The annual finals system debate thread

[18to87]

How many do you think would have gone to/watched the Knights belt Penrith last week had we been using a top 5 or 6 system.

Your points about crowd figures is a fair one but the AFL or Super League system or whatever it is simply better.

 

[Alex28]

How many do you think would have gone to/watched the Knights belt Penrith last week had we been using a top 5 or 6 system.

If it was a Top 5 perhaps Newcastle would have puled their fingers out a little earlier than the last round in an effort to make the finals. Perhaps we would have got bigger crowds earlier in the season - the Panthers game was always going to be a big crowd (Old Boys game).

Why should you be rewarded for mediocrity? 8th place is mediocre.

 

[Ridders]

AFL system imo offers much more incentive to finish in the top 4. While 4th does have to play 1st, the guaranteed second chance is very just reward. FFS look at the fact that Manly may indeed get another chance to play next week. Under any fair system, this should never happen.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Not at all. It is quite plausible that Manly will be playing next week and so will the Storm. Any system that has one team thrashing another then has them back on level points with an equal chance to win the comp the next week is seriously flawed.

Yeah, and the top 5 nulifies that right?

82, Parra lose to Manly 20-0 in the GF qualifyer, Parra win the comp.
86, Parra smash Canterbury 28-6 in the GF qualifyer, GF ends up being Parra vs Dogs.
90, Penrith beat Canberra 30-12 in GF Qualifyer, Canberra win the comp.

 

[Non Terminator]

If the 2005 GF went the other way, that too.

 

[18to87]

Yeah, and the top 5 nulifies that right?

82, Parra lose to Manly 20-0 in the GF qualifyer, Parra win the comp.
86, Parra smash Canterbury 28-6 in the GF qualifyer, GF ends up being Parra vs Dogs.
90, Penrith beat Canberra 30-12 in GF Qualifyer, Canberra win the comp.

Ok correct me if I am wrong cause I am not that old but in the 5 team system if you lost as Parra did in 82 you then had to go play sudden death the next week while Manly waited already qualified. Totally different.

So based on that logic the Storm should have just earned a week off, but hang on they probably didn't and they and Manly could be playing next week both in sudden death. Either Manly should have just been knocked out for sure or the Storm should be guaranteed some sort of reward for the Macintire to have any credibility.

 

[user_nat]

So the only way for it to be fair is if every team that loses goes home? Only advantage to the top 4 is a home game (and possibly an easier opponent).

 

[Eelectrica]

So the only way for it to be fair is if every team that loses goes home? Only advantage to the top 4 is a home game (and possibly an easier opponent).

That's the way it works in the NFL - lose you're out.

 

[Hanscholo]

I honestly fail to see what is so bad about this system, that requires people to go on and on about it.

Semi-finals are about winning, not losing. The top 4 get to play at home, they also get to play lower ranked sides in the order they finished. If they cannot beat the lower ranked side at home then BAD LUCK. May i ask what do the losing sides expect to get? In season gone by, when you lose and get a second chance at it you have to beat a side in good form to make it any further. So what is so different? If 3 & 4 lose, at home against weaker opposition then quite frankly i dont want them in the semi finals, they dont deserve to be there. The history of the game is full sides that finished in the top 4, limping home to be dispatched by in form sides. That is the nature of semi final football, winning is everything losing is fatal. The way it should be, at the very minimum, it certainly doesnt require the kind of whinging that takes place on an annual basis whipped up by the media. I'd dare say that most of the complainers wouldnt even have uttered a word unless the system had a name to call upon continually, a face for their frustrations.

When i listen to people like Wayne Bennett whinge about the system, it always comes from the top 4, the question i always get in my mind is what exactly do you want mate? You get to play at home ( something which 90 odd years of sides never got to do ), sometimes you get to play two home games, if you lose its extremely rare for 3 or 4 to be knocked out, and you get to play weaker sides? Would you just want us to fasttrack you into the GF? Would that be better for you?

Over the years think back at what sides have had to put up with to get to and win GF's, playing in sydney every week travelling in some cases vast distances against hostile crowds at biased venues. In those days you didnt have the luxury of playing twice at home, you had to fight for everything you got...so no why is it that home games against weaker sides is somehow worse than nuetral venues against weakers sides. There is no logic to the arguments. The Macintyre system, if anything is vastly more biased towards the top 4 being successful. Sure the advent of interstate teams led to that, its not the systems fault but its the situation that is the key and that is definitly in favour of the top 4.

You want to win the premiership? Win your semi finals.

 

[mickdo]

Why should you be rewarded for mediocrity? 8th place is mediocre.

If you're mediocre then you won't last long in the finals, right... so what's the problem? It's not THAT much of a reward if they truly are mediocre. And if they manage to win the GF from 8th then maybe they weren't so mediocre after all?

What it does most importantly is keep much more interest in the regular season. With the old final 5 system, there was usually only around 12 or 13 teams in the comp, so it didn't clear out half the field before the season had barely started. With 16 you just can't have 5.

 

[Ridders]

Having a five team finals is almost suicidal from a financial perspective. We are trying to grow out game, not inhibit it.

 

[mickdo]

Imagine

Manly v parra @ Brookie Loser GOOOONE
Bris v Newcastle @Sancorp Loser GOOOONE
Dogs v Gold Coast @ ANZ 33000
St Geo v Melb @ OKI 18000

I would rather that than watching 16000 at etihad in a game that is basically swap partners turn around go again

That's just 1000 times better. Every game has something definite riding on it, not two 'maybe' games where they all do the two-step to next week.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Having a five team finals is almost suicidal from a financial perspective. We are trying to grow out game, not inhibit it.

Thank you, its just ashame that some traditionalists cant see that some traditions arent worth holding on to.

 

[hellteam]

I think the only thing that needs changing is that the home team for the second week games should be the higher team on the table, not just the team that won the week before.

An example of this is if the Broncos win this week, they will get a home game vs someone like Manly, who are above them on the table. Doesn't seem fair really.

Was also extremely unfair last year when Broncos (5th) beat the Roosters (4th) and then got a home game next week vs the Storm (who came 1st), because they lost to the Warriors.

 

[Loudstrat]

NRL system sucks. The team that runs 6th should not be able to lose their first game of the semis and STILL be able to win the GF!!! Ludicrous.

Meaningless whinge. Make some rules for the sake of it fs. As has been said before, team 6 has to win to keep going - and semis are all about winning.

If you want unfair - and everyone is missing the point: Under the AFL system, why to the minor premiers get 'rewarded' for playing another top 4 club?????
How many Dragons fans would have preferred to play a sh*t hot Melbourne, or Parra after flogging the same team last week? The reward for minor premiership is harder games????

Of team 4 playing minor premiers, and team 5 play the team coming 8th?

Yeah, the AFL system is really fair isn't it. In all honesty, their system is as f*cked as their sport and their expansion policy. The only NRL fans pining for the AFL system are the same whinging knobs that have an inferiority complex about AFL over other issues.

We have the best system to serve our great game. End of story.

 

[ME SO HORNBY!]

The major flaw in the Mcyntyre system for me is that if the Dragons or Bulldogs lose this weekend they have to play away next weekend against lower placed teams. So pretty much your ladder position doesnt matter after week 1. If they fix that then ill be happy.

 

[simmo1]

The current AFL one is better. It makes much more sense, and it doesn't have the stupid situation where the 3v6 and 4v5 games mean absolutely nothing unless there is a huge upset in the other two games.

Better still though would be a top 6 system. If you're coming 7th or 8th out of 16 teams, I don't think you deserve to be in the finals.

 

[ME SO HORNBY!]

I think the only thing that needs changing is that the home team for the second week games should be the higher team on the table, not just the team that won the week before.

An example of this is if the Broncos win this week, they will get a home game vs someone like Manly, who are above them on the table. Doesn't seem fair really.

Was also extremely unfair last year when Broncos (5th) beat the Roosters (4th) and then got a home game next week vs the Storm (who came 1st), because they lost to the Warriors.

Lol you beat me to it hellteam. Great minds think alike.

 

[ME SO HORNBY!]

The current AFL one is better. It makes much more sense, and it doesn't have the stupid situation where the 3v6 and 4v5 games mean absolutely nothing unless there is a huge upset in the other two games.

Better still though would be a top 6 system. If you're coming 7th or 8th out of 16 teams, I don't think you deserve to be in the finals.

Couldnt agree more mate

 

[typicalfan]

The big problem with the NRL system is 3-6 in week 1. Week 1 really is just a shuffling of the deck really.

The current system is fairer for 1-2 and 7-8 though than the AFL finals format.