The annual finals system debate thread

[zulu]

Give me the McIntyre system any day. It gives the top 2 teams a much greater advantage than in the AFL system, because they play the bottom two teams in the top eight and are guaranteed a second chance if they lose.

Sure, the 3rd and 4th teams can drop out in the first week if upsets occur, but they are given a home final against a team below them on the ladder. In the AFL system they must play a fellow top-four side away from home which is a must harder task.

Teams scraping into the eight must be forced to play the top sides.

Let's stick with it.

 

[Dr Crane]

The McIntyre system is fine.

The solution to avoiding getting knocked out is DONT LOSE. You have to win to win the comp, and you don't get knocked out if you win.

 

[bubs]

Players spend 26 rounds of the year for just one thing. A position on the NRL final 8 in round 1 of the semis.
The lower you are, the harder it is to continue in the finals series.
This year, we have had 7 beat 2, 6 beat 3, and 4 beat 5.
This is a suprise, however, you have to win finals games to continue.
Cowboys and Storm beat two premiership favourites AT THEIR HOME GROUND to continue.
They have paid their 'punishment' for finishing 6th and 7th respectively, and will now advance.
The DragQueens finished 5th and lost. TOUGH. (ps :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: ). You skid marks are OUT. If you had won, you would have had a week off. What a difference one point makes.
The higher you finish, the easier run you have through week 1 (and 2 if you get the week off). The lower you finish, the harder it is for you to advance.
The McIntyre Finals system is much fairer and rewards form. (And the Queens got kicked out as an added bonus!! )

 

[DJ1]

The biggest advantage of the McIntyre system is that it makes it possible for any 2 of the final 8 to meet in the GF. i.e. 28 possible GF combinations.

The AFL system does not allow this.

 

[The Observer]

What about the Top 7 system that the ARL used in 1997? ADVANTAGES OVER OTHER SYSTEMS
* Less than half the teams make the finals
* Incentive to finish 1st with top team getting week off.
* Removes 8th team from finals which rarely wins. This year, the 8th team lost more games than it won and had a -ve points differential but still made it.
* Still large enough number to make the competition exciting until round 26.

WEEK 1
A: 6th versus 7th [loser eliminated]
B: 4th versus 5th
C: 2nd versus 3rd

<1st place had week off>

WEEK 2
D: winner of A versus winner of B [loser eliminated]
E: loser of B versus loser of C [loser eliminated]
F: 1st versus winner of C

WEEK 3
G: loser of F versus winner of E (loser eliminated)
H: winner of F versus winner of D (H) (loser eliminated)

WEEK 4
Grand Final: winner of G versus winner of H

It a simple extension of the old five team format to seven teams, with a twist in the second week.

For this year, in Week 1 we would have had:
1 Roosters Bye
A 6 vs 7 Storm vs Cowboys - Melbourne
B 4 vs 5 Dragons vs Penrith - WIN PENRITH
C 2 vs 3 Dogs vs Brisbane - Telstra Stadium DOGS

 

[Man_of_Steel_1982]

Final Five!

The best and fairest system.

With 15 teams at the moment, bottom 10 end their season and the elite can go at it. First week would of been:

WEEK ONE:
*Roosters week off
Bulldogs vs Broncos
Panthers vs Dragons (loser eliminated)

WEEK TWO: just some examples ;-)
Roosters vs Bulldogs
Broncos vs Panthers (loser eliminated)

WEEK THREE:
Bulldogs vs Panthers

WEEK FOUR:
Roosters vs Panthers

;-)

The top five is definately the fairest system. The minor premiers get a week off and are only one win away from the GF. Teams 2 and 3 get a second bite at the cherry, while 4 and 5 are into sudden death.

Nothing more exciting than watching teams fighting to be 'alive in the five'.

 

[The Observer]

The top five format is the best and fairest system, but the NRL will not adopt it because they will lose the money they make on extra finals games. The same goes with a top 6.

 

[simostorm]

I reckon the McIntyre system is fine, it always builds up to the best game of the year, why change it when it has produced perfect results. The best team has won since its been used.

 

[thuganomics]

I perfer the McIntyre system.

 

[jamesgould]

I read somewhere (either SMH or RLW) that Warren Ryan's finals system is expected to gain support in the next few weeks. What do you guys think of it? (I assume that it's the same one I tracked down from a SMH article a few years ago)

The Ryan system



WEEK 1 Game 1: 5 v 8, Game 2: 6 v 7, Game 3: 2 v 3, Game 4: 1 v 4. *Highest-ranked winner to Week 3, lowest-ranked loser eliminated. WEEK 2 Game 5: top-4 highest loser v bottom-4 lowest winner. Game 6: top-4 lowest loser v bottom-4 highest winner. Game 7: top-4 2nd highest winner v bottom-4 2nd lowest loser. *All losers eliminated. WEEK 3 Game 8: highest winner week 1 v lowest winner week 2. Game 9: highest winner week 2 v 2nd highest winner week 2. *Losers eliminated. WEEK 4 - Grand final

 

[Razor]

That's a good system

 

[Raiders Plight]

It's the best top 8 system i've seen.

 

[Balmain_Boy]

So potentially 2nd place can win their first game, lose their second game and they're gorn? I don't rate that...

 

[Misty Bee]

Yeah, really great when the team that comes 5th gets the easiest game. Example - Melbourne v Manly would be a bigger flogging than Parra v Wests

 

[yobbo84]

That system should NEVER be adopted unless it is tweaked.

No matter what the result is for teams coming 4th and 5th in week one, they go through to the Week 2.

If, say this season that was in place, and Brisbane come 4th.. tell me they wouldn't rest some key players in Week 1 of the finals?

 

[wittyfan]

The McIntyre system is probably not perfect, but it does work pretty well I think.

 

[Razor]

So potentially 2nd place can win their first game, lose their second game and they're gorn? I don't rate that...

And that's the case now. 2nd place win their first match. Lose their 2nd match. And they're out.

 

[Meanie]

And that's the case now. 2nd place win their first match. Lose their 2nd match. And they're out.

But they get a week off.

 

[yobbo84]

What about the system they used to have in the 20's and 30's??

Top 3...

1st straight into Final
2nd v 3rd, winner to Final, loser eliminated

If 1st win the Final, they are the premiers
If winner of 2 v 3 wins the Final, they go to a Grand Final re-match

Winner of GF wins the comp.

How strange is that??

 

[Front-Rower]

Is that Ryans Final System cause its a bit messy to understand up in the first post:

Week 1

non-elimination
Game 1: 1 v 4 Winner to Week 3
Game 2: 2 v 3 Winner to Week 3

Elimination

Game 3: 5 v 8 Winner to Week 2 loser out
Game 4: 6 v 7 Winner to Week 2 loser out

Week 2

Game 5: Highest Ranked Loser (from game 1 or 2) V Highest Ranked Winner (from game 3 or 4)
Game 6: 2nd Highest Ranked Loser (from game 1 or 2) V Second Highest Ranked Winner (from game 3 or 4)

Week 3

Highest Ranked Winner Rd 1 V Winner game 5
2nd Highest ranked winner Rd 1 V Winner game 6

Week 4

Grand Final

Personally I believe thats a much more fairer system and gives teams incentive to get in the top 4 rather than just having a home semi.