We have the FA Cup at a Neutral site for the Finals. I don't think both Cups need to be.

No.

I think a Semi Final at Neutral would also be good

I'm a firm no.

I think it's good to have different cups

I feel that all cup finals should be on a neutral pitch. It's a bit much for a team to have HA for cup that instantly puts the away team at a -9 disadvantage. I'm going through the same with the FA Shield final. That's not why I voted yes here - I have always believed that.

I feel that all cup finals should be on a neutral pitch. It's a bit much for a team to have HA for cup that instantly puts the away team at a -9 disadvantage. I'm going through the same with the FA Shield final. That's not why I voted yes here - I have always believed that.

It's good to have different flavours to each cup competition.

For the final they should be at a neutral venue it is far too much of an undeserved advantage to play at home.

If we were going with what traditionally happens in the real world, then at very least the final would be neutral field. Plus, unless your name is Dave or Alon, it is rare for most managers to reach a final - and home advantage is big, so let's give everyone a fair chance. That was my initial instinct on the match comments. 

However, I'd also use the phrase Al has said to me, many times over the years, when I've asked or commented about stuff. That phrase is "Ian, read the rules". Having read the rules today for the first time in many years, it appears home advantage isn't due to random chance.

Unless your name is Dave or Alon, resources are scarce. Most teams need to make a decison about which games to focus their best players. Following it through logically, a team needs to win 1 game in session 1 to advance in the FA Cup, or needs to "do well in" 3 games to advance in the AP Cup. So it makes sense that there would be some longer term advantage to doing well in those 3 AP Cup group games, or else there would be no sense in prioritising it over the FA Cup.

In other sports there's precedent for this. Take the NFL for instance, where Dave Dohm's Seahawks (erm, go Hawks) had home advantage throughout the playoffs due to their superior regular season record. Although the Superbowl is neural field.

Having read the rules...the part I think needs to change is how the teams are randomly drawn. It seems a little unfair that a manager can go all out and get the 3rd seed, and yet their first knockout game might still be away against Dave or Alon. Makes much more sense to me that the lowest seed would be away against the highest seed etc. The seeds could also be listed alongside the other tables, and I'm sure some "I knocked out the 1st seed" would go down well in match comments and on the comment wall.

In the excellent TMVL league (there's an opening for a coach - you should really check it out) the WGM Cup starts out as 8 groups of 4. Top of each group are seeded 1 to 8 (after that I'm not 100% sure) but all 32 teams are seeded for the knockout stages which is then fixed, with the best seed being at home including the final.

Ian makes a lot of good points here. 

I like the idea of seeding in the Cups. (Well done Ian)

From my experience with the World Cup competition, seeding would likely require manual review and input. That's not to deter the league from changing to a seeding format, just as a general FYI. This all assumes Al is willing to make such a change.

I personally like what I see as a good compromise:

* Random draw for opening round of FA Cup, AP Cup and Youth Cup (i.e. the current system)

* Seeding bracket dictates each knock out round for FA Cup, FA Shield, AP Cup and Youth Cup (not sure how teams would be seeded for the knock out round bracket for FA Cup, FA Shield and Youth Cup, so that requires some extra work from Ian)

* All finals played on a neutral pitch

I also like Ian's suggestion of seeding the knockout rounds.