The annual finals system debate thread

[ME SO HORNBY!]

I do find it interesting St George fans seem to be pro-home and away and anti-finals ;-)

Gets a bit like that after 30 years haha. We will take every little advantage we can get :lol:

 

[18to87]

Because Melbourne won.


Had Melbourne lost, it would be week 2 - Manly home, Melbourne away.


None of the finals are meaningless.

But Melbourne didn't lose. Just take home field out of the equation for a second ...

Melbourne smashed them and now their reward is a sudden death game next week which is fine and dandy except Manly got smashed and they get to be in the exact same position.

 

[meltiger]

But Melbourne didn't lose. Just take home field out of the equation for a second ...

Melbourne smashed them and now their reward is a sudden death game next week which is fine and dandy except Manly got smashed and they get to be in the exact same position.

You can't take home field out of the equation, because in a national competition it is a huge factor.


Assuming any 2 of 1-3 win tonight/tomorrow, Melbourne play a sudden death semi in Melbourne, Manly play a sudden death semi away from home.

On the assumption St George & Canterbury win, Melbourne will play either the Gold Coast or Brisbane in a sudden death semi in Melbourne, whilst Manly will be off to either Robina or Lang Park to play a sudden death semi.


Reverse last nights result, St George & Canterbury win, Manly are playing Gold Coast or Brisbane at Brookvale ... Melbourne are off to Robina or Lang Park.


You simply can't ignore the home ground factor.

 

[parano1a]

Melbourne at home Week One, Manly away Week One
Melbourne at home Week Two, Manly away Week Two

What about if 2 Sydney based sides were playing, e.g. Souths and Bulldogs who share the same home ground? No advantage whatsoever. Scrap the McIntytre, teams should be able to determine their own fate, not rely on other results.

 

[18to87]

I understand that home field is important.

Lets just say last night was an off night for Manly. Well they may well get a second chance. Is it really fair that if Melbourne has an off night next week that they don't get a second chance too? Where as Manly could be playing for a spot in the Grand Final?

Hence the only performance that really matters for either of these two teams is Week 2.

 

[meltiger]

Hence the only performance that really matters for either of these two teams is Week 2.

If Brisbane & Newcastle win (Which as the day draws out could very well happen) ... Manly are out, as would Melbourne had they not won last night.

I understand the argument about teams having to rely on other results (Though I disagree - WIN your finals and you're not relying on others), but to claim week 1 finals are meaningless is ridiculous. Look at the larger picture.

 

[Ridders]

If Brisbane & Newcastle win (Which as the day draws out could very well happen) ... Manly are out, as would Melbourne had they not won last night.

I understand the argument about teams having to rely on other results (Though I disagree - WIN your finals and you're not relying on others), but to claim week 1 finals are meaningless is ridiculous. Look at the larger picture.

They are if 1 and 2 both win. Why do you think games 2v7 & 1v8 are always played last in the week?

 

[supercharger]

The best finals series would be a knockout tournament.
You lose you deserve to be eliminated i dont care if your minor premiers you got the jj giltinan and 100k the top 4 still get an advantage in hosting games
But the NRL would never implement such a system as they would lose a week from the playoffs and revenue.

 

[18to87]

If Brisbane & Newcastle win (Which as the day draws out could very well happen) ... Manly are out, as would Melbourne had they not won last night.

I understand the argument about teams having to rely on other results (Though I disagree - WIN your finals and you're not relying on others), but to claim week 1 finals are meaningless is ridiculous. Look at the larger picture.

Your right - As of right now its not meaningless, but come 6pm Sunday it could be seen as meaningless. Sure there are possible outcomes that make it interesting. But if the top 4 teams win in week one in this system, then 3 and 4 are at a disadvantage no matter which way you look at it.

 

[18to87]

They are if 1 and 2 both win. Why do you think games 2v7 & 1v8 are always played last in the week?

Haha good point!

 

[dubopov]

The Comp as it stands is not a level playing field. The most obvious way of making the semis fair is to divide the teams into a North and South Division in a similar vein to seppo sports.

My system would involve the two Divisions playing each other twice on a Home and Away basis and playing the teams in the other Division once, alternatively getting a Home game every second year.

The ANZAC Test and 3 Origins would be played on weekends without any fixtures being played.

For arguments sake, the Northern Division would comprise of:-

NQ
Brisbane
Gold Coast
Newcastle
Central Coast Sharks
Manly
Parramatta
Penrith

Southern Division:-

Sydney Roosters
Canterbury
Souths
St George/Illawarra
Wests
Canberra
Melbourne
NZ

Top 4 in each Division would meet in semis

1 v 2 ( winner to Div Final)
3 v 4 ( loser out)
loser 1/2 v winner 3/4 in prelim final
winner 1/2 v Prelim winner in Div final

Div winners clash in Grand Final

 

[Loudstrat]

Team 4 gets it much, much better then team 5. a) they get the double chance and b) if they do lose, they get a home semi-final in week 2. if they manage to win, they get a home prelim. if 5 happens to lose week 1, it's season over and if they win, they play away matches for the rest of the finals. how does 5 get it better?

Team 4 plays the best side all year. Team 5 plays the 8th best side all year. So, Team 4 is up against it, yet the team below them is not. HOW IS THAT FAIR?????

What about if 2 Sydney based sides were playing, e.g. Souths and Bulldogs who share the same home ground? No advantage whatsoever. Scrap the McIntytre, teams should be able to determine their own fate, not rely on other results.

Scrap the whole system because on the off chance that the only 2 teams sharing the same home ground without an alternative venue might meet - when one of them actually making the finals is longer odds than Cronulla being premiership favorites?

I understand that home field is important.

Lets just say last night was an off night for Manly. Well they may well get a second chance. Is it really fair that if Melbourne has an off night next week that they don't get a second chance too? Where as Manly could be playing for a spot in the Grand Final?

Hence the only performance that really matters for either of these two teams is Week 2.

If it's an off night in sudden death then you are out. Simple. If you can't switch on for sudden death, you don't deserve to be there. No-one would argue about that.

They are if 1 and 2 both win. Why do you think games 2v7 & 1v8 are always played last in the week?

Using that argument, last years entire finals series was a waste, because Manly flogged everyone.

Finals are never a waste, because it's about the GAME deciding the outcome, and we saw the perfect example last year when the Warriors beat Melbourne.

The Mac is the ONLY system where teams chances are equally graded in a diminishing scale depending upon their place after round 26.

 

[Ridders]

The Comp as it stands is not a level playing field. The most obvious way of making the semis fair is to divide the teams into a North and South Division in a similar vein to seppo sports.

My system would involve the two Divisions playing each other twice on a Home and Away basis and playing the teams in the other Division once, alternatively getting a Home game every second year.

The ANZAC Test and 3 Origins would be played on weekends without any fixtures being played.

For arguments sake, the Northern Division would comprise of:-

NQ
Brisbane
Gold Coast
Newcastle
Central Coast Sharks
Manly
Parramatta
Penrith

Southern Division:-

Sydney Roosters
Canterbury
Souths
St George/Illawarra
Wests
Canberra
Melbourne
NZ

Top 4 in each Division would meet in semis

1 v 2 ( winner to Div Final)
3 v 4 ( loser out)
loser 1/2 v winner 3/4 in prelim final
winner 1/2 v Prelim winner in Div final

Div winners clash in Grand Final

Dude we don't need to Americanize our great game by bringing in divisions. Would you want to bring in a national draft as well?

 

[dubopov]

Dude we don't need to Americanize our great game by bringing in divisions. Would you want to bring in a national draft as well?

MATE .. we don't need to Americanize our language either ??

And no, I don't favour a draft .. my idea is surely better than the current set-up whether along the lines of seppo sports or not.

 

[Ridders]

MATE .. we don't need to Americanize our language either ??

And no, I don't favour a draft .. my idea is surely better than the current set-up whether along the lines of seppo sports or not.

Not really imo. One of the things i hate most about American sports is the whole division concept, although it is somewhat understandable given the amount of teams they have in their comps.

 

[Man_of_Steel_1982]

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.

That's right.

Also, in both, a team could be undefeated all year and get beaten only once (grand final qualifier) and not even make the grand final.

Go to the "AFL" / old ARL system plus Warren Ryan's "extra week" suggestion. Instead of having two sudden death GF qualifiers, swap the teams over and have the two winners from week one play each other in a "dress rehersal" with the winner going through to the GF and loser playing the winner from the other match.

It is a bit long, but it's very clear cut, fair, better match ups and provides more $$$ with an extra blockbuster.


WEEK 1

A: 1 v 4
B: 2 v 3
C: 5 v 8 - sudden death
D: 6 v 7 - sudden death


WEEK 2

E: Loser A vs Winner D - sudden death
F: Loser B vs Winner C - sudden death


WEEK 3

G: Winner A vs Winner B - 1st Grand Final Qualifier
H: Winner E vs Winner F - sudden death


WEEK 4

I: Loser G vs Winner H - 2nd Grand Final Qualifier


WEEK 5

GRAND FINAL

 

[18to87]

Team 4 plays the best side all year. Team 5 plays the 8th best side all year. So, Team 4 is up against it, yet the team below them is not. HOW IS THAT FAIR?????

If it's an off night in sudden death then you are out. Simple. If you can't switch on for sudden death, you don't deserve to be there. No-one would argue about that.

Its fair because team 5 is playing sudden death. I would rather take on Team 1 with a chance to move on up in proceedings than be playing for survival.

Fair point that you need to be able to switch it on for sudden death, but what about the week before. Manly is likely going to get a free pass for not even showing up.

 

[The_Savage_1]

try this one on for size...

the figures in brackets are assuming the highest ranked team wins every game, which IMO every system needs to consider and is why both the NRL and AFL systems have fatal flaws.

week 1

a 1 v 2 @ 1
b 3 v 4 @ 3
c 5 v 6 @ 5
d 7 v 8 @ 7

loser d (8) gone, winner a (1) bye

-------------

week 2

e loser a (2) v winner d (7) @ loser a (2)
f winner b (3) v loser c (6) @ winner b (3)
g loser b (4) v winner c (5) @ loser b (4)

losers gone (5, 6 & 7)

-------------

week 3

h winner a (1) v lowest ranked winner week 2 (4) @ winner a (1)
i highest ranked winner week 2 (2) v middle ranked winner week 2 (3) @ highest ranked winner week 2 (2)

losers gone (3 & 4)

-------------

grand final

winner h (1) v winner i (2) @ neutral

-------------

1st - play at home in the first week against 2, if they win they go straight to the GF qualifier against the lowest ranked team still in the comp. if they lose the first week, they still play at home in week 2 against the winner of 7 v 8 then play in the GF qualifier against the second worst team left in the comp.

2nd - the same as 1 but play away in week 1 instead of home.

3rd - play at home in the first week against 4, if they win they play at home in week two against the loser of 5 v 6 to get through to the GF qualifier. if they lose against 4 in week one they play against the winner of 5 v 6 instead of the loser, but it's still at home.

4th - the same as 3 but play away in week 1 instead of home.

5th - play at home in the first week against 6, if they win they play the loser of 3 v 4 away to reach the GF qualifier. if they lose against 6 in week one, they play the winner of 3 v 4 away to reach the GF qualifier.

6th - the same as 5 but play away in week 1 instead of home.

7th - play an elimination final against 8 at home in week one. if they win, they play away against the loser of 1 v 2 to reach the GF qualifier.

8th - the same as 7 but play away in week 1 instead of home.

-------------

it's actually one extra game than the current system in the same amount of weeks which will mean extra ratings and revenue but not a longer season.

 

[18to87]

WEEK 1

A: 1 v 4
B: 2 v 3
C: 5 v 8 - sudden death
D: 6 v 7 - sudden death


WEEK 2

E: Loser A vs Winner D - sudden death
F: Loser B vs Winner C - sudden death


WEEK 3

G: Winner A vs Winner B - 1st Grand Final Qualifier
H: Winner E vs Winner F - sudden death


WEEK 4

I: Loser G vs Winner H - 2nd Grand Final Qualifier


WEEK 5

GRAND FINAL

Sure beats the current system and the AFL system in my mind.

 

[18to87]

Love it Savage.