runners up as a matter of course. The three years my daughter swam for Millfield they were runners up in the West but appeared in the A final by virtue of their position in the VG.

2 per region is not arbitrary. There were at one time 8 regions including Scotland. All winners in the A final and runners up in the B Final. 8 teams in a 10 lane pool was not too bad but when the Scots and North East were no longer competing the powers that be decided it would be better to fill the lanes and hence an additional 8 and now 6 (following the return of the North East) teams decided by the VG

[BIGBrian]

A couple of points:-

The B Final does not contain all the runners up as a matter of course. The three years my daughter swam for Millfield they were runners up in the West but appeared in the A final by virtue of their position in the VG.

Ah, good. That was my understanding too of how it works.

2 per region is not arbitrary. There were at one time 8 regions including Scotland. All winners in the A final and runners up in the B Final. 8 teams in a 10 lane pool was not too bad but when the Scots and North East were no longer competing the powers that be decided it would be better to fill the lanes and hence an additional 8 and now 6 (following the return of the North East) teams decided by the VG

Which of course throws out another issue. Playing Devil's Advocate, should the NE be entitled to the same potential representation as, say, South until they get their league up to a decent size? If you come second in the NE region, there are only 10 (I think? Did they eventually manage to get 12 teams together including some A and B teams from the same clubs?) teams behind you.

To finish second in South, you have to finish ahead of 70+ teams

:devil:

[BigFish]

To finish second in South, you have to finish ahead of 70+ teams
:devil:

Why is quantity important? Can you honestly find 70+ teams in the North East to challenge the likes of Leeds and Sheffield? There might be 2 or 3 teams missing at the moment who could put up a challenge for 2nd place (I'm led to believe one of them might be joining this year), but history tells us the top spot is pretty much known before we start.

Just out of interest, how many other swim leagues exist in the South? I've always wondered whether one of the reasons the NE doesn't really take the National League to heart is because we have an abundance of local leagues (especially in Yorkshire).

[Blower]

Big Fish:
There are a few Leagues in the South.
The Hants & South Coast Swimming Leagues provides six!

[Apostle]

Ah, good. That was my understanding too of how it works.



Which of course throws out another issue. Playing Devil's Advocate, should the NE be entitled to the same potential representation as, say, South until they get their league up to a decent size? If you come second in the NE region, there are only 10 (I think? Did they eventually manage to get 12 teams together including some A and B teams from the same clubs?) teams behind you.

To finish second in South, you have to finish ahead of 70+ teams

:devil:

OK,

First off, I have been in touch with the national secretary and I'm close to being able to publish the rules around making it to the finals. I'm just waiting for a couple of clarification point.

Next. BB. I think it's wrong to suggest that you have to beat 70+ teams to be second in the south region, or any other for that matter.

It may be that there are 70+ teams affiliated to the south league but only 16 teams are in the premier league. Only the teams from that division have any chance of making it to the regional final and so you only have to beat 8 others to make it to the final and 14 others to be second. In reality all the regional finals are made up from a similar size of teams across all regions.

And if we look back over the past 10 or 20 years you could probably work out that there are only around 8 or so clubs from each region that have a chance in the regional finals, even taking ebbs and flows in their talent pool.

[BIGBrian]

OK,

First off, I have been in touch with the national secretary and I'm close to being able to publish the rules around making it to the finals. I'm just waiting for a couple of clarification point.

I just remembered a document put together by the National Secretary and sent to me in October 2010, explaining how the composition of finals day is arrived at. This is an excerpt

"How the Virtual gala works is totally based on the time of each individual swimmer in each race and the team race times across 42 clubs, so 2,100 times are considered. The winner gets 42 points, second 41 points etc. A swimmer in each event is therefore ‘swimming’ against 41 other swimmers from 41 other clubs. The clubs other than the winners and runners-up get to the finals day completely on merit. However a disqualification could mean the loss of 42 points in a 42 team gala, as a DQ still attracts zero points.

The Cup Final consists of the Winning clubs from each league, then, the next fastest three clubs, they could be runner-up or other higher placed clubs in the virtual gala. The ‘B’ Final consists of the other 10 clubs."

Another part of the document confirms that a club can't have two teams in the Virtual Gala

Next. BB. I think it's wrong to suggest that you have to beat 70+ teams to be second in the south region, or any other for that matter.

It may be that there are 70+ teams affiliated to the south league but only 16 teams are in the premier league.

Just making the point that you have to have beaten them to a spot in the Premier Division first, before you can be one of the (normally 18) teams in the division.

[BIGBrian]

Full set of results attached for South.

What are we going to do with ourselves for 10 months?

Slight change to the composition of the Premier division for 2012.

In 2011, Southampton pulled their A team because of the travel commitment of competing in the Premier Division, leaving their B team as their only team, competing in Div 1 West. They got promoted to the Premier Division for 2012, and have reportedly withdrawn that team from the league too (presumably for the same reason).

As a result, in order to keep the 18 teams in the division, the mighty Basingstoke Bluefins will not now be relegated to make way, since Southampton's withdrawal was notified to the league before the deadline for finalising the composition of the divisions.

[city4nil]

Yep.

I have to say pre-empting an announcement from the national secretary like this could end up in tears if there's a late reason for change. It might have been better for the official announcement.

But good luck to everyone who has qualified. Looks like being two great finals.

My prediction for the A final, if I'm allowed to put it in this thread is

PL
Leeds
Hatfield
Millfield
Sheffield
Ealing
Derby
Liverpool
Guildford
COPS

Virtual league results and final A/B final places confirmed : Put in a random order, taken from the city of Cardiff website. ( we were ranked 7th in the VG ) The Swimming times shows the divisional winners/runner up as well as VG points:

A FINAL
1 Plymouth Western
2 Hatfield London
3 C O Leeds North East
4 Guildford South
5 City Of Liverpool North West
6 Derby A West Midlands
7 City Of Peterborough East Midlands
8 Millfield Western
9 C O Sheffield North East
10 City Of Salford North West

B FINAL
11 Ealing London
12 Preston North West
13 Windsor South
14 Coventry A West Midlands
15 City Of Cambridge East Midlands
16 City Of Cardiff Western
17 Stockport Metro North West
18 Amersham South
19 Camden Swiss Cottage London
20 Boldmere West Midlands

Not quite as expected

[city4nil]

virtual spreadsheets wow is that a new technology.... lol yeah I have a prediction : Salford to make the A final .... Cmon we're gonna come second in our regional Final to to eventual League Champions Preston, beating Stockport/Liverpool and Warrington in the process

I would love to see the real spreadsheet for the virtual gala that ranks the clubs after the regional finals.

Well my crystal ball was certainly firing on all 4 back then.... what a prediction! go Salford, we made the A and have prompted an interesting letter in the swimming times.

Great answer from Ian that goes a long way to demystify the virtual gala