Champions Cup permutations 2016/17 after Round 4

irishbucsfan

Buer wrote: »

No business being in the competition. Their presence is highlighted by the other three teams in their pool all finishing on a minimum of 18 points. 10 points are guaranteed.

The competition would be better off with Italian teams only allowed into the Challenge Cup until they can qualify by rights with a top 6 finish in the Pro12.

^ McCafferty's lapdog :cool:

Buer

irishbucsfan wrote:

^ McCafferty's lapdog

Woof.

awec

Only 2/8 English teams in the quarters, wonder if that's enough for McCafferty...

A few more years of this and we might see another format change.

tanko

Neil3030 wrote: »

Clermont or Toulon V Leinster or Wasps

- in France if Leinster win
- in England if Wasps win

Munster or Toulouse V Saracens or Glasgow

- In Ireland or France if Saracens win
- In Scotland if Glasgow win

How is it decided where the semis are played?

mahoney_j

Don't the top 2 seeds (clermount ,Munster )have home semis if both win there respective quarter finals ??

irishbucsfan

mahoney_j wrote: »

Don't the top 2 seeds (clermount ,Munster )have home semis if both win there respective quarter finals ??

Not if they're playing a team who were away in the quarter finals.

Munster would be at home against Sarries, away against Glasgow.

CIARAN_BOYLE

mahoney_j wrote: »

Don't the top 2 seeds (clermount ,Munster )have home semis if both win there respective quarter finals ??

A winning away team in the quarter final gets a home seed otherwise top two seeds get it.

Neil3030

tanko wrote: »

How is it decided where the semis are played?

The hierarchy is Did you win your match -> Where did you played your quarter -> Where were you seeded in the QF

You can see this if you make a table in Excel

Put the numerical values of the QF seeds (1-8) in Column A

Put the letters H or A, i.e. home or away in the QF, in Column B

Now in Column C, play around with the QF results, put a W or an L, for a win or loss.

Should have something like this:

A B C
1 H L
2 H W
3 H W
4 H L
5 A W
6 A L
7 A L
8 A W


Once finished, do a custom sort of this table:

Sort by Column C: Z to A (prioritises wins over losses)
then by Column B: A to Z (prioritises winning away over winning at home)
then by Column A: smallest to largest (prioritises higher seedings)

In my example, this gives:

A B C
5 A W
8 A W
2 H W
3 H W
6 A L
7 A L
1 H L
4 H L


Out of this table,

row 1 (at home), plays row 4
row 2 (at home), plays row 3

swiwi_

Neil3030 wrote: »

The hierarchy is Did you win your match -> Where did you played your quarter -> Where were you seeded in the QF

You can see this if you make a table in Excel

Put the numerical values of the QF seeds (1-8) in Column A

Put the letters H or A, i.e. home or away in the QF, in Column B

Now in Column C, play around with the QF results, put a W or an L, for a win or loss.

Should have something like this:

A B C
1 H L
2 H W
3 H W
4 H L
5 A W
6 A L
7 A L
8 A W


Once finished, do a custom sort of this table:

Sort by Column C: Z to A (prioritises wins over losses)
then by Column B: A to Z (prioritises winning away over winning at home)
then by Column A: smallest to largest (prioritises higher seedings)

In my example, this gives:

A B C
5 A W
8 A W
2 H W
3 H W
6 A L
7 A L
1 H L
4 H L


Out of this table,

row 1 (at home), plays row 4
row 2 (at home), plays row 3

So if you lose your 1/4 you don't get a home semi. Seems reasonable to me.

bmwguy

Neil3030 wrote: »

The hierarchy is Did you win your match -> Where did you played your quarter -> Where were you seeded in the QF

You can see this if you make a table in Excel

Put the numerical values of the QF seeds (1-8) in Column A

Put the letters H or A, i.e. home or away in the QF, in Column B

Now in Column C, play around with the QF results, put a W or an L, for a win or loss.

Should have something like this:

A B C
1 H L
2 H W
3 H W
4 H L
5 A W
6 A L
7 A L
8 A W


Once finished, do a custom sort of this table:

Sort by Column C: Z to A (prioritises wins over losses)
then by Column B: A to Z (prioritises winning away over winning at home)
then by Column A: smallest to largest (prioritises higher seedings)

In my example, this gives:

A B C
5 A W
8 A W
2 H W
3 H W
6 A L
7 A L
1 H L
4 H L


Out of this table,

row 1 (at home), plays row 4
row 2 (at home), plays row 3

Holy Jaysus that's unnecessary!

Clermont/ Toulon winner plays Leinster/Wasps winner

If:

Clermont v Leinster, Clermont home (higher pool ranking)
Clermont v Wasps, Wasps home (wasps had away qf)
Toulon v Leinster, Toulon home (Toulon had away qf)
Toulon v Wasps, Wasps home (higher pool.ranking)

Munster/Toulouse winner plays Saracens/ Glasgow winner

If:

Munster v Saracens, Munster home (higher pool ranking)
Munster v Glasgow, Glasgow home (Glasgow had away qf)
Toulouse v Saracens, Toulouse home (Toulouse had away qf)
Toulouse v Glasgow, Glasgow home (higher pool.ranking)

ArmaniJeanss

To shorten it further.

The teams in a semi-final will have won a quarter final either Home or Away.

If its H&H winners then higher seed at home.
If its A&A winners then higher seed at home.
If its H&A winners then the A will now be at home.

pickarooney

swiwi_ wrote: »

So if you lose your 1/4 you don't get a home semi. Seems reasonable to me.

Even losing an away quarter shóuld rule you out of a home semi. That might be a bit controversial.

Neil3030

Yeah, think I nerdified that a bit beyond what was needed. AJ has the cleanest explanation!

nordydan

pickarooney wrote: »

Even losing an away quarter shóuld rule you out of a home semi. That might be a bit controversial.

Any team losing their quarter final should not be allowed qualify for the final!

thomond2006

Zebre 2016/17: 0 points, 90 points scored, 331 points conceded
Treviso 2015/16: 0 points, 53 points scored, 233 points conceded
Treviso 2014/15: 4 points, 62 points scored, 246 points conceded
Treviso 2013/14: 0 points, 41 points scored, 202 points conceded
Zebre 2013/14: 0 points, 33 points scored, 210 points conceded

At what stage is it acknowledged that a free pass for the Italians isn't to anyone's benefit?

errlloyd

thomond2006 wrote: »

At what stage is it acknowledged that a free pass for the Italians isn't to anyone's benefit?

I dunno Thomond, since we stopped giving them 2 free passes they have actually been conceding more points. :(

Buer

thomond2006 wrote: »

Zebre 2016/17: 0 points, 90 points scored, 331 points conceded
Treviso 2015/16: 0 points, 53 points scored, 233 points conceded
Treviso 2014/15: 4 points, 62 points scored, 246 points conceded
Treviso 2013/14: 0 points, 41 points scored, 202 points conceded
Zebre 2013/14: 0 points, 33 points scored, 210 points conceded

At what stage is it acknowledged that a free pass for the Italians isn't to anyone's benefit?

It's of massive benefit to those who get them in their pool!

You essentially only have to win 2 home games and you should be in with a very strong likelihood of progressing to the QF.

The Italian sides in this competition are a bad joke at this stage and it beneifts nobody.

errlloyd

I think the Italian slot should be given to the Challenge Cup winner - at least that way they have a back door.

WeleaseWoderick

Buer wrote: »

It's of massive benefit to those who get them in their pool!

You essentially only have to win 2 home games and you should be in with a very strong likelihood of progressing to the QF.

The Italian sides in this competition are a bad joke at this stage and it beneifts nobody.

Or in Toulouse's case, only win 1 other match in the group apart from the Zebre games and still qualify.

I was all for having a guaranteed spot for each of the countries in the Pro 12 but it's very hard to argue that the Champions Cup wouldn't have benefited from Ospreys being there ahead of Zebre.

ScrubsfanChris

WeleaseWoderick wrote: »

Or in Toulouse's case, only win 1 other match in the group apart from the Zebre games and still qualify.

I was all for having a guaranteed spot for each of the countries in the Pro 12 but it's very hard to argue that the Champions Cup wouldn't have benefited from Ospreys being there ahead of Zebre.

Especially with Ospreys making a mockery of the tournament. 30 match points after 6 pool games with an average of 7 tires per game. Hardly a challenge :pac:

CMOTDibbler

WeleaseWoderick wrote: »

Or in Toulouse's case, only win 1 other match in the group apart from the Zebre games and still qualify.

I was all for having a guaranteed spot for each of the countries in the Pro 12 but it's very hard to argue that the Champions Cup wouldn't have benefited from Ospreys being there ahead of Zebre.

They also drew with Wasps. They'd never have made it if that had been a loss.

Treviso had two wins in the Challenge Cup. That's probably more their level, but there was so few of those matches televised that you'd wonder at its value to them.

WeleaseWoderick

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

They also drew with Wasps. They'd never have made it if that had been a loss.

Treviso had two wins in the Challenge Cup. That's probably more their level, but there was so few of those matches televised that you'd wonder at its value to them.

They'd only have needed one more try against Connacht in the last game to qualify if that had been a loss too.

I think another issue I have with the current setup of 5 groups instead of 6 is that the group runner up spots don't seem quite as earned as previous. That might just be my own perception but when it was 2 from 6 instead of 3 from 5, I can remember those last 2 qualifier spots changing dramatically on the last weekend of the groups.

Triboro

When do they confirm exact dates and times for the qf's?

techdiver

Triboro wrote: »

When do they confirm exact dates and times for the qf's?

Was going to ask the same thing. Frustrating that they can't have it planned quicker to give people a chance to plan trips etc.

phog

WeleaseWoderick wrote: »

Or in Toulouse's case, only win 1 other match in the group apart from the Zebre games and still qualify.

And they still managed to pip Connacht. This competition is all about picking up points, any points.

thomond2006

phog wrote: »

And they still managed to pip Connacht. This competition is all about picking up points, any points.

Would you keep the Italian team phog?

Former Former

techdiver wrote: »

Was going to ask the same thing. Frustrating that they can't have it planned quicker to give people a chance to plan trips etc.

Luckily it doesn't really affect Irish fans this year but the delay is (I would guess) because Saracens want to play at Allianz Park, but need to increase capacity to the minimum 15,000 and are waiting for the go-ahead on that.

I would bet that Leinster and Saracens games will be on the Saturday and Munster and Clermont games on the Sunday.

phog

thomond2006 wrote: »

Would you keep the Italian team phog?

I don't know.

I think having them in the 6Ns probably means we need them in the CC. While Zebre didn't win a match, they scored more points than Racing, Sale & Leicester and scored more tries than Saints, Leicester & Sale - the problem is that they concede too many tries which is an advantage to the other teams in that pool.

thomond2006

phog wrote: »

I don't know.

I think having them in the 6Ns probably means we need them in the CC. While Zebre didn't win a match, they scored more points than Racing, Sale & Leicester and scored more tries than Saints, Leicester & Sale - the problem is that they concede too many tries which is an advantage to the other teams in that pool.

I'd want to look at how many of those points were scored during 'garbage time'. They count all the same but they don't mean as much to me.

Buer

thomond2006 wrote: »

I'd want to look at how many of those points were scored during 'garbage time'. They count all the same but they don't mean as much to me.

Not only that but teams adjust their mindset playing Zebre. They know it's going to be a cake walk. The intensity is way down. People fall off tackles and don't work as hard because they know that if Zebre score a try, they can walk down and score a few if they have to.