You've changed what you are saying there though, you said can (as in it is possible) that it would decide the league. A flukey 61-59 win is a difference of 22 points between those clans. Considering there was 21 points between 1st and 2nd this season I would consider that as a possibility that it could decide the league.

If there were 2 teams competing then it's always going to boil down to a particular fixture. This season there was 3 competing, then 2 by the end. The head-to-head decided the result of the league.

This is what I agree with and the way I'd want it to go.

I really don't see the issue with a team going unbeaten and finishing second - if the format is a point a frame then it's irrelevant whether you win or lose an individual match.

My vote would be for the FBL & FCL to come together and scrap all bonuses. And then one league has the football system (although I'd say 2 points for a win, 1 for a draw) and the other staying as a point a frame.

That way you have two distinct formats with both parties being catered for.

2 points for a win isn't catering for anybody apart from the best couple of teams, it's a stupid idea saying that it doesn't matter if you win all your games 120-0 and lose one 61-59 you aren't the best team and it's stupid getting the same points for losing by 1 frame as you do for losing by 120.
Also stupid creating a system in a league where games would be over without people getting the chance to play.

I went and done this for all results last season, so without any bonus points and 2 points for a win counting on individual wins so all players games count:-

Games Won Games Lost Points
Professionals 66 14 20
Snooker Squad 59 21 16
Uprising 59 21 16
Unbeatables 50 30 14
Phoenix Storm 47 33 11
Fighting Eagles 43 37 10
Pocket Dynamos 37 43 9
Mousey Misfits 25 55 6
Top Guns 24.5 55.5 4
Ballbreakers 17.5 62.5 2
Underdogs 12 68 2

Where teams were level on points i have used head to head against each other to split teams which would mean snooker squad were runners up as they won 5-3 on games v uprising (Yet lost the fixture 61-59 on current format) This again highlights the flaw that if it is a true team event SS would win but if we use a system where winning by as much as possible they lose.

So there is no difference in winning 15-0 to winning 8-7?
Every player wins 8-7 and you get an 8-0 win? that seems like a true representation of a close match lol

Why are you so fascinated with needing to win 15-0?

Under current system you can win 7 of the 8 games and lose the 8th game heavily and end up losing the fixture. So a team who can win 1 out of 8 games is the better team then?

Anyone who has played pool or snooker in any leagues would recognise the format i have proposed which mean every individual game has equal bearing on the out come of each fixture and the league overall. The current set up does not. Also the format i propose does away with any bonuses and the best team will always win the league which is how it should be.

If I win 7 frames against someone like dvz then I want the 7 frames to benefit my team not get us nothing.

I just want to say that Hull City won 6-0 and only got 3 points which is the same as Arsenal got for winning 1-0.

I don't know if theres any real life leagues out there where teams get points for losing but if there is maybe the league runners should take a look at them and come up with something that keeps everyone happy.

I agree a lot of the RULES and Formats appear to cater more for the top sides, we know who are the best sides and one day one of us 'minnows' will ruffle some feathers and 'break the mould'. (IF players aren't taken to weaken)

In the meantime the rules and regulations should benefit ALL, points should be awarded for wins, draw, etc you achieve nothing for losing (unless you lose by say 5 points), more incentive to try that little harder and fight like a team should.

None of the players nor Captains from the other teams bother to speak up as they or their ideas or 'blown completely out' without even being considered. There's 11 Teams in the FCL hopefully more next season, let them be heard and represented too, not just the Top ones.

- I speak for Phoenix Storm will try represent the 'minnow teams', we have a voice too.

What comparison is there to football? You normally get 2 goals in a whole football match this is 120 seperate frames by 16 different people in 8 individual matches online (just in case anybody thinks your post has any relevance)
They don't go around the pitch counting who has won the individual battles either do they

There was never any problem with 10 points as a bonus, there has definitely never been a problem with counting all frames scored and yet you again want to rip up everything to favour the very top teams and ruin the leagues for everyone else.
Say we got pros and Top Guns in a set with your scoring system, best off putting our best players against Top Guns and getting 8 points whereas at the moment you put your best players against the best teams to score as many points as possible even if you do lose nearly all the individual games.

very true, i think that way the league would be unenjoyable to be in. Horse looks at it only on a bigger team view, but for example if i was Underdogs captain i wouldnt bother entering any league when i know i cant get any points. And also if i was a less better player than my opponent in a fixture i wouldnt bother playing it when i know i would get beat. That way we will see more defaults then games played.

Div 1 teams should not play div 2 teams, until the winner of each is decided at end of season. Then they will battles in some sort of style.

But i still think there should be a limit to the amount of class players a team has, as some teams just dont come CLOSE to the skills certain other teams possess. Why play a clan when u know u have absolutely 0% chance of winning that fixture overall

If it is adopted i think it should go for all leagues!

Edited at 08:51 Mon 30/12/13 (GMT)

There is one suggestion that is being talked about by runners now which I think is the fairest way I'll have a word with Chris and jacko day and see if the mind me postin that idea here :-)

The 2 Leagues is a stupid idea, we are virtually a new team and my players like to face Everyone. Why should they be deprived?

Pros and SS will always be the best as they have the better the players, for example tinie at TFS so bought in franer_ and cue_ball. We lost cue_ball so with us being new ill try get dvz lol (hmmm i don't think that will happen) well until we win the League.

Your right dave loves me too much ;-)

Yeh i nau lol

But there is an idea floating round between me,jack and Chris, early stars but it wil get posted soon to get everyone else's views on the idea.

What's next carbo? Reduce how players players usernames begin with the letter 'c' in a team? You cant limit skill.

Yeah probably reducing the team sizes imo. (i think)

Reducing clan sizes would force players out of Uprising that don't want to leave. I imagine there would be a few more clans with the same issue. The reason every clan doesn't have an active 16 players isn't that the player pool is so small, it's either that some clans are too elitist, and others don't put enough effort into recruitment. I could easily start a brand new team and fill it with 16 players.