The Fictional Extra Time Debate


Fictional extra time of course came about in Season 2 of Top 100 in order to provide a means of finding a fair winner in cup fixtures within such tournaments as the Top 100 Youth Cup & the Top 100 World Championship whereby arranging additional fixtures / replays was not feasible due to time available to complete the competitions within the 38 game week season.


Recently brought up by Broon, the debate now is the method of deciding victors in games drawn in future competitions in the knockout stages of those competitions.


There are currently 2 ideas suggested for deciding these games;


1: Average Rating Totals

Using the recent Top 100 Youth Cup final 2nd leg game as an example to explain this you have a game that was drawn 3-3. If this were a 1 leg match the average rating totals would have scored as follows;



Juventus score 71 from the first 11 as of course the clubs might have used a different number of players during the game meaning that subs would create an unfair advantage. 

Lokomotiv Moscow score 70 from the first 11 meaning that in total Juventus would be awarded the game based on the ‘better performance’ of their starting 11 players.


The pros here are as the above point suggests, the first 11 of Juventus scored higher as a whole despite drawing the game & ‘performed better’ however the cons are that Juventus had K.Coman sent off after 58 minutes meaning his rating was not scored over 90 minutes & neither were the subs. Additionally some players leave the field of play later or sooner than others & therefore it is not a completely fair contest. 


2: Match Stat Criteria


The method adapted in season 2 where by an odd number of criteria were suggested as providing random but fair means of deciding a winner of the game.

Again using the same match as was used in the above example for Average Rating Totals we have the match stats from that game;



The 3 areas chosen to find a winner were; First Goal, Most Possession & Most Shots on Target. In this match example the score would be 2-1 to Juventus in extra time due to Lokomotiv’s first goal (1st minute), Juventus 54% possession & 7 shots on target to Lokomotiv’s 3. 

The pros to this method are that it evaluates 3 areas which can be very random. Any side no matter the average rating of their 11 on the field can score the first goal, it is also not unheard of that a team can have the most shots on target but not the most possession meaning the final score in extra time can be very random. However the cons are that because the stats can be random a team can have the most shots on goal & therefore debatably be the most likely winner but lose 2-1 due to not scoring the first goal & having less possession. Furthermore possession can be tied 50-50 meaning that even with this method of fictional extra time there might not be a winner.
_____________________________________________________________________________

It is proposed that from Season 3 onwards one of the methods be used or perhaps both could be in the event of whichever method is used as the primary results in a tie still & therefore the 2nd would come into play, for example;

Average Rating Totals is used as the primary method however at the end of the game the score is a tie & as are the average rating totals of the starting 11’s of both sides (70-70) again as an example. We could then refer to the Match Stat Criteria in order to find a winner between the two sides. 

In the highly unlikely outcome that both Average Rating Totals & Match Stat Criteria resulted in a draw I would suggest that the team whom had the MOTM in their 11 would progress to the next stage. 

Any further suggestions for methods on deciding winners in tied knockout stage cup games are welcome!

2 comments

  1. As somebody who benefitted from the existing \”Extra Time\” rules during the Youth Cup I may be biased 🙂 But I do like the existing rule with its \”spice\” factor. The first goal point almost feels a bit \”Golden Goal\”-like, and overall possession and total goals make a lot of sense to be included. And let's face it, SM has a large degree of randomness anyway, so what's a little more?

    Like

  2. I would also propose a modified version of Option 1.In the given game Juve beat Loko – 71-70 on the performance rating system, however this does not take into account the stat ratings of the players.If you divide the total performance ratings by the player stat ratings you will get a fairer outcome as it takes into account the strength of the teams. So the above result would be re-worked as follows.Juve – (total match rating) 71 / (total player rating) 946 = 0.075 (x 100 to make a sensible number) = 7.51Loko – (total match rating) 70 / (total player rating) 906 = 0.073 (x 100 to make a sensible number) = 7.73

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s