The annual finals system debate thread

[mepelthwack]

No offence but that is just the same system I wrote in 1999 and have put up once a year ever since. BTW, the NRL already has it.

It is flawless and fair. The system need to be 5 weeks to be that way.

Here is how I typed it up last time (original source RLeague.com)

-----------

Once again, here is my system : -

By simply adding 1 week and reverting to week 2 of the old top 5 by week 3, all flaws get eliminated and all top 4 sides gain 2 bites regardless of any results. All bottom 4 play constant elimination as they should. It's fair and all matches mean something. With the Gold Coast being admitted the season can reduce to 22 weeks to accomodate this.

In this example assume the highest ranked team wins but remember no matter who wins the top 4 all get 2 bites and the bottom 4 always play sudden death.

E = elimination

WEEK 1 (HOME team 1st)

1 v 4
2 v 3

(winners above advance to GF qualifier week 3, losers get home advantage in week 2 v bottom 4 winners which is more reward for their top 4 finish)

5 v 8 E
6 v 7 E

WEEK 2 (HOME team 1st)

3 v 6 E
4 v 5 E

WEEK 3 (all games from now on neutral venues and the system now flows EXACTLY as it did from week 2 of the old top 5 from here on)

1 v 2 (winner advances to the Grand Final, loser gets their 2nd bite nxt wk)

3 v 4 E

WEEK 4

2 v 3 E

WEEK 5

1 v 2 (Grand Final)

This series is only 1 game extra over what we have now and eliminates all flaws. 1 of the top 4 sides will only play 3 games in 5 weeks BUT this is no different to 1 side only playing 2 games in 4 weeks in the old top 5 system. History has shown the very good sides overcame this and arguments raged whether it was better to have the week off or to play throughout.

 

[mepelthwack]

The big problem I see with that system is if you finish first and stay undefeated through the finals you will only play 2 games in 5 weeks leading into a GF. Imagine having a bye in the week leading into the Semis?

2 games in 6 weeks could be a possibility.

3 games in 5 weeks.

The Minor Premiers in the old Top 5 often had the exact same circumstances and lo and behold the best of the MP's back then still won the Premiership.

 

[Raider Azz]

i don't like it. like whats already been said, there's a possibility of a team playing only twice in 6 weeks. that wouldn't be an advantage, that'd be a seriosuly disadvantage especially leading into a grand final. and it's basically the afl system with an extra week added on for absolutely no reason.

 

[wittyfan]

I'm devising a Final 12 system which is fair and equitable to all teams.

 

[Balmain_Boy]

TBH, I don't think there is a perfect top 8 system. They're all going to disadvantage a team. The most important thing is to make sure the top 4-6 are the best off they can be

 

[forward pass]

Why do teams 5 and 6 get to play the two weakest opponents in week 1? That advantage should be given to the top 2 sides not the 5th and 6th best.

And 5 weeks is way too long - how can we fit in another week?

I can see you have put a bit of thought into it though.

 

[Bomber]

Raider_azz - the AFL system used to be the ARL system. ;-)

Here is my hashed attempt at a finals system. I believe this is very close to the Warren Ryan system.

I'll use the 2005 finishing table as an example. The winner in each game is the higher ranked team.

Week One - Qualifying Finals
Lowest loser is eliminated

Friday - QF1 - 1st v 2nd - Parramatta v St George Illawarra
Saturday 6:30 - QF2 - 3rd v 4th - Brisbane v Wests Tigers
Saturday 8:30 - QF3 - 5th v 6th - North Qld v Melbourne
Sunday 4:00 - QF4 - 7th v 8th - Cronulla v Manly

Teams are ranked as follows:
1. Winner QF1 - Parramatta
2. Loser QF1 - Dragons
3. Highest Winner QF2/3/4 - Brisbane
4. Second Winner QF2/3/4 - Cowboys
5. Lowest Winner QF2/3/4 - Cronulla
6. Second Loser QF2/3/4 - Melbourne
7. Highest Loser QF2/3/4 - Wests
8. Lowest Loser QF2/3/4 - Manly

(Originally Melbourne was ranked seventh, Wests sixth. Teams swapped to avoid repeat final - Brisbane v Wests - on consecuitive weeks)

Team 1 goes to Week 3, Team 8 is eliminated. Team 2 gets a home semi in Week Two (advantage of finishing in Top 2), other games at neutral venues

Week Two - Elimination Finals
Losers eliminated
9. Team 2 v Team 7 - St George Illawarra v Wests Tigers - WIN Stadium
10. Team 3 v Team 6 - Brisbane v Melbourne - Aussie Stadium
11. Team 4 v Team 5 - North Queensland v Cronulla - Aussie Stadium

Week Three - Preliminary Finals
Winners go to Grand Final
12. Highest ranked winner of Games 9/10/11 v Second ranked winner of 9/10/11 - St George Illawarra v Brisbane - Aussie Stadium
13. Winner 1 v Lowest ranked winner of Games 9/10/11 - Parramatta vs North Queensland - Telstra Stadium

Week Four - Grand Final

I'm sure someone could find a whole heap of flaws with this system. ;-)

 

[NRL_man]

5 weeks seems a little excessive.

I fail to see the advantage of that system over the AFL system. Your system takes the AFL system and adds an extra week for no apparent reason.

Very strange.

The AFL system and this system are exactly the same until Week 3. I think the AFL system is flawed in the way that they do a silly thing by swapping over the teams playing in the third week ie. 1 vs 3, 2 vs 4 so as to avoid a repeat of Week 1. What's the point of having rankings then? As before, an advantage of the extra week is an extra game which provides more income. Looking at the system from Week 3 onwards, I believe that if you were a proponent of the old ARL top 5 system, then you can't deny that this top 8 suits you the most.

 

[forward pass]

If anyone can can up with a formula that will result in Parra winning the comp - I say lets go with that one !!

 

[Cheesie-the-Pirate]

I see what you're saying.

However, one must weigh the advantages against the disadvantages. I'm not sure that preventing the potential for in week for 1st to play 3rd and 2nd to play 4th is sufficient to :

a) add an extra week of finals
b) force one team to have two byes in 5 weeks

Finding a perfect Top 8 system is very difficult, no doubt. I'm not sure this is the solution. I'm yet to see a system with a sufficiently high balance of advantages over McIntyre to warrant change.

It has taken me a while but I've got over what happened to Saints in 2004.

 

[NRL_man]

Looks alright. I'll wait for more detailed analysis that I can't be shagged to do and comment from the people who do it before committing myself fully.

How do you see the home games being allocated?

Well I guess I would allocate it as such:

Week 1 - Teams 1,2,5,6 have home ground advantage
Week 2 - Loser Games 1 & 2 have home ground advantage
Week 3 - Highest Ranked Winners Game 1/2 & Game 5/6 have home ground adv.
Week 4 - No home ground advantage
Week 5 - No home ground advantage

 

[Bumble]

If anyone can can up with a formula that will result in Parra winning the comp - I say lets go with that one !!

Week 1:

Parramatta vs Bye
St George vs Souths
Wests vs Cronulla
Manly vs Roosters
Bulldogs vs Knights
Broncos vs Warriors
Cowboys vs Panthers
Raiders vs Storm

All teams not with a bye are eliminated.

 

[OVP]

If anyone can can up with a formula that will result in Parra winning the comp - I say lets go with that one !!

:lol: Id like another one for the Roosters as well :lol:

We could share it ... sif Fitzgerald wouldnt be in on the scam. Uncle Nick might even buy him a car or 20 ;-)

 

[*Paul*]

Any finals system is inherently unfair: the minor premier has already won the comp.

If we are going to have them, and we are, 1v8, 2v7 etc. knockout. Every game sudden death.

 

[Man_of_Steel_1982]

The 5 week system is definately the best.

Under this proposed top 8, the minor premiers have to lose twice before bowing out. Unlike the current system (and the AFL system), where a team can go undefeated all year but lose their major semi final and it's all over.

 

[Crusher]

I'm sure most would agree the current finals system is flawed. Below is a competition formula I have seen previously which seems to have merit.

1. Two divisions of 8 teams allocated based on previous years points tally.
2. Each team plays their own division twice (14 games) and the other division once (8 games) = 22 round competition.
3. Top 4 from each division play off in the finals

Week 1:
1 vs 2
3 vs 4
The loser of 3 vs 4 is out (say 4), the winner plays the loser of 1 v 2 (say 2)
The winner of 1 vs 2 (say 1) has next week off

Week 2:
(1) week off
2 v 3
The loser out (say 3) with the winner playing (1) for a spot in the GF

Week 3:
1 v 2
The winner is in the GF against the winner of the other division.

Very simple and still gives all teams a 50/50 chance of making the finals. Does anyone have another alternative?

 

[innsaneink]

So youre proposing the two initial divions as:

1st
3rd
5th
7th
9th
11th
13th
15th

and

2nd
4th
6th
8th
10th
12th
14th
16th


9th does it tougher than 8th

 

[Crusher]

So youre proposing the two initial divions as:

1st
3rd
5th
7th
9th
11th
13th
15th

and

2nd
4th
6th
8th
10th
12th
14th
16th


9th does it tougher than 8th

agreed....based on previous years points tallies yes, but other things come into it.

2nd may have been the best side then again 8th may have lost some players.

Its really the only fair way to split teams into divisions without creating an imbalance. Every system will have flaws but geez the current one is skewed against the minor premiers. If Storm for example finish first or second and win game one they get a week off. If they lose the week after they're gone...What happened to the second chance.

 

[Timmah]

What merit? Splitting a final series in half? There are no more or less finals matches played than the current system. Of the final eight, you'll only be better than x amount of teams from your own division before meeting the best of the other division.

Furthermore, Of the 16 sides, your side could finish 5th overall, but still miss the final series because a team who scored less competition points came 4th in the other division.

It ain't broke, don't need fixin.

 

[Timmah]

Every system will have flaws but geez the current one is skewed against the minor premiers. If Storm for example finish first or second and win game one they get a week off. If they lose the week after they're gone...What happened to the second chance.

Ummm, your system and the current one do the exact same thing. Winner 1 plays the first week, if they win, they go to Week 3, if they lose, they're gone. I fail to see in either system where a second chance isn't given.