The annual finals system debate thread

[bartman]

McIntyre is locked in for the next three seasons I believe?

Stuff like this is just the result of slow news days and the negative media and commentary mentatily.

With nothing outright disgraceful having happened for a while, last week the negative nancies that determine the agenda for the meek masses picked an issue to focus on and inflame passions in order to fulfill their negativity quota re the state of league. Roll out a few disgruntled ex players or coaches, run a few stories, get the fans riled up over nothing, and they've achieved their aims for the week!

It's a top 8, and every system you have will have some flaw. And any team in the top 8 with premiership aspirations should be prepared to win 4 matches to get themselves a trophy - anything less is a bonus. Don't care what system they have personally...

 

[Brycey]

I think that the ideal finals system is sudden death for every game. I like how the NFL have got it (without the conferencing) but we don't have the numbers to expand the finalists to 10 or 12.

 

[adamkungl]

For once I agree with you.

 

[no name]

People love to complain about something
If they change the finals format they will complain about the new one as well

And the DangerMouse will complain about the complaining :crazy:

 

[Miller was a legend]

I'm sick of all the bullsh*t being directed at the Mcintire system. I heard Hadley attacking Gallop about it the other day on the radio and being dumbfounded why we don't have the AFL system. There's nothing wrong with preferring the AFL system over ours but at least see that both systems have a lot wrong with them. These systems were devised by people who spent a hell of a lot of time thinking about them. Very good arguments can be made for and against both. I am very sure there is no brilliant way of structuring the finals with 8 teams that hasn't been thought of yet.

The 8 team format poses limitations and thats what we are seeing. No matter what format you choose there will be 100 arguments against it and little things you can argue. I heard Hadey arguing that third wasn't getting a big enough reward seeing as they finished on equal points as first. I mean f**k me. What about the year when third finished 10 points behind first. Will they change the finals system just to punish third sufficiently. It's all such picky crap. I can't stand the arrogance and naivety of thinking other 8 team systems will be vastly superior. They won't so deal with it. If anyone should be pissed it should be me. My team has to play Melbourne in week 2 after a good win. I'm not angry though because I understand the finals have to work somehow and if Brisbane are going to win it they should be able to beat everybody. You could argue the Broncos are advantaged as they get to play the storm at home rather than away the next week so there's 2 sides to everything.

If you want an 5 team final series thats fine. That would be fairer. However stop all this stupid bitching about which 8 team finals series is best. It's a flawed concept to begin with.

Stop bitching about the bitching! bitch!!!

 

[Lego_Man]

I actually agree with DangerMouse here. It seems whatever happens people will find some reason to bitch about the current finals system, as if any alternative would automatically be better in every situation. Its just hypocrisy and selective statistics.

Perfect example is the Warriors win over the Storm. People have long bitched about the meaninglessness of the 2 v 7 and 1 v 8 clash since "7 and 8 are just cannon fodder" = then when a lower ranked team throws the form book out the window, suddenly its now "unfair that the minor premiers have to play the broncos away and that the warriors get a home semi"...overlooking the tremendous feat it is to beat the number 1 side away.

I can guarantee if we had used the AFL system for the past decade there would have been at least as many situations that would have generated as much bitching. You have to have a fixed system, you simply cant customise the finals each year to produce the combination of games you'd ideally want in any scenario. That's what people need to understand - no system will be perfect. I feel that the McIntyre system does strike a good balance, and is fair on all teams taking into account their ladder positioning.

In short, if it aint broke, dont fix it.

 

[Tigers_are_Pro]

AFL System = 1st vs 4th at 1st Home Ground. No reward for fourth, vice versa for third.

I agree it could be better, but this will do.

 

[Loudstrat]

The Mac pisses me off because it's not a final 10, with the 10th placed team getting a home semi against a team who came last, for the right to go into the GF!

And everyone knew the finals format way before a ball was kicked in anger back in March.

Clubs need to jockey themselves to get into the right position. Cronulla might have had equal wins, but only decided to attack on Saturday.

Then again they could have faced the Warriors!

 

[wittyfan]

I like the current system.

The only thing that needs fixing is the silly "home city" scenario in week 2. Should be home games.

 

[pcpp]

AFL System = 1st vs 4th at 1st Home Ground. No reward for fourth, vice versa for third.

I agree it could be better, but this will do.

Do you even understand both systems?

They get a home final the next match and a double chance if they lose.

In the "AFL" system:

1st/2nd = 2 home finals + double chance if they lose 1st week
3rd/4th = 1 home final + double chance if they lose 1st week
5th/6th = 1 home final + NO double chance if they lose 1st week
7th/8th = NO home finals + NO double chance if they lose 1st week

 

[bazza]

AFL System = 1st vs 4th at 1st Home Ground. No reward for fourth, vice versa for third.

I agree it could be better, but this will do.

The advantage of the McIntyre system is that almost any combination of teams can meet in the grand final.
I think under the old top-8 system there were some combinations that could never occur.

 

[Loudstrat]

Do you even understand both systems?

They get a home final the next match and a double chance if they lose.

So the minor premiers could suddenly turn into Souffs in the finals and still make the GF?

 

[pcpp]

So the minor premiers could suddenly turn into Souffs in the finals and still make the GF?

WTF are you talking about?

The minor premiers have an even easier path in the Mcintyre system.

 

[Azkatro]

The current system is fine. Melbourne lost to 8th at home, for f**k's sake. Why should they get any more favours? It is the finals now, they won the $100,000 cheque for finishing first, they got to play the 8th placed side, and they f**ked up. Now they are back with the pack.

In essence, teams that win games are rewarded, and teams that lose are punished. Which works fine for me!

 

[DangerMouse_007]

All these people arguing that teams should be rewarded or punished more fairly for where they come in the season might want to consider no finals at all. What could be fairer than the team that proves themselves over 26 rounds winning it? The team that finishes 8th then will always finish 8th and that will reflect their performance during the year. Of course no one wants to see finals scrapped but just understand that a finals system is a little flawed to begin with. Perhaps flawed isn't the right word, but it is very much about rewarding the team that can get up for a couple of games and win under pressure. This element of all or nothing is integral to any finals series and you will get it whether you have a top 5, 6, 7 or 8. Ultimately finals series are about setting a bunch of guidelines and each team must operate within them.

 

[DangerMouse_007]

WTF are you talking about?

The minor premiers have an even easier path in the Mcintyre system.

Exactly. I favor rewarding the teams at the top more than the bottom. How many times did Manly or Melbourne push themselves that little bit further during the season when teams like the Warriors and Dragons probably didn't really show up on the day. That extra effort has to be rewarded through the season.

 

[Loudstrat]

What I'm talking about is a side losing 2 games from their last 4, and making the GF. Not since the final 5 has that scenario existed.

Melbourne played a weaker team - got beaten in a tide of whinging. But manly and Cronulla had arguably the same scenario, and got on with the job.

Manly and Cronulla earned their passage to the penultimate weekend. Brisbane and NZ earned their home semi. Melbourne and Easts earned their second chance by finishing in the top 4.

Now there are no more rewards, and each team has to make the best of their situation. Facing Sudden death, New Zealand and Brisbane did. Don't see tyhe advantage in giving Melbourne endless chances if they couldn't take the gift one they had last weekend.

 

[Pass the Ball]

Have to say, once again the McIntyre system worked perfectly...

The best two teams are going to battle out the GF...

There has been plenty of final series action..

The NRL went to New Zealand and to Brisbane when it otherwise wouldn't have (The best crowds of the series)

If Brisbane had of beaten Melb and then Cronulla - They would have deserved to be there but they did'nt...

If the Roosters had of beaten NZ and then Manly - They would deserve to be there, but they didn't..

If the Sharks beat the storm, they would deserve to be there, but they didn't..

If you are good enough, you make the Grand Final..

Great system....

 

[The Engineers Room]

This system is better:

Week 1
1 v Bye
2 v Bye
3 v 4 a
5 v 6 b
7 v 8 c loser eliminated

Week 2
1 v 2 d
winner a v Bye
loser a v loser b e loser eliminated
winner b v winner c f loser eliminated

Week 3
winner d v bye
loser d v winner a g
winner e v winner f h loser eliminated

Week 4
winner d v loser g i loser eliminated
winner g v winner h j loser eliminated

Week 5
winner i v winner j k loser eliminated

So to use this years example, home side listed first (Bolded sides win):

Week 1
Storm v Bye
Sea Eagles v Bye
Sharks v Roosters
Broncos v Raiders
Dragons v Warriors

Week 2
Storm v Sea Eagles
Sharks v Bye
Roosters v Raiders
Broncos v Warriors

Week 3
Sea Eagles v Bye
Storm v Sharks
Roosters v Warriors

Week 4
Sea Eagles v Sharks
Storm v Warriors

Week 5
Sea Eagles v Storm

 

[no name]

So to use this years example, home side listed first (Bolded sides win):

Week 1
Storm v Bye
Sea Eagles v Bye
Sharks v Roosters
Broncos v Raiders
Dragons v Warriors

Week 2
Storm v Sea Eagles
Sharks v Bye
Roosters v Raiders
Broncos v Warriors

Week 3
Sea Eagles v Bye
Storm v Sharks
Roosters v Warriors

Week 4
Sea Eagles v Sharks
Storm v Warriors

Week 5
Sea Eagles v Storm

Too many flaws to point all of them out but the main 1 is:
Why do Sharks get week 2 off, lose week 3 and then still play in week 4 for the GF, where Broncos win Week 1 lose Week 2 and are out?