The annual finals system debate thread

[pcpp]

Here's another potential finals system I just thought of:

Split the final 8 into 2 groups of 4

Group 1: 1,4,5,8
Group 2: 2,3,6,7

Each team plays each other in the group once. Higher ranking team always gets home advantage (1st/2nd get 3 home games, 3rd/4th get 2, 5th/6th get 1, 7th/8th get none).

You could give higher ranking teams an additional advantage by always giving the higher ranking team priority on the ladder if multiple teams finish on the same number of wins (regardless of For/Against).

Here's how it would work

Week 1

1 v 8
2 v 7
3 v 6
4 v 5

Week 2

1 v 5
2 v 6
3 v 7
4 v 8

Week 3

1 v 4
2 v 3
5 v 8
6 v 7

Week 4 - Top two from each group

1st Group 1 v 2nd Group 2
1st Group 2 v 2nd Group 1

Week 5

Grand Final

Advantages: More games = more money, clear advantages for finishing higher, best (most competitive) games are saved for last
Disadvantages: Too many games?, one week longer, third week games could be dead rubbers

 

[Gaba]

Ever heard of for and against???

So whats wrong with the current finals system then

placings are decided on for and against

team 1 to 4 get home advantage in week 1 and if the lower ranked teams beat them, the lower ranked team deserve to be given the advantage for beating a higher ranked team.

why should teams 1 to 4 still get an advantage in week 2 if they lose to a lower ranked team in week 1

or if you want to go through the afl sytem


why should the loser of the 1 vs 4 and 2 v 3 get an extra advantage of an home game when they already had the advantage of the 2nd chance


I think home game finals week 1 and netural grounds up to the grand final like they done before bringing this home ground for finals in

 

[Man_of_Steel_1982]

So whats wrong with the current finals system then

placings are decided on for and against

team 1 to 4 get home advantage in week 1 and if the lower ranked teams beat them, the lower ranked team deserve to be given the advantage for beating a higher ranked team.

why should teams 1 to 4 still get an advantage in week 2 if they lose to a lower ranked team in week 1

or if you want to go through the afl sytem


why should the loser of the 1 vs 4 and 2 v 3 get an extra advantage of an home game when they already had the advantage of the 2nd chance


I think home game finals week 1 and netural grounds up to the grand final like they done before bringing this home ground for finals in

What's wrong with the way things are now? An entire season's effort means nothing after week 1.

Why should the loser of 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 get an extra advantage? Because the lower teams shouldn't receive an advantage for one good game over higher ranked sides - teams that are more deserved of that advantage through their superior season performance.

 

[Gaba]

What's wrong with the way things are now? An entire season's effort means nothing after week 1.

.

Yep thats why every game is sudden death in the finals, the finals is a different comp

Because the lower teams shouldn't receive an advantage for one good game over higher ranked sides - teams that are more deserved of that advantage through their superior season performance.

That's what the finals all about , what ever teams perform better or worst on the day wins finals , and grand finals

 

[Surely]

So whats wrong with the current finals system then

it is decided on for and against

If the sharks win tonight its probable the roosters get to play a home game against them next week, despite finishing fourth and losing.

 

[Gaba]

If the sharks win tonight its probable the roosters get to play a home game against them next week, despite finishing fourth and losing.

Yes ,but the sharks have a choice though they can take it to anz,or to any other ground like suncorp

Thats the problem with these home grounds some of them dont fit under the criteria , thats why the nrl should go back to neutral grounds , then there would be no disadvantages

 

[Marshall_magic]

The only fairness you can have in the finals is having a knock out all the way through , team who finish first gets the advantage by playing the lowest ranked team in the finals series

1 vs 8 loser knock out
2 vs 3 loser out
4 vs 5 loser out
6 vs 7 loser out



where a team gets flogged or having 40 or 50 points put on them do not get a 2nd chance

if a team 8 beats team 1 which has a bad day and loses so be it ,

under any current finals format a team can get flogged and get a 2nd chance

Don't mind a straight knock out system. If you rank first and can't beat 8th, or vice versa, you don't deserve to be premiers. In the past 4 seasons, twice we've seen the eventual premiers lose their opening finals game (Broncos in 06 and Bulldogs in 04), under the new system they wouldn't have this luxury.

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/nrl/story/0,27074,24343193-14823,00.html

Time to scrap McIntyre system

By James Hooper | September 14, 2008 12:00am


THE NRL must scrap the McIntyre finals system, according to an array of past and present greats.

While the AFL's alternate format continues to receive widespread acclaim, NRL officials have come under fire for sticking with the format the AFL scrapped in 1999.

Wests Tigers star Robbie Farah and Panthers great Greg Alexander have both branded the NRL's McIntyre system as flawed.

Rugby League Players Association president Simon Woolford will lobby the NRL to jettison the current system in light of calls for it to be dumped by respected commentator Matthew Johns.

In the AFL, the top four teams and the bottom four teams play each other in the first week of the finals.

The bottom four teams face sudden-death elimination, with teams five and six gaining home-ground advantages.

"I've sided with the NRL in the past on this one but more recently I've had a change of opinion,'' Alexander said.

"The anomalies that happen in weeks two and three make the system flawed.

"Week one is also not as attractive as the AFL system. The AFL system is better.

"Elimination semi-finals between the bottom four sides is a better scenario.

"Teams five and six get home semi-finals in the first week, but you get a whole new mix of games in weeks two and three.''

In the first week of the AFL finals, the Western Bulldogs finished third and lost to second-placed Hawthorn. Having secured a top-four finish, they were guaranteed a second chance in a home final.

The Bulldogs then met the Swans last Friday night at the MCG and won, meaning they advance to the grand final qualifier against minor premiers Geelong next Friday.

The variety of the AFL finals appeals to Farah, who played a leading role in the Tigers' premiership in 2005.

"You get better games under the AFL format. If you finish 4th and 5th, you're pretty much just swapping teams,'' Farah said.

"It would be better if you finished in the bottom four of the top eight, then you were facing elimination in the first week of the finals.

"And it would give the teams that finish seventh and eighth more of a chance.

"The first week of the finals would be even more exciting.''

Woolford intends to raise the possibility of changing the system with the NRL.

However, NRL chief operating officer Graeme Annesley defended the current format, outlining how clubs had voted it in on three occasions.

"If you follow the AFL system then you disadvantage the teams that finish first and second and you advantage the teams that finish seventh and eighth,'' Annesley said.

just go back to the 95/96 one. never heard any complaints about it and the AFL have now copied it

 

[adamkungl]

Yawwwwn. Every system has flaws. People bitched and moaned about the old one. I just don't remember why.

 

[Bobby DIGital]

I remember in 95 the Raiders finished 2nd, and had to play 3rd placed Brisbane in Brisbane. We won anyway. But were bundled out by the Dogs in the GF qualifier.

I'd like to see top 7.

 

[Bowhunter]

Here's how you do it, lads.

Monday after the final round of regular season you get the 8 coaches together for a televised "finals draw". There are 4 slots:

Friday night
Saturday night 1st game
Saturday night 2nd game
Sunday game

The coach whose team finished first gets first pick. He can choose any slot he wants. 2nd place team gets 2nd pick. 3rd place gets 3rd pick, and so on and so forth, until 8th team gets whatever slot is left. The higher ranked team in each slot gets home field advantage. The two highest ranked winners from the first week get the next week off. The two lowest ranked losers are goneski.

Let's see how this might have worked out with this year's top 8.

Bellamy wants as much recovery time as possible, he takes the Sunday slot. Hasler wants recovery time also, but doesn't want to give up a home ground final, especially against the storm. He's also not keen on an 8:30 kick off. He takes Saturday first game. Stuart wants no part of the Storm or the Eagles in week one. He takes Saturday 2nd game. Fittler isn't keen on a Friday night game. He fancies his chances against the Sharks. He also knows that making a 3 v 4 game means that both Manly and the Storm would have to lose for him to be eliminated in week 1. He rolls the dice and elects to fill the slot beside the sharks. Bennett snaps up a Broncos home final on a Friday night. The Raiders do not fancy a trip to Brisbane, and Olympic park is out of the question. Manly has been faltering and Henry sees them as the most viable option. He takes the slot against Manly. Brown reluctantly takes the Broncos. The warriors are left with Melbourne.

Game 1: Broncos (5) vs Dragons (7)
Game 2: Sea Eagles (2) vs Raiders (6)
Game 3: Sharks (3) vs Roosters (4)
Game 4: Storm (1) vs Warriors (8)

Let's assume higher ranking teams win.

Next week:

Sharks vs Raiders
Broncos vs Roosters

Next week:
Sea Eagles vs Sharks
Storm vs Roosters

Next week:Sea Eagles vs Storm

Let 'em choose their own destinies.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

I'd like to see a top 12 so I'd get to see the Tigers in the semis occasionally.

Seriously though, the system the AFL use now is the better one.

 

[bileduct]

Bring back the top five system.

 

[The Tank]

top 5 or top 6 are the fairest systems but 8 teams are required for commercial reasons. the fagball system is flawed aswell but it's better than this sh*t.

 

[Southern Rooster]

The NRL had the best system but like with everything else over the last 30 years they changed to the McIntyre because the AFL had it.
The NRL's policy seems to be if the AFL do it, it must be good so they do it. Now they are being stubborn by not going back to the original system we had.

 

[Timmah]

The more people whinge, the more the fact is lost that THE CLUBS VOTED FOR IT. Noone elses fault but theirs.

 

[Brutus]

We used the current AFL system before they did.

We should be calling it the old "ARL" system not the "AFL" one.

 

[_Johnsy]

IMO Top 7, give the side wionning the minor prem the 1st week off, and one team eliminated 1st week (6 v 7). After this every game is an elimination game.

 

[badav]

Bring back the top five system.

The top 5 system would never work in a 16 team comp.

 

[Timmah]

So Johnsy, what happens to first spot in Week 2? Can they be knocked out if they lose?

Week 1 (1st advances to Week 2):
2nd v 3rd
4th v 5th
6th v 7th (Loser eliminated)

Week 2:
SF1 1st v Winner 2v3 (winner to GF)
SF2 Loser 2v3 v Winner 4v5 (Loser eliminated)
SF3 Loser 4v5 v Winner 6v7 (Loser eliminated)

Week 3:
PF1 Loser SF1 v Winner SF3 (Loser eliminated)

Week 4:
PF2 Winner SF2 v Winner PF1

GF: Winner SF1 v Winner PF2

That's about the only fair way your system could work - and it would require an extra week to facilitate the twists and turns. If you're going to reduce the top eight, make it six.