I thought the National League had finished playing ?

[Sid Bishop]

Yeovil 15:00 Barnet
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53371869
How come this fixture is on today in the National League, I thought that their fixtures had finished due to the Covid 19 virus restrictions ?

[slacker]

It’s a promotion playoff eliminator, Sid.

Boreham Wood beat Halifax in the other one last night.

[Sid Bishop]

It’s a promotion playoff eliminator, Sid.

Boreham Wood beat Halifax in the other one last night.

Barnet in 11th place not in the top 7 e.g https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/teams/barnet/table
According to this BBC League table they are in 11th position many games to go before the season would have been completed but Barnet had a couple of games in hand compared to most other teams, so i guess allowed to take part in the play offs ?
Strange how they worked these things out. I suppose because Bury dropped out the FL that only Stevenage will be going to go down from Division 2 FL to the National League. So I wonder, do Barnet in 11th place knock 4th placed Yeovil out of the play offs if they win today ?

[slacker]

Barnet were 7th after the PPG adjustment used in all unfinished Leagues where promotion and relegation were to happen.

You’re right about only 1 down to the NL, and Stevenage standing on the trap door. But the EFL are appealing against the Macclesfield points penalty that kept them up (I think that’s not concluded), so that might still change.

[Sid Bishop]

Barnet were 7th after the PPG adjustment used in all unfinished Leagues where promotion and relegation were to happen.

You’re right about only 1 down to the NL, and Stevenage standing on the trap door. But the EFL are appealing against the Macclesfield points penalty that kept them up (I think that’s not concluded), so that might still change.

Barnet rather lucky to get in the play offs then ! The readjusted League position is not shown on the BBC site, many teams must feel rather aggrieved if they miss out on play offs/promotion because of this PPG adjustment.

[Ornchurch]

If its like League 1 where Wycombe only got in play-offs through PPG then Barnet will get promoted.

[EH16]

If its like League 1 where Wycombe only got in play-offs through PPG then Barnet will get promoted.

Yes because that's always how football works.

[Sid Bishop]

Yeovil lost 2-0 to Barnet
So is this a double header, home and away or are Yeovil now out of the play offs ?

[slacker]

Single leg. Barnet now away to Notts County in the semis (Boreham Wood at Harrogate) next weekend.

[Tent Keague]

Rules are rules but if you're talking of injustices dished out by it all..

Ebbsfleet got relegated by 0.01 of a point or something crazy like that.

The worse thing about it is that over Xmas / winter time they were under pressure to call a game off. They didn't call it off, got it played and lost. If they hadn't worked their jacobs off to get it played they'd have stayed up.

You'd be fuming wouldn't you.

[tuffers#1]

Barnet were 7th after the PPG adjustment used in all unfinished Leagues where promotion and relegation were to happen.

You’re right about only 1 down to the NL, and Stevenage standing on the trap door. But the EFL are appealing against the Macclesfield points penalty that kept them up (I think that’s not concluded), so that might still change.

Barnet rather lucky to get in the play offs then ! The readjusted League position is not shown on the BBC site, many teams must feel rather aggrieved if they miss out on play offs/promotion because of this PPG adjustment.

Notts County very lucky to get 3rd
Yeovil who were 3rd were meant to play Barnet the same
day notts won there last game which they won to put them above yeovil.
Yeovils game was called off because 2 barnet players tested for covid.

[Sid Bishop]

Barnet were 7th after the PPG adjustment used in all unfinished Leagues where promotion and relegation were to happen.

You’re right about only 1 down to the NL, and Stevenage standing on the trap door. But the EFL are appealing against the Macclesfield points penalty that kept them up (I think that’s not concluded), so that might still change.

Barnet rather lucky to get in the play offs then ! The readjusted League position is not shown on the BBC site, many teams must feel rather aggrieved if they miss out on play offs/promotion because of this PPG adjustment.

Notts County very lucky to get 3rd
Yeovil who were 3rd were meant to play Barnet the same
day notts won there last game which they won to put them above yeovil.
Yeovils game was called off because 2 barnet players tested for covid.

Yeovil lost 2-0 today to Barnet.

[WickfordO]

It’s a promotion playoff eliminator, Sid.

Boreham Wood beat Halifax in the other one last night.

Barnet in 11th place not in the top 7 e.g https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/teams/barnet/table
According to this BBC League table they are in 11th position many games to go before the season would have been completed but Barnet had a couple of games in hand compared to most other teams, so i guess allowed to take part in the play offs ?
Strange how they worked these things out. I suppose because Bury dropped out the FL that only Stevenage will be going to go down from Division 2 FL to the National League. So I wonder, do Barnet in 11th place knock 4th placed Yeovil out of the play offs if they win today ?

Yes they did is the answer.
The premiership lead BBC have not adjusted the tables accordingly, because it is the NL, but because Barnet only played 35 games and the others played 37 or 38 or 39 games, they managed to accrue more average points over those 35 games, than the others who played the more games when the league stopped and that put them up to 7th. The formula for the PPG is:- (points gained divided by games played) multiplied by (games due to be played in the full season). In Barnet's case that is (54/35) x 46 = 70.97. Hope that explains it.

[tuffers#1]

Barnet rather lucky to get in the play offs then ! The readjusted League position is not shown on the BBC site, many teams must feel rather aggrieved if they miss out on play offs/promotion because of this PPG adjustment.

Notts County very lucky to get 3rd
Yeovil who were 3rd were meant to play Barnet the same
day notts won there last game which they won to put them above yeovil.
Yeovils game was called off because 2 barnet players tested for covid.

Yeovil lost 2-0 today to Barnet.

Exactly
Should of been notts getting beaten today .
Still they play them next

[Smendrick Feaselberg]

It’s a promotion playoff eliminator, Sid.

Boreham Wood beat Halifax in the other one last night.

Barnet in 11th place not in the top 7 e.g https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/teams/barnet/table
According to this BBC League table they are in 11th position many games to go before the season would have been completed but Barnet had a couple of games in hand compared to most other teams, so i guess allowed to take part in the play offs ?
Strange how they worked these things out. I suppose because Bury dropped out the FL that only Stevenage will be going to go down from Division 2 FL to the National League. So I wonder, do Barnet in 11th place knock 4th placed Yeovil out of the play offs if they win today ?

Yes they did is the answer.
The premiership lead BBC have not adjusted the tables accordingly, because it is the NL, but because Barnet only played 35 games and the others played 37 or 38 or 39 games, they managed to accrue more average points over those 35 games, than the others who played the more games when the league stopped and that put them up to 7th. The formula for the PPG is:- (points gained divided by games played) multiplied by (games due to be played in the full season). In Barnet's case that is (54/35) x 46 = 70.97. Hope that explains it.

It's for this reason that rollbacks would have been fairest. Rollback everyone's points tally in the NL to after they had played 35 games (matching Barnet, the lowest in the division) and place teams according to that. Then you get no need to have to worry about points per game projections.

[Tent Keague]

Barnet in 11th place not in the top 7 e.g https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/teams/barnet/table
According to this BBC League table they are in 11th position many games to go before the season would have been completed but Barnet had a couple of games in hand compared to most other teams, so i guess allowed to take part in the play offs ?
Strange how they worked these things out. I suppose because Bury dropped out the FL that only Stevenage will be going to go down from Division 2 FL to the National League. So I wonder, do Barnet in 11th place knock 4th placed Yeovil out of the play offs if they win today ?

Yes they did is the answer.
The premiership lead BBC have not adjusted the tables accordingly, because it is the NL, but because Barnet only played 35 games and the others played 37 or 38 or 39 games, they managed to accrue more average points over those 35 games, than the others who played the more games when the league stopped and that put them up to 7th. The formula for the PPG is:- (points gained divided by games played) multiplied by (games due to be played in the full season). In Barnet's case that is (54/35) x 46 = 70.97. Hope that explains it.

It's for this reason that rollbacks would have been fairest. Rollback everyone's points tally in the NL to after they had played 35 games (matching Barnet, the lowest in the division) and place teams according to that. Then you get no need to have to worry about points per game projections.

Hadn't heard of that before. Or even considered it.

Seems like a good was of going about things. What's the drawback using that method? I'm plucking my brains trying to think of one and all I can think of is that some could claim that after the 35th game that they had actual points.

Wonder how Websfeet would've faired using that method.

[tuffers#1]

Yes they did is the answer.
The premiership lead BBC have not adjusted the tables accordingly, because it is the NL, but because Barnet only played 35 games and the others played 37 or 38 or 39 games, they managed to accrue more average points over those 35 games, than the others who played the more games when the league stopped and that put them up to 7th. The formula for the PPG is:- (points gained divided by games played) multiplied by (games due to be played in the full season). In Barnet's case that is (54/35) x 46 = 70.97. Hope that explains it.

It's for this reason that rollbacks would have been fairest. Rollback everyone's points tally in the NL to after they had played 35 games (matching Barnet, the lowest in the division) and place teams according to that. Then you get no need to have to worry about points per game projections.

Hadn't heard of that before. Or even considered it.

Seems like a good was of going about things. What's the drawback using that method? I'm plucking my brains trying to think of one and all I can think of is that some could claim that after the 35th game that they had actual points.

Wonder how Websfeet would've faired using that method.

Notts county would complain as there wer 4th or 5th at the time having won games.
There argument quite fairly could have been
Why should we be punished ?

Remember covid was only supposedly
In london at the time.

[Smendrick Feaselberg]

It's for this reason that rollbacks would have been fairest. Rollback everyone's points tally in the NL to after they had played 35 games (matching Barnet, the lowest in the division) and place teams according to that. Then you get no need to have to worry about points per game projections.

Hadn't heard of that before. Or even considered it.

Seems like a good was of going about things. What's the drawback using that method? I'm plucking my brains trying to think of one and all I can think of is that some could claim that after the 35th game that they had actual points.

Wonder how Websfeet would've faired using that method.

Notts county would complain as there wer 4th or 5th at the time having won games.
There argument quite fairly could have been
Why should we be punished ?

Remember covid was only supposedly
In london at the time.

They're not being punished. You're just rolling it back to a 35 game season.

[tuffers#1]

Hadn't heard of that before. Or even considered it.

Seems like a good was of going about things. What's the drawback using that method? I'm plucking my brains trying to think of one and all I can think of is that some could claim that after the 35th game that they had actual points.

Wonder how Websfeet would've faired using that method.

Notts county would complain as there wer 4th or 5th at the time having won games.
There argument quite fairly could have been
Why should we be punished ?

Remember covid was only supposedly
In london at the time.

They're not being punished. You're just rolling it back to a 35 game season.

Notts were 3 goals worse off than yeovil on roll back
They scored 5 in there last game putting them 3rd .
Moving them back down to 4th & therefore out of the semi final &
Home advantage to quarter finals with an away semi final.

How is that not punishment ?

The fairest way, was to play the season out & the govt/PL to pay 70-80 % wages of lower league football &
Non leagues top 3 tables.

The only reason it wasnt finished is players would no longer be furloughed , but clubs could not pay
Players without any income .

[Ornchurch]

The fairest way, was to play the season out & the govt/PL to pay 70-80 % wages of lower league football &
Non leagues top 3 tables.

[tuffers#1]

The fairest way, was to play the season out & the govt/PL to pay 70-80 % wages of lower league football &
Non leagues top 3 tables.

I said the fairest way .

Im not saying it should of or would of happened .

It is what it is & its been accepted.by all clubs in said leagues.

[Smendrick Feaselberg]

Notts county would complain as there wer 4th or 5th at the time having won games.
There argument quite fairly could have been
Why should we be punished ?

Remember covid was only supposedly
In london at the time.

They're not being punished. You're just rolling it back to a 35 game season.

Notts were 3 goals worse off than yeovil on roll back
They scored 5 in there last game putting them 3rd .
Moving them back down to 4th & therefore out of the semi final &
Home advantage to quarter finals with an away semi final.

How is that not punishment ?

The fairest way, was to play the season out & the govt/PL to pay 70-80 % wages of lower league football &
Non leagues top 3 tables.

The only reason it wasnt finished is players would no longer be furloughed , but clubs could not pay
Players without any income .

It's not punishment because you're looking at performances over a relatively robust sample size of 35 games, not a volatile sample of 2-4 games that happened after game 35.

[tuffers#1]

They're not being punished. You're just rolling it back to a 35 game season.

Notts were 3 goals worse off than yeovil on roll back
They scored 5 in there last game putting them 3rd .
Moving them back down to 4th & therefore out of the semi final &
Home advantage to quarter finals with an away semi final.

How is that not punishment ?

The fairest way, was to play the season out & the govt/PL to pay 70-80 % wages of lower league football &
Non leagues top 3 tables.

The only reason it wasnt finished is players would no longer be furloughed , but clubs could not pay
Players without any income .

It's not punishment because you're looking at performances over a relatively robust sample size of 35 games, not a volatile sample of 2-4 games that happened after game 35.

It is punishment to a point.
I wont argue with you over it as the leagues & clubs voted to allow ppg to happen.
Therefore that is the fairest way . As Barnets ppg was better over a number of the 35
games they still would have finished in the play offs .
Halifax may not have as Stockports
last 5 was Stronger , only to mess up with a defeat in there..

[Smendrick Feaselberg]

Notts were 3 goals worse off than yeovil on roll back
They scored 5 in there last game putting them 3rd .
Moving them back down to 4th & therefore out of the semi final &
Home advantage to quarter finals with an away semi final.

How is that not punishment ?

The fairest way, was to play the season out & the govt/PL to pay 70-80 % wages of lower league football &
Non leagues top 3 tables.

The only reason it wasnt finished is players would no longer be furloughed , but clubs could not pay
Players without any income .

It's not punishment because you're looking at performances over a relatively robust sample size of 35 games, not a volatile sample of 2-4 games that happened after game 35.

It is punishment to a point.
I wont argue with you over it as the leagues & clubs voted to allow ppg to happen.
Therefore that is the fairest way . As Barnets ppg was better over a number of the 35
games they still would have finished in the play offs .
Halifax may not have as Stockports
last 5 was Stronger , only to mess up with a defeat in there..

It's not correct to say that because teams voted for points per game that it was the fairest way when that was the only option on the table at that time. For example the league had ruled out weighted points per game and didnt present that as an alternative to be voted on.

Rollback was never on the agenda. It was never discussed, debated or even raised by the media. Which is odd when it would have eliminated all guesswork and flawed estimations of the number of points that a team may or may not have picked up in their remaining games.

[A Pedant]

The premiership lead BBC have not adjusted the tables accordingly, because it is the NL

To be fair to the BBC sport website, they haven't adjusted the tables for any division. They just show the actual games played in each division.