Someone asked me how my blog and newspaper column came to be titled "Bleachers Brew". It's like this, it's an amalgam of sorts of two things: The bleachers area in the stadium/arena where I used to sit when I would watch baseball, football, and basketball games and Miles Davis' great jazz album Bitches Brew. That's how it got culled together. I originally planned on calling it "The View from the Big Chair" that is a nod to Tears For Fear's second album, Songs from the Big Chair. So there.

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

I can't believe we're having this discussion (the UAAP Women's Football Finals) again!

I AM INSERTING THIS AT 10am of Thursday morning.

I found out that after last year's problem regarding the UAAP Juniors Finals, the UAAP Board decided that should a team be tied in points it is automatic that it is a Best-of-Three Finals. Now if that is the case, then the ruling is correct. Except that prior to the start of the season, the football committee was asked to come up with rules and it included tie-breakers. Now this was reportedly approved as well. Will dig up the info later. But that rule does not make sense at all. It does not help the sport and it is certainly not fair play. Why will you reward a second place team by giving them a better chance to win? When I think of the way the UAAP Board changes and interprets rules to suit their needs, I see the need to place them in (the immortal words of Animal House's Dean Wormer) "double secret probation".

I posted this late Wednesday evening: After two rounds of football, the UAAP Women's Competition ended like this (see the table above). The elimination round ended with FEU and UST on top as they had the same number of points. Based on that, UST should have the twice-to-beat advantage heading into the finals. But there was once more a protest by FEU and surprisingly -- one year after I presented proof that debunked their board room decision to make the Season 72 Juniors Football Finals a Best-of-Three -- they are at it again.

In the picture below, taken from the UAAP Rules & Regulations, it is clear that the league indicates that the tie-breaking system must be used.

However, in the picture below (Championship Series), it is said that the top two teams that are tied in points shall play a best-of-three series.

But also in the UAAP Rules on Tiebreakers, the formula to break the tie is: 1) goal difference, 2) the highest number of goals scored.  On that alone, it is clear that UST should be awarded the twice-to-beat advantage.

You might want to revisit an argument on last year's UAAP Juniors Finals between me and FEU that ultimately saw the board decision reversed. It went from Bleachers' Brew to even Facebook and ultimately the Board Room. Incredibly!!!! Please revisit Season 70 when both Ateneo and FEU's men's teams finished with the same number of points after two rounds. But because FEU had one more goal, they were given the twice-to-beat advantage.


  1. ust should file a counter-protest. the uaap rules on tiebreakers, 11.1.1 clearly shows that they have the twice to beat advantage!!

  2. 3 days prior to champi0onship game and theycan still bend the rules in a heartbeat?! it's so not fair.

  3. yep dapat twice to beat ang ust...mag counter protest sila..kaya rin naman silang talunin ng feu kahit twice to beat pa sila eh..di nga maka attempt ust sa kanila kahit sobrang pandak ng last defender ng feu...natalo lang sila dahil dalawang penalty na binigay ng ref sa closing minutes..

  4. "should a team be tied in points it is automatic that it is a best of three finals". then they should have revised rule 11.1, if there is no revision made and they have no document to present regarding the best of three final then rule 11.1.1 still stands.