The annual finals system debate thread

[mongoose]

Top 6 would be ideal imo except i don't think there is a fair top 6 system.

 

[Dragonsforthewin]

The NRL makes more money with more teams playing so they wont change it.

A top 5 or 6 is alot more rewarding.

 

[El Diablo]

because the AFL currently use it and we don't...thats why I call it the AFL system. Pretty simple really.

but they also call the one we use as the AFL's system because they used to use it

 

[RalthFilthy]

The finals should be about the best playing the best.

I agree, the old GFs had a bit more feeling in them when the two teams had met 2 weeks earlier in the major semi.
We don't really get that with this system, since the McIntyre system has been in place how often have the 1st and 2nd(minor prem.) met in the GF? or even played each other in the finals?
I'd love to see a top 5 or 6, but if I had to pick a top 8 format it would have to be the AFL one, 2 big games and 2 knockout games in the 1st round and every team knows where they stand. In the NRL 2 teams know they are playing knockout games against 2 teams that are playing for a week off and the other four know it's better to win but have know idea if they're in or out with a loss.
Also if you finish 6th and lose you should not be taking any further part. Stupid system.

 

[El Diablo]

Also if you finish 6th and lose you should not be taking any further part. Stupid system.

that is the biggest flaw imo

 

[yobbo84]

A 5 week, Top 7 would be the best I reckon! I haven't given it THAT much thought but here goes:

Week 1

Game A - 2 v 7
Game B - 3 v 6
Game C - 4 v 5

Highest Ranking Winner to Week 3, Two Lowest Ranking Losers Eliminated

Week 2

Game D - 1 v 3rd Highest Ranking Winner
Game E - 2nd Highest Ranking Winner vs 3rd Lowest Ranking Loser (Loser Eliminated)

Week 3

Game F - Winner Game A v Winner Game D
Game G - Loser Game D v Winner Game E (Loser Eliminated)

Week 4

Game H - Loser Game F v Winner Game G (Loser Eliminated)

Week 5

Game I - Winner Game F v Winner Game H

 

[RHYTHM AND STEALTH]

Why wasnt Bennett moaning about it last year, oh thats right his team finished higher than 8th

 

[Lockyer4President!]

why do people call it the AFL system :?

the ARL used it first in 95 and 96

I was going to post the same thing.

 

[pantherz9103]

Also if you finish 6th and lose you should not be taking any further part. Stupid system.

All the more reason for why I'd like to see the Eels knock out the Dogs (I also have a bet on eels going further than dogs). The Bulldogs have had 12 wins and 13 losses yet they are still alive in week 2 of the finals :crazy:

 

[In-goal]

I love the top 6 system the crowds would be right up for that system becuase the top 6 system keeps only the cream.

7th and 8th do they really need to be in the finals?

Should we award mediocrity?

16 teams with 50% of clubs in the finals is a joke

 

[The Engineers Room]

I don't buy into the whole more losses than wins makes you not worthy. This competition can be so tight that it is very possible the 6th placed team can be in that situation.

Top 7 System 1:

This is a progressive style so going into the first week teams take points advantages in as follows:

1 - 3pts
2 - 3pts
3 - 1pts
4 - 1pts
5 - 1pts
6 - 1pts
7 - 0pts

(bye is worth 2 points)

Week 1 (1st legs)
1 v bye
2 v 7
3 v 6
4 v 5

Week 2 (2nd legs)
2 v bye
1 v 7
3 v 5
4 v 6

Teams are then ranked based on the first two weeks

Week 3
1 v 4
2 v 3

Week 4 (GF)
1 v 2

Top 6 System 2:

Also progressive:

Two pools; 1-4-6 & 2-3-5

Initial points:
1 - 1pts
2 - 1pts
3 - 0pts
4 - 0pts
5 - 0pts
6 - 0pts

Week 1
1 v bye
2 v bye
3 v 5
4 v 6

Week 2
4 v bye
1 v 6
3 v bye
2 v 5

Lowest team in each pool eliminated.

Highest initially ranked winner of pool becomes team 1 and teams are ranked thus

Week 3

1 v 2
3 v 4 (elimination)

Week 4
loser 1v2 v winner 3v4 (elimination)

GF
winner 1v2 v winner week 4

 

[Azkatro]

I don't buy into the whole more losses than wins makes you not worthy. This competition can be so tight that it is very possible the 6th placed team can be in that situation.

Top 7 System 1:

This is a progressive style so going into the first week teams take points advantages in as follows:

1 - 3pts
2 - 3pts
3 - 1pts
4 - 1pts
5 - 1pts
6 - 1pts
7 - 0pts

(bye is worth 2 points)

Week 1 (1st legs)
1 v bye
2 v 7
3 v 6
4 v 5

Week 2 (2nd legs)
2 v bye
1 v 7
3 v 5
4 v 6

Teams are then ranked based on the first two weeks

Week 3
1 v 4
2 v 3

Week 4 (GF)
1 v 2

Top 6 System 2:

Also progressive:

Two pools; 1-4-6 & 2-3-5

Initial points:
1 - 1pts
2 - 1pts
3 - 0pts
4 - 0pts
5 - 0pts
6 - 0pts

Week 1
1 v bye
2 v bye
3 v 5
4 v 6

Week 2
4 v bye
1 v 6
3 v bye
2 v 5

Lowest team in each pool eliminated.

Highest initially ranked winner of pool becomes team 1 and teams are ranked thus

Week 3

1 v 2
3 v 4 (elimination)

Week 4
loser 1v2 v winner 3v4 (elimination)

GF
winner 1v2 v winner week 4

I've got a slightly simplier system. I call it the Azkatro Top 1 Finals System. It goes like this:

First placed team: Winner

That's it.

 

[Crippler]

SOmeone rang 2sm with the idea

I thought it was quite good but still think the AFL systems the best

His one was

top 6 System

WEek 1
1 v 2 (Team 1s home ground)
3 v 6 (loser eliminated) Say team 3 wins
4 v 5 (Loser Eliminated) Say team 4 wins

Week 2
1 v 2 ( team 2s Home ground) Win 2 games go Straight to Grand final, if games are tied 1 game all Best For and against goes through to Grand final

Winner of Sudden death matches

3 v 4

Week 3

Team 1 or 2 that doesnt qualify for GF plays winner of 3 v 4

Winner of that plays against team 1 or 2 who qualified for Grand final in week 2.

Advantages

Creates rivarly between teams 1 and 2 if they end up meeting in grand final.

Lead to much higher quality games

Teams 1 and 2 at least one of them are guaranteed a grand final spot

teams 1 and 2 can afford to lose 2 games and still make the grand final.

Teams 3 to 6 play all games sudden death

If teams one and 2 go through 26 rounds ending in the top 2 they deserve and get a huge advantage to make the grand final

 

[mepelthwack]

Name me a credible top 8 finals system that doesn't have this problem.

Sure, introducing my system (The GlennC System or Clarke System) yet again :-


BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF CLARKE SYSTEM

- Assume Higher Ranked Team always wins each game. E = Elimination Semi

WEEK 1 (all teams listed first receive a home semi-final)
1 v 4 (Winner Advances to Wk 3)
2 v 3 (Winner Advances to Wk 3)
5 v 8 E
6 v 7 E

As can be seen, every team has an advantage or disadvantage regarding the teams above and below them based purely on their end of season finish. eg 1st has an advantage over 2nd in that 1st gets to play team 4 while 2nd has the harder game against team 3. Teams 3 and 4 have an advantage over the bottom 4 by not having to play a sudden death game.



WEEK 2 (all teams listed first receive a home semi-final)
3 v 6 E
4 v 5 E

This is where the beauty of this system really starts to kick in. The advantages of finishing top 4 are there for all to see. Despite losing their week one semis the top 4 teams deservedly get a home semi in their next match against the surviving bottom 4 teams. The winning teams from the qualifying semis in week 1 have earned the right to a week off and no prospect of being eliminated.




WEEK 3 (All games at neutral venues, eg SFS)
1 v 2 (Winner Advances to GF)
3 v 4 E

Loser of Grand Final Qualifier still gets a second bite of the cherry in Week 4.



WEEK 4 (Game held at a neutral venue, eg Stadium Australia)
2 v 3 E

All or nothing shot at getting to the big one.




WEEK 5 - GRAND FINAL (Stadium Australia)
1 v 2


CLARKE SYSTEM vs McINTYRE SYSTEM

· Clarke System: Top 4 is properly rewarded compared to Teams 5 – 8. All Top 4 teams can only be eliminated by two (2) losses in the finals. Bottom 4 always play sudden death.
McIntyre System: Only Top 2 are guaranteed second chance. On the one hand, the McIntyre System makes it possible for Teams 3 and/or 4 to be eliminated in Week 1 after one
loss. On the other hand, the same McIntyre System makes it possible for Teams 5 & 6 to get a second chance despite losing in Week 1. Unlike the McIntyre
System, a fair system like the Clarke System provides potential rewards to teams that are clear and consistent, not variable based on other results, and only to those
teams deserving of them (eg no 2nd chance for bottom 4 under any circumstances).


· Clarke System: All match ups ensure higher ranked team gets the most favourable draw.
McIntyre System: A losing team from Week 1 may have an easier game in Week 2 than the team that beat them in Week 1.
Eg in 2002, Roosters (4) beat Sharks (5) in Week 1, but in Week 2, it was Roosters (4) v Newcastle (2) and the Sharks (5) v Dragons (7). Despite beating the
Sharks in Week 1, the Roosters faced a potentially tougher game than the Sharks in Week 2.


· Clarke System: At least one Grand Finalist is guaranteed to come from the Top 4.
McIntyre System: A Grand Final between 7 v 8 is possible, potentially damaging the credibility of the 26 round season.


· Clarke System: No possible Grand Final combination between top 4 teams is excluded by the system for teams that continue to win.
McIntyre System: After Week 1, some Grand Final combinations are no longer possible because those teams will meet in the Week 3 Grand Final Qualifier.
Eg in 2002, after Week 1, a Brisbane v Roosters Grand Final was not possible, even though both teams won in Week 1.


· Clarke System: Five (5) Week Final Series with ten (10) games – longer showcase of top teams and additional revenue from the extra game. As it is a 5 week series, Semis can
return to their traditional starting time of the first week in September and the Grand Final can still be played on the October Long Weekend.
McIntyre System: Four (4) Week Final Series with nine (9) games. With Grand Final now on first weekend of October, September now includes the final competition round, rather
than being solely dedicated to Semi Finals football as has been the long standing tradition in Rugby League.


· Clarke System: Loser of the Grand Final qualifying game in Week 3 (Major Semi Final) gets a second chance in the Final (like old Top 5).
McIntyre system: Minor Premiers could beat team 8 in Week 1, but then lose Grand Final Qualifier in Week 3 and be OUT.



Other Advantages

· Use of Home Semi Finals provide significant advantage and reward to teams finishing higher on the ladder than their visiting opponents.
· Given it is a “National” Competition, Home Semi Finals in Week 2 (as well as in Week 1) provide the opportunity for more Final Series Matches to be played outside Sydney, with the teams gaining that advantage based on having earned it during the 26 rounds of the premiership.
· After Week 2, Clarke System is structured very closely like the old Top 5 system, with all its advantages.

Nb - This was written originally in 1999 obviously years before this years home advantages implemented after week 1 for the first time. I just copied and pasted an older version.

 

[The Engineers Room]

I like that system with the double 1 v 2 system

I propose a top 8 like that

Week 1
1 v bye
2 v bye
3 v 8
4 v 7
5 v 6
Losest two losers eliminated

Week 2
1 v 2 (1st leg)
Highest winner v Highest loser (loser eliminated) - game d
2nd Winner v 3rd winner (loser eliminated) - game e

Week 3
2 v 1 (second leg)
winner game d v winner game e (loser eliminated) - game f

Week 4
Loser (1-2) v winner game f (loser eliminated) - game g

Week 5 (GF)
winner (1-2) v winner game g

Although I would make it if the 2 legs are 1 all then team 1 makes it due to their higher ranking.

 

[mongoose]

I came up with this top 6 system.
winners in bold

Week 1

1 v 6
2 v 5
3 v 4
- highest rank winner advances to week 3
- lowest rank loser is eliminated

Week 2

-2 remaining winners from week 1 play each other
-2 remaining losers from week 1 play each other

2 v 4 - winner advances to GF, loser eliminated
3 v 5 - winner advances to week 3, loser eliminated

Week 3

1 v 3 - winner to GF, loser eliminated

GF

1 v 2

 

[nqboy]

The Clarke system looks superior to McIntyre but I haven't heard from its detractors yet.

 

[eel01s]

The only drawback of both the Clarke system and the old final 5 is that team 1 or 2 can potentially have 2 weeks off during the finals series, which history shows is a major momentum killer!!!

Other than that, the Clarke system is a very good alternative and really provides an incentive to finish higher up the ladder.

 

[Hass]

SOmeone rang 2sm with the idea

I thought it was quite good but still think the AFL systems the best

His one was

top 6 System

WEek 1
1 v 2 (Team 1s home ground)
3 v 6 (loser eliminated) Say team 3 wins
4 v 5 (Loser Eliminated) Say team 4 wins

Week 2
1 v 2 ( team 2s Home ground) Win 2 games go Straight to Grand final, if games are tied 1 game all Best For and against goes through to Grand final

Winner of Sudden death matches

3 v 4

Week 3

Team 1 or 2 that doesnt qualify for GF plays winner of 3 v 4

Winner of that plays against team 1 or 2 who qualified for Grand final in week 2.

That's the same as the system used in the UK Super League - the only exception being that Super League gives teams 1 and 2 the first week off.

The advantage of having the 1 v 2 match-up played over two legs is that no team can lose momentum by having two weeks off in a four-week period.

Any system worth its salt needs to get down to this equation with three weeks to go.

a) 1 v 2 - winner to GF
b) 3 v 4 - loser out

c) loser of a v winner of b

d) winner of a v winner of c

The old Final 5 does this. The Super League Final 6 does this. The Clarke/Clenn C Final 8 does this and the "Crippler Final 6" quoted above does this.

Any other system is unrewarding because it forces the minor premiers to win a sudden death match to make the Grand Final. If you're going to have a finals system it should reward the minor premiers or you might as well have straight knock-out from the start.

I prefer the Final 5 because, not only is it proven, but it follows a logical progression. Each team has to beat all the sides above them (without exception) to win the Premiership. Teams 1-3 also have to lose twice to miss out on the Grand Final.

But if we must have more teams I can be stretched to 6 and support either of the Final 6 systems mentioned in this thread.

Cheers.

 

[NK Arsenal]

AFL top 8 FTW!