The annual finals system debate thread

[The_Savage_1]

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

its flawed unfortunately, in week two 4 would play 6 while 3 would play 5, a clear disadvantage to 3, who gets a harder opponent than 4, and 5, who gets a harder opponent than 6

 

[The_Savage_1]

if you want a five week system, the fair one is...

1v4
2v3
5v8
6v7

7 & 8 gone, 1 & 2 bye

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

3v6
4v5

5 & 6 gone

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

1v2
3v4

4 gone, 1 bye

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

2v3

3 gone

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

1v2

 

[Loudstrat]

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.

You have more chance moving up in proceeedings playing a weaker team than the best team in the comp.

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.

So? They finished higher than 3 other finallists. That must give them some reward.

That is why the mac works. Every team is graded, based upon their position, and tasks give accordingly.

St George play the 8th best team at home with a minimum 7 day turnaround with a guaranteed second chance

Canterbury play the 7th best team at home with a minimum 6 day turnaround with a guaranteed second chance

God Coast play the 6th best team at home with a minimum 6 day turnaround with a very strong possibility of a second chance

Melbourne play the 5th best team with a minimum 5 day turnaround and a strong possibility of a second chance

Manly play the 4th best team away with a minimum 5 day turnaround and some possibility of a second chance

Brisbane play the 3rd best side with a minimum 6 day turnaround with a very slim possibility of a second chance.

Newcastle play the second best team away with a minimum 6 day turnaround and no second chance

Parramatta play the best side away with a minimum 7 day turnaround and no second chance.

What could be fairer than that?

I'm sure Melbourne would have preferred last nights game over having to play Saints at Kogarah. Same for Saints.

Brisbane would perfer a home semi against Newcastle rather than an away one against Gold Coast - a reward for having 5 teams better than them.

The AFL system, to me, seems rediculously flawed.

 

[18to87]

You have more chance moving up in proceeedings playing a weaker team than the best team in the comp.


So? They finished higher than 3 other finallists. That must give them some reward.

Fine I dont care if Manly gets a reward for coming 5th but what does Melbourne get for beating the crap out of Manly? Nothing if 1 + 2 win. Last night was a practice game.

 

[ElectricEelMan]

Fine I dont care if Manly gets a reward for coming 5th but what does Melbourne get for beating the crap out of Manly? Nothing if 1 + 2 win. Last night was a practice game.

Hardly a practice game ...
Melbourne retain the right to a home final next week and possibly a week off and a home final in week 3
Manly do not get a home final and are possibly eliminated

Far from a meaningless game ... proven by the captains comments through the week about it being 'a must win game'

 

[Loudstrat]

What else do they deserve for having 3 better sides than them? A home semi for the next round against a last start loser from interstate. It is as good as it should get for team 4 winning it's first semi

 

[18to87]

Week Two can end up being exactly the same as Week One for Melbourne and Manly just different opposition and now its sudden death. You cannot tell me that outcome is fair when Melbourne beat Manly in a thrashing in Week One.

What if 1 v 8 was on Friday Night and 2 v 7 was the first Saturday game and 1 + 2 won.

All the remaining two games would be for is home field the next week when 3, 4 already earned that right during the season. About 100 people would show up for the games.

 

[Loudstrat]

Week Two can end up being exactly the same as Week One for Melbourne and Manly just different opposition and now its sudden death. You cannot tell me that outcome is fair when Melbourne beat Manly in a thrashing in Week One.

What if 1 v 8 was on Friday Night and 2 v 7 was the first Saturday game and 1 + 2 won.

All the remaining two games would be for is home field the next week when 3, 4 already earned that right during the season. About 100 people would show up for the games.

And if my aunt had a dick she would be my uncle.

You can't whinge about a system because if it was different it would be stupid!

 

[choisir]

The comp hasnt been fair since the complete home and away rounds were dumped .

 

[18to87]

If it was different it would be better.

This system can never be fair when 1, 2, 3, 4 win in week one.

 

[Zelig96]

7 Teams Final System

Wk 1 (Preliminary Finals)
1 - Bye
2 v 7 @ 2 - sudden death
3 v 6 @ 3 - sudden death
4 v 5 @ 4 - sudden death

3 winners ranked in table order as Winner1, Winner2 and Winner3



Wk 2 (Semi-Final)
A: 1 v Winner1 @ 1's Home city stadium - Grand Final qualifier
B: Winner 2 v Winner 3 @ Winner 2 home city Stadium - sudden death


Wk 3 (Final)
C: Loser A v Winner B @ Loser A Home Region Stadium

Wk 4 (Grand Final)
Winner A v Winner C



Using the above finals system and results for week 1 so far, 2009 semis would look like this:-

Wk 1
Dragons - bye
Bulldogs v Newcastle @ ANZ - Newcastle GONE
Titans v Broncos @ Skilled - Titans GONE
Storm v Manly @ Etihad - Manly GONE

Winner1 = Bulldogs (2)
Winner2 = Storm (4)
Winner3 = Broncos (6)

Wk 2
A: Dragons v Bulldogs @ SFS - say Dragons win - Dragons go to GF in Wk4, Bulldogs go to Wk3
B: Storm v Broncos @ Etihad - say Storm win - Broncos GONE

Wk 3
C: Bulldogs v Storm @ ANZ - say Storm win - Bulldogs GONE

Wk 4
GF: Dragons v Storm


3 Sudden Death games in Week 1 will certainly make winning the Minor Premiership very valuable.

There is only one Double chance game (Game A in Week 2) and that Double Chance is only afforded to the Minor Premiers and the best of the Week 1 winners (which could never be team 6 or 7). Every other game is sudden death. Loser of the Double Chance game still gets Home Region advantage in Week 3, which is only fair because if minor premiers lost Game A, they shouldn't suddenly be playing an away game in Week 3 (eg if Dragons lost Game A above, they shouldnt be going to Melbourne in Week 3).

Sure, team 2 could go out in Week 1, but that's the price of losing in the Finals. If Team 2 can't make the most of having a home game against team 7, then they deserve to be out.

 

[Marshall_magic]

To everyone whinging that Manly don't deserve to be there because they had 40 put on them, do the Titans deserve to be there? They had 40 put on them.

 

[aussies1st]

Both systems have their pros and cons. Obviously if your NRL team is on the brink of elimination you will have the NRL one. I was like this last year when the Raiders got knocked out despite finishing 6th. In the AFL one we would have been gone.

Since we have the McIntyre system already I don't see the reason to change it to the AFL one. The pros of the AFL don't far outweight the negatives of the McIntyre. All systems will have some flaw which you can nip pick at.

 

[Eels Dude]

its flawed unfortunately, in week two 4 would play 6 while 3 would play 5, a clear disadvantage to 3, who gets a harder opponent than 4, and 5, who gets a harder opponent than 6

To avoid that all you have to do is swap the week 2 games around, so not really a flaw more an oversight on the poster's behalf.

 

[trudge]

MAC is very silly. After each semi we still don't know the outcome of elimination.

The AFL semis everyone knows the outcome of elimination at the siren.

If you know the game's outcome it would be more desperate and intense.

 

[broncos_warriors_storm]

i like it how it is. its fair and does a good job. the meida want people to change but i wouldent. there are alot of ways a finals series can be played out but if you lose, you should be in danger. iif you win, you deserve to be safe.

if they are still unhappy next year, how about just trial a different one in the U20's?

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

I rekon we put up with it for 4 more years and when we have 18 teams we make it a top 10 again.

 

[parano1a]

i like it how it is. its fair and does a good job. the meida want people to change but i wouldent. there are alot of ways a finals series can be played out but if you lose, you should be in danger. iif you win, you deserve to be safe.

It's fair that Storm smashed Manly but if the Dragons beat the 8th side as expected both teams simply progress to the 2nd week regardless? Sure, they get another home final, but imagine they were 2 teams from the same state (eg Tigers & Souths) - there would be no advantage whatsoever gained from winning the first final.

 

[Misanthrope]

They're both kind of stupid. A top six would provide consistently competitive football for the most part. Let's be realistic - Newcastle and Parramatta aren't on the same level as the other six sides.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

They're both kind of stupid. A top six would provide consistently competitive football for the most part. Let's be realistic - Newcastle and Parramatta aren't on the same level as the other six sides.

And teams 3-6 arent on the same level as 1 and 2, where does it end and why?