We all have heard and seen teams and coaches complaining of the frequency of games and how close they are to each other, which affects the quality of performances, high rate of injuries among players and generally creating lots of problems for coaches & clubs.
considering the foolish set of unnecessary breaks we have in our league for all sorts of religious and c0ckamamie events which compresses the schedule even further, thus making life even more difficult for the teams, not to mention the clash in IPL's schedule and the rest of asia's (I really dont know why we had to coordinate our schedule with that of europe's. we're not playing in europe. why did our buffoons at IFF use the european calendar? which brain-dead moron came up with this gem of an idea?), I dont think it would be a bad idea to reduce the number of teams to 16 in our league.
yes, it would be unfair to the bottom teams. but I still think it would benefit our football.
at least until the day we correct our scheduling and remove those unnecessary breaks.
a look at the ACL, we usually see our rival clubs seem more fresh, more relaxed and less tired once they enter the games. but at the same time we see our clubs come in with a bunch of tired, half-emptied players, some of whom may also be injured due to the long season.
look at sepahan and SS last ACL season. fatigue, injuries and stress was evident in them and no wonder they fell.
but the arab clubs come in less fatigued due to the lower number of teams in their leagues, which allows them time to recover and recuperate during their season.
I also would think the quality of the IPL games would be elevated. there'd be less injuries and fatigue at the end of the season (which often coincides with other asian tournaments too).
is 16 for a country of 70 million ideal?
NO.
18 is perfect.
but we are not in an ideal set up and we make life even more difficult by bringing stupid, unrelated stuff into our football to boost!
considering the foolish set of unnecessary breaks we have in our league for all sorts of religious and c0ckamamie events which compresses the schedule even further, thus making life even more difficult for the teams, not to mention the clash in IPL's schedule and the rest of asia's (I really dont know why we had to coordinate our schedule with that of europe's. we're not playing in europe. why did our buffoons at IFF use the european calendar? which brain-dead moron came up with this gem of an idea?), I dont think it would be a bad idea to reduce the number of teams to 16 in our league.
yes, it would be unfair to the bottom teams. but I still think it would benefit our football.
at least until the day we correct our scheduling and remove those unnecessary breaks.
a look at the ACL, we usually see our rival clubs seem more fresh, more relaxed and less tired once they enter the games. but at the same time we see our clubs come in with a bunch of tired, half-emptied players, some of whom may also be injured due to the long season.
look at sepahan and SS last ACL season. fatigue, injuries and stress was evident in them and no wonder they fell.
but the arab clubs come in less fatigued due to the lower number of teams in their leagues, which allows them time to recover and recuperate during their season.
I also would think the quality of the IPL games would be elevated. there'd be less injuries and fatigue at the end of the season (which often coincides with other asian tournaments too).
is 16 for a country of 70 million ideal?
NO.
18 is perfect.
but we are not in an ideal set up and we make life even more difficult by bringing stupid, unrelated stuff into our football to boost!
Comment