Conferences

[PaulNewman]

Hard to believe we now have a whole thread about potential scandal in the NESCAC.

It's also not like if all final regular season conference games kicked off at the same time that teams couldn't 'strategize' (if going to the trouble actually made sense). 

Asst coach tracking the other games at same time says to coach....."Hey, Coach, Bates just scored in 85th minute to draw level with Hamilton so now a draw in our game will lock up our spot in the playoffs, so maybe we shouldn't push for a goal in the last five minutes of our game as we might expose ourselves to blowing our own draw and getting eliminated, but maybe we shouldn't rely on that because if Hamilton scores in the last five minutes and we end settling for a draw with Colby we'll also be eliminated."

[camosfan]

And even when you have buy-in, those schemes often blow up because too many folks are in the know... Black Sox scandal... Italian match fixing in the 2000s... etc.

(It's why boxing fixes were, and maybe still are, so common and difficult to bust... Only need a couple of people, possibly only one, to pull off. Same reason basketball has seen a lot of scrutiny. A good, involved player can absolutely mess with the spread.)

You seem a reasonable person who follow the game in addition to D3, do you think the rule in FIFA or the other leagues is just overreach or was a reaction to events? Are you aware of the 1978 Worl d Cup game between Argentenia and Peru that prompted the change?

[Flying Weasel]

I agree that this issue is not really a concern in D-III soccer, and as such I don't see a need to discuss it at any real length.  However, if I understood the original poster correctly, most of the replies seem to be responding to something somewhat different than the concern camosfan presented.  If I understood correctly, camosfan did not suggest a team would do something that would potentially jeopardize their own qualification for the conference tournament, nor that they would purposely lose a conference tournament game, but rather that a team, once it is already guaranteed a spot in the playoffs, could purposely throw (lose or tie) a regular season game to help one conference foe make it into the playoffs instead of another (or maybe affect playoff seedings/match-ups). 

For example, with all other games already played at any earlier time, Team A takes on Team X in the final regular season game knowing a win or tie gets them the #1 seed and that their opponent will be tied for 8th in the standings with Team Y if they lose and a loss by more than one-goal would give the tie-breaker to Team Y.  Team A would prefer to play Team X in the first round because Team Y creates bigger match-up problems for them and is perceived to be the bigger threat as Team X has really cooled off after a good start. Team A takes a 1-0 lead and then doesn't push to increase their lead knowing that a 1-0 win or 1-1 ties gets them the #1 seed and gets them their preferred first round opponent.  (And the motivation to want to help one team over another could be all sorts of things--spite/grudge, seeding, etc.)

Now, as rightly pointed out, a team runs the risk of jeopardizing their at-large selection chances if they tie or lose on purpose to manipulate who makes the conference tournament and/or where teams are seeded.  But there are always teams that are virtual locks to get an at-large berth for whom that is not really a risk.  Again, I personally don't see this as a genuine concern, but as I read through the responses it felt like there was a disconnect from what camosfan actually presented as the concern.

[camosfan]

thanks for the insight!

[PaulNewman]

FW, I guess.

Seems to me that the one potential real-life D3 scenario is one that could happen even if they all start of the same time.  Let's say Amherst is two full games clear and there is no scenario where they can damage their own spot.  Could they play their subs more than they normally would or rest some starters still struggling with injuries?  Sure, that could happen and does happen usually professionally, but this scenario I think would be seen as just being smart even if a couple of other teams were impacted by the result.  This happens in the NFL and NBA but usually not to get any kind of revenge but just out of pure self-interest.  Another way of looking at it...if your team is depending on a set of results out of its control with its fate being determined by the outcome of what other teams do then that's the problem...not untoward manipulation.

[Maine Soccer Fan]

I watched two HS teams "arrange" the result of their last game of the regular season because they liked what it would do for their playoff seedings (HS seedings can be kind of whacky). It is done.

Both lost the in the first round of the playoffs...thankfully.

[Hopkins92]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disgrace_of_Gijón

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disgrace_of_Gij%C3%B3n

[Ejay]

sorry - thanks!

[Convict charlie]

No, it doesn't. Please explain.

On the final day of conference play with teams fighting for playoff spots, teams can sit back and let a team they prefer advance rather than another. All games on the final day of EPL start at the same time, the same goes for world cup first round.

The chance of a D3 team sitting around and letting another win a conference championship - and very possibly  costing themselves the chance to host in the first round, impacting their first-round matchup, or even cheating themselves out of a playoff bid altogether given the vagaries of Pool C selection - is effectively zero.

Old assistant college coach for a number of years. We were in the amcc in the northeast. Had to attend one coaches meeting before as our representative. The conference had a rule (bet it's still in place) for the conference tournament in the case of cancellation or total weather failure. If the game wasn't able to be played. The automatic bid had to be to the ncaa by that Sunday night. The highest seed got the automatic bid.