So accrington and Walsall both finished 68th?
Yet there are 92 teams in the league? 
Tell me more about this new maths 
Where would you say they finished?
Itās a subjective argument, as weāve established, but only 4 teams were asked to apply for re-election. Walsall were one of the 4. You canāt argue we were better than Shrewsbury (the team directly above us). To me that makes Walsall 90th at best.
By pure points 92nd.
I was told by my dad that we got re-elected for 2 reasons.Our gates were better than those who might have replaced us and our geographical position meant that we were relatively easy to reach from all parts of England. There were no motorways in those days and pre Beeching Walsall was easily reached by rail.
4 Likes
Are you saying (for the purpose of giving each team in Division Three a ranking from 48-92) the playing records in these parallel divisions are merged and ranked as if it was a 48 team league.
So the team that wins the Third Division North finishes below the team that wins the Third Division South if they have inferior points, goal difference etc?
Well, thatās where the debate comes in isnāt it? Thereās no way of knowing, but what you suggest would seem the obvious way of ranking the teams. We certainly didnāt finish 68th 
Likewise thereās no way of knowing where Walsall would have finished if the 2020-21 season was split into north and south, but you could make a strong case for arguing if it had been, we would have finished above Southend and Colchester. I.e. not as bad as 52-53, and thus not our worst ever season 
Do you still not know what āat bestā means?
Unlike you to admit you were in the wrong. I was expecting you to come back with some sort of semantic argument.
Oh wait
Iām not sure you can finish 92nd when there are only 68 league places available to you.
I ā¦ donāt even understand this here 
Itās not a hard concept. I know youāve been desperately defending this season and Dutton for weeks.
But this is, definitely, categorically, without shadow of a doubt, factually, the lowest weāve finished in 100 years.
Well you have to put some sort of ranking on the 92 teams donāt you. Thatās the debate, thatās the subjectivity.
You can argue Walsall were better than all division 3 north teams, and were thus the 68th best team. I canāt prove that wrong, but itās an assumption.
Only an idiot would say both Accrington and Walsall finished 68th out of 92 teams though.
A lot of it was down to clubs thinking āthere but for the grace of god go we.ā
If they voted a club out of the league who would it be next year?
1 Like
Good job nobody has said that then. ā ā ā ā me, what is the point. You donāt understand words (wilfully, I suspect)
So where do you rank Walsall and Accrington then?
How many times do you want me to write 68th at best?
I mean, you could argue they were competing in completely different competitions and both finished at that level. Only an idiot would think one team in the world can finish 68th in a competition completely unconnected to another.
And at worst?
However many teams were in the pyramid to the third tier. We will never know for sure because it wasnāt amalgamated.
What we do know is they both fished 68th in their different regions. Case closed.
I know you are desperate to defend this season/Dutton but this is getting silly.
So Walsall finished above Southend and Colchester in their different regions this year.
Thus not our worst season.
ā¦ WHAT?! 
Jesus Christ.
Hmm donāt like flaws in your arguments pointed out do you?