Stacked Deck? the draw

[Too old too slow]

The dragons had the "second hardest draw" for 2015 according to an interesting synopsis By Dominic Brock...

http://m.nrl.com/how-tough-was-your-teams-2015-draw/tabid/10874/newsid/90538/default.aspx


"A team's success or failure each season depends on a lot of factors – injuries, playing talent, team harmony, coaching, key decisions in key moments. But one factor that can be hard to quantify is the effect of a "tough" or "easy" draw."

Given a harder draw, a run of injuries and lack of significant depth.. Perhaps 2015 could be viewed as a success.. Albeit with running the risk of upsetting those who think that may be settling for mediocrity.

Conversely, given other teams with "easier" draws and massive overs of the salary cap / TPA arrangements, could / should, be seen as a failure of a season.

 

[blacksafake]

Until there is a proper home & away system the draw will always be unfair.

 

[since77]

i have an idea for both shortening the season and keeping the draw fair and rewarding for consistent teams
1st half of season all teams play each other once.
Then second half of season teams who finished positions 1 to 8 only play teams who finished 9 -16, rewarding them for a good start to the season, while the teams who finished lower have to play and beat higher teams most of the way to the end of the regular season to make the semis.
This system gives the teams who get off to a good start a reward while also allows teams who had a poor start to the season the chance of a late run to the finals but only if they're good enough.
Add in one more thing - that for golden point games, the winners get 1.5 points and the losers 0.5 points. A team who loses a golden point game in the regular season should get something for their efforts. (interestingly, while I have always hated golden point, it seemed right in the grand final)

 

[bottle]

In a 16 team comp a top 8 finals system is ample compensation for the inequities of the draw. It's no accident that the Premiers almost always come from the top 4 finishers. The rest are there to make up the numbers, stretch out the finals games and end of season interest, and to extract more cash from fans, sponsors and networks.

 

[Slippery Morris]

Golden point should be 1 point for loser and 2 for winner. At least if you lose to golden point you get some reward for the 80 mins you played to get to golden point. Seems easy but we are talking NRL and they like to make things difficult when it comes to rules.

 

[bottle]

Easy would be a draw at full time in a regular season game is a point each.
Too easy in fact.

 

[possm]

I'd like to see a golden try be the decider with the winner getting two points and the loser getting one.

 

[Lethal25]

Personally I've never liked Origin taking 8 weeks of the season with players missing games and backing up. I feel this is an inequity that needs more attention, first step taken with one game being played on a weekend.

In 2011 we had something ridiculous like 9 players involved in one match and lost to the Titans who were woeful that year. From there we never recovered.

Interestingly of the 90 golden point matches played since it's introduction there's been 12 draws, much more than I thought.

Saints however have on of the poorest records in golden point winning just 3 of a possible 12 with one draw. The Dogs on the other hand have won 7 of 10.

With the competition so compressed between top and bottom golden point & origin luck of the draw has a big bearing on where teams might finish. In saying that I do appreciate that generally the better teams tend to shine through. But I'm sure there's supporters of teams out there blowing up about these issues as they're entitled to do

 

[hazzbeen]

Golden point should be 1 point for loser and 2 for winner. At least if you lose to golden point you get some reward for the 80 mins you played to get to golden point. Seems easy but we are talking NRL and they like to make things difficult when it comes to rules.

Slippery you are right on , have been thinking the same... After 80 min no team has been defeated so if the NRL want to play golden point then one team should be entitled to 1 point...

 

[Mr Red]

expand to an 18 team comp. central QLD and a second NZ team to give north and south island rivalry, or Perth.

NRL to increase salary caps and dip into their TV rights slush fund to bring back high profile ex NRL players and poach the best english players from superleague in order to boost playing depth to cover for the extra 2 teams.
by default English international team becomes stronger with more players in the NRL allowing for tougher international matches...

each team plays each other once, totalling 17 weeks + 8 team finals series.
season starts later in the year due to less rounds, allowing for a pre-season knockout comp with prize money instead of useless trial matches.

seson finishes a little earlier, allowing to properly facilitate international matches at end of season, and returning to a logical order of rep matches... ie city/country - state of origin - internationals.

the current notion of test matches before origins and having players picked for their country before they have proven themselves at origin level is ridiculous.

 

[Spud 13]

Probably the best idea ive heard so far!

expand to an 18 team comp. central QLD and a second NZ team to give north and south island rivalry, or Perth.

NRL to increase salary caps and dip into their TV rights slush fund to bring back high profile ex NRL players and poach the best english players from superleague in order to boost playing depth to cover for the extra 2 teams.
by default English international team becomes stronger with more players in the NRL allowing for tougher international matches...

each team plays each other once, totalling 17 weeks + 8 team finals series.
season starts later in the year due to less rounds, allowing for a pre-season knockout comp with prize money instead of useless trial matches.

seson finishes a little earlier, allowing to properly facilitate international matches at end of season, and returning to a logical order of rep matches... ie city/country - state of origin - internationals.

the current notion of test matches before origins and having players picked for their country before they have proven themselves at origin level is ridiculous.

 

[The Nick]

Slippery you are right on , have been thinking the same... After 80 min no team has been defeated so if the NRL want to play golden point then one team should be entitled to 1 point...

Personally I'd like to see Golden Point abolished for regular season matches, only bringing it in for finals, Origins and Tests.

For a regular season match there's nothing wrong with 2 teams walking away with 1 point each if they're drawn after 80mins.

I don't know the stats on it but just as an observation, if you look at teams backing up after going to Golden Point the week prior they always look more tired/sore/lethargic. A case in point is the Bulldogs in week 2 of the finals, they looked lame after going to Golden Point against us.

I know it's only an extra 10 mins (sometimes only a couple of minutes) but that extra effort really seems to take it out of the players and increases the risk of injury.

If the NRL is serious about shortening the season for player welfare, they can start by containing regular season matches to 80mins max.

 

[grandorient]

Agree to an extent.

Regular season, draw, 1 point each.

All others 5 or ten minutes each way followed by a golden point or try if still no score.

Don't know if the betting agencies would like that though.


GO

 

[St Georgio]

i like both ideas
1.17 rounds of footy or
2.Play each other once, then reward the quick starters to the season, playing the bottom teams.

I am a big believer of playing each team once to begin with!!!!!!

 

[bottle]

17 rounds=less TV exposure=less TV money=lower salary cap=more player losses

A shorter season in itself has some merit, but we need to be mindful of the outcomes.

 

[Mr Red]

17 rounds=less TV exposure=less TV money=lower salary cap=more player losses

A shorter season in itself has some merit, but we need to be mindful of the outcomes.

Regular season shorter = yes
Including second NZ team or Perth or another Qld team = more different time zones = more opportunity to show more matches on TV

Competiitive pre season tournament + proper rep matches at end of season also = opportunities for more TV matches

I do see your point but I do think with some creative thinking and match scheduling to take advantage of the numerous time zones plus end of season rep matches the TV matches will still total the same amount

 

[bottle]

Gotcha. Didn't pay enough attention to the pre season tourny comment.